HEEMAS IN ABCADIA 
 
 AND OTHEB ESSAYS.
 
 tlonDon: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 
 AVE MARIA LANE, 
 
 263. ARGYLE STREET 
 
 F. A. BROCKHAU8. 
 gork: MACM1LLAN AND CO.
 
 ,HEEMAS IN ARCADIA 
 
 L / 
 
 AND OTHEB ESSAYS 
 
 BY 
 
 J. RENDEL HARRIS, M.A., D.LITT. (DUEL.), 
 
 FELLOW OP CLABE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
 1896 
 
 [All Rights reserved.]
 
 PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 TN the following pages I have reprinted two essays which throw 
 some light on critical problems connected with the text and 
 interpretation of that famous early Christian book, known as the 
 Shepherd of Hermas. Each of them has been the starting point 
 for important investigations by the leading scholars of our time ; 
 and I have endeavoured to indicate the accretions or corrections 
 which they have made to my first statements, so that the student 
 may not only have before him the texts of my researches, which 
 are extant, sometimes in very brief form, in journals not very easy 
 of access, but may also be able to bring the investigations up to 
 their latest point of development. 
 
 Of these two essays the first appeared in June 1887 in the 
 Journal of the Society for Biblical Literature and Exegesis 
 (Boston, U.S.A.); the second is three years earlier in date; it 
 was first printed in the Circulars of the Johns Hopkins University 
 for April 1884, a publication containing many valuable notes on 
 all branches of science, but not generally accessible, nor easy to 
 handle. If the brief paper in question were estimated by the 
 combat of giants which it provoked, I think it would be admitted 
 that it was worth reprinting. 
 
 To these I have added a number of other pieces which may, 
 perhaps, be found useful by the critics. Where they do not 
 permanently instruct, they may transitorily please; and where 
 the matter of them may seem to be unimportant, the method 
 will sometimes be found deserving of consideration.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGES 
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA . . . . " . . . . 1 20 
 
 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS ... . . 21 25 
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY 26 42 
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTHQOSPEL . . 43 59 
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS . 60 83
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 object of the present paper is to set at rest a critical 
 J- difficulty which has been raised concerning the interpretation 
 of the tract of Hernias which goes under the heading of the Ninth 
 Similitude ; and to indicate a direction in which further light may 
 be obtained on the vexed question of the date of this remarkable 
 writer. The difficulty is in the first instance one of interpretation : 
 we find in the writings of Hernias a blending of the real experi- 
 ences of life with imaginary importations from current mythologies 
 which render it hard to decide whether the writer wishes us to 
 take him seriously, or to apply to his works an allegorical inter- 
 pretation such as was common enough in early times, both in 
 pagan and Jewish and Christian circles. And it is probably this 
 perplexity rather than a mere personal fondness for such interpre- 
 tations which led Origen to explain even the most strongly defined 
 personal allusions in Hernias, the names of Clement and Grapte, 
 in a spiritual manner. We may at least conclude that the subject 
 invited such treatment. We may easily agree that the allusions 
 to his life in Rome in the first Vision are genuine history, from 
 which the step to the second Vision, which contains a visit to 
 Cumse, seems natural, as does also the account of the walk on the 
 Via Campana in the third Vision. But if we admit these passages 
 to be meant for a literal acceptation, we certainly cannot admit 
 the interview with the Church-Sibyl to be anything but a work of 
 imagination based on popular religious mythology. And we should 
 not find it easy to determine where the literal ends and the 
 allegorical begins. We are thus in much the same case as an 
 interpreter of the Pilgrim's Progress would be who had sufficient 
 knowledge of Bunyan's history to see that the "certain den" with 
 which the book opens is the Bedford prison, and who had sufficient 
 
 H. H. 1
 
 2 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 insight to determine that the rest of the book was allegorical, but 
 who was wanting both in the historical information and in the 
 intuitive perception by which to detect the traces of Bunyan's 
 personal history which lurk behind the folds of the Allegory. It 
 is however generally held that the mention of places not very 
 remote from Rome ought to be accepted as sufficient evidence that 
 the writer is giving us history rather than romance. The Via 
 Campana, at least, scarcely admits of being allegorized, nor the 
 mile-stones which Hernias passes on the road : with Cumae the 
 question is a little more involved, but even here the general 
 opinion has been, and probably will remain in favour of the positive 
 geographical acceptation of Hernias' words. 
 
 Such being the case, it is not a little surprising that, when we 
 have so many Italian allusions in the book of Visions, we should 
 find ourselves transported in the Ninth Similitude into Arcadia, 
 and there regaled with an allegorical account of the building of 
 the Church, which outdoes in fantastic detail the whole of the 
 previous accounts. Are we to assume that, as in the case quoted 
 from the Pilgrim's Progress, the initial note of place is to be 
 accepted literally, and that from that point we plunge into 
 allegory ; or is the whole a work of imagination from the start ? 
 In the latter case, how can we explain the change of literary 
 method involved in the comparison between a real Rome, Cumse, 
 Via Campana, and a poetic Arcadia ? In the former case, how did 
 the Roman Hernias find his way into the most inaccessible part of 
 Greece? It was no doubt through some such questioning that 
 Zahn was led to propose an emendation in the text of Hennas so 
 that instead of reading 
 
 Kal dinfoa/yev /J 649 'ApicaSlav 
 
 we should put 'ApiKiav for 'ApicaSUiv. The advantage of this 
 correction was that it transferred the scene again to the neighbour- 
 hood of Rome, and restored the literary parallelism between the 
 Ninth Similitude and the book of Visions. To support this 
 conjecture, Zahn first brought forward a case where the word 
 'Apitciav had been corrupted in transcription, viz.: a passage in 
 the Acts of Peter and Paul, c. 20, where the scribe has in error 
 given 'Apaftiav. If Arabia, why not Arcadia ? 
 
 Then he proceeds to shew that the country around Aricia 
 corresponds to the description given by Hernias of Arcadian
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 3 
 
 scenery, and, in particular, he identifies the "rounded hill" (opos 
 fjiaa-ToSSes) to which Hernias was transported, with the Italian 
 Monte Gentile. I do not know whether this suggestion of Zahn 
 has met with any great favour, although it is ingenious, and not 
 outside the bounds of possibility. The objection to it is chiefly 
 that which falls to the lot of the majority of conjectural emenda- 
 tions, viz. : that it is not necessary ; for, as I shall shew presently, 
 the whole description of the country visited by Hernias, corresponds 
 closely with the current accounts of Arcadian scenery, and is 
 probably based upon them. So that if I do not discuss Zahn's 
 hypothesis directly, it is because it is a last resort of criticism to 
 which one must not look until the normal methods of interpretation 
 have broken down. Let us then examine the scene into which 
 Hernias introduces us ; and the interpretation which he puts upon 
 what he sees. We are told in the first place that his guide led 
 him away into Arcadia and there seated him upon the top of a 
 rounded hill from whence he had a view of a wide plain surrounded 
 by mountains of diverse character and appearance. We will 
 indicate the description of these mountains by the following 
 diagram, in which the successive eminences are ranged in a 
 circular form, and attached to each is the leading characteristic 
 which is noted by Hernias: 
 
 o\ov 
 
 SeVSpa /xeyiora 
 
 TJ' X ct^c x r' (Txtcr/Ac3v oAov lyc/ACv 
 
 /Soravas lAapas . . el\ov Se (3oTdva<s ai 
 
 /ecu Trav ycVos a"xi<rp.ai 
 KTfjvtov KOI opveW 
 
 fl 'x 
 
 ; X OV /?oravas 
 
 KBU 
 
 ov 
 
 opos /taoraJSes 
 
 SevSpa 
 
 oAov XCUKOV 
 
 8' 
 
 fXav ws d(rfl6\r) 
 
 12
 
 4 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 Now before we begin to look for identifications with the 
 scenery of any particular country or neighbourhood, we should try 
 to subtract from the description those details which are artistically 
 inserted by Hennas in order to bring certain views of his own 
 before the minds of his reader under the cover of his allegory. 
 The matter of the Ninth Similitude so far as it concerns the 
 building of the tower and the shaping of the various stones is 
 already present in the third Vision ; and there is much in the 
 description that is parallel to the account given of the various 
 stones which are brought from the twelve mountains. For ex- 
 ample, just as in the third Vision we find stones brought for 
 building that are white, and some that are speckled (tyfopiaKores) ; 
 some that are squared, and some that are round; some that are 
 sound, and some that have cracks in them. When we find, 
 therefore, that in his Ninth Similitude Hernias makes his first 
 mountain black as soot and his twelfth perfectly white, we know 
 that it is more likely to be an expansion of the previous allegory 
 than a natural feature ; and when we find him saying that some 
 of the mountains had chasms (O-^KT/MM) in them, we must rather 
 refer to the stones that have cracks in them (cr^tcr/ia? e^oi/re?) 
 than to any peculiarity of the mountain region, however the 
 description may seem to invite the identification with the peculiar 
 characteristic of Arcadia, the Kara^adpa or underground passages 
 and hollows of the mountains into which the rivers of that country 
 so commonly precipitate themselves. 
 
 A similar process of subtraction must be made on account of 
 the similarity between this Ninth Similitude and the one that 
 precedes it. In this case the allegory turns upon the distribution 
 by the angel of the Lord of a number of branches which he had 
 cut from a great willow-tree. After a while the angel summons 
 the people to whom he had given them and scrutinizes them 
 carefully. Some brought back their branches withered, others 
 half-withered and with cracks on their surface, (fjfjLigiipovs KOI 
 <r^tcr/ia<? e^ouo-a?,) others again were green, (^\a>/?a9,) others had 
 fruit, and so on. A comparison of these terms with those used by 
 Hermas of his mountains will shew that there has been a use made 
 of the Eighth Similitude in the Ninth. 
 
 Nor must we suppose that there is any special identification 
 with the particular number twelve. The number is introduced 
 artificially and for the following reason : the mountains out of
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 5 
 
 which the stones are taken are declared to represent the peoples 
 of the earth out of whom the church is builded ; now the idea 
 prevailed at an early period that since the Jewish Ecclesia was 
 composed of twelve tribes, something of a similar nature was to be 
 predicated concerning the Christian world which had replaced and 
 comprehended the Jewish world. Otherwise how was an explana- 
 tion possible of the sealing of the 144,000 in the Apocalypse ? 
 But then these twelve tribes could not be identified with nation- 
 alities and must therefore represent so many different types of 
 character. 
 
 This is undoubtedly Hernias' idea, and it shews us that we 
 must not suppose any geographical enumeration to be involved in 
 the number twelve. The author of the Opus Imperfectum in 
 Matthaeum amongst his many traces of antiquity gives us the 
 following on Matt. xix. 28 : " Adhuc autem audeo, et subtiliorem 
 introducere sensum, et sententiarn alterius cuiusdam viri referre. 
 Exponit autem sic: Quoniam sicut Judaeorum populus in duo- 
 decim tribus fuit divisus, sic et universus populus Christianus 
 divisus est in duodecim tribus secundum quasdam proprietates 
 animorum et diversitates cordium, quas solus deus discernere et 
 cognoscere potest, ut quaedam animae sunt de tribu Reuben, 
 quaedam de tribu Simeon vel Levi vel Juda." 
 
 These twelve classes according to Hermas are 
 a. Blasphemers and traitors. 
 @. Hypocrites and wicked teachers. 
 
 7. Rich men and those who are involved in the business 
 of life 1 . 
 
 8. The double-minded. 
 
 e. Badly-trained, self-willed people. 
 
 r. Slanderers and keepers of grudges. 
 
 f. Simple, guileless, happy souls who give of their toils with- 
 out hesitating and without reproach. (Of. Teaching of Apostles.) 
 
 vj. Apostles and teachers. 
 
 6. Bad deacons who have plundered the widow and orphan. 
 Lapsi who do not repent and return to the saints. 
 
 1 Note that these are said to be iri>iy6/j.evot. vwb TWV irpd^euv avruv, and correspond 
 to the mountain covered with thorns and briars ; the reference to the Gospel (the 
 thorns sprang up and choked them) seems indisputable.
 
 6 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 i. Hospitable bishops who entertain the servants of God. 
 
 la. Martyrs for the Name, including those who thereby 
 obtain a remission that was otherwise inaccessible to them. 
 
 t/3. Babes of the Kingdom who keep all the commands 
 of God. 
 
 These, then, are the twelve tribes of the new Israel ; and, as 
 I have said, we do need to identify twelve mountains. 
 
 When we have made the deductions intimated from the 
 imagery, we are left to identify the locality from the remaining 
 data ; and this we shall proceed to do. And to begin with, let us 
 observe that the idea of Arcadia presented itself early in con- 
 nection with Christianity. For example, that beautiful compo- 
 sition which passes under the name of the second epistle of 
 Clement, but which seems rather to be an early Christian homily, 
 declares (c. xiv) the pre-existence of the Church in the following 
 terms: "Wherefore, my brethren, if we do the will of God our 
 Father we shall be of the first Church, viz. : the spiritual one, 
 which was created before the sun and moon. . . For the Church was 
 spiritual as was also our Jesus 1 , and was manifested in the last 
 times." No doubt this language is in part to be explained like 
 the Valentinian Syzygy of Man and the Church by reference to a 
 gnosis on Genesis i. 27. The writer of the homily says as much ; 
 the first Adam having been created male with female, so was 
 the second; but what should be noticed is that the terms used 
 to describe the pre-existence are not borrowed from Genesis, but 
 from the Arcadian tradition that they existed in their mountain 
 fastnesses before the moon, and it was thus that they explained 
 their name of IT potreXyvoi. What the writer of the homily means 
 is that the Christian Church is the true Arcadia. And thus we 
 have at once the explanation of the ideal journey which Hernias 
 makes into Arcadia. For we find the same view held in the 
 second Vision of Hermas (Vis. ii. 4. 1), where we are told even 
 more decidedly that the Church was created first of all things. 
 Similar ideas must have been common enough in the earlier 
 centuries. So much being premised, let us put ourselves into the 
 position of Hermas on the supposition that he has no more than 
 the ordinary notions concerning Arcadia. We should simply be 
 
 1 That Christ was before " the Sun and Moon " is proved by Justin, Dial. 76, 
 apparently from Ps. 72. 17, 110. 3.
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 7 
 
 able to say that Arcadia was the innermost part of the Pelo- 
 ponnesus, and that it was shut in on every side by a ring of 
 mountains. The rudest idea that could be formed would there- 
 fore be that of a plain within a circular mountain- wall ; precisely 
 the kind of view with which the Ninth Similitude opens. Here 
 dwell the remnants of the primitive and virtuous race of men 
 whom the gods loved to visit, whose chief virtues were, according 
 to Polybius, <j>t\o^evia and <f>i\av0po)7ri,a. It may be noticed in 
 passing, though I do not attach any importance to it, that Hernias 
 makes one of his spiritual tribes, the good bishops, representative 
 of the virtue of hospitality. 
 
 But it is plain that Hernias' knowledge goes beyond the 
 elementary notion sketched above. This can be seen best by 
 noticing the points which occur in the description of the moun- 
 tains which have no special parallel in the allegorical explanation 
 of the characters whom the mountains represent. For example, 
 he adds to his description of his seventh mountain the fact that 
 there were found on it all manner of beasts and birds ; the eighth 
 mountain is full of springs ; the tenth mountain has sheep resting 
 under the shade of its timber; the ninth is full of snakes and 
 evil beasts ; the eleventh shews fruit trees, and so on. But 
 especially one should draw attention to the sixth mountain, whose 
 description is e^ov ftordvas %\a)pd<i KOI rpa^v ov. The same 
 language is used again in c. 22 rov e^ovTos fiordvas x\copd<j KOI 
 T/>a%e'o<r or/To?. Here all the editors print the word rpa-^v as an 
 adjective, and it may be so ; but if an adjective it is suggested 
 by the name of one of the mountains of Arcadia. A reference 
 to a map of Arcadia will shew this mountain on the eastern side 
 of the plain of Orchomenos : E. Curtius in his Peloponnesos 
 (i. 219) describes it as follows: "Den ostlichen Berg nannten die 
 Alten seiner rauhen und schroffen Form wegen Trachy." 
 
 I suppose it will hardly be maintained to be an accidental 
 coincidence that Hernias, writing of Arcadia, or professing to 
 do so, should twice describe a particular mountain by the name 
 which the ancients used to designate one of the mountains of 
 Arcadia. So far from any such assumption being likely, the 
 mere mention of the name Trachy would be sufficient to intimate 
 that we were in Arcadia. 
 
 This identification being then made, we are able to take the 
 next step, and to determine the plain in which the scene is laid
 
 8 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 and the rounded hill from which the scenery is viewed. This 
 seems at first sight to be difficult, because, although to an outsider 
 Arcadia might be pictured as a happy valley within mountains, 
 in reality, like Switzerland, with which it has often been compared, 
 it does not furnish any one central plain, but innumerable valleys 
 and small plains; and although there are one or two larger and 
 more spacious than others, none seems to correspond to the rounded 
 form which Hernias' language would at first lead us to expect. 
 But the mention of Mount Trachy shews that the plain must 
 be the plain of Orchomenos, in the midst of which stands, dividing 
 it into upper and lower respectively, the hill of Orchomenos, 
 the strongest natural fortress of Arcadia and perhaps of ancient 
 Greece. This then must be the opo? juia-TwBes of Hernias; it 
 rises to a height of nearly 3000 feet immediately from the plain, 
 and was famous even in Homeric times as one of the early Greek 
 strongholds and cities 1 . 
 
 Thus far we might have arrived from a study of the itinerary 
 of Pausanias, from whose description of Arcadia we must make 
 not a few references. Thus in xiii. 2 we have the following 
 notes : 'Op%ofj,evioi<; Be rf Trporepa TroXt? e-Trl opovs f)v dtepa rfj 
 Kopvtpf) KOI dyopa? re real Tei%a>v epeiiria XetTrerat: and in 3. 
 ecrri, Be diravTiicpv TT}? TroXew? opo$ Tpa'xy. TO Be vBcop TO e/c ToO 
 Qeov Bta xapdBpas peov Koi\t]<; p,era^v rfj? re TroXeto? KOI rov 
 Tpa^eo? opovs Kareiatv e? a\Xo 'Op^o/iez/toi/ TreBiov' TO Be TreBiov 
 TOVTO fieyeOet, ftev fJ^eya, ra ir\ei(a Be ea~riv avrov \l/jLvrj. It 
 appears, therefore, that the name Trachy was current for the 
 mountain on the east of Orchomenos in the second century: 
 Pausanias seems to have given us here a careful and correct 
 description of the country. 
 
 Some of the other mountains to which Hermas makes reference 
 may now be identified by the aid of Pausanias. For example, 
 the ninth mountain is said to be full of serpents and noxious 
 beasts. The mountain referred to is Mt. Sepia. The name is 
 supposed to be derived from the venomous viper that was found 
 there ; and there were legends enough about the neighbourhood, 
 even in Pausanias' time, to make it appear a country which was 
 formerly something like Ireland before the arrival of St. Patrick. 
 
 1 Curtius, Peloponnesos, i. 220. " Die orchomenische Berg, eine Kuppe von 
 2912 F. Hohe, welche Ithome ahnlich 1st, und wie diese zwei Ebenen beherrscht, 
 eteigt unmittelbar ana dem Nachlande empor."
 
 HEBMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 ICftelyebtta. 
 
 MAP ILLUSTRATING HERMAS' VISIT TO ARCADIA
 
 10 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 Here they said that ^Epytus, the son of Elatos, met his death 
 from the bite of a serpent. Cf. Pausan. Arcad. iv. 4, KXeiropt, 
 Be TOJ 'Aai>o? ov <yevo/j,evcov TraiBwv 9 A.ITTVTOV 'EXarot; irepi- 
 e^(opt](rev V) 'ApicdBwv ySatriXeta. TOV Be ACTTVTOV e^e\06vra e? 
 aypav Oijpicov fiev TGOV d\Kifj,a)Tepci)v ovBev, crrj-fy- Be ov Trpo 
 aTroKTivvvo-t. TOV Be o<j>iv TOVTOV ical airro? TTOTC elBov Kara e- 
 o~ri TOV fincpoTdTOV, Te<f>pa ep,$epr}<j, aTvyiiacriv ov o~vve%o~i 7T67rot- 
 
 KT> 
 
 xvi. 1, TpiKprfvmv Be ov 7r6ppa) a\Xo eo-rlv 0/305 S^TTta KOI 
 W 'EXarov \eyovo~iv evravda iyeveo~0ai rrjv T\VTTJV e/c 
 rov o<e&)5 KTC. 
 
 Now, I think, if we compare Pausanias' account of ^Epytus' 
 death while hunting, through no great beast, but by the bite of a 
 viper, with Hermas' statement that in the ninth mountain there 
 were epTrera OavarcaBrj, Bia<j)deipovra TOV? avOptairov^, he will have 
 little doubt that the mountain meant is Mt. Sepia. 
 
 The identification of these two mountains, Trachy and Sepia, I 
 regard as established. They are respectively the fifth and ninth 
 of Hermas' series, and whatever further progress in identification 
 is possible, the results must harmonize with these so that the 
 other mountains enclose a plain with them, and from an exami- 
 nation of the situation of these two on a map of Arcadia it is not 
 difficult to infer that the order in which Hermas reckons his 
 mountains is East North West South. I am not, however, 
 very sanguine of making any further identifications that would 
 be equally convincing. It would be, however, possible to detect 
 the origin of Hennas' many-fountained mountain. For we are 
 informed by Pausanias that the emperor Adrian brought water 
 for the city of Corinth all the way from Stymphalus: Paus. ii. 
 iii. 5, Kpfjvcu Be 7ro\\al fj,ev dva ryv irb\w TreTrolyvrai irao-ai, 
 (ire d<j>d6vov peovros afyiviv vBaros, teal o Brj /3ao~i\ev<; 'ASpiavo? 
 eo-ijyasyev etc ^Tv/j><f>ij\ov. The language of Pausanias is in close 
 correspondence with Hermas, and the mountain is located in the 
 eighth place in the field of view. The umbrageous mountain 
 under the shade of which flocks of sheep were gathered might 
 find its identification in the Mt. Skiathis, described by Pausanias 
 as follows, xiv. 1, Kapvwv Be crrdBta TTCVTC d<j>e<TTr)tcev % re "Opt/ft? 
 Ka\ovfj,evr} /ecu erepov 2/aa#?. v$ exarepm Be can ro3 opet fidpa- 
 6pov TO vBcap KaraBe^ofjievov TO e'/cVoO TreBlov. 
 
 According to this identification Mt. Skiathis should be the next
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 11 
 
 in order to Mt. Sepia, since it is the tenth on Hennas' circle ; and 
 a reference to the map will shew that this conclusion is not 
 contradicted by the geography of the region, except that I think 
 Skiathis would appear a little to the right of Mt. Sepia to an 
 observer on the hill of Orchomenos 1 . As to the other character- 
 istics, it is not worth while to discuss the animal and vegetable 
 products of Arcadia more at length : it is sufficient to say that 
 Hennas' description shews a very fair acquaintance with ancient 
 Greek geography : and we may naturally go on to enquire what 
 were the sources of his knowledge. 
 
 I think that it will be sufficiently evident from what has gone 
 before that there is at least a suspicion that the description is 
 taken from Pausanias. When we remove from our minds those 
 details which I have shewn to be artificial creations of Hermas, 
 and such generalities as attach themselves naturally to the idea of 
 Arcadia as seen from the outside, we are left with peculiarities 
 that at once fall in with the notes in the Itinerary of Pausanias. 
 And these peculiarities are not the striking features of the Arcadian 
 scenery, such as the lofty Mt. Cyllene 2 and the like, but somewhat 
 insignificant details which would hardly have been noted except 
 by a close observer who was making his own notes carefully as he 
 went along, nor would they have been repeated except by some 
 one who had carefully perused such an itinerary 3 . 
 
 Now here a difficulty presents itself. No doubt we may admit 
 a certain amount of agreement between Pausanias and Hermas, 
 and it would be strange if two second-century writers, both dealing 
 with the subject of Arcadia, had not expressed themselves in a 
 
 1 Note that Curtius says (i. 210), " S/cfo0is ist der schattige Waldberg, gleich 
 Spot bei Dikaearch. 75. Diesem Bergnamen entspricht der Name des Dorfes 
 
 Skotini das am Abhange unseres Skiathis liegt." 
 
 2 We cannot even be sure whether Hernias alludes to Mt. Cyllene at all ; yet it 
 must have been the most conspicuous feature of the landscape. The fact that it is 
 not actually on the borders of the plain of Orchomenos, proves nothing ; Mt. Sepia 
 overlooks the valley of Stymphalus rather than the plain of Orchomenos, yet it is 
 clearly alluded to by Hermas. Is Mt. Cyllene intended by the seventh mountain 
 upon whose slopes are found all kinds of cattle and of birds ? 
 
 3 For example, in addition to what has been said, notice that the leading feature 
 in the southwest of the landscape is Mt. Ostrakina, and compare the description in 
 Hermas where the pastor bids those who build the tower to bring 6nTpa.Kov and 
 tf<r/3e<rros in order that they may make the neighbourhood of the tower clean against 
 the day of its inspection: Viraye Kal <ptpe Aff^ea-rov Kal a<rrpa.Kov \eirT6v. Is this 
 Ostrakina the twelfth mountain of Hermas?
 
 12 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 manner which suggested peculiar coincidences in minor points, 
 but in that case how could it be possible that Hermas could have 
 utilized Pausanias, when that writer had not completed his Arcadia 
 before the year 167 (as we shall shew) ? 
 
 For determining the date of Pausanias' Itinerary we have, I 
 believe, no facts besides those which are contained in the work 
 itself. The chronological landmarks are as follows : In the seventh 
 book of the Itinerary (Achaia 20, 6) Pausanias explains that the 
 Odeion at Athens was not described in his first book on Attica 
 because Herodes Atticus had not built it at the time when the 
 first book was written. Now Atticus is one of the leading figures 
 of the second century, sufficiently known by his reputation as a 
 rhetorician, an executor of magnificent public works all over 
 Greece, and as a teacher and friend of Marcus Aurelius. The 
 period of his life is supposed to be A.D. 104-180. Since the close 
 of his life was embittered by the plots and complaints of an 
 opposing faction at Athens, we may suspect that his liberality in 
 public building at Athens does not belong to the last years of his 
 life. And, whatever date we may assign to the structure, we 
 have the following sequence : 
 
 Pausanias writes his Attica. 
 Herodes builds the Odeion. 
 Pausanias writes his Arcadia. 
 
 The other landmark is as follows: Pausanias alludes in his Itinerary 
 of Arcadia to Marcus Aurelius and, perhaps, to his victory over the 
 Quadi which took place in A.D. 174. The passage is as follows: 
 TOVTOV Etvo~ef3f) TOV {3a<rt\ea eicdXea-av ol 'Pcopaioi, Sion rfj e? TO 
 Seiov TifATJ (j,d\.io~Ta tyaivero xp&fjbevos' 56%$ 8e e//.?; KOI TO ovopa 
 TO Kvpov <j>epotTO av TOV Trpeo-fivTepov, TraTrjp dvOpcoTrwv tca\ov- 
 'ATreXtTre 8e KaL CTTI TT? {3ao~t\eia TraiSa ofAcovvfAOv' 6 Be 
 OUT09 o SevTepos Kal Tov<t T Tepfj,dvov<i, fj,axifjL(0TdTov<; 
 teal TrXeMTTOus TWV ev TTJ EivptoTrrj ftapftdpwv Kal effvos TO 2<avpo- 
 
 The language here used has generally been taken to mean 
 that Pausanias was writing his eighth book subsequently to the 
 defeat of the Quadi in 174. But it seems to me that while the 
 passage has an air of having brought recent history down to date, 
 that date is the date of the departure of the expedition against 
 the Germans and not of its return. It becomes therefore possible
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 13 
 
 to push back the date of the Arcadia nearly seven years earlier. 
 We proceed on the supposition that Pausanias wrote his history 
 and published it as he went along; this appears from the fact 
 that the eighth book was written at a time when the first book 
 was out of reach of correction. But even, on the earliest hypothesis, 
 does it seem likely that Hermas could have written so late in the 
 second century as to copy Pausanias? And if this seem too 
 difficult an assumption, especially in view of the Muratorian canon, 
 is there any other hypothesis that will explain the apparent 
 coincidence ? The alternative that first offers itself is the depres- 
 sion of the date of this portion of Hermas. 
 
 It has been noticed by Hilgenfeld that the writings attributed 
 to Hermas fall, upon critical examination, into three groups : the 
 first of these which Hilgenfeld calls Hermas apocalypticus, com- 
 prises the first four Visions; the second part, which comprises 
 Vis. v to Sim. vii, having Vis. iii for its prologue, and Similitude 
 vii for its epilogue, is the true Hermas pastoralis or book of the 
 Shepherd. The third division comprises Similitudes viii and ix 
 with the tenth for an epilogue. This part of the book Hilgenfeld 
 calls Hermas secundarius, and attributes to his editorial care 
 (whoever he may be) the massing together of the whole series of 
 writings. Now there is something to be said for this division, 
 even if we may not feel like abandoning altogether the theory of 
 the single authorship. May it not be that the last division is the 
 later workmanship of the same hand as wrote the two former 
 groups ? In that case we are able still to hold to the Muratorian 
 statement with the single restriction that it applies only to the 
 earlier parts of the book. This would require us to assume that 
 Hermas outlived his brother Pius by a number of years, depending, 
 in part, upon the (doubtful) date of the death of Pius, or at least 
 of the close of his episcopate. And even if this explanation be 
 considered insufficient, it is still possible to adopt Hilgenfeld's 
 theory of a later writer who re-edits and makes an appendix to 
 the earlier Hermas (I do not of course mean to imply that 
 Hilgenfeld makes Hermas fall so late as my theory would imply). 
 And even if Pausanias should turn out not to be the true 
 authority, the identification of the water sources of Corinth 
 brought by Hadrian remains and lowers the date of Hermas 
 accordingly. 
 
 It becomes proper now to return to the Arcadian allegory and
 
 14 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 see whether there is any other point where the comparison can be 
 made geographically correct. And I should like, though in a 
 somewhat tentative manner, to suggest that in the details of the 
 building of the tower, Hermas has had some reference to the early 
 Cyclopean buildings of which the ruins were still to be seen in 
 Greece and especially in the Peloponnesus. Perhaps the best way 
 to make my meaning clear will be to compare a passage in Hermas 
 with descriptions taken from Pausanias and modern writers. In 
 Sim. ix. vii. 4, we find Hermas speaking as follows : " I said to the 
 Shepherd, How can these stones which have been condemned 
 enter into the building of the tower? He answered and said 
 unto me, Dost thou see these stones ? I see them, sir, said I. 
 Said he, I will cut away the greater part of these stones and put 
 them into the building, and they shall fit in with the rest of the 
 stones. How, sir, said I, can these stones when cut occupy the 
 same room ? He answered and said unto me, Those which are 
 found to be small for their place shall be put into the middle of 
 the building, while the larger ones shall be put outside, and so 
 they will hold one another together." 
 
 Now let us compare with this the description which Pausanias 
 gives of the wonderful Cyclopean walls of Tiryns. He tells us 
 that these walls are made of unwrought stones of such size that a 
 team of mules would not be able to shake even the smallest ones ; 
 and that smaller stones to these are fitted into the interstices of 
 the larger ones, so as to produce the closest union between them 1 . 
 
 I understand Hermas to mean to describe in his builded tower 
 a work of Cyclopean character (which, by the way, appears also 
 from the fact that there are only ten stones in the first course of 
 the building), and the small stones which result from the process 
 of cutting, to correspond to those which Pausanias describes as 
 producing a union between the larger blocks. And it is clear 
 from the description in Hermas that the larger blocks are un- 
 wrought stones (dpyd). Those who wish to see the appearance of 
 such a wall depicted will find it in Schliemann, Mycence and 
 Tiryns, p. 29, where it is called a " wall of the first period." 
 
 Similar Cyclopean remains may be found at other points in 
 
 1 TO 6ij Te?xy, 8 Si) (*6vov -r&v tpetirlw Xe/rrerat, KVK\uirwv ptv tffrw tpyov, 
 te dpyuv \lduv, ptyfOos (X uv ^KaffTot X0oj ws air ai/Tuv /iijS* &v dpxn" KtvijBrjvai rbv 
 fUKpbraTov virb fetiyovs T)iu6vwv ' \l6ia Si evfipnoarcu. ird\ai wj avruv tKaarov ap 
 TO?S fj.(yd\ois X/0o elvai. Paus. ii. 25. 8.
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 15 
 
 the Peloponnesus, such as the top of the mountain of Orchomenos, 
 and the ruins of the ancient city of Lycosura in Southwest 
 Arcadia. 
 
 And this identification helps us to explain a detail in Hernias' 
 accoimt ; viz. : the way in which his tower is said to be built over 
 the rock and over the gate (eVdi/w T^? trirpa^ KOI eVai>&> rrjs 
 TrvXijs). Special attention is given in these early buildings, such 
 as the acropolis of Mycenae and the like, to the defences of the 
 entrance. The entrance to the gate of the Lions at Mycenae is an 
 .illustration of this, the gate being placed at right angles to the 
 wall of the citadel and approached through a passage formed by 
 the citadel wall and a nearly parallel outer wall which formed 
 part of the masonry of a tower by which the entrance was guarded. 
 Schliemann adds to his description of this gateway an approving 
 reference to Leake for pointing out that "the early citadel 
 builders bestowed greater labour than their successors on the 
 approaches to the gates." Another instance of a gate defended by 
 a tower which projects over it is given by Curtius from the ruins 
 of Lycosura : " On the east side of the city there is preserved a 
 gate with a projecting tower (ein Thor mit einem Thurmvor- 
 sprunge)." 
 
 I venture the suggestion, then, that Hernias in the Ninth 
 Similitude, when working up again the subject of the Church- 
 Tower, has been influenced by accounts of the Cyclopean buildings 
 of the Peloponnesus. If his authority was a written one, it may 
 have been Pausanias, as in the previous cases ; unless some point 
 can be brought forward to show that Pausanias was unacquainted 
 with what Hernias describes elsewhere, and that Hernias must 
 have had written authority for the same. 
 
 To sum up the whole course of the preceding arguments : the 
 scene of the Ninth Similitude of Hernias is really laid in Arcadia, 
 probably in the plain of Orchomenos. Some of the mountain 
 scenery which he describes is capable of exact identification by 
 means of the Itinerary of Pausanias ; and he has been influenced 
 in his architecture by the Cyclopean remains of the Peloponnesus. 
 Either the whole or at all events the latter part of the writings of 
 Hermas should therefore be held of later date than the Arcadia of 
 Pausanias. But the objection will be made that recent researches 
 of German investigators and archaeologists have shown reason for 
 believing Pausanias himself to be a wholesale thief and plunderer
 
 16 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 of previous guide-books to Greece. So that our investigation may 
 lead rather to the reopening of the Pausanias question than to 
 the solution of the Hermas chronology and geography. 
 
 The attack upon Pausanias was commenced by Wilamowitz- 
 Mollendorf (Hermes xii. 72) and sharply reinforced by Hirschfeld 
 in an article in the Archdologische Zeitung (XL =1882, f. 97). 
 Hirschfeld brings a good deal of evidence to shew that the list of 
 statues of Olympian victors does not reach later than the second 
 century B.C.; and that the series stops here, not because there 
 were no more Olympian victories commemorated, but because 
 Pausanias is copying an earlier writer (probably Polemo), who 
 does not pass this point of time in his descriptions: so that we 
 may almost say that there is no evidence that Pausanias ever 
 visited Olympia at all ; but that both he and Pliny drew upon 
 earlier writers. 
 
 NOAV this problem is a very many-sided one, and the archaeo- 
 logical world is still divided over it, and, until the discussion 
 subsides somewhat, it is not easy to determine whether the 
 defenders of Pausanias or his severe critics have won the day. 
 My own judgment is still reserved upon the point. Hence we 
 must also be careful in reference to Hermas. We may be reason- 
 ably sure that if Pausanias was never at Olympia, he was never in 
 Arcadia ; but the preliminary hypothesis is not yet settled. 
 Hence we content ourselves in the Hermas problem with affirm- 
 ing that Hermas really describes Arcadian scenery, but whether 
 he takes his description from Pausanias or from some earlier 
 Baedeker's Guide to Arcadia is as yet uncertain.
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 17 
 
 After the appearance of the foregoing paper, I received the 
 following remarks upon it from Dr Hort, the characteristic caution 
 of which will be evident to the reader, as I hope it will also be 
 evident presently that the caution was undue and unnecessary. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE, 
 
 23 Dec. 1887. 
 
 The first reading interested me much, but not with 
 
 conviction; for the time, at least, the coincidences seemed too 
 slight. The passage from Op. Imperf. at p. 73, a book which has 
 much from Origen, is probably founded on some lost passage of 
 him. There is a reference, though in somewhat ambiguous terms 
 in the Comm. in Matt. p. 688 Ru. (1325 A, Migne); cf. 480 
 (912 A) 
 
 Dr Lightfoot was more favourable in his view of the argument, 
 but he demurred (as we shall see, rightly) to the assumption that 
 Hennas was indebted to Pausanias. 
 
 He wrote as follows : 
 
 AUCKLAND CASTLE, BISHOP AUCKLAND, 
 
 Nov. 14, 1887. 
 MY DEAR SIR, 
 
 I am much obliged to you for your very interesting 
 paper on Hermas in Arcadia. 
 
 You seem to me to make out a very strong case for Arcadia. 
 As for Pausanias, I am less able to follow you. But you do not 
 insist on this, nor does it affect your main point. If his informa- 
 tion had been derived from Pausanias, I should have expected to 
 find the resemblances go much further. 
 
 Yours very sincerely, 
 J. B. DUNELM. 
 
 At this point the argument was taken up by Mr (now Prof.) 
 Armitage Robinson, who published, in an Appendix to his edition 
 of Lambros' collation of the Athos Codex of the Shepherd of 
 H. H. 2
 
 18 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 Hennas, some further considerations, which will be found sufficient 
 to dissipate the suspicions aroused by Dr Hort, and to confirm 
 those expressed by Dr Lightfoot. 
 
 Over and above the identifications which I had suggested 
 between the Arcadian mountains and the scenery described by 
 Hernias, Mr Robinson suggested four further positive identifica- 
 tions as well as some of a more shadowy character. These are as 
 follows : 
 
 (i) Mt Knakalus described by Pausanias (viii. 23. 3, 4); 
 tcvaKos is the Doric form of tcvfjicos a kind of thistle, and conse- 
 quently this mountain is to be equated with the mountain which 
 Hermas describes as dtcavOwBes fcal rpi/36\Q)v Tr\f]p<> (Sim. ix. 
 1.5). 
 
 (ii) A ridge close to Mt Sepia, called TplKprjva. 
 
 ' This no doubt was an abbreviation of TpiKapijva, the three- 
 peaked ridge ; but its popular explanation is all that we have to 
 do with, and that is shewn by the legend that is attached to it : 
 opr) Qevear&v eWt Tpiicprjva KaXovpeva' teal elcrlv avrodi Kpfjvai 
 rpei?' ev rat/Tats \ovaat, re^devra 'JLpfArjv al irepl TO 0/309 \eyovrat 
 vv/j,<j>ai,, /cal eVt Tovrw r9 irrj^a^ iepa<$ 'Qpfiov vo/J,tov<rw' 
 (Paus. viii. 16. 1). 
 
 Accordingly Mr Robinson identified this with the mountain 
 which Hermas describes as Trvjywv 7r\f)p<;...Kal irav 761/09 rrjs 
 /CTure&)9 TOV tcvpiov eVoTtbz>TO GK TWV Trqywv rov opovs eiceivov. 
 
 The next two identifications are less satisfactory : 
 
 (iii) A mountain is mentioned by Pausanias, called Phalan- 
 thus, and since <pa\avdo<; is synonymous with 0a\a/c/?o9 which, 
 like T/a\o9, means 'bald,' Mr Robinson proposed to identify this 
 with a mountain which Hermas describes as >/aXoV, /3oTdva$ prj 
 e%ov. This seems to me too artificial ; if Hermas had been 
 describing this mountain, it is much more likely that he would 
 have preserved its Greek name, in the same way as he preserved 
 the name of Tpa^v. 
 
 (iv) The next identification I am almost ashamed to cast a 
 suspicion upon. Mr Robinson replied to my question as to the 
 omission of Mt Kyllene from the panorama of Hermas, when it 
 must have been the most conspicuous feature in the landscape, 
 by suggesting that Mt Kyllene is the twelfth mountain of 
 Hermas, the great white, glad-faced mountain, 'unreached by
 
 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 19 
 
 either cloud or wind, so that the very ashes on the altar of 
 Hermes were found undisturbed whenever the worshippers re- 
 turned for the annual sacrifice.' 
 
 There is no doubt that this profound calm of the mountain of 
 Hermes was a favourite thought with the ancients; it has survived 
 for us in modern poetry in the beautiful lines of Wordsworth, 
 where he praises 
 
 .... the perpetual warbling that prevails 
 In Arcady, beneath unaltered skies, 
 Through the long year in constant quiet bound, 
 Night hushed as night, and day serene as day. 
 
 Excursion, Bk. iii. 
 
 Unfortunately, however, and this is the only serious objection 
 to the identification, the mountain Kyllene is, as Mr Robinson 
 knows from an actual visit to the spot, invisible from the hill of 
 Orchomenos; and it seems unlikely that Hernias would have 
 thrust into his panorama a mountain which did not properly form 
 a part of it. He might, perhaps, have done so, if he had been 
 simply working from a geography or a guide-book ; but the result 
 of Mr Robinson's additions to my identifications is such as to make 
 it impossible for me to hold any longer the theory of borrowing 
 from Pausanias. Hernias must have been in Arcadia, and in that 
 case, it is very unlikely that he would have given us an incorrect 
 landscape. I will not say it is impossible, and I should be glad if 
 further consideration should make it appear more probable. 
 
 But enough has been said to dissipate the suspicions which 
 Dr Hort had expressed to me in private. We take it as proved 
 that the scenery of Hermas' vision is actually laid in Arcadia, and 
 we have not the slightest right to substitute Aricia, or to try to 
 Italianize the vision. 
 
 Not only so, but as Mr Robinson has shewn by a number of 
 considerations, the net result of the investigation is to shew that 
 Hermas must have come from Arcadia ; his geography is a part of 
 himself and not a loan from Pausanias or some other guide-book. 
 ' May he not,' asks Mr Robinson, ' have been a Greek slave of 
 Arcadian origin ? In this case his name, a common one for Greek 
 slaves, would seem specially fitting for a native of this particular 
 district, when we remember that Pausanias tells us of the worship 
 of Hermas at Pheneos, twelve miles distant from Orchomenus..., 
 when we remember also the story of the Nymphs who bathed him 
 
 22
 
 20 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 
 
 at his birth in the sacred fountains of Trikrena, one of the spurs 
 of Mount Kyllene; and above all when we recall the epithet 
 ' Cyllenius ' derived from the worship of Hernias on the windless 
 summit of the great mountain-king of Arcadia, who reared his 
 head, as it was firmly believed, right up into the eternal calm 
 above the clouds and above the storms which darkened and 
 distressed the world at his feet.' 
 
 The conclusion seems to me to be correct as well as highly 
 eloquent; and I am quite prepared to admit that we have in 
 Hermas a Greek slave from Arcadia. And in this connexion, it is 
 worthy of note that it explains certain features in Hernias' 
 personal history. Arcadian slaves were commonly sold in pairs, 
 and we may get some light on the situation by recalling an 
 instance from the century before Hermas, where two brothers, 
 Arcadian slaves, rose to great eminence in the Roman Empire. 
 The case to which I allude is that of Pallas and Felix, who were 
 sold to Antonia, the mother of the emperor Claudius; both of 
 them attained their freedom; Pallas became a leading figure in 
 the life of imperial Rome, and Felix is known to us as the 
 procurator of Judaea who trembled before the preaching of Paul. 
 Now Tacitus tells us (Ann. xii. 53) that Pallas was 'regibus 
 Arcadiae ortus,' no doubt because he was named after one of the 
 Arcadian kings, Pallas the son of Lycaon ; and if this be so, we 
 have an exact parallel to the naming of Hermas after the great 
 deity of Arcadia. But it may be asked, where is the brother of 
 Hermas to complete the parallel ? The answer is in the Mura- 
 torian Canon which tells us that Hermas is the brother of Pius, 
 who occupied the episcopal chair of the Roman Church. 
 
 We thus arrive at a picturesque series of parallels between 
 the two pairs of Arcadian brothers, who, in two successive centuries, 
 attained eminence in Roman life ; and while we do not wish to 
 press coincidences which may be accidental, such as the sale of 
 slaves to Roman ladies (cf. Herm. Vis. i. 1 o ffpfyas /ze Treirpaicev 
 /* 'PoSjy) and the like, we may at least illustrate by the successful 
 rise from slavery into political eminence of the two freedmen of 
 Claudius, the similar liberation which took place in the case of 
 Hermas and Pius, and which set one of them on the chair of 
 St Peter, and gave the other an even greater place than the chair 
 of Peter, as representative in the Church's literature of one of the 
 most interesting periods in her history.
 
 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. 
 
 (Johns Hopkins University Circulars, April 1884.) 
 
 THERE is a passage in the Shepherd of Hermas, Vis. iv. 2, 4, 
 which has occasioned a great deal of perplexity to the com- 
 mentators. Hermas is met by a fierce beast with a parti-coloured 
 head, which beast symbolizes an impending persecution or tribula- 
 tion, and makes as though it would devour him. But the Lord 
 sends his angel who is over the wild beasts, whose name is Thegri, 
 and shuts the mouth of the creature, that it may not hurt him. 
 
 @ey/?t according to Gebhardt and Harnack is 'nomen inau- 
 ditiim' ; it appears in the Vulgate Latin as Hegrin and in the 
 Palatine version as Tegri. The Ethiopia translation has Tegri. 
 Jerome seems to have read Tyri, since in his comments on Habac. 
 i. 4 we have ' ex quo liber ille apocryphus stultitiae condemnandus 
 est, in quo scriptum est quemdam angelum nomine Tyri praeesse 
 reptilibus.' Much ingenuity has been expended over the origin 
 of the word and in particular the following is the solution of 
 Franciscus Delitzsch as given in Gebhardt and Harnack's edition : 
 ' Si sumi possit, Hermam nomen angeli illius ex angelologia 
 Judaica hausisse, quae angelos maris, pluviae, grandinis etc. finxit 
 iisque nomina commentitia indidit, Oeypi idem est quod ^Fl 
 
 instimulator h. e. angelus, qui bestias (contra homines) instimulat 
 atque, si velit, etiam domat (Taggar = dissidium, discordia ; 
 cum i = Tigri, quod bene descripsit H. : deypi, etc.).' 
 
 I assent to the Hebrew origin of the name, but am unwilling 
 to explain a nomen inauditum by a nomen vix auditum. A more 
 simple solution presents itself; if for 6 we write <r, according to 
 the confusion common in uncial script, we have 2ey/>l for the
 
 22 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. 
 
 name of the angel : which immediately suggests the root "l^D, 
 to close. The angel is the one that closes or shuts. This is 
 immediately confirmed by the language of Hernias, o Kvpios 
 aTrecrrei\,ev rov a<y<ye\ov avrov rov eirl rwv Oijpicov ovra, ov TO 
 eo~riv Oeypi, Kal eve<f>paj;ev TO arofia avrov iva prf <re 
 
 If any doubt remained as to the correctness of this solution it 
 would be swept away by reading the passage in Hermas side by 
 side with the LXX of Daniel vi. 23 ; o 0eo? p.ov direa-reCkev rov 
 ayy\ov avrov KOI eve(f>pa^ev (""DDI) ra Grbpara rwv \eovrcov 
 Kal OVK eXvprfvavro fie. 
 
 The curious parallelism of the language employed in the two 
 passages is decisive as to the etymology, and further we may be 
 sure that the language of Hermas is an indirect quotation from 
 the book of Daniel. 
 
 The result arrived at is an important one in many respects, 
 and has a possible bearing upon the genealogy of the MSS. and 
 versions of Hermas : so far as we are concerned we may simply 
 say that those copies and versions which read 6eypl or any 
 variation of the same bear conclusive marks of a Greek original. 
 It might seem unnecessary to make such a remark, but the fact is 
 that grave suspicions have been thrown out in some quarters as 
 to the character of the original text of Hermas. Upon further 
 consideration I am inclined indeed to conclude that all the versions 
 came from an original which read Oeypi, for even the Vulgate 
 Latin which has Hegrin seems to have arrived at it by dropping 
 the reduplicated T in the words 
 
 NOMEN EST THEGBI. 
 
 There is, however, another way in which the Latin variant 
 might be explained : for, as Dr Haupt points out to me, we have 
 a similar transformation in the Hebrew D^SD (2 Kings xviii. 34) 
 
 which appears in Berosus as ^la-jrapa, in Ptolemy v. 18 2 
 but in Pliny vi. 123 as Hipparenum.
 
 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. 23 
 
 At this point the argument was taken up by Dr Hort, in a 
 communication which appeared in the Johns Hopkins University 
 Circulars for Dec. 1884, as follows : 
 
 Hernias and Theodotion; 
 
 a communication from Professor Hort with regard to an emenda- 
 tion of the text of Hennas. 
 
 The note on the Angelology of Hermas printed by Professor 
 Rendel Harris in the Johns Hopkins University Circular for April 
 contains a discovery of considerable interest in itself, and further 
 noteworthy as having at once enabled the discoverer to find a 
 satisfactory answer to an old riddle. There cannot be a doubt 
 that he is right in tracing back the language of Hermas in Vis. iv. 
 2 4 to Daniel 632; and it is hardly less certain, I think, that 
 he has given the true explanation of eypl, the mysterious name 
 of the angel who is sent to protect Hermas, by reading it as 'S.eypi 
 taken as a derivative from sagar, the verb employed in that verse 
 for the shutting of the lions' mouths. 
 
 The best known repositories of Jewish angelology do not appear 
 to contain the name of Segri : but Sigron (p"UD) is recorded by 
 Levy-Fleischer (p. 478) from the Talmudic Tract Sanhedrin as an 
 accessory name of Gabriel, given him 'because, if he shuts the 
 doors of heaven, no one can open them.' The designation would 
 seem to belong more naturally in the first instance to some such 
 high function as this than to the shutting of lions' mouths an 
 office not to be confounded with the general charge of lions or 
 other beasts, said to have been appropriated to different angels ; 
 and the occurrence of Gabriel's name in Dan. 8 16 ; 9 2i may easily 
 have been taken as determining the identity of the angel of 633. 
 By what channel the Hebrew application of an obscure name 
 belonging to Jewish tradition came to be accepted, though ap- 
 parently misunderstood, by the Roman Hermas, is a question 
 easier to ask than to answer. 
 
 My chief purpose, however, in writing this supplementary note, 
 which is sent by Prof. Rendel Harris' request, is to point out that 
 his discovery may have an important bearing on the disputed 
 question of the Shepherd's date. The language of Hermas follows 
 not the true Septuagint version of Daniel, but that of Theodotion,
 
 24 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. 
 
 which superseded it in the course of the second century. The 
 Septuagint drops the angel altogether : and in v. 22 has merely 
 
 (reatoicev fie 6 Oeos airo r<ov \eovroiv, 
 
 while it transfers the shutting of the lions' mouths to v. 18 by the 
 insertion of an interpolated clause ending 
 
 a7reic\ia-ev ra (rrofiara rtav \e6vra>v KCU ov 
 
 This clause, shortened in the opening words, was retained by 
 Theodotion, with e/cXeto-e*/ (according to the best MSS.) substituted 
 for aireK\eia-ev ; but he corrected v. 22 by the Aramaic text 
 reading 6 0eo9 fiov aTrearei\ev rbv dyye\ov avrov KOI eve<f>paev 
 ra arofiara ra>v \eovrcov ical OVK eXvfirfvavro fie. Now Hermas 
 has retained not only the angel, but the two characteristic Greek 
 verbs, for he writes 6 Kvpios d7re<rrei\ev rov ayye\ov avrov...Kal 
 eveQpagev ro a-ro/ia avrov iva fir) <re \Vfjt,dvrj. 
 
 It follows that Hermas cannot be older than Theodotion. To 
 discuss the other evidence for the date of either Hermas or 
 Theodotion would be beyond my present purpose. 
 
 F. J. A. HORT. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND. 
 July 8, 1884. 
 
 This attempt to place the date of Hermas lower than that of 
 Theodotion provoked the opposition of Dr Salmon who, in the 
 following year in a note on Hermas and Theodotion which will be 
 found appended to his Introduction to the New Testament, de- 
 fended the antiquity of Hermas relatively to Theodotion. Dr 
 Salmon had already in an article on Hermas in Smith's Dictionary 
 of Christian Biography rejected the evidence of the Muratorian 
 Canon which places the time of the composition of the Shepherd 
 in the episcopate of Pius, i.e. c. A.D. 140 155. (The Canon itself 
 must be later than this by some years, and we shall perhaps not 
 be far wrong if we date it approximately in A.D. 180.) Salmon 
 was now obliged to face new and, at first sight, conclusive evidence 
 for the lateness of Hermas. True, the date of Theodotion is not a 
 fixed point, being almost as much in dispute as the date of 
 Hermas. But the evidence of the Patristic literature goes to shew 
 that the Church abandoned the use of the Septuagint Daniel 
 somewhere between the time of Justin and the time of Irenaeus,
 
 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. 25 
 
 substituting for it the more exact version of Theodotion. And 
 certainly the translation made by Theodotion is earlier than 
 Irenaeus, for it is alluded to by the latter writer in his work 
 against Heresies (iii. 21), and there are traces of the use of the 
 Theodotion Daniel in the quotations of Irenaeus from the book 
 itself. It follows, therefore, that Theodotion's text was known in 
 the West as early as 180 A.D. And if we grant the use of 
 Theodotion by Irenaeus why should we deny it in the case of 
 Hermas ? 
 
 The answer to this, from Dr Salmon's point of view, is that we 
 have no right to assume that the only translations of Daniel 
 current in the early Church were those of the LXX and of 
 Theodotion. An examination of the quotations made from Daniel 
 in the Apocalypse shews some singular agreements with the text 
 of Theodotion as against the LXX, from which it is a natural 
 inference that Theodotion remodelled an earlier version of Daniel. 
 But in that case we have no right to say positively that Hermas 
 has quoted from the text of Theodotion. Even in the very verse 
 which is supposed to furnish the test case, we find a curious 
 agreement with Daniel as quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 which suggests the use of a version like the Theodotion version by 
 a writer a century earlier than Theodotion (cf. Heb. xi^ e<j>pat;av 
 crTOfiara Xeovrav). 
 
 The argument must be traced at length in Dr Salmon's own 
 pages, and it will, I think, leave the impression upon the mind of 
 the student that a fair case has been made out for a suspense of 
 judgment in regard to inferences drawn from the Segri passage. 
 Probably it will also be felt that Dr Salmon went too far when he 
 suggested that even the quotations in Irenaeus, which were 
 supposed to come from Theodotion, might be from some lost early 
 version to which that of Theodotion was closely related. If these 
 quotations are to be disputed, in the light of the known fact of 
 Irenaeus' acquaintance with the version of Theodotion, we should 
 almost be obliged to go further, and deny the use of Theodotion 
 by Irenaeus' pupil Hippolytus. But this step is too extreme for 
 any one who was not prepared to abolish Theodotion altogether. 
 But without denying the use of Theodotion by Irenaeus we might 
 hold the posteriority of Hermas to be non-proven, and the question 
 then arises as to whether there is any further light to be obtained 
 upon the disputed points from fresh points of view.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 A Lecture delivered in the Divinity School, Cambridge, 
 in October 1892. 
 
 THE newspapers have from time to time during the last two 
 years informed us that the King of Abyssinia has begun to collect 
 books for a Royal Library, and that he has made requisition from 
 the monks of the various monasteries in his kingdom for the 
 leading works which are extant among them, or for copies of 
 the same. One suspects that some traveller is there who has 
 been urging the King to make collections with the view of 
 rendering the recovery of lost Ethiopic books more easy. If that 
 be so, he is a wise traveller and deserves our best thanks. 
 
 The suggestion, however, of a royal library for Abyssinia takes 
 us back as well as invites us forward ; for one of the features 
 of the great kingdom of Prester John, the Christian King of 
 Ethiopia, whom the Portuguese discovered holding the faith in 
 the mountains that border on the southern end of the Red Sea, 
 was a magnificent library. Abyssinia was reported to be a 
 paradise of books, as well as a Christian country with a Happy 
 Valley in it 1 . And the description which the English writer 
 Purchas gives of this collection of rare books is enough to make 
 the mouth of every scholar and bibliophile to water. Let me 
 draw your attention, as mine has been drawn by a friend, to the 
 following extract from Purchas his Pilgrimage or Relations of the 
 
 1 Rasselas is no mere imagination of Johnson ; he wrote the novel shortly after 
 he had been doing the hack-work of translating Lobo's Voyage to Abyssinia for 
 Bettesworth and Hicks of Paternoster Bow, who published it in 1735. Johnson 
 received five guineas for this piece of work and devoted his first earnings to the 
 funeral expenses of his mother. The translation was made from the French 
 edition.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 27 
 
 World and the Religions observed in all Ages, London, 1613; 
 pp. 565 ff., Of the Hill Amara : and the rarities therein. After 
 describing the natural features of the hill, the stately buildings 
 of the two churches with their monasteries, he goes on to speak of 
 the library thus (p. 567) : 
 
 "In the monastery of the Holy Crosse are two rare peeces, 
 whereon Wonder may justly fasten both her eies ; the Treasury 
 and Library 1 of the Emperour, neither of which is thought to be 
 matchable in the world. That Librarie of Constantinople 2 wherein 
 were 120000 bookes, nor the Alexandrian Library, wherein 
 Gellius* numbereth 700000, had the fire not been admitted (too 
 hastie a student) to consume them, yet had they come short, if 
 report over-reach not, this whereof we speake, their number is in 
 a maner innumerable, their price inestimable. The Queene of 
 Saba (they say) procured Bookes hither from all parts, besides 
 many which Solomon gave her, and from that time to this, their 
 Emperors have succeeded in like care and diligence. There are 
 three great Halls, each above two hundred paces large, with Bookes 
 of all Sciences, written in fine parchment, with much curiosity 
 of golden letters, and other workes, and cost in the writing, 
 binding, and covers: some on the floore, some on shelves about 
 the sides ; there are few of paper : which is but a new thing in 
 Ethiopia 4 . There are the writings of Enoch copied out of the 
 stones wherein they were engraven, which intreate of Philosophic, 
 of the Heavens and Elements. Others goe under the name of 
 Noe, the subject whereof is Cosmographie, Mathematickes, cere- 
 monies and prayers ; some of Abraham which he composed when 
 he dwelt in the valley of Mamre, and there read publikely Philo- 
 sophie and the Mathematikes. There is very much of Salomon, 
 a great number passing under his name; many ascribed to Job, 
 which he writ after the recovery of his property 5 ; many of Esdras, 
 the Prophets and high Priests. And besides the four canonicall 
 Gospels, many others ascribed to Bartholomew, Thomas, Andrew, 
 and many others ; much of the Sibylles, in verse and prose ; the 
 
 1 "The library of thePrete." [Margin.] 2 " Zonar. Ann. to. 3." [Margin.] 
 s "Gell. li. 6 c. 17." [Margin.] 
 
 4 "Fr. Luys hath a very large catalogue of them 1. 1, c. 9 taken out (as he saith) 
 of an Index, wh. Anthony Gricus and L. Cremones made of them, being sent 
 hither by the Pope Gregory 13 at the instance of Cardinall Zarlet, which sawe and 
 admired the varietie of them, as did many others then in their company." [Margin.] 
 
 5 Qu. prosperity.
 
 28 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 workes of the Queen of Saba; the Greek Fathers all that have 
 written, of which many are not extant with us ; the writers of 
 Syria, Egypt, Africa, and the Latine Fathers translated, with 
 others innumerable in the Greeke, Hebrew, Arabike, Abissine, 
 Egyptian, Syrian, Chaldee, far more authors, and more of them 
 than we have ; few in Latin ; yet T. Livius is there whole, which 
 with us is imperfect, and some of the works of Thomas Aquinas ; 
 Saint Augustines workes are in Arabike : Poets, Philosophers, Phy- 
 sicians, Rabbines, Talmudists, Cabalistes, Hierogliphikes, and others 
 would be too tedious to relate. When Jerusalem was destroyed 
 by Titus; when the Saracens over-ranne the Christian world; 
 many books were conveyed out of the Eastern partes into Ethiopia ; 
 when Ferdinand and Isabella expelled the Jewes out of Spaine, 
 many of them entered Ethiopia and for doing this without licence, 
 enriched the Pretes library with their Bookes; when Charles V 
 restored Muleasses to his kingdom, the Prete hearing that there 
 was at Tunis a great Library sent and bought more than 3000 
 books of divers arts. There are about 200 monks whose office 
 it is to looke to the Librarie, to keep them cleane and sound ; each 
 appointed to the Books of that language which he understandeth ; 
 the Abbot hath streight charge from the Emperor, to have care 
 thereof, he esteeming this Library more than his treasure." 
 
 The foregoing statements of Purchas are astonishing enough, 
 and it may well be supposed that the range of the literature 
 declared to be extant in the library of Prester John would be 
 sufficient, of itself, to destroy all faith in the authority of the 
 narrator: and indeed this seems to have been the impression 
 produced upon the minds of many scholars of the day, who, while 
 they were not unwilling to believe that lost books might be 
 recovered from Abyssinian libraries, not unnaturally shrank from 
 the belief that all the lost works of ancient Christian literature, 
 to say nothing of pagan letters, were to be found under a single 
 roof in the library of Rasselas. 
 
 But we must admit that the statements made by Purchas 
 have an air of verisimilitude to a modern scholar. Take the 
 very first statement made by the Elizabethan writer, that the 
 books are all on vellum, and that paper is a new thing in Ethiopia. 
 Does that look like an invention? Take Wright's Catalogue of 
 the Ethiopic MSS. in the British Museum : and examine whether 
 there are any paper MSS. You will find that they are sur-
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 29 
 
 prisingly few, and of those which exist almost all are of a 
 more recent date than Purchas' Pilgrims : e.g. No. 127 is written 
 in the xviiith century; No. 151 is dated 1630; No. 318 was 
 written in the xixth century; No. 357 was written about the 
 beginning of the xixth century ; No. 392 was written in A.D. 1861 ; 
 No. 395 was written in 1810 (and the paper is dated 1807), and 
 so on. In fact I have not noted any copy in the British Museum 
 on paper which was not written later than Purchas' day. Is not 
 this remarkable ? How did Purchas' informant know that things 
 were so different in Abyssinia to what they were in Syria, for 
 example ? 
 
 In the next place notice that the first of the books referred to 
 by Purchas as extant in the Abyssinian Library is " the writings 
 of Enoch, copied out of the stones on which they were engraven, 
 which intreate of Philosophie, of the Heavens and Elements." Is 
 it not strange that the front rank should have been assigned to 
 the very book which was actually brought back a century and 
 a half later from Abyssinia by the traveller Bruce ? Further 
 the reference to the heavenly tablets is in agreement with the 
 language of the book of Enoch ; for example, compare c. 81 " and 
 he said unto me, O Enoch, observe the writing of the heavenly 
 tablets, and read what is written thereon and mark every indi- 
 vidual fact. And I observed everything on the heavenly tablets, 
 and read everything which was written thereon and understood 
 everything." Compare with it the manner in which the book of 
 Enoch is cited in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs : " and 
 now, O my sons, I have read in the tablets of heaven." 
 
 Last of all the description which Purchas gives is not a bad 
 summary of the contents of the lost book. The most recent 
 editor of Enoch (Mr Charles) describes a certain section of the 
 book as a Book of Celestial Physics, which is not unlike Purchas' 
 language concerning the Heavens and the Elements. For example, 
 the 62nd chapter entitles itself " The Book of the courses of the 
 luminaries of the heaven and the relations of each, according to 
 their classes &c." 
 
 It must, I think, be admitted that Purchas' account of the 
 book of Enoch is not inconsistent with the belief that he derived 
 his knowledge from some one who had seen the book. 
 
 A little lower down in the list we are told that the library 
 contained the works of the Queen of Saba. Now this, at all
 
 30 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 events, could hardly have been derived from notices of the earlier 
 Greek and Latin literature. The Queen of Sheba, however, is one 
 of the stock figures in Abyssinian History ; for instance in the 
 book called Kebra Nagast (the Glory of Kings) fourteen chapters 
 are devoted to the legends concerning the Queen of Sheba 1 . 
 Further the Abyssinian literature contains amongst the laws and 
 statutes of the kingdom, a collection brought from Jerusalem 
 by Menelek the son of Solomon. Menelek's mother is the Queen 
 of Sheba. 
 
 Now we can hardly regard it as a pure accident that Purchas 
 has thrust the Queen of Sheba in amongst the ecclesiastical 
 authors known in Abyssinia ; he must have had some knowledge 
 or tradition at the very least with regard to the historical and 
 literary position assigned to the elect lady in question by the 
 Abyssinians. 
 
 It becomes proper for us, therefore, to investigate as far as 
 possible the sources from which Purchas drew his wonderful 
 account of the Ethiopian literature. 
 
 Now, as will be seen from our quotation, Purchas gives a 
 marginal reference which betrays his authority: he tells us that 
 " Fr. Luys hath a very large catalogue of them (the Abyssinian 
 treasures) taken out, as he saith, of an Index, which Anthony 
 Gricus and L. Cremones made of them, being sent hither by the 
 Pope Gregory 13 at the instance of Cardinall Zarlet, which sawe 
 and admired the varietie of them, as did many others then in 
 their company." 
 
 Cardinal Zarlet is, of course, the famous Sirletus, Librarian of 
 the Vatican, and just the very man to have instituted a literary 
 hunt in connexion with the Apostolic missions to the Ethiopes. 
 But who is Fr. Luys, that tells the tale ? 
 
 Amongst the historians who have written of Ethiopia in 
 modern times, we find the name of Luys de Urreta. His work 
 'Historia de la Etiopia' was published at Valencia in the year 
 1610, just three years before the first edition of Purchas. In 
 those days Englishmen travelled in Spain and talked Spanish 
 and read Spanish. One has only to recall the allusions in 
 Shakespeare to Spanish customs and the borrowing of Spanish 
 words in a manner which would be unintelligible now-a-days 
 
 1 These chapters were edited by Pretorius in 1870 under the title ' Fabula de 
 Keg in a Sabaea apud JEthiopes.'
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 31 
 
 and to compare similar phenomena in Ben Jonson and other 
 Elizabethan writers, in order to assure oneself that in the golden 
 age of English literature learned men were familiar with Spanish 1 . 
 
 There is then no difficulty a priori in the use of a Spanish 
 author by Purchas, two or three years after the date of production 
 of his work. But we need not speculate, for we have only to read 
 Purchas side by side with Fr. Luys de Urreta in order to see that 
 practically everything in the one is translated from the other. 
 The very description of the Monasteries, and their location on the 
 sacred mountain of Amara, comes out of Urreta, and so does the 
 whole account of the library and its contents. 
 
 In proof of these statements we transcribe some sentences of 
 Urreta, and reproduce his account of the Library, from which 
 it will be seen that it is indeed, as Purchas described it, a very 
 large catalogue, too large apparently for the faith of Purchas, 
 and his was no slight faith, to judge from the number of lost 
 books which he advertised out of Urreta. 
 
 In lib. i. c. 9 Urreta tells us all about Prester John's library 
 under the heading De los dos Monasteries que ay nel Monte 
 Amara, y la famosa libreria que tiene en uno de ellos el Preste 
 Juan....Estas dos Iglesias que la una se intitula del Espiritu 
 Santo, y la otra de Santa Cruz, son las mas sumptuosas y 
 magnificas q ay en toda la Etiopia. 
 
 He then gives a sketch of the most famous libraries in the 
 world, from Aulus Gellius, Epiphanius, Plutarch, Galen, Nicephorus 
 and Zonaras. Two of his references, viz. to Zonaras and Gellius 
 will be found on the margin of Purchas. He goes on to describe 
 the buildings: Son tres solas grandissimas, cada una de mas 
 de dozientos passos de largo, donde ay libros de todas scientias, 
 todos en pergamino muy sutiles, delgados y brunidos, con mucha 
 curiosidad de lettras doradas y otras labores y lindezas; unos 
 enquadernados ricamente, con sus tablas; otros estan sueltos, 
 como processes, rollados y metidos dentro de unas bolsas y talegas 
 de tafetan: de papel ay muy pocos, y es cosa moderna y muy nueva 
 entra los de Etiopia. 
 
 The passages which I have printed in italics shew the source 
 from which Purchas derived his information about the size of the 
 
 1 Cf. George Herbert's playful allusion : 
 
 "It cannot sing or play the lute, 
 It never was in France or Spain. 1 '
 
 32 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 three separate halls, and the predominance of vellum books over 
 paper, and the whole of his statements may be further compared 
 with Urreta. 
 
 Next comes the Catalogue made for Gregory XIII. 
 
 El aranzel que se traxo al Sumo Pontifice Gregorio deci- 
 motercio, es el siguiente. Hay escrituras de Enoch, q fue el 
 septimo nieto de Adam, las quales esta en pergaminos, fa9adas 
 de piedras y ladrillos donde se escriuieron primeramente, que tratan 
 de cosas de Philosophia, de cielos y elementos. Hay otros libros 
 q van co nombre de Noe, que trata de Cosmographia, y Mate- 
 maticas d cosas naturales y de algunas oraciones y ceremonias. 
 Hay libros de Abraham, los que el compuso quando estuuo en el 
 valle de Mambre, donde tenia discipulos y leya publicamente 
 Philosophia y las Mathematicas ; estos discipulos fueron con cuya 
 ayuda vencio a los quatro Reyes que lleuauan preso a su sobrino 
 Loth. De Salomon muchissimos, unos traydos por la Reyna Saba, 
 otros por Melilec hijo de Salomon, y otros q el mismo Rey Salomon 
 embiaua, y assi son en grande numero los que van con titulo de 
 Salomon. Hay muchos libros con titulo de Job, y dizen que el los 
 compuso despues que boluio en su antigua prosperidad. 
 
 So far we can see that Purchas has taken practically every- 
 thing in Urreta. But it will be noticed that Urreta is not 
 destitute of information which could not have been obtained 
 except from people conversant with Ethiopian life. The allusion 
 to Melilec the son of Solomon agrees closely with what we have 
 noted above from the Kebra Nagast or book of the Glory of Kings. 
 
 Urreta continues as follows ; and we shall see that Purchas is 
 with him for a part of the account : 
 
 Hay muchos libros de Esdras, y de muchos Prophetas y Sumos 
 Sacerdotes. Muchas epistolas extraordinarias de San Pablo 1 , de las 
 quales no se tiene en la Europa noticia. Muchos Evangelios fuera 
 de los quatro Canonicos y Sagrados, que son san Matheo, san Lucas, 
 san Marcos, y san Juan, como el Evangelio secundum Hebraeos, 
 secimdum Nazaraeos, Encratitas, Ebionitas, y Egipcios ; y Evangelio 
 secundum Bariholomaeum, Andream, 8. Thomam, y otros. 
 
 Compare this with Purchas' account, and you will see that the 
 English transcriber has begun to abbreviate. Urreta's account 
 grows more and more wonderful. 
 
 1 The italicized authors are either those mentioned above by Purchas, or they are 
 names to which we shall refer a little later on. See note on p. 40.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 33 
 
 Aunque es verdad que todos estos Evangelios y libros nombra- 
 dos sean apocriphos, de muy poca, o ninguna autoridad, con todo 
 los pongo aqui por curiosidad que por tal los guardan en esta 
 libreria, que tambien los tienen por apocriphos en toda la Etiopia ; 
 solo los guardan por grandeza, y lo es sin duda para una libreria. 
 Hay muchos libros de las Sybillas en verso y en prosa, y otros 
 compuestos por la reyna Saba y Melilec. 
 
 By this time Purchas had got as much as he could carry, and 
 he summarizes what remains in Urreta, by telling us that all the 
 Greek and Latin fathers, and all the Philosophers, Physicians and 
 Rabbis are there. Urreta's account proceeds as follows : 
 
 Historias de la vida y muerte de Jesu Christo, y otras cosas 
 que sucedieron despues de su muerte, compuestas por algunos 
 Judios de aquellos tiempos. Hay tambien muchos libros de 
 Abdias 1 , San Dionysio, fuera de los que por Europa tienen de 
 Origines, y de su maestro Clemente Alexandrine, y el maestro de 
 este Panteno, de todos estos ay muchas obras ; de solo Origines ay 
 mas de dozientos libros. Tertulliano, san Basilio, san Cypriano, 
 san Cyrillo, san Hilario, san Hilarion, san Anastasio, san Gregorio 
 Niceno, y Nazianzeno, Epiphanio Damaceno, y todos los Dotores 
 Griegos, sin que aya ninguno de los que han escrito que no este 
 en esta libreria: no solo los que comunmente andan entra las 
 manos, pero otros muy esquisitos que no se tiene de ellos noticia, 
 copuestos per los mismos Dotores. De San Ephrem Siro, Moyses 
 Bar cepha, y de otros de la Iglesia Syra. Muchos tomos de San 
 Juan Chrisostomo, y de su maestro Diodoro Tarcese todas sus 
 obras. Oecumenio, Doroteo, Tyro 2 , y Dionysio Alexandrine disci- 
 pulo de Origines. Serapion en muchos libros, San Justino Martyr 
 muchas obras, con las de su discipulo Taciano; todos los Theo- 
 doros, el Antiocheno, el Heracleyta, y el Syro, o Teodorito por 
 otro nombre, en compania de Theodolo; los dos Zacharias, el 
 Obispo de Hierocesarea, y el de Chrisopolis, Triphon discipulo de 
 Origines; y Tito Bostrense Arabio. Tambien estan las obras de 
 Ticonio y Arnobio, Theophilato Antiocheno: las obras de Theo- 
 gnosto alabado por San Athanasio, y Theodoto Ancirano, Acacio 
 discipulo de Eusebio Cesariense, San Alberto Carmelita, Alex- 
 andro de Capadocia; las obras de Ammonio Alexandrino maestro 
 de Origines, y las de Amphilochio de Iconic, que tuuo la ciencia 
 
 1 Cp. lib. ii. c. 14 "Abdias in vita Apostolorum. " 
 
 2 I follow the punctuation of the MS. 
 
 H. H. 3
 
 34 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 reuelada ; Anastasio Sinayta, y el Anastasio Antiocheno, y Andreas 
 el Cretense, y Hierosolimitano, y el Cesariense, Antiocho Monacho, 
 y Antiocho Ptolemaydo, Antipater Bostrense ; los dos Apollinares, 
 el Junior y el Antiquior ; y tambien los dos Aristobolos, el mo9o y 
 el viejo, y Aretas Cesariense, Rodon discipulo de Taciano, Rodul- 
 pho Agricola, Cayo Mario, Victorino, Catina, Syro, por su nombre 
 Lepos, esto es, agudo, ingenioso ; Proclo Constantinopolitano, 
 Primacio Uticense discipulo de San Augustin, Policronio discipulo 
 de Diodoro, Phocion, y Pierio Alexandrine, Philon Judio, del 
 qual ay mas de trezientos libros, cosa que admiro. Y los Judios de 
 Egipto, de Arabia, y otras partes se obliga a dar muchos millares 
 de ducados, solo por que se las dexen trasladar. Pedro Edesino 
 discipulo de San Efren, Paulo Emesino, y Patrophilo Palestino, 
 Pantaleon ; de san Didimo Alexandrino ay muchos libros, y 
 tambien son muchos los de Egesippo : Oresieso Etiope Monge, que 
 vivio ano 420 ; y las obras de Olimpiodoro y de san Nilo y 
 muchas de Nepote Egipcio : Euagrio Antiocheno, y las obras de 
 Eudoxia Emperatriz muger de Theodosio el menor; Euthalion 
 Monge, Basilio, Eustachio Antiocheno, y Euthimio y san Metho- 
 dic, las obras de Melito Sardense, y de San Luciano Antiocheno, y 
 de Flauiano Constantinopolitano, y Fortunaciano Africano, y el 
 glorioso Fulgencio, Junilio, y Julio, todos Africanos ; los libros de 
 Judas Syro, Isidoro Pelusiota en Egipto, discipulo de San Chriso- 
 stomo, Isidoro Thesalonicense ; estan las obras de George Trape- 
 zuncio, y de Gennadio Constantinopolitano; los dos Josephos, 
 San Juan Climaco, y Cassiano, Hisichio Hierosolimitano ; de San 
 Augustin ay inumerables obras, no solo las que comunmente 
 andan por las librerias, sin otros muchos libros que nunca se han 
 impresso : de San Hieronymo, San Ambrosio, San Leon Papa, y 
 San Gregorio Magno ay algunos libros, aunque muy pocos, porque 
 de los Dotores Latinos es lo menos que ay. Y aduiertase, que 
 todos los libros que ay en estas tres salas son en lingua Griega, 
 Arabiga, Egipcia, Sira, Chaldea, Hebrea, y Abissina: en lingua 
 Latina no auia ningun libro, sino todas las Decadas de Titoliuio, 
 que por la Europa no se tenian, y alia estauan oluidadas, que como 
 no las sabian leer, no hazian caso de ellas. Lo que digo de los 
 libros de Dotores Latinos, estauan traduzidos en lengua Griega, 
 como San Hieronymo, Ambrosio, San Augustin en lingua Arabiga. 
 De los Dotores mas modernos ay algunos, como las partes de 
 Santo Thomas, y el Contra Gentes : las Obras de San Antonino, y
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 35 
 
 el directorio Inquisitomm, traduzidas en lingua Abissina por 
 Pedro Abbas Abissin, natural de Etiopia, hombre doctissimo en 
 lenguas y Theologia Escolastica. traduxo muchas sumas de casos de 
 conciencia, y cada dia se van traduziendo obras de Latin, Italiano, 
 Espanol en el collegio de los Indianos en Roma, para embiar a la 
 Etiopia ; y al presente se estan traduziendo en lengua Etiopia las 
 obras deuotas de Fray Luys de Granada. Estan sobra la Sagrada 
 Escritura todas las translaciones de Origenes, Luciano, Theodosion, 
 Simacho, Aquila ; liciones Griegas, Arabigas, Egipcias, Hebreas, 
 Chaldeas, Abissinas, en Armenio, y en Persa, tambien esta la 
 Latina; pero la Vulgata que se cita, y lee, es la Chaldea 1 . De 
 Astrologia, Matematicas, Medicina, Philosophia, son innumerabiles 
 los libros que ay escritos en las linguas dichas, Platon, Aristoteles, 
 Pitagoras, Zenon ; de Archimedes, Auicena, Galeno, Hipocrates, 
 Auerroes, muchos libros, no solo los que comunmente se platican, 
 sino otros muchos, de los quales no se tiene por aca noticia. 
 Libros de Poetas como Homero, Pindaro, innumerabiles. De 
 historias ay gran numero. Basta dezir que los libros que ay son 
 mas de un million. De Rabinos assi antes de la venida de 
 Christo, como despues de su santissima muerte, ay muchissimos ; 
 como de Rabi Dauid Kimki, Rabi Moyses Aegyptius, Moyses 
 Hadarsam, Sahadias, Bengion, Rabi Salomon, Simeon Benjochay, 
 Simeon Benjoachim, Rabi Abraham, Benesra, Bacaiay, Chischia, 
 Abraham Parizol, Abraham Saua, Rab. Achaigool, Rabi Ammay, 
 Rab. Baruchias, Rab. Isaac, Ben Scola, Isaac Karo, Isaac Nathan, 
 Rab. Ismael, Rab. Leui Bengerson, Rab. Pacieta, y otros muchos. 
 De la Cabala, y del Talmud de los Judios auia en un aposento mas 
 de cinco mil tomos. Esta tabla que he puesto en este capitulo es 
 parte de un indice y aranzel que hizo de todos ellos Antonio 
 Greco, y Loren9o Cremones, embiados por el Papa Gregorio 
 decimotercio, a instancia del Cardinal Zarleto : los quales fueron a 
 la Etiopia solo para reconocer la libreria, en compania de otros 
 que eran embiados para lo proprio, y vinieron admirados de ver 
 tantos libros, que en su vida vieron tantos juntos, y todos de mano 
 y en pergamino, y todos muy grandes, porque son como libros de 
 coro, con el pergamino entero, con los estantes de Cedro muy 
 curioso, y en tan diferentes linguas. 
 
 1 That is the Ethiopic : cf. letter of Gonzalez Boderico to the Jesuits in Goa, 
 quoted in Purchas lib. vii. c. 8 "I had made my book in Portuguese and it waa 
 necessary to turn it into Chaldee." It is also so named in the Psalterium in qua- 
 tuor linguis of 1518. 
 
 32
 
 36 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 Urreta goes on, after this tremendous catalogue, to tell us how 
 all these books got to Abyssinia, beginning with the Queen of 
 Sheba, and working down through various historical persecutions 
 and falls of great cities with subsequent removals of collections of 
 books and the like. 
 
 Now what are we to say to all this story ? 
 
 Is there anything in it and how much ? We have noticed 
 already that the suspicions awakened in favour of the genuineness 
 of Purchas' story are not reduced to nothing by reading the 
 accounts of Urreta. There are some things brought to light 
 which betray an actual knowledge of Abyssinia. He tells us, 
 moreover, what, as a member of the Dominican order he ought to 
 know, and which is probably quite correct, that the Roman 
 missionaries were translating various books of doctrine and 
 discipline into Ethiopic, such as the works of Aquinas or S. Luys 
 de Granada. And he says that his lists are taken from cata- 
 logues made at the instigation of Sirletus. All of this looks 
 reasonable enough, if it were not for the colossal size of the 
 library and its wonderful inclusiveness. What are we to say to it ? 
 
 We know what was said by contemporary writers. 
 
 Urreta's account was challenged by Godignus in his book De 
 Abassinorum rebus, published at Lyons in 1615. 
 
 Godignus says (lib. i. cap. xvii.) "Ait in monte Amara, in 
 coenobio sanctae crucis earn (bibliotecam) servari, et ab Regina 
 Sabae accepisse initium, repositos ibi esse libros permultos, quos et 
 tune Salomon ipsi reginae ab Hierosolymis in patriam discedenti 
 dono dedit: et singulis deinde annis solitus erat ad eandem 
 mittere. Inter reliquos esse quosdam, quos vetustissimus ille 
 Enochus ab Adamo septimus de coelo de elementis etc.... 
 
 Haec de monstruosa ilia biblioteca dixisse satis. Reliqua 
 apud eum videat, qui volet. Duo tamen hie adjungenda quae 
 addit. Unum est, Sirleti Cardinalis rogatu, fuisse a Gregorio xiii 
 Pontifice maximo in Ethiopian! missos Antonium Gricum et 
 Laurentium Cremonensem, ut hanc inspicerent bibliotecam etc.... 
 
 Haec ille. Sed nullam in monte Amara esse bibliotecam, ex 
 litteris habemus, et narratione eorum, qui loca ilia diu coluere. 
 Nonnihil librorum est in eo coenobio, quod Axumum vel Acax- 
 umum dicitur, et a regina Candace ferunt aedificatum in urbe 
 Saba, quae nunc paene euersa, et aequata solo nonnulla retinet 
 antiquae signa pulchritudinis. Quidquid id tamen librorum est, 
 regiae bibliotecae non meretur nomen.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 37 
 
 Ita referunt, qui rem perpexere, indubitatae homines fidei." 
 
 It may perhaps be thought that Godignus was a little too 
 sweeping in his condemnations ; no doubt the Jesuit fathers were 
 not disposed to regard with much confidence the statements of the 
 Friars Preachers with regard to Abyssinia or any other matter. 
 
 Godignus' contemptuous rejection of Urreta was taken up by 
 Ludolf in his History of Ethiopia, published not long after. I 
 quote the second English edition, which bears the date 1684. 
 Ludolf says : 
 
 "Besides sacred books the Habessines have but very few others. 
 For the story of Barratti 1 , who chatters of a library containing ten 
 thousand volumes, 'tis altogether vain and frivolous. Some few 
 we had an account of," and he appends the following note : 
 
 "Urreta did not think worth while to tell so modest an 
 untruth. The most celebrated Libraries, saith he, that ever had 
 renown were nothing in respect of Presbyter John's: the books 
 are without number, richly and artificially bound ; many to which 
 Solomon's and the Patriarchs' names are affixt. Godignus explodes 
 him, 1. i. c. 17." 
 
 Que"tif, the literary historian of the Dominicans, in giving an 
 account of the works of Fr. Luys de Urreta, endeavours to 
 apologize for a description of Abyssinia which he has not courage 
 to defend by suggesting that Urreta was imposed upon by some 
 Ethiopian. He had no intention himself to utter anything that 
 was not truth, but some one played off on him a literary forgery. 
 
 " De quibus operibus (sc. Urretae) eruditi alii aliter sentiunt, 
 nos hoc unum contendimus Urretam ab implanatorum falsario- 
 rumve crimine immunem esse, nee quid quod verum ipse non 
 putaret edidisse: utrum autem cujusdam Aethiopis agyrtae 
 Joannis Baltazar 2 fraudibus illectus et circumventus fuerit, facilio- 
 risque fidei hominem se praestiterit, ac levioris, id peritorum 
 certe cordatorumque relinquimus arbitrio et criterio." 
 
 1 John Nunez Barreti (a Portuguese of the city of Oporto) was appointed 
 Patriarch of Ethiopia by the influence of King John of Portugal and at the 
 instance of Peter the Abyssinian : his life will be found in the second book of 
 Godignus, De Alassinorum rebus : cf. Purchas, Pilgrims, lib. vii. c. 8. 
 
 2 This John Balthazar Abassinus is alluded to in Godignus lib. ii. c. 18, p, 315. 
 Purchas lib. vii. c. 8 (ed. 1625) speaks of him and his connexion with Urreta in the 
 following decided manner : " One Juan de Baltasar, a pretended Abassine, and 
 Knight of the Militarie Order of Saint Antonie, hath written a Booke in Spanish of 
 that Order, founded (as he saith) by the Prete John, in the daies of Saint Basil, with
 
 38 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 But this appeal for mercy leaves us still without an ex- 
 planation of the way in which the fraud, if it was indeed a fraud, 
 was concocted by the hypothetical Ethiopian. It certainly was 
 no ordinary person that manufactured the catalogue in the first 
 instance. To take a single specimen, we are told that the library 
 contained an account of the events occurring in connexion with 
 the Passion, and subsequently ; this evidently means the Gospel 
 of Nicodemus, but the writer goes on to say that it was an 
 account written by the Jews : this arises out of the false prologue 
 to the Nicodemus Gospel which affirms the Hebrew origin of the 
 legends. But the reference implies a writer who had also read 
 carefully the books which be describes. Would an Ethiopic 
 trickster have done it so cleverly as this ? Why may not the Acts 
 of Pilate have been extant in Abyssinia ? 
 
 We will now try to take the enquiry a little further, by 
 pointing out the actual source from which Urreta's lists are 
 derived. 
 
 It has occurred to me that perhaps the details may be 
 extracted from the Biblioteca of Sixtus Senensis: and I now 
 propose to shew that this is really the case. The supposition is 
 not an unlikely one, for Sixtus is the great scholar of the 
 Dominican order; moreover, there is on the margin of Urreta's 
 book, in one place, a reference to Sixtus. He is describing the 
 works of the Patriarchs who wrote before the Flood, and on the 
 margin are the words 
 
 Escrituras hechas antea del diluvio 
 
 Sixto Senense lib 4. Bibliothecae. 
 
 Our main reason for making this suggestion lies in the fact 
 that Urreta's list has every appearance of being taken from an 
 alphabetically arranged catalogue. For example, we have such 
 conjunctions as : 
 
 Tatian : Theodorus Ant. : Theodoras Heracl. : Theodorus 
 Syrus : Theodoritus : Theodoulos : 
 
 rules received from him, above seven hnndred yeares before any Military Order was 
 in the world. I know not whether his Booke (which I have by me) hath more lies 
 or lines ; a man of a leaden braine and a brazen face ; seconded, if not exceeded by 
 the Morall, Naturall and Politicall Historic of Ethiopia, the worke of his Scholler 
 Lays d'Urreta, a Spanish Frier and Iyer : the said Godignus every where through 
 his first Booke confutes him." 
 
 I have examined Baltazar's book, published at Valencia in 1609, entitled 
 Fundacion, Vida y Regla de la grande orden militar, and do not see any reason 
 to make him responsible for Urreta in the matter of the Catalogue.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 39 
 
 and then after inserting Zacharias of Hierocesarea and Zacharias 
 of Chrysopolis, we go on with Tryphon, Titus of Bostra, and 
 Ticonius and so on. 
 
 The list then inserts Arnobius, and returns to the end of the 
 alphabet with Theophylact, and Theognostus. 
 
 There is a method in this madness; it is not necessary to 
 spend time in making illustrations of it. Where is the catalogue 
 from which this was taken ? Either the books in the library of 
 Prester John were arranged alphabetically, and followed a Western 
 alphabet, or we have here a Western book catalogue from which 
 selections have been made. That the latter is the solution 
 appears at once on consulting Sixtus Senensis. 
 
 Let us take one or two extracts from Urreta, and put side by 
 side with them the corresponding parts of the alphabetically 
 arranged catalogue of Sixtus. 
 
 Urreta 
 
 Triphon discipulo de Origenes y 
 Tito Bostrense Arabic. Tambien estan 
 las obras de Ticonio. 
 
 Acacio, discipulo de Eusebio Cesa- 
 riense, San Alberto Carmelita, Alex- 
 andro de Capadocia. 
 
 Sixtus 
 
 Titus Bostrenae ecclesiae in Ara- 
 bia episcopus. 
 
 Triphon, Origenis discipulus. 
 Tichonius, natione Afer. 
 
 Acacius . . . Caesariensis Ecclesiae 
 Palestinae episcopus, Eusebii Caesa- 
 riensis Episcopi discipulus. 
 
 Albertus Joannis Harlemensis 
 Carmelita.... 
 
 Alexander, Episcopus Cappado- 
 
 (The intrusion of the modern 
 Fathers is very striking.) 
 
 Rodon discipulo de Taciano, 
 Kodulpho Agricola, 
 
 Cayo Mario, Victorino, 
 
 Catina Syro, por su nombre Lepos, 
 esto es, agudo, ingenioso. 
 
 writer between the two Church 
 
 Rhodon Asianus, Tatiani in scrip- 
 tuns auditor et discipulus, 
 followed by 
 
 Rodolphus Agricola, Frisius. 
 
 Caius Marius Victorinus Afer, 
 rhetor sui temporis praestantissimus. 
 
 And a little later on, 
 
 Catina Syrus, cognomine Leptos, 
 id est, acutus et ingeniosus...Cuius 
 meminit Hieronymus libro i. comm. 
 in Ezech., referens summatim exposi- 
 tionem illius super visione rotarum et 
 animalium.
 
 40 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 Or compare the following : 
 
 Oresieso Etiope Monge, que vivio Oresiesis monachus et eremita, 
 
 ano 420 y las obras de Olimpiodoro. Pachomii et Theodori monachorum 
 
 in solitudinibus ^Egypti commoran- 
 tium collega...Claruit sub Honorio 
 Aug. anno Dom. 420.... 
 Olympiodorus Monachus. 
 
 But we need not occupy more space in proving what is 
 abundantly clear that the list of Urreta is a series of extracts 
 from Sixtus Senensis, and that he follows his authority even in 
 printers' errors 1 . We can hardly interpose another writer between 
 Urreta and Sixtus, and the idea that the catalogue was the 
 fabrication of an Ethiopian monk seems especially improbable. 
 
 The only question that remains is whether Urreta has drawn 
 upon the narratives of the Dominican missionaries as well as upon 
 the printed work to which we have tracked him. This is not at 
 all an unlikely supposition, and deserves looking into. But we 
 must first subtract all the information that can fairly be set down 
 to Sixtus: and when this is done, there is very little left. All 
 the lost Gospels are gone, Livy is gone, Abraham, and Noah and 
 
 1 The following further coincidences may be noted with passages which we have 
 italicized in Urreta's account. 
 
 Tryphon, Origenis discipulus, 
 preceded by 
 
 Titus Bostrenae ecclesiae in Arabia episcopus. 
 and a little earlier 
 
 Tichonius, natione Afer. 
 
 Primasius, Uticensis in Africa episcopus, 
 divi Augustini, ut creditur discipulus, 
 Pierius, Alexandrinae ecclesiae presbyter... 
 Placidus... 
 Polychronius...Diodori Tarsensis episcopi 
 
 auditor. . . 
 and on an earlier page 
 
 Petrus, Edessenae Ecclesiae presbyter, 
 scripsit in morem Sancti Ephrem 
 Syro sermone Homilias etc.... 
 and on the previous page 
 
 Paulus, Emcsae episcopus, 
 and a little earlier 
 
 Patrophilus Scythopoleos, Palacstiuae episcopus, 
 and on the previous page 
 
 Pantaleon, magnae Dei ecclesiae diaconus etc. 
 
 The reader can also verify a host of other names, both those which we have 
 italicized and most of the others. From Sixtus comes also the table of Rabbis.
 
 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 41 
 
 Enoch have disappeared, and the crowd of lesser men. Prester 
 John's Library has shrunk to quite an attenuated form, and we 
 are now in danger of expecting nothing from Abyssinia instead of 
 expecting everything. A winter of discontent has followed rapidly 
 on the glorious summer of Urreta's promises. We are reduced 
 from the stately palace of Basselas to a lodge in a garden of 
 cucumbers. 
 
 The attitude of despair is, however, as unreasonable as that of 
 extreme hope. The libraries which gave us Enoch and the Book 
 of Jubilees cannot be exhausted. It is not generally known that 
 the English army swept up nearly 1000 MSS. at the capture of 
 Magdala, and left 600 of them behind in a church on their return 
 to the sea-coast 1 . 
 
 It is much to be regretted that no sufficient band of Ethiopic 
 scholars was attached to the Abyssinian expedition. Were those 
 600 volumes all prayer-books ? 
 
 These books from the collection of king Theodore cannot, 
 however, be held to have exhausted the MS. wealth of Abyssinia. 
 And significant rumours have lately been reaching us of discoveries 
 made in an island on one of the great Abyssinian lakes. 
 
 Here is a notice from a German paper of March 16, 1894 
 (Theol. Lit.-Blatt) : " Konig Menelek von Abessinien hat, nach der 
 Meldung franzb'sischer Blatter, bei einer Expedition nach dem im 
 Sliden seines Reiches gelegenen Zuai-See einen werthvollen Fund 
 alt-athiopischer Manuskripte gemacht. Die Inseln dieses Sees 
 galten immer als 'heilig' und die dortige schwer nahbare Be- 
 volkerung verwahrt trotz ihrer barbarischen Unbildung nach alter 
 TJeberlieferung die athiopischen Blicher als Heiligthiimer. Die 
 auf der Insel Debra-Sina gemachten Funde sind theils liturgischen 
 Inhalts, zum anderen Theil versprechen sie aber werthvollere 
 Ausbeute. Der Konig beabsichtigt eine Dampferverbindung auf 
 dem See herzustellen, womit der sagenhafte Zauber der heiligen 
 Inseln verschwinden wiirde." 
 
 1 Record of the Expedition to Abyssinia, ii. 396 : " On the capture of Magdala a 
 large number of Ethiopian MSS. were found, having been carried there by Theodore 
 from the libraries of Gondar and the central parts of Abyssinia during his late 
 expedition, in which he destroyed very many Christian churches. On finding that 
 Magdala would have to be abandoned to the Gallas, it became necessary to provide 
 for the safety of these volumes, which would otherwise have been destroyed by the 
 Mohammedans. About 900 volumes were taken as far as Chelikot, and there about 
 600 were delivered to the priests of that church, one of the most important in 
 Abyssinia; 359 books were retained for the purpose of scientific examination,"
 
 42 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 
 
 What makes it practically certain that this is a true report 
 which has reached Europe is that a similar statement with regard 
 to the existence of the books will be found in the Journals of the 
 missionaries Isemberg and Krapf: we find in their account (p. 179) 
 as follows : 
 
 "In the lake of Gurague called Suai five islands exist, in 
 which the treasures of the ancient Abyssinian kings are said to 
 have been hidden from Gragne [the Mohammedan desolator of 
 Abyssinia] when he entered Abyssinia. That there are Ethiopic 
 books is confirmed by a man whom the king sent as a spy." 
 
 In all probability, then, it is the books mentioned by Isemberg 
 and Krapf that have been brought to light by king Menelek ; and 
 one can only hope that before long the contents of this newly- 
 found library may be rendered accessible to Western scholars.
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 (A Paper read before the Society for Historical Theology, 
 November 28, 1895.) 
 
 THERE are some learned men whose works it is almost im- 
 possible to read with a proper degree of scepticism; their ac- 
 quaintance with the subjects upon which they write is so wide, 
 the considerations which they bring forward are so varied and 
 new, the collateral information, both relevant and irrelevant, which 
 they furnish is so stupendous, that the critical faculty becomes 
 paralyzed in its most useful members, in its power to doubt and 
 to contradict; and it is often only after long and weary study 
 that we begin at last to realize that these great scholars were just 
 as capable of running down a cul de sac as we are ourselves, and 
 that we must resume with regard to them the habit of healthy 
 distrust and apply it to many of their strongest and most elaborate 
 demonstrations. 
 
 Such is the temper of mind in which I am trying to read 
 Lightfoot, the writer of all others in our time whose criticisms 
 seem to defy challenge and escape contradiction ; and the object 
 of the present paper is to shew in a brief, but I hope conclusive 
 manner, the accumulation of errors for which Lightfoot is respon- 
 sible in his treatment of a single problem of Church History, and 
 the way in which our progress has been arrested by the erroneous 
 hypothesis which he brought forward and his undue zeal in 
 defending that hypothesis. I am referring to the question of 
 Gaius the Presbyter, a famous third century writer, of whom 
 Eusebius tells us that he wrote or held a dialogue against Proclus 
 the Montanist in the days of Zephyrinus, and that he attacked 
 in this dialogue the Chiliastic views which Cerinthus and others
 
 44 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 deduced from the Apocalypse, and probably attacked the Apo- 
 calypse itself. 
 
 As far back as 1868 in an article entitled 'Gains or Hippolytus,' 
 published in the Journal of Philology, Lightfoot had maintained 
 the theory that Gaius was merely the double of Hippolytus ; and 
 he brought forward a number of confirmatory considerations, 
 which were revised and amplified in his Apostolic Fathers, a work 
 in which, as I have intimated above, everything has the air of 
 being final and infallible. These considerations were (i) that the 
 historical allusions to Gaius agree exactly with parallel details in 
 the life of Hippolytus ; as, for instance, that they both flourished 
 under Zephyrinus, that each was styled presbyter, that they both 
 lived at Rome, that they were both learned men, that they both 
 denied the Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, that 
 each was antimontanistic, and that, more obscurely, the title 
 ' Bishop of the Gentiles,' whatever it may mean, seems to have 
 been applicable to either of them. And (ii) further than these 
 historical allusions there were literary confusions between Gaius 
 and Hippolytus of an extraordinary kind, which were made worse 
 by the modern critics who insisted on referring every anonymous 
 work of Hippolytus to the shadowy Gaius, until at last, as Light- 
 foot allowed, they overdid the matter by trying to make Gaius 
 the author of the Philosophumena. Now since the Philosophu- 
 mena is undoubtedly the work of Hippolytus, and the recognition 
 of its authorship carries also the authorship of a number of lesser 
 works which are in dispute, Gaius would have been a jay stripped 
 of a mass of peacock's feathers and left to us merely as the author 
 of the Dialogue against Proclus the Montanist, if it had not 
 happened that Lightfoot ingeniously stuck all the feathers on 
 again by maintaining that Gaius was Hippolytus, and that even 
 the Dialogue against Proclus was due to the latter father. His 
 explanation was that the title of the Dialogue in question ran as 
 
 follows : 
 
 AtaXo'/o? Yatov KOI Hpo/cXou 
 
 r) Kara ^A.ovravicrr(av, 
 
 and that Gaius is here either a literary lay-figure, which has given 
 cause to a mass of subsequent misunderstandings, or that it is 
 the actual prsenomen of Hippolytus. 
 
 Now this was very ingenious ; moreover it rid us of the trouble- 
 some and perplexing figure of the Higher Critic (for such Gaius
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 45 
 
 certainly was) in the Roman Church ; it disposed of a person who 
 was of doubtful orthodoxy (for the fact that Gains wrote against 
 the Montanists is not a set-off against his attack on the Johannine 
 writings ; any stick is good enough to beat a Montanist dog), and 
 it left us a clearer view of the classic form of the great pupil of 
 Irenaeus, who seems to have never been guilty of anything worse 
 than Novatianism, and who in other respects was a genuine malleus 
 haereticorum. No doubt there is a certain advantage to be gained 
 from the fact that heretics turn to shades and their works do 
 follow them, while the orthodox defender of the Faith becomes 
 more and more imposing and real, so that we may say, with Homer, 
 
 0109 TreTTwrcu, rol Se criaal atcrcrovaiv' 
 
 in no other way could the rule ' quod semper, quod ubique, quod 
 ab omnibus' become verifiable. But, as it happens, in the case 
 which we are studying, the shade has evaded the Charon who had 
 ferried him over, and is back again, as in his last edition Lightfoot 
 admits, in the upper air. 
 
 The key to the problem, as in so many modern cases, is of 
 Syrian manufacture. 
 
 First of all, we are to set over against the fact of Gains' attack 
 on the Apocalypse, and the statement on the back of the chair of 
 Hippolytus in the Lateran Museum that Hippolytus wrote a 
 treatise inrep rov Kara ^\wavvr]v evayye\iov teal aTro/caXu^etw? 
 the remarkable entry made by the Syriac writer Ebed-jesu at 
 the beginning of the 14th century that Hippolytus, Bishop and 
 Martyr, wrote a treatise called 
 
 ooc\_r<l^ A-a_noAi rdau'i 
 
 or 'Heads against Gaius.' 
 
 This latter entry ought to have been sufficient to prove that 
 Gaius was an antagonist of Hippolytus and not his double ; and 
 taken with the first two statements to make it highly probable 
 that Gaius actually attacked both of the Johannine writings, for 
 the defence of Hippolytus is clearly a single work occupied with 
 the Johannine matter in the Canon. But, unfortunately, we have 
 not been in the habit of either studying or trusting Syriac writers 
 in the degree that they deserve. 
 
 The second direction from which the Syriac fathers come to 
 our aid is Dr Gwynn's discovery 1 that Dionysius Bar-Salibi in his 
 1 Hermathena, vol. vi. pp. 397 418.
 
 46 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 Commentary upon the Apocalypse, of which a copy is extant in 
 the British Museum 1 (of course unpublished), quotes from the very 
 treatise referred to by Ebed-jesu, giving in a number of instances 
 the substance of the objections made by Gaius to the Apocalypse 
 and the replies of Hippolytus. 
 
 The recovery of these passages enabled Dr Gwynn to affirm 
 with certainty the separate identity of Gaius, and to prove that 
 Gaius had rejected the Apocalypse from the Canon on the ground 
 that it contained ' predictions mainly eschatological, irreconcilable 
 with the words of our Lord and the teaching of St Paul'; and 
 these views of Gaius were antagonized by Hippolytus in a treatise 
 whose title was probably ' Heads against Gaius ', and we are thus 
 led to conjecture that the complete title was 
 
 Ke(f>d\aia Kara Yatov virep TOV Kara 'Iwavvijv 
 Kal 
 
 or else that the work of Hippolytus existed also in an Epitome ; 
 that is, we equate the title preserved in Syriac with the title on 
 the back of the chair, and so make Gaius to have attacked the 
 canonicity, not merely of the Apocalypse but also of the Fourth 
 Gospel. 
 
 But here we are upon new ground, for we have taken a step 
 at which Dr Gwynn hesitated and drew back. For, finding 
 that in replying to Gaius, Hippolytus cites, once at least, from 
 St John's Gospel, he argues that this implies that Gaius accepted 
 the Fourth Gospel. Indeed he says that it seems to follow with 
 scarcely less certainty than the preceding conclusions that Gaius 
 accepted the Fourth Gospel as St John's. It is this statement into 
 the accuracy of which I propose to enquire. 
 
 But before doing so, it is instructive to recall some of the 
 obstacles through which we have threaded our way in the history 
 of the investigation. Lightfoot in his last edition admitted the 
 weight of the new evidence brought forward by Dr Gwynn, but 
 suggested that, although Gaius may be come to life again, it may 
 be some other Gaius. He clung to the theory which he had care- 
 fully elaborated, and was unwilling to abandon it. I think this 
 tenacity is to be regretted; it would have been better to have 
 been more Saturnian with one's offspring. But Lightfoot, of 
 course, granted at once that Gaius had written against the Apo- 
 
 1 Rich, 7185.
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 47 
 
 calypse, and from this it follows that the remarks which Gaius 
 makes about Cerinthus and the sensuous millennium which he 
 proclaimed in the name of a great Apostle, must be understood 
 as a criticism of the Apocalypse and the Chiliastic interpretations 
 of it. In the light of which recently acquired knowledge it is 
 interesting to compare the misunderstanding of the situation 
 involved in the following sentence from Lightfoot (Apost. Fathers, 
 Pt. I. vol. ii. p. 386), "It is difficult to see how an intelligent 
 person should represent the Apocalypse as teaching that in the 
 kingdom of Christ ' men should live in the flesh in Jerusalem and 
 be the slaves of lusts and pleasures ; ' and again ' that a thousand 
 years should be spent in marriage festivities.'" Amongst the 
 people of ecclesiastical rank and dignity who held the view 
 involved, though somewhat caricatured, in these words were 
 Papias, Irenaeus, Nepos and Victorinus of Pettau. They certainly 
 were not all of them idiots, though perhaps we may allow Papias 
 the title of a-<j>68pa api/cpos rov vovv. The fact is that Lightfoot 
 did not do justice to the Chiliastic movement. 
 
 Dr Gwynn is in the same case ; in order to save the credit of 
 the Apocalypse he ventures to suggest that Cerinthus " may have 
 written a pseudo-Apocalypse, containing previsions of a millennium 
 of carnal pleasures, and that Gaius, in his anti-millenarian over-zeal, 
 may have rejected both Apocalypses, the genuine and the spurious 
 alike." But since Cerinthus is credited with nothing worse than 
 the rest of the Chiliastic succession, we have no reason to make 
 him the author of a further Apocalypse, which would not also 
 apply to the other fathers who are named, all of whom hold what 
 their opponents call the ' sensuous millennium.' We must not 
 multiply Apocalypses : the one which is certainly involved in the 
 phenomena is sufficient for the explanation of the phenomena. 
 
 And now for our problem ; did Gaius write against the Fourth 
 Gospel, yea or nay ? 
 
 The answer will come from the same quarter as before, for the 
 Syrian Church holds the keys of all the problems. Suppose we 
 turn to Dionysius Bar-Salibi's Commentary upon St John, of 
 which a Latin translation is preserved in the Bodleian Library 1 , 
 made by Dudley Loftus from a MS. now in the Library of Trinity 
 College, Dublin. We find the following sentence, which I give in 
 Loftus' own words : 
 
 1 Fell MSB. 6 and 7.
 
 48 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 Gains haereticus reprehendat Johannem quia non concors fuit 
 cum sociis, dicentibus 1 , quod post baptismum abiit in Galilaeam, 
 et fecit miraculum vini in Katna. Sanctus Hypolitus e contrario 
 (1. ad versus eum) scilicet, Christus postquam baptizatus fuerat, 
 abiit in desertum, et quando inquisitio facta erat de illo per 
 discipulos Johannis et per populum, quaerebant eum et non 
 inveniebant eum, quia in deserto erat, cum vero finita fuisset 
 tentatio et rediisset, venit in partes habitatas nou ut baptizaretur, 
 baptizatus enim jam fuerat, sed ut monstraretur a Johanne qui 
 dixit intuens eum, ecce Agnus Dei ! baptizatus igitur fuit et 
 abiit in desertum dum exquirerent eum, et quod vidissent eum 
 bene persuasi erant, quis fuit, sed quo abiisset non sciverant, sed 
 quando rediisset persuasit eis ex quo quod monstratus fuit a 
 Johanne, crastino die vidit eum Johannes et dixit ecce agnus Dei ! 
 istos quadraginta dies exquisiverunt eum et non viderunt eum ; 
 peractis vero diebus tentationis, cum venisset et visus esset venit 
 in Galilaeam ; quapropter inter se conveniunt Evangelistae quia 
 postquam rediisset Dominus noster a deserto eumque monstrasset 
 Johannes, illi, qui vidissent eum baptizatum, apprehendissent 
 patrem clamautem, non viderunt eum amplius, quia abiit in 
 desertum, necesse habuit Johannes ut iterum testimonium hujus- 
 modi perhiberet de eo, quod hie est quam quaeritis et illinc abiit 
 in Galilaeam virtute spiritus. 
 
 Now this extract at first sight seems to dispose completely of 
 Dr Gwynn's statement as to the acceptance of the Fourth Gospel 
 by Gaius. There is, however, a textual difficulty. On comparing 
 Loftus' rendering with two MSS. in the British Museum (Codd. 
 Add. 7184 and 12,143), I find reason to suspect that the name of 
 Gaius was not in the primitive draft of the Commentary. For 
 example the MS. Add. 7184 begins as follows: 
 
 ^XuCuX K'cvcn -\i\pnL."ga 
 
 'A certain heretic had accused John &c.' 
 
 and a later hand adds above the line the word oocxKl^. On 
 the other hand this addition is wholly wanting in the MS. Add. 
 12,143, and as we can see no reason for the omission of the name 
 of Gaius in these two copies, we suspect that it has come in by 
 editorial correction. Indeed the opening words which answer to 
 the Greek a/pert/co? rt? would of themselves suggest the absence 
 1 We should probably correct the Syriac text and read dicentem.
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 49 
 
 of the name of the heretic. The question is whether the name is 
 rightly added by way of identification. And to this I think we 
 may answer in the affirmative ; for the description of Hippolytus' 
 reply which follows 
 
 cn\-incA ODCV^Acx^.K' rda_.Tn:i 
 
 ' Of the holy Hippolytus against him,' 
 
 immediately recalls the title ' Heads against Gaius.' And indeed 
 there is no other candidate for the honour of the place of 
 opposition. It is, moreover, interesting to compare the way in 
 which the quotations are introduced with the passages quoted by 
 Bar-Salibi in his commentary on the Apocalypse. 
 
 The five cases given by Dr Gwynn are introduced as follows : 
 
 KLlcn AnnVi rccu-Our^in^ Qoa*rd (i) 
 
 onflow K* 
 
 i.e. 'Gaius the heretic, who objected to this Revelation and said 
 ... Hippolytus of Rome refuted him and said' 
 
 (ii) 
 K'.icn \ n nciA oocv^ iN 
 
 i.e. Gaius said : 
 
 and Hippolytus said in reply to this objection of the heretic : 
 
 (iii) 
 
 i.e. Here Gaius objected... 
 
 and Hippolytus refuted him and said 
 
 i. e. Gaius : 
 
 Hippolytus against him... 
 
 (iv) 
 
 (v) 
 
 i.e. Gaius the heretic objected... 
 
 Hippolytus refuted this and said. 
 
 H. H.
 
 50 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 and these prefaces are so closely parallel to the passage which we 
 have quoted from Bar-Salibi's Commentary on the Fourth Gospel, 
 that we need have no hesitation in saying that if the name of 
 Gaius was wanting in the first copy, it has been rightly suggested 
 by later readers. And if this be so, we can only regard as a 
 serious misstatement Dr Gwynn's remark that it follows with 
 hardly less certainty than the fact that Gaius lived and opposed 
 the canonicity of the Apocalypse that the said Gaius accepted the 
 Fourth Gospel. 
 
 But in order that the matter should be put outside of doubt, 
 we will take the argument a little further and examine what 
 Epiphanius brings forward in his treatment of the 51st Heresy, 
 that of the people whom he calls the Alogi, It is commonly 
 supposed that this title is an invention of Epiphanius to describe 
 the people who did not believe in the Johannine writings, which 
 contain the Doctrine of the Logos. And Epiphanius actually says 
 in c. 3 Tt <f>d<rtcovo-iv TOI'VVV ol "A\oyoi ; TavTijv yap avrots 
 rrjv 7ro)vviJ,iav' diro yap rfjs Bevpo o>TO)9 K\i)6rio-ovTai, KOI 
 dyaTrijToi, eTTiOwfiev aurot? ovofjia, rovreffnv "AXoyoi. And 
 he speaks with the same air of originality in c. 28, in the words, 
 'HXey^Tjtrtw /cal ol aTroftaXXo/jbevot TO /card 'Itodvvrjv evayye\iov, 
 OU9 8ifcat(o<i 'A\o70f5 KaXecropai, eireiSr) rbv \6yov TOV 6eov CUTTO- 
 j3d\\ovTai, TOV Sid 'Iwdvvrjv Ktjpv^OevTa KTG. There is, however, 
 a curious feature in the title of the refutation of this heresy which 
 suggests that this originality is an illusion. For the title runs as 
 follows: Kara TTJS alpecrefos rfjs fj,rj Be^ofjbevr}<f TO KCLTO, 'Icadvwrjv 
 evayyehiov real Trjv 'A-Tro/coXiM/ai/, r)v Kd\<rev 'AvoiJTWV, Tpia- 
 KOVTTI -TrpwTij, Y] teal TrevTTjfcoaTrj 7rpu>Trj. Here the obvious 
 suggestion is to restore *h\6yo>v for 'AvoijTtov in harmony with 
 the passages quoted above. But how did the error arise ? The 
 answer is, I think, as follows : the title must have been confused 
 with the title of another heresy, viz. the heresy of Noetus, to 
 whom the appellation of 'AfOTjro? would be peculiarly applicable. 
 And when we turn to the heresy in question, which is the 57th in 
 Epiphanius' list, we find him using this very play upon the name, 
 though it does not appear in the title prefixed to the heresy. For 
 example in c. 4 he says KOI Siejreo-ev etc rravTa^oOev 6 TT?? 
 dvor)<ria<i aov \6yos, w dvoijTe. It is to this heresy then that 
 the name applies. We may also compare c. 6 OUTO? teal 6 arc 
 avTov NOTJTOI) %(>) ovofjut dvoriTOS vTrdp-^ei Kal ol e avTov dvorj-
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 51 
 
 , also c. 8 Tt ovv epel NOT/TO? ev rfj avrov dvoyvia; etc. 
 etc. Now when we turn to the heresy of the Noetians as described 
 by Philaster (Haer. 53) we find that the same play upon words 
 occurs, as the following sentence will shew : 
 
 alii autem Noetiani insensati cuiusdam nomine Noeti, qui 
 dicebat patrem omnipotentem ipsum esse Christum; 
 
 and here, as Lipsius shews, the word insensati stands for avoijrov, 
 And a comparison with the language of Hippolytus contra Noetum 
 shews that Philaster is following Hippolytus closely; so that we 
 reasonably infer that the play upon the name began originally 
 with Hippolytus, and this inference is fully confirmed by an 
 examination of Hippolytus' treatment of the subject. For not 
 only does Hippolytus shew an acquaintance with the joke, but we 
 can see the way in which he was led to it. He compares the 
 theological system of Noetus with that of Heraclitus, in which all 
 contraries are harmonized so that crooked things are the same as 
 straight things, mortal and immortal are equivalent terms, and 
 God is at once ' summer and winter, peace and war, satiety and 
 famine.' What wonder then if he should apply the same reason- 
 ing to the name of Noetus, who should turn out to be Anoetus ! 
 And that he does so reason will appear from Ref. Haer. ix. 10, 
 where he follows the sentence C O 0eo9...7ro\e/<io<?, elpr/vij, icbpos, 
 
 Xt/io<? by saying Tdvavria cnravTa. ovros (1. oyT<o<?) o i/ov<? 
 
 <&avepov 8e Tratri rot)? 1/017x01)9 (1. dvoijrovs} NO^TOI) Sia8o%ov<; real 
 rrjs at/?ecrea><? Trpoo-rara?, el KOI 'HpaK\eiTOv Xeyotcrav eavTov<? p,rj 
 yeyovevai (ucpoaras, d\\d ye ra T&> NO^TW So^avra alpovftevovs 
 dva(f>av8ov, ravra 6fj,o\oyetv. For, as he continues, they hold the 
 doctrine of contraries in regard to the Divine Nature. It was 
 reasonable, then, that they should furnish a parallel to it in 
 themselves. 
 
 But if this title is derived primarily from the wit of Hippoly- 
 tus it is not unreasonable to suppose that the title "AXo709 which 
 it has displaced in the text of Epiphanius comes from the same 
 mint. For Epiphanius does not, apparently, use the title 'Avoijroi 
 at the head of his treatment of the heresy of Noetus, however 
 much it is involved in the text : yet it must have stood in the list 
 of heresies, in order that a transcriptional confusion should arise 
 between the Alogi and the Anoeti. We infer, therefore, that the 
 presence of the title Alogi is probable in the book or table of 
 
 42
 
 52 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 heresies upon which Epiphanius is working. And with this 
 Lightfoot agrees (S. Clement of Rome, ii. 394), for he says, " We 
 may suspect that Epiphanius borrowed the name a\oyot,, ' the 
 irrational ones,' from Hippolytus; for these jokes are very much 
 in his way; e.g. 1/077x09, 01/017x09, and 80*09, Sotceiv, SoKrjraL" We 
 may also add the heresy which Epiphanius describes as Ktjpiv- 
 Biavol rjroi Mrjpivffiavoi 1 to our list, and here Epiphanius has 
 failed to see the Hippolytean joke (MijptvOos = a noose) and 
 discusses whether it is one person or two that is meant. 
 
 So much for the title of the 51st Heresy : it suggests the use 
 of Hippolytean material ; and now let us turn to the text of the 
 section. It is mainly made up of two separable defences, that of 
 the Fourth Gospel and that of the Apocalypse. For aught 
 Epiphanius knows (ra-^a), the Alogi may have also rejected the 
 Johannine Epistles which confirm the authenticity of the other 
 two books, but he is concerned only with material furnished by 
 the attacks upon the greater Johannine writings. He deals 
 accordingly with selected objections. And amongst the refutations 
 which he makes of the attacks on the Apocalypse there is, as 
 Dr Gwynn has pointed out, one which is closely parallel to one of 
 the instances in the Bar-Salibi extracts from the Heads against 
 Gaius. For convenience we will print the text of Epiphanius side 
 by side with the Gwynn-Gaius fragment : 
 
 Epiph. Haer. li. c. 34. Gains. 
 
 Kai (pacrw ort, Et8oi>, /cm flirt ra ayye'Xw, And the angels were loosed, 
 
 ACo-ov TOVS Tta-aapas dyyeXovs roi/s tirl TOV which were prepared for sea- 
 
 Eucppdrov KOI rJKovo-a TOV apiQpbv TOV orparov, sons and for days to slay the 
 
 p.vpido'ts KOI ^tXtat ^tXtafifj, KOI rfa-av third part of men (Rev. ix. 
 
 Ltvoi dtapaKas irvpivovs KOI 0dui8fis <cat 15). On this Caius says : 
 
 'Evofiia-av yap ol TOIOVTOI, pj m) It is not written that angels 
 
 Spa yeXotoj/ f<mv ; aXydtia- eav yap \fyrj TOVS are to make war, nor that a 
 
 T((r<rapas dyytXovs TOVS iv T<? Ev^por?; <a6e- third part of men is to 
 
 iva fifing TUS Tt<T<rapas 8ia(popas T&V perish : but that nation shall 
 
 fdvav Ka6f{op(v<av fir\ TOV EvQpdnjv, rise against nation (Matt. 
 
 fla-iv 'A(roT;'ptot, Ba/ih/Xcoi'ioi, Mfjdoi KOI xxiv. 7). Hippolytus in re- 
 
 Tltpo-ui. Avrai yap at Tf<r<rap(s /SatrtXetat Kara ply to him : It is not of 
 
 ftiaSoxf/v tv TO> Aaw^X e/i0epowat, <as irpatTot. angels he says they are to go 
 
 'Acroupioi /3a(riXc vov, Kal HaftvXctvioi tv xpovois to war, but that four nations 
 
 OVTOV, Mfjftoi 8t 8tf8tf-avTo, p,tT OVTOVS Si are to arise out of the region 
 
 Hfpa-at, av irpoaTos ytyovt Kvpos o @ao-i\tvs. which is by Euphrates and to 
 
 To yap fdvrj viro dyytXovs TfTayptva (l<rtv, <os come against the earth and 
 
 1 See Lightfoot, Lectures on St John.
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 53 
 
 firifj.apTvpf'i pot Mavafjs 6 ayios TOV Qtov 6fpd- 
 trtav, TOV \6yov Kara UKoXovdiav fpfjajvevatv Kal 
 Xtynv, '~Enfp(aTT)o-ov TOV iraTepa trov Kal dyye\el 
 croi, TOVS TTpfo-ftvTfpovs Kal fpovo~i <roi' "Ore 
 8ief*.epifv 6 vfyio-ros edvrj, ms 8ifo~irfiptv vlovs 
 'A8a/x, fo~TT)o~fv opia I6v<av Kara apidp.ov dyyeXcw 
 Qeov- Kal fyfvijdrj p,fpls Kvpiov Xaos OVTOV 
 'laKw$, cr^otVtcr/Lia K\T)povopias avTov 'itrpajfX. 
 Ei oui/ ra fdvr) VTTO dyye\ovs eicrl reray^ieva, 
 ciiKinws fine, Avow TOVS reVcrapay dyyf\ovs 
 TOVS ev T& ~Ev<ppdTT) Ka6fopevovs /cat eVexM '" 
 vovs tiriTpfirtiv TO'IS edveo-iv fls TrdXf/iov, ecus 
 Kaipov paKpodvpias Kvpiov, fa>s Trpoara^ei 81 
 avT&v fKdiKiav yevftrdai T&V OVTOV dyla>v. 'EKpa- 
 TOVVTO yap ol eniTfTay^fvoi ayytXoi IITTO TOV 
 q e\ovTts Kaipov fm.8pofj.fjs, 8ia TO 
 \veiv avTots TTJV diKTjv, TOV TO XotTra edvr) 
 \vecrdai tvfitev TTJS irpos TOVS aytovs v/Spewr. 
 AuoiTai 8 01 rotovrot Kal fTrepxovrai. TTJ yfj ms 
 'laidvvTjs irpofprjTevfi Kal ol XOITTO! Trpo<pf)Tai. 
 Kal yap Kivovpfvoi ol ayyeXot KIVOVO-I TO. fdvij fls 
 opfj-rfv (xdiKias. "On 8f irvpivovs Kal 0fua8fis 
 Kal vaKivdlvovs d&paKas cr^/iatvet, ov8fls dfifpi- 
 /3aXX. 'EKflva yap ra fdtr) OTTO TTJS ToiavTTjs 
 Xpoas fX l T *l v dfj,(placriv. Ta ptv yap faiaSr) 
 l/jiaTia XP oa T ' IS ^o" 7 " 1 firjXivT] OVTO> Ka\ovp.fvrj 
 tpfa- TO 8e irvpiva, iva fiirrj TO. KOKKijpa tv8v- 
 fJMTa, KOI vaKivdiva, Iva 8eigij TTJV Ka\\atvrjv 
 tpeav. 
 
 to war with mankind. But 
 this that he says, four angels 
 is not alien from Scripture. 
 Moses said, When He dispersed 
 the sons of Adam, He set the 
 boundary of the nations ac- 
 cording to the number of the 
 angels of God (Deut. xxxii. 8). 
 Since therefore nations have 
 been assigned to angels, and 
 each nation pertains to one 
 angel, John rightly declared 
 by the Revelation a loosing 
 for those four angels : who 
 are the Persians and the 
 Medes and the Babylonians 
 and the Assyrians. Since 
 then those angels who have 
 been appointed over the na- 
 tions have not been comman- 
 ded to stir up those who 
 have been assigned to them, 
 a certain bond of the power 
 of the word is indicated which 
 restrains them until the day 
 shall arrive and the Lord of 
 all shall command. And 
 this then is to happen when 
 Antichrist shall come. 
 
 The parallelism between the two lines of defence is so striking 
 that it betrays a common origin, and this must be the work of 
 Hippolytus, which has been rehandled by Epiphanius, and which 
 appears, perhaps in an abbreviated form, in the extracts of Bar- 
 Salibi. Such an abbreviation might be due to Bar-Salibi himself, 
 or to the fact that the Heads against Gains is a summary of a 
 larger work. 
 
 But if this be the case, that we are dealing with lost Hippoly- 
 tean and Gaian matter, we cannot limit ourselves to the single 
 passage in which Epiphanius and Bar-Salibi agree. We must 
 group together all the extracts in the two writers which defend 
 the Apocalypse, and regard them as the residue of a single lost 
 work; after which we must make a similar investigation with 
 regard to the Fourth Gospel. 
 
 We thus learn, over and above what Bar-Salibi tells us, that
 
 54 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 the Alogi objected to the machinery of the Apocalypse, especially 
 to the Angels and Trumpets ; and that they criticised the Epistle 
 to Thyatira, on the ground that no Church existed in Thyatira in 
 St John's day. 
 
 And the same method of enquiry holds with regard to the 
 relation of Gaius to the Fourth Gospel : for we find Epiphanius 
 dealing with a series of objections made to the Chronology of the 
 Fourth Gospel and to special disagreements between St John and 
 the Synoptics, and we shall see that under both these heads he is 
 dealing with Hippolytean matter; the replies are the replies of 
 Hippolytus, rehandled by Epiphanius, and the Chronology is the 
 Hippolytean modification of the work of Julius Africanus. 
 
 We have shewn from Bar-Salibi a single instance of a Gaian 
 objection to the Fourth Gospel, viz. the discordant accounts of the 
 events connected with the Baptism. And when we turn to 
 Epiphanius we find that the very first objection of the Alogi 
 which he refutes is this very difficulty. Qaanovcri yap fca.0* 
 eavT&v, ov yap eiTroifjii Kara rfjs aXijBeias, on ov <rvjA<f)a>vei rd 
 avrov /3ifi\ia rot? XotTrot? aTrooroXoi?. Here Epiphanius is 
 working on a text which read erepot? for which he gives Xowrot? ; 
 for we find the equivalent sentence in Bar-Salibi : 
 
 quia non concors fuit cum sociis (i.e. erat/aot?). 
 
 The form of the objection turns upon the quotation of a 
 number of verses from the beginning of the Gospel, such as : 
 'O 'I<0ai>i>779 /j,aprvpei, /cal fceicpaye, \eycov ort, OVTO<? ea-rtv ov 
 etTroy v fj.lv' teal ori, Ouro9 e&Ttv o dfjivbs TOV Oeov, 6 aipcov rtjv 
 d/utpTiav TOV tcoa-fiov Kal KaOelffjs <j>r)<ri, Kot etTroi/ airreS ol 
 aKova-avres, 'Pa/3)8i, TTOV /xei/et? ; a/xa Be ev ravrw, Tfj eTravpiov, 
 (jjvjcrlv, rfdi\r](Tev ^e\6elv et? TTJV Ya\i\alav teal evpicricei 3?i\t,Tnrov, 
 teal \eyet avrta o 'IiycroO?, 'A/coXou^et fioi. Kal pera rovro 0X170) 
 Trpoadev <f>f]a-l, Kal perd rpeis rjfiepas 70/409 eyevero ev Kava r^? 
 
 Epiphanius' reply is long and diffuse ; he begins by pointing 
 out that the same method of criticism might be applied to- the 
 internal disagreements of the Synoptics ; how, for example, are 
 we to piece together the infancy accounts in Matthew and Luke ; 
 and how are we to place the visit of the Magi and the flight into 
 Egypt, so as to be in harmony with the presentation of Christ 
 in the Temple etc. The criticism of the Alogi who accepted the
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 55 
 
 Synoptics could thus be easily directed against themselves. When 
 at length Epiphanius comes to the discussion of the Johannine 
 passage, he explains that the Lord, after his baptism, went into 
 the wilderness, returned to Nazareth, and afterwards came back 
 again to the Jordan where John was baptizing : iva Seigy perd 
 ra9 T<rcrapdKOVTa ^/zepa? TOV TretpacrfAov, icai /u-era rrjv aV avrov 
 TOV Treipaa-pov ejrdvoSov /cat opjjLrjv rrjv eVt Naaper teal FaXt- 
 \aiav, to? oi a\\oi rpels efayyeXierrai etfrijcrav, Trd\Lv eVt TOV 
 I lop8dvrjv avTov rjicevai, tcre. 
 
 And this is substantially the same as we find in the passage 
 in Bar-Salibi, so that we may claim again the recognition of 
 Hippolytean matter. 
 
 The second difficulty which he undertakes to handle is the 
 question of the number of passovers in our Lord's ministry. 
 According to the Alogi, John mentions two passovers in our 
 Lord's ministry, the Synoptics only one. Epiphanius adds the 
 accounts together and argues, reasonably enough, for three pass- 
 overs. But he is evidently falling foul of the belief of the 
 early Church that our Lord's ministry was confined to a single 
 year, an opinion which was based upon or confirmed by the words 
 of Isaiah that he came to preach the acceptable year of the 
 Lord. Accordingly Epiphanius, who is working at the data 
 of some Chronographer, that our Lord was born on the llth 
 of the Egyptian month Tybi, and that he was baptized in his 
 30th year on the 12th of the Egyptian month Athyr proceeds to 
 the question of the acceptable year in the following words ; xal 
 direvTevOev djro 'A0i)p SwSe/caTT/? tcijpvTTOVTOs avrov TOV SGKTOV 
 evtavTov rcvplov KTC. And certainly he argues, the Lord did 
 preach the acceptable year, because for the first year of his 
 ministry he met with general acceptance, but after that with 
 opposition ! This ingenious argument shews that Epiphanius is 
 trying to get rid of the theory of a single year of the ministry, 
 which he found in his sources. 
 
 Now it would be very interesting if we could compare the 
 Chronology which Epiphanius gives with that of Hippolytus 
 either as it existed in the Ghronica or as we are entitled to 
 assume that it must have existed in the defence of the Fourth 
 Gospel and the Apocalypse (for certainly Hippolytus must have 
 dealt with the objection made by the Alogi on the subject of 
 the Passovers).
 
 56 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 But unfortunately we are dealing here with lost documents. 
 What does seem clear is that Epiphanius has been tinkering the 
 data before him ; for he alters the date of Christ's death, which 
 in the Hippolytean tradition is usually the consulate of the two 
 Gemini, and makes it two years later, by assuming in the life 
 of our Lord two further consulates, of which the first is that of 
 Rufus (Fufius) and Rubellio (who are in fact the Gemini over 
 again) ; and the second is the consulate of Vinicius and Longinus 
 Cassius. It is clear that such a confusion as this cannot be due 
 to Hippolytus, and we suspect that some one has been trying to 
 add a couple of years to the tale. 
 
 But in the next place when we compare the list of consuls 
 given by Epiphanius for the first thirty years of our Lord's life 
 with the table in the Chronographer of 354 which is taken from 
 the Hippolytean table of 234, we find that Epiphanius has placed 
 the birth of Christ two consulates earlier than the Chrono- 
 grapher; and this again suggests an attempt to gain two years 
 in our Lord's life by some one who was working on a chronicle 
 of 31 years which he was trying to turn into one of 33 years. 
 Now whether all of this confusion is due to Epiphanius, or whether 
 part of it is due to Hippolytus who has emended the 31 year 
 life of Christ which appears in his paschal cycle into some system 
 more consistent with the Gospels, I am not at present prepared 
 to say; it is possible that the correction is due to more than a 
 single reformer. 
 
 At all events, we may be confident that Hippolytus in dealing 
 with Gaius must have had to face the difficulty of the Chronology, 
 and if he did not succeed in abandoning the theory of the accept- 
 able year, Epiphanius must have done it for him, and done it 
 with much blundering. But behind all these confused data of 
 Epiphanius there must lie the Hippolytean tables as they were 
 taken from Africanus. And perhaps some day we may be able 
 to say how much of the work of Africanus has escaped mutilation 
 at the hands of those who worked him over. We have shewn, 
 then, that Epiphanius in his 51st heresy, that of the Alogi, is 
 using material which was taken in part at least from the reply 
 of Hippolytus to Gaius in defence of the fourth Gospel and the 
 Apocalypse. And it is clear, since Hippolytus would not have 
 been defending what no one was attacking, that objections were 
 still current at Rome in the early part of the third century to
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 57 
 
 the canonicity of the fourth Gospel. How much is involved in 
 this admission as regards the existence of a previous succession of 
 adverse Higher Critics, is difficult to say. In the case of the 
 Apocalypse the objection taken can easily be seen to be early and 
 constant and widely diffused. Whether criticism of the same 
 intensity was applied to the fourth Gospel, we have no means of 
 determining: but it is a fixed point gained to have restored, as 
 Dr Gwynn has done, the personality of Gaius : and to have defined, 
 as we hope to have done, his position as a critic.
 
 AN EXTRACT FROM THE COMMENTARY OF DIONYSIUS BAR- 
 S ALIBI ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN (c. ii. v. 1). 
 
 From (A) Cod. Mus. Britt. Add. 7184, /. 2432 ^cith some variants 
 from (B) Cod. Mus. Britt. Add. 12,143. 
 
 ca.a.1 rdj_sa.To 
 coal oca r^uioS rdsacuo 
 
 i 
 
 .i OOP 
 
 rdl.i ^ tr rt -^ r^oco 
 
 r^fti \ \VcvrdA rc'ocn y\ \ T. 
 
 1 A (not B) adds on marg. in a late hand: 
 
 JLOJL.I oca r<'ca\rc'.i cav^Qr^ cvicn 
 
 2 A (not B) adds on marg. in a late hand : r^LS9CU ^.l CUCO 
 * A (not B) adds over line in a late hand
 
 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 59 
 
 . coa>kT.r< > r^A caA oocn i s 10 
 
 . nc'crA rC 7 .! cnis^rc' PC'cn.l . iswK' ^crxV -t^.l OcrA 
 
 .^CPO\X oocn ^iins'Ta .i 
 
 .r^ocn ^coo^urf t-^* *& .ooco 
 
 .1^0 .oocn ..T* r^A AtK* 
 
 
 .PC'cnAK'.l covert' OCO , 
 i&xao .^cnoK'VM rdAo >*COOT^S-I 
 
 . . . * 
 
 Ct-icoA ^LuCU oo_*CU*O 
 
 0^ .icnon^u* r<^Ao r^sn.i K^ardAo .1 m s .1 
 A\ ^ .1 en .on 1.1 ^ < rr rt - AJ^ua0t< . T<*i-=3.i *xi 
 
 i OJCD.I ^00^3 :
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 BY the publication of his researches into the problems as- 
 sociated with the name of Euthalius of Alexandria, Prof. Robinson 
 has laid all New Testament scholars under a great debt of 
 gratitude. If his Euthaliana had done nothing more than restore 
 to us a number of pages of the famous Codex H of the Pauline 
 Epistles by the simple process of reading the impress of the ink of 
 the perished pages upon the pages which remain, it would have 
 been a distinct paleographical triumph. For it must be re- 
 membered that this MS. of which the extant leaves are scattered 
 over the libraries of Paris, St Petersburg, Moscow, Kieff, Turin 
 and Mt Athos, has been the object of study of a great many pairs 
 of eyes that are usually in the habit of seeing. Dr Gregory, 
 acting as literary executor to Tischendorf, had certainly planned 
 an edition of the H-fragments, and made preparation for that 
 edition, yet he does not seem to have suspected that the worn and 
 stained pages had a double tale to tell, and could furnish the text 
 of leaves lost as well as of leaves preserved. We also made a 
 careful study of this Codex, so far as its Paris fragments are 
 concerned, yet it never dawned upon our minds that the set-off on 
 the pages belonged to a different set of pages than those which 
 were extant ; nor did the thought occur to us when, not long since, 
 we were examining the Athos fragments. These Athos leaves 
 were also examined by Duchesne 1 , but neither does he appear to 
 have suspected that there was any supplementary evidence 
 forthcoming from the manuscript. 
 
 More curious still, M. Omont in publishing an edition of the 
 St Petersburg leaves, actually read a lost page of the MS. by the 
 
 1 Archives des Missions scientifiques et littgraires, ser. 3, vol. 3. Paris, 1876.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 61 
 
 reversed writing, but does not seem to have applied his method to 
 any further leaves either at Paris or St Petersburg. It is, therefore, 
 a distinct triumph and a very welcome increase to our knowledge 
 that Prof. Robinson, working independent of us all, has been able 
 to read, without serious lacunae, sixteen fresh pages of this 
 valuable text. 
 
 But, valuable as this increment to our knowledge is, it is only 
 a small part of Mr Robinson's services to the critic who occupies 
 himself with the supposed Euthalian text of the Epistles and the 
 shadowy editor of that text. He has passed under review almost 
 the whole of the literature of the subject from Zacagni onwards, 
 with the view of determining all that can be known with regard 
 to the person and work of Euthalius. And in so doing he has 
 shewn a remarkable grasp of critical methods, far beyond what 
 one is used to look for in English work. Nor is the study the less 
 interesting because the author displays such evident delight in 
 knocking down all the ninepins which recent students of Euthalius 
 had set up, including Ehrhard, Dobschiitz, Conybeare and myself. 
 'The scholar's melancholy,' as Shakespeare says, 'is emulation.' 
 We have sometimes a touch of the complaint ourselves, and Prof. 
 Robinson will not be angry if we indulge the hope that, as far as 
 our own ninepins are concerned, we may be able to set some of 
 them up again. At least that is the object of the following pages. 
 But whether we succeed in our attempt or not, we have a good 
 hope that we shall not leave the subject without adding to our 
 knowledge something which will be of permanent value. 
 
 This is the third time, I think, that I have approached the 
 Euthalian problems. The first occasion was when in connexion with 
 the study of the Stichometry of ancient MSS. I came across the 
 collection of Euthalian and Ps.-Euthalian data which Zacagni 
 had amassed in his Collectanea, Monumentorum Veterum, and under- 
 took to prove, as against the traditional view held by Scholz, 
 Scrivener and others, that the lines numbered by Euthalius were not 
 sense-lines (cola and commata as they are sometimes called) but 
 space-lines of which the unit of measurement is a 16-syllabled 
 hexameter. There has been no exception taken to this demon- 
 stration (nor is it easy to see how any exception was possible, for 
 the investigation was self- verifying) ; but a new point has been 
 raised by Prof. Robinson who questions with great propriety why 
 we should attribute to Euthalius at once the art of writing the
 
 62 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 N.T. in sense-lines, and the counting of the N.T. and attached 
 matter in space-lines. He proposes, therefore, to divide the 
 Euthalian materials, speaking roughly, between two artists of 
 whom one, Euthalius, should write the Acts and Epistles in cola, 
 and add certain prologues, while the other, whom he identifies 
 with an Evagrius who appears in the subscription to certain 
 Euthalian MSS. (notably in Cod. H, as recent investigations have 
 shewn) should publish an editio minor of the Euthalian text and 
 materials and be responsible for the stichometry, properly so 
 called, of the text and prologues. This suggestion has a great air 
 of probability about it. For the present we leave it on one side, 
 as we hope to re-open the investigation from a fresh quarter. 
 Most of what we had said upon the interpretation of the 
 Euthalian lines will be found reprinted in the little volume 
 Stichometry 1 . 
 
 The second attack which we made upon the Euthalian problem 
 dealt with the obscure personalities of the writer and of the person 
 to whom the work was dedicated. It is well known that there is 
 a great air of uncertainty about the titles prefixed to the works 
 attributed to Euthalius. The MSS. speak, but by no means 
 uniformly, of Euthalius of Sulci, but no one knows where Sulci 
 is, not even Prof. Robinson, for it is almost impossible to refer 
 the work to Sardinia, where a place of that name is known ; they 
 make Euthalius a bishop, but we cannot identify either him or his 
 diocese. His first work, that on the Pauline Epistles, is based 
 upon the previous work of a pious father whom he does not name, 
 though he speaks of him flatteringly enough, and the influence 
 has not been an unnatural one that the father in question was not 
 exactly in the very odour of sanctity ; and internal evidence has 
 been produced which suggested that the great nameless one might 
 perhaps be Theodore of Mopsuestia. In the second part of his 
 work, that which deals with the Acts and the Catholic Epistles, 
 Euthalius (whoever he was) expressly addresses in his prologues a 
 father of the name of Athanasius ; but here, too, the critic found a 
 difficulty, for of the actual dates found in the Euthalian prefaces 
 one (A.D. 396) was too late for Athanasius the Great, and the other 
 (A.D. 458), which might seem to refer the work to the time of the 
 second Athanasius, appeared not to be due to the hand of the 
 original author of the Prologues. 
 
 1 Stichometry, Cambridge University Press Warehouse, 1893.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 63 
 
 At this point I took up the matter with the object of proving 
 that the name of Athanasius which occurs in the Prologues to the 
 Acts and Catholic Epistles is an orthodox substitute for an un- 
 orthodox name which has disappeared ; and, guided by what 
 seemed to me an obvious and repeated play upon words in the 
 Euthalian text, where there were frequent and significant allusions 
 to MeXerTj or study, I maintained that the work was originally 
 dedicated to a father of the name of Meletius upon whose name 
 Euthalius was playing, and that its true title was Evda\,iov TT/JO? 
 
 The subordinate question, as to which of the possible Meletii 
 of doubtful ecclesiastical repute was the one to whom the book 
 was dedicated was decided, perhaps too rapidly, in favour of 
 Meletius of Mopsuestia, the pupil and successor of the great Theo- 
 dore. In making this identification, I was, of course, influenced 
 by the first of the two dates (A.D. 396) found amongst the 
 Euthalian matter, which I took to be the true date of Eutha- 
 lius. 
 
 But to all this Prof. Robinson takes exception : according to 
 him the date 396 is not the date of Euthalius, but of his successor 
 Evagrius, and consequently we have no chronological difficulty to 
 get over in accepting the ascription of certain MSS. and of the 
 text itself to Athanasius ; while, as to the supposed play upon a 
 name, while not entirely denying that there is something of the 
 kind involved, he thinks that it is merely a play upon a word 
 capable of two senses, because MeXer??, which I take to be the 
 key-word to the understanding of the prologues, is a word which 
 may mean either study or training in the athletic sense : accord- 
 ing to which interpretation, since the word training is susceptible 
 of a double sense even amongst ourselves, we are to understand 
 Euthalius as saying 'I recommend to you my foster-sister and 
 friend, the appropriately named lady, Madam Training.' And 
 Prof. Robinson concludes by saying, 'I cannot myself think that 
 a case is made out for any deletion of the name Meletius at all.' 
 With which observation he finally knocked over my ninepin ! 
 
 Now, as far as I am concerned, I have no special objection to 
 be put in the wrong, but inasmuch as we are obliged by Euthalius 
 to sing the praises of Mistress Study, whoever she was, and the 
 praise ought not to be mere superficial adulation, it might be as 
 well to make the examination a little more closely concerning these
 
 64 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 two points, the question of the supposed Meletius whom I maintain 
 to have been erased, and the subordinate issue as to the date of 
 Euthalius. The latter question can, indeed, be treated indepen- 
 dently of the former; for, as Mr Robinson allows, if A.D. 396 is 
 the date of Evagrius and not of Euthalius, there is at least one 
 other Meletius of an earlier date, viz. Meletius of Antioch, who 
 might be a candidate at once for ecclesiastical disgrace and the 
 hand of Melete ; but I shall not abandon the date 396 for Eutha- 
 lius without applying to the subject some more of the sleepless 
 discipline which Euthalius praises; and as for Melete, who has 
 engaged me as well as the pious father of antiquity in her toils, if 
 I find her fallacious, she shall be burnt for a witch. 
 
 And so we come to our third contribution to the Euthalian 
 problem, which is the relation of the prologues of Euthalius to the 
 text of Eusebius. According to Robinson (and the impression is 
 not an unnatural one), Euthalius is a very original writer, with a 
 'great wealth of expression,' a person who can not only talk in 
 high-sounding Greek, but who would also not sully his style by 
 'repeating his own language in a slavish manner': in other words 
 a literary artist of some eminence whose commodity of words and 
 of ideas (which words are meant either to express or to conceal) is 
 something more than 
 
 A beggarly array of empty boxes, 
 
 Of musty packthread and old cakes of roses. 
 
 I will confess that, until recently, I shared with Mr Robinson 
 this idea of Euthalius ; he was one of the writers who drove one 
 to the dictionary, and such we always respect and hate. But I 
 hope to be able to shew that this grandeur of style is only 
 apparent, and that, in reality, one of the main uses of the swollen 
 speech of Euthalius is to furnish various readings for the text of 
 Eusebius ! 
 
 In the first place, then, we observe that Euthalius himself has 
 directed us to Eusebius as one of his sources : he tells us, in his 
 Prologue to the Pauline Epistles (Zacagni, p. 531) as follows : 
 
 Eu<rey9to9 8e, rot><? ^eri-jreira xpovo 
 icrroprja-ev rifuv Kal ev ro3 Sevrepa TO//.W 
 i<rropia<s TOVTOV /cal TO fj,aprvpi,ov' Kai (fyrjcrt rov Hav\ov averov 
 Siarptyat Kal rov rov eo) \6yov aKW\.vrw<$ Krjpv^at 7ricr'r)fj,r]vd- 
 fjievos. Tore jjuev ovv eirl Nep&>i>O9 a,7ro\oyr)o-dfjvov rov TlavXov 
 av0i<i 7rl rrjv TOV Kypvyparos Siatcoviav Xoyo?
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 65 
 
 The passage, to which we shall presently have to refer more at 
 length, is taken from Euseb. H. E. ii. 22, where Eusebius is 
 relating what St Luke says about Paul's first imprisonment and 
 what report says about the second imprisonment. As it stands in 
 Euthalius the structure of the sentence is harsh enough : but it 
 all becomes clear when we refer to the History which tells us : 
 
 Kal Aovtcas Se o TO,? 7r/oaet<? rwv cnro(TTo\(i)v ypa<f>fj 
 ev TOVTOIS KaT\va-e TTJV ta-Topiav, Sieriav oXrjv eVt, rij<; ' 
 TOV Tlav\ov aveTov Siarptyai Kal TOV TOV eoi) \6yov a/coa- 
 \VT(0<; Ktjpv^ai 7rio-r)(j,Tjvdfj,evo<;. Tore pev ovv a 
 av6i<; eVt rrjv TOV KrjpvyftaTOS SiaKovlav \6yos 
 rbv air6(TTO\ov. 
 
 We see then the way in which Euthalius appropriates his 
 author, and we could easily extend our recognition of the matter 
 borrowed from Eusebius by examination of the immediate context. 
 But, for the present, let it suffice to shew that the Ecclesiastical 
 History of Eusebius is one of the sources of Euthalius. A second 
 source may be identified by a reference to c. 3 of the Pauline 
 prologue (Z. p. 529) where Euthalius tells us as follows : 
 
 'Avay/caiov Se riyrja-d/A'rjv ev (3pa%i Kal TOV %povov e7Tio~r)- 
 fjii(i)(Tao'6ai TOV Kr/pvypaTos Hav\ov K TWV \pOVlK&v Kavovcov 
 Qvaeftiov TOV Tlafj,<f>i\ov TTJV avaKe$>a\alwcriv TroiovfjLevof. ev6a 
 8r) TTJV /3/y9Xoy /iera ^etpa? etX^^xy? KTC., where from the very 
 language we are led to expect that quotations are coming, or at 
 all events, statements which are the equivalent of quotations. 
 And we shall shew that Euthalius actually had the Chronicon 
 open before him, as well as the History to which, as we have 
 already pointed out, he refers on a subsequent page. 
 
 He begins his extracts by saying that the Passion of our Lord 
 occurred in the 18th year of Tiberius. The passage of the 
 Chronicon from which this is taken is preserved in Syncellus 
 (614. 7) : 
 
 'I?7(70{}<? O XptCTTO? 6 VIOS TOV 06OV 6 KVplOS rjfAWV KCITO. Ta<? 
 
 Trepl avTOV 7T/300T?Tta9 7rl TO Tra^o? TTpoijet, eToy? 10' TT}? Tiftepiov 
 
 The Hieronymian version of the Chronicon gives the xviiith 
 year, the Armenian agrees with Syncellus in giving the xixth 
 year. 
 
 Euthalius then alludes to the election of the seven deacons, 
 and in particular of Stephen, in the following terms : 
 
 H. H. 5
 
 66 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 fie8' rtfiepas Tivas o\/ya<? elSov etcei -rrpo^eipi^of^evovf; rou? 
 <t ei9 8t,aKoviav TOV avTowvvAOv 2<Te<)avov /cal 
 
 Of this we find, in spite of Euthalius' express statement, no 
 trace in the Chronicon, but on looking into the History (H. E. 
 ii. 1) we find 
 
 Ka0icrTavTai...el<> SiaKovlav...avSp<; SeSoKi/Jiacrpei'Oi rbv dpid- 
 fjibv CTTTO, ol d/ji<f)l rbv *2<Te<f>avov, where the coincidences in language 
 will be noticed, and then a little lower Eusebius speaks of Stephen 
 as follows : 
 
 7T/3ft)T05 TOV dVTW <f)p(bl>VfJl,OV T(0V djflOVlKtoV TOV 
 
 And here a curious fact comes to light, viz. that Euthalius has 
 failed to understand Eusebius' language. 
 
 Eusebius speaks of Stephen as bearing away the martyr's 
 crown, which is appropriately named (o-re^ai/o?) for him. Here 
 the play upon words has taken Euthalius' fancy, but he has 
 blunderingly carried off avT< <f>pa>vvfiov and applied it to Stephen, 
 without mentioning the crown to complete the parallel. He 
 might have contented himself with calling Stephen fapwvvpos 
 and leaving his readers to see the obvious play upon the name ; 
 but he was appropriating from Eusebius, and not 'mixing his 
 paints with brains,' and so we have the impossible reading which 
 appears in Cod. Boeclerianus as a^ro!> fapdavvfAov, in other MSS. 
 as a single impossible word avTofapwvvfAov, in Cod. Lollinianus by 
 emendation as TTCLVV <f>epu>vv/j,ov a . 
 
 And lest there should be any doubt about the fact that 
 Euthalius has been appropriating Eusebian language, we can 
 compare with the foregoing passage from Eusebius the language 
 in which Euthalius speaks of the martyrdom of Paul (Z. 522) : 
 
 Tft) TWV lepOVlKWV XptO-TOl) fiapTVpWV <TT<})dvQ) KaTKO<r/J,ij0T). 
 
 Cf. also Euseb. Mart. Pal. 3 TOV TWV Zepovitccov rr}9 Oeoo-efteias 
 dOXrjT&v <TT<f>avov dTrijvejKaTO, 
 and Mart. Pal. 9 Oelw KaTe/coa-^drj paprvplw etc. 
 
 Euthalius continues his discussion of the Pauline chronology, 
 and presently he makes the statement that Paul continued 
 
 1 With this compare Syncellus, 621. 4 : 'ETTTCI rov apidpbv, SOKCI /xot, irpot 
 birijpffflav TUV a.ot\<puv virb TWV diroffroXuv KaTfffTaOrjffav uv irpwros yv Sr^avoj 6 
 irpwros /A6T& rbv ffwrrjpa irapb TUV KvpioKr6i>wv \i6of}o\r]0els Kal TOV <pcpuvvfM>v a^/wj 
 fcravycd^MFOI ffrtyavov virlp ai)roO. 
 
 2 I was wrong in defending this last reading ; let the barbarism stand.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 67 
 
 preaching from the 19th year of Tiberius to the 13th year of 
 Claudius, qrye/JiOvevovTOS Tore Tr}<? 'louSaia? <&rj\itco<; e<f> ov Karr)- 
 yoprjOels VTTO 'lovSalwv rrjv airoKo'yiav eTronfjcraro HaOXo?. 
 
 Turning to the Chronicon we find the following entries from 
 Syncellus : 
 
 (629. 3) K\au8to? <I>^X,ta rf)<> 'louSa/a? yye/j,6va e^eiren-^e. 
 
 (632. 17) eVt avrov HauXo? virb 'lovSaicov KaTr)joprj0ei<; rrjv 
 diroXoyiav TreTroirjTai. 
 
 After describing Paul's appeal to Rome, Euthalius continues 
 (Z. 531): 
 
 crvvrjv 8e avrq) KOI 'Aptcrrap^o? ov KOI elicoTws a-vvai^/Jia^corov 
 TTOV rwv 7Ti(TTO\(av aTTOKa\i, teal Aov^a? 6 ra? Trpafet? raiv 
 
 But this is taken, word for word, from the History (H.E. ii. 
 22) : and shortly after this the quotation from the History is 
 continued in language which we transcribed above. 
 
 A little lower down Euthalius tells us, against which we will 
 set the Eusebian parallels, as follows : 
 
 Euseb. H. E. ii. 25. 
 
 Euthal. (Z. 532). 
 avfi\tv (lev 'A.ypnnrivav irpmra rrjv 
 I8iai> WTfpa, en 8e Kal rf/v aSeX$i)i> row 
 irarpbs, KOI 'Oraoui/aj/ TTJV favTw yv- 
 pvpiovs r<5 ye'w* npo- 
 
 fj.r)Tepa 8f opoia>s Kal a8e\(povs KOI 
 yvvaiKa <rvv KOI aXXots fivpiots rw yevei 
 
 Euthalius continues : 
 
 fjL(T7TfiTa 8e KaOo\tKov (Ktvrjcrf 8ia>y- 
 pov KOTO TVV Xptcmai/wi/, Kal OVTO>S firi 
 TO.S cara Ttav ' ATTOO~TO\<I)V 
 yds. 
 
 ftp Syncellt 636 8- 
 
 Ncpoov dvel\f TTJV eavrov fjL.rjrepa 
 ' AypiTrnivav Kal TTJV rov narpos d8(\(pijv. 
 Euseb. Chron. Armen. 
 
 Neron cum aliis viris illustribus 
 et Hochtabiam uxorem suam inter- 
 fecit. 
 Euseb. Chron. ap. Cedrenum 360. 17. 
 
 Kal a\\ovs /xvptovy TW yevei Trpoor/- 
 Kovras. 
 
 Euseb. H. E. ii. 25. 
 
 ravTT) yoiiv OVTOS 6(0fj.a^os tv rofs 
 pd\i(TTa Trpwrof dvaKrjpvx&fis, eVi rag 
 Kara TO>V 'ATrooroXwi' firijpdr) cr(payds' 
 
 and cf. Chron. ap. Syncell. 644. 2. 
 
 e iraori avrov ros aru^j/Ltatrt Ka 
 TOV TTpwrov Kara Xpumavav evf8eiaTO 
 
 fTrl nacri 8' avrov d8iKr/fi.a(ri Kal TOV 
 TrpS>Tov KUTO. Xpio~Tiavv fi>(8(iaTo 8ia>y- 
 p.6v, rjviKa IlfTpos Kal HaCXos KT. 
 
 52
 
 68 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 After calculating the years from the Passion to the Martyrdom 
 of Paul (which is evidently reckoned by the aid of the Chronicon), 
 we find that he has turned back to H. E. ii. 22 and is working 
 very literally : 
 
 Euthalius (Z. 533) 
 
 rrepl fiev Tt/9 rrpwrrjs avrov arro\oyia<$ <f>da"Ka>v rdBe' ev rfj 
 rrpatrrj IJLOV arro\oyia' i ...eK arro^iaro^ Xeo^ro?, rovrov rov Nepcova 
 elvat \ey(av' rrepl Be rfj<; Sevrepas ev fj KCU re\iovrat T&> tear 
 avrov [Aaprvpio), firjarlv, rrjv Ka\ijv Biarcoviav aov rr\r)po(p6pr)(rov. 
 eycb yap 77^77 <nrev&ofjiai 2 ...<f)e<TT'r)Ke. teal on Aoi/ca<? r^v 7rd\iv 
 <rvv avTO) /ere, 
 
 with which we may compare 
 
 Euseb. H. E. ii. 22 
 
 ev rfj Trpwrr) jiov, (fytjfflv, aTroiXoyia... Xeovros, rov 
 ravrrj, a>9 eot/ce, BLO, ro wfj,6Bv/j.ov rrpo<ret,rr(ov...ev rrj avrfj rrpo\eyei 
 ypa(f)f) <pd(TK(ov' eyci) yap 77877 (T7rev8ofj,ai...e<f>e<rr'r)Kv. 
 
 But enough has been said to shew that Euthalius is for the 
 most of his time a plagiarist, as well as sometimes a blunderer. 
 Will it be said in reply that it was quite natural that he should 
 use the Chronicon and the History in writing the life of the 
 Apostle Paul, and that, at all events, he has confessed to borrow- 
 ing 1 It usually happens that debts confessed are only a fraction 
 of those contracted, and an examination of the rest of Euthalius' 
 work will confirm that proposition. If he should be original 
 anywhere, it ought to be in his opening remarks, where he 
 explains the scope of the work which he has undertaken and is 
 untrammelled by history or by chronology. But is it so 1 Let us 
 turn to the prologue to the Acts (Z. p. 404), and see whether it reads 
 like the work of an original and fecund mind. We find him 
 telling us of the new and difficult path that he has to tread 
 in making his edition of the Acts: old Tt<? TrwXo? d/BaSr)? rj 
 veos dfAa0T)s eprffjbrfv 6Bov ical arpi(3f) levai rrpocrrerayiJievos. 
 ovBeva yap TTOV ra>v o&oi rov delov errpe&fteva'avro \oyov el? 
 Bevpo Bteyvtav rrepl rovro rfjs ypa<f>f)<; ravrrjs e/9 crTrovorjv 
 fievov TO 
 
 1 2 Tim. iv. 16. * 2 Tim. iv. 5.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 69 
 
 But when we turn to the opening chapter of the Ecclesiastical 
 History, the secret is out, for here we find 
 
 >\\ * * t /\ ' n / / j / 
 
 eiret, /cat TTpwroi vvv T?;? vTrove&ews eTripavres ola nva eprj/jujv 
 Kal drpi/Srj ievai 6S6v ey%et/30i) / u,ei', 
 
 and somewhat further on 
 
 'AvajKaiorara Se JAOI Trovelo'dai rr)i> irrrbdea'Lv r/yovpat on 
 /ArjSeva 7TO) 64? Sevpo rwv KK\'r)0'iao'TiK<av (rvjjpa(f>ea)v Sieyvwv 
 jrepl rovro T?}? ypa<f>f)<? (nrovSrjv TreTrotyftevov TO /iepo?. 
 
 Further the expression oaot rov Oetov eirpeaftevcravro \6<yov 
 may be compared with the opening sentences of Eusebius ocroi re 
 Kara jeveav kicdaTriv dypd<f)a><; f/ Kal 8ia <7vyypa/jL[jidT(ov rov 6elov 
 7rpe<r/3evcrav \6<yov /ere. 
 
 Other coincidences in thought and expression may be noted 1 , 
 and it follows that the loans which Euthalius makes on Eusebius 
 are not limited to a single section, but that he is a systematic 
 plagiarist. 
 
 It will be admitted, I think, that the dependence of Euthalius 
 upon Eusebius is established: but it may well be questioned 
 whether it does not go much further than our identifications, and 
 whether it does not involve other authors beside Eusebius. 
 
 Take, for example, the Pauline prologue in which Euthalius 
 speaks in such choice language of the reasons which led him to 
 his task, and of his own ecclesiastical obedience to the superiors 
 who set him at the work. At first sight these sentences appear to 
 be the most original in the whole document and to have the 
 flavour of real history. No one would suspect, at the first reading 
 of these personal statements on the part of Euthalius, that they 
 constitute a conventional opening to a new book. But that such 
 is the case will, I think, be clear by comparing with the language 
 of Euthalius the opening sentences of the Armenian historian, 
 Lazarus of Pharbi. 
 
 1 e.g. (Z. 405) ffvyyv&fMjv ye irXelffrrjv alruv eir' dfJ.<poiv, T6X/tt?;j 6/J.ov Kal irpoireTelas 
 rrjs e/UTjs. 
 
 Euseb. H. E. i. 1 dXXct /uot ffvyyvufuriv tfSri e&yrvfl6rtr ivrevdev 6 \6yos a/ret, with 
 which cf. H. E. vi. 20 TTJV irepl TO yvvro.rrt.iv Kaivas ypa.<j>as irpoTrtTftdv re 
 
 The pilfering runs through the prologue to the Acts. Cf. (Z. 410) 'A.vrioxfvs yap 
 OUTOS vwdpxuv TO ytvos, larpbs re ryv iir<.arr\ii.t\v , irpbs ITauXou fJUidrjTfvOfls, with Euseb. 
 H. E. iii. 4 AoiKcas 3 TO p,tv ytvos av TUV air 'Avrioxeias, Tr/v 3 firiffTri/jLi)v laTpbs, rd 
 TrXetora ffvyyeyovus
 
 70 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 Euthalius. Lazarus of Pharbi. 
 
 Prol. in Epp. Paul. History of Armenia. 
 
 To (pi\ofiadft K a\ tnrovSaloi/ dyd^vos Written at the request of Vahan, 
 
 rfjs ays dydTTTjs, Udrtp n^uwraTe, m'So? general and marzban of Armenia. 
 re Kal ntidol eiKo>i>, o-revwTrw rm Kal (Translation of Victor Langlois.) 
 
 irapfi<r8v<Tfi TTJS laropias tp-avrbv eVa- Le present ouvrage, oeuvre de 
 
 <j)fjKa, rov8f TOV irpoKoyov TOV llavXov notre faiblesse, va -former comme la 
 irpayfMTfias (rvyypd^ai' ica\ TTO\V ftct- troisieme partie de ces annales. Nous 
 fov r) Kaff was tpyov dv(8(gdnijv Se'ei sommes forc^ d' [entreprendre] un 
 T7/r TrapaKofjs' tyvuv yap tv jrapoipiais sembable travail par ordre des princes 
 ro XaXov fj,(vov, or i 8?) vlos dvyicoos tv et sur les exhortations des saints 
 dnotXtia fcrrai, 6 8e VITTJKOOS eorai docteurs, n'osant pas nous opposer, 
 TavT;r tKTos (cf. Prov. 13. 1). e n nous rappelant les menaces que 
 
 la saint Ecriture fait aux enfants 
 desob^issants et de 1'indulgence 
 [qu'elle] montre vis-k-vis de ceux 
 qui sont soumis et dociles. 
 
 Here the same idea is seen to underlie both authors, viz. the 
 fear of disobedience to superiors, based on the warning of the 
 Scriptures against disobedient children. The passage which Eu- 
 thalius quotes from the Proverbs underlies the prologue of Lazarus. 
 Each writer suggests by antithesis, in the manner of the Proverbs, 
 the well-being which is the portion of the obedient. Each of 
 them speaks modestly of his own powers, Lazarus calling the task 
 one that is 'the work of his weakness,' and Euthalius 'a work 
 that is too great for me.' 
 
 Euthalius further describes his work by saying that he has 
 rushed into 'the narrows and straits of history' in writing the 
 present prologue to St Paul. 
 
 Surely the natural suggestion is that both writers are using 
 conventional openings, and Euthalius' language suggests further 
 that he has borrowed from the prologue to a history. 
 
 Lazarus wrote his History not earlier than A.D. 485 as a sequel 
 to the works of Agathangelus and Faustus of Byzantium. Eutha- 
 lius cannot have imitated him, both by reason of the date, as well 
 as because the work is written in Armenian. Will it be said that 
 Lazarus has imitated the Euthalian prologue ? this is extremely 
 unlikely, for Lazarus was well acquainted with Greek literature 
 and was hardly likely to select for a model of style so trifling a 
 piece as Euthalius' prologue. Moreover when we take into 
 account the proved borrowing of Euthalius from Eusebius and the
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 71 
 
 suspicious statement about the 'narrows and straits of history' 
 we are led to infer that both writers are drawing upon some 
 classic opening in which the work of a historical writer is compared 
 to the course of a ship navigated in difficult and narrow seas. 
 
 And this supposition is not an unnatural one. It will be 
 found to be the main idea of the prologue to the history of Aga- 
 thangelus, who tells us (Langlois, p. 106) " Pour nous, ce n'est pas 
 une orgueilleuse resolution qui nous pousse a entreprendre teme- 
 rairement ce travail ; mais nous sommes contraint malgre nous, 
 par les ordres formels des princes, a naviguer sur la mer des 
 lettres." And a reference of the prologue of Euthalius to the 
 Catholic Epistles shews the same comparison of the literary artist 
 to the tempest-tossed voyager in a tiny skiff. 
 
 We say, then, that the evidence favours a belief that Euthalius 
 found a literary model for his prologue to the Pauline Epistles in 
 the proem of some well-known historical work; and from the 
 suspicious use of a quotation from the Proverbs we suspect that 
 it was the work of a Christian historian. And certainly we do 
 not think any one will have anything further to say in defence of 
 the originality of Euthalius or in praise of his copious vocabulary. 
 
 Having now proved the dependence of Euthalius upon Euse- 
 bius and others we are in a better position to determine the text 
 of Euthalius in doubtful cases and the interpretation where the 
 meaning is obscure. 
 
 For example, in a passage quoted above (Z. 532) the printed 
 text of Euthalius reads avelXev fiev 'Aypnnrivav Trpwra rrjv ISiav 
 /*7?Tepa where Cod. Vat. 761 has rr}v eavrov fjujrepa. A reference 
 to the Eusebian text shews that this latter reading is probably 
 correct. 
 
 On the same page Euthalius has a-vvrjKde Be ird\iv 6 Aoy/cas 
 avra>, but Cod. Vat. 761 and Cod. Boeclerianus read a-vvijv. A 
 reference to the text of Eusebius shews that he constantly, and in 
 this very connection reads O-VVTJV. Conversely, where the text of 
 Eusebius is doubtful, we have reason to believe that the Euthalian 
 extracts furnish fresh material for its elucidation. 
 
 Coming now to the question of interpretation, we have a right 
 to assume as a general principle that when Euthalius uses 
 Eusebian language he uses it in the Eusebian sense ; he may 
 sometimes misunderstand, but even a stupid transcriber will, in 
 the majority of cases, take the words in their proper sense. Let
 
 72 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 us then turn to the disputed passage in which I claim to have 
 detected a deletion of the unorthodox name Meletius and the 
 insertion of the orthodox Athanasius, and in which Mr Robinson 
 thinks no case has been made out for any tampering with the 
 text. 
 
 The principal sentences which need interpretation are as 
 follows : 
 
 (Z. 406) eja) Be BiKaiwrara, fcal p,a\a <ye 6p0<us, <rvvrpo<f>6v re 
 Kal fyi\r)v e7ri(f)ri/j,L<raifji' av aoi, KOI Kara\e%w rrjv evTrpo<rrjyopov, 
 rr)v trdvv (frepwvvpov, rrjv r<v deiwv \oyio)v fi<f)i\,6(70(f)6v <f)r)fjLi 
 fj,e\ert}v, ixfi f/v yeycovax;, ^Cko^piare, Kal eiarcoye roi ra>v BiKrvwv 
 avTrjs vrcdp^wv, Kal rrjv epda-fjiiov avrrjs Trpoarjyopiav eyxara- 
 TrpaynarevofAevos crv^vals re del Kal dfcoifjuJTOis yv/j,va(riai<; 
 d/covo/Jievos (1. ao7coi//iei>o<?) evOaXea-TaTtjv Acareo-T^o-a?. 
 
 Starting from the known fact that Euthalius is a careful 
 student of Eusebius, we naturally ask the question whether 
 Eusebius uses the word <e/;jftW/io<?, which is a little difficult of 
 interpretation, and what meaning he attaches to it. 
 
 We have already given one instance in which Euthalius plays 
 on the name of Stephen, and the crown, <ep&W/io<? avrw, that is 
 involved in that name, and have shewn that the word-play was 
 based upon a similar one in the text of Eusebius, which Euthalius 
 has blunderingly appropriated. 
 
 But it is when we come to look into the text of Eusebius 
 generally that we find the meaning of the disputed word and 
 discover that it is one of the commonest literary artifices of 
 Eusebius to indulge in an etymological subtlety over the names of 
 the people whom he describes. Let us take some cases. 
 
 H. E. iv. 1 6. Eusebius describes the philosophy of Crescens 
 the opponent of Justin by saying rov <j>eptovv/j,ov Be ouro? rg 
 Kvviicfj Trpovrjyopiq ftLov re /cat rpoirov etyXov. 
 
 The mode of life of Crescens was appropriately named after the 
 Cynic or Canine philosophy. 
 
 H. E. v. 24 (which, I see, Prof. Robinson also refers to) Kat 6 
 ijvalo^, <f>ep<avv/j.6<; ns <av rfj Trpoa-rjyopia, avrat re rc3 
 eiprjvoTroibs, roiavra vTrep rfc rwv eKKXrja-idSv elpr}vr)<; 
 7rapKd\ei, where the meaning is sufficiently clear. 
 
 H. E. vii..32 describing the bishop Theodotos, Eusebius speaks 
 of him as Trpdypaeiv avrois dvr}p ical TO icvpiov ovopa Kal rov 
 erra\'r)Qevffa<i t a man who verified by his actions his
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 73 
 
 proper name (i.e. as involved in the interpretation of Theodotos, or 
 God-bestowed) and the name of bishop. 
 
 H. E. ix. 2. In the same way Theotecnos, the persecutor, is 
 spoken of as Setz/o? Kal 70?;? teal Trowrjpbs dvrjp KCU TT}? -rrpocrwvvpias 
 aXXorpios. No child of God he ! 
 
 Somewhat more obscure is the passage Mart. Pal. 8, in 
 which Eusebius speaks of the martyrs in the Porphyritic mine in 
 the Thebaid : et^e fj^ev irpb TOVTOV TO KCL\OV pevov ev 
 <f)epa)vvfj,a><; ov jei'vdrai Tlop<f)vpiTOv \L6ov /j,era\\ov 
 OGTJV 7r\r)0vv TWV rfjs Oeoae/Bela^ 0/^0X0777x0) v : a sentence which the 
 contemporary Syriac version interprets as follows : " great multi- 
 tudes of confessors were in the mines that are called Porphyrites, 
 in the country of Thebais, which is on one side of Egypt : and on 
 account of the purple marble which is in that land the name of 
 Porphyrites has also been given to those who were employed in 
 cutting it." 
 
 There is no doubt Eusebius is playing upon the name Hop<j>v- 
 pirrj*;, but whether we have the Greek sentence in its original 
 form is a little doubtful. 
 
 A still more difficult case to interpret is Mart. Pal. 9, where a 
 persecutor is spoken of, Ma'^t/9 6W/u,a, j^eipwv T/}<> Trpocriyyopias 
 avdpwjros. The word Mafu<? does not seem to be Greek, and an 
 attempt has been made, not very successfully, to give it a Syriac 
 etymology (see Ruinart, Act. Sine. p. 287). 
 
 The word fyepwvv n(as is used also with reference to the name 
 of a disease, which, for the present investigation, is much the 
 same as a proper name, and Eusebius says, in describing a 
 pestilence that had broken out, H. E. ix. 8 eA,/co<? Se f)v fapwvvpa)? 
 rov TTVpcoSovs eveicev av6pa% TrpocrayopevofAevov, 'there was a sore 
 that was rightly called carbuncle on account of its inflammatory 
 nature.' 
 
 Very similar is the way in which Eusebius plays upon the 
 name of the heretic Manes, whom he describes, H. E. vii. 31, as o 
 ro.9 (frpevas, eTrwvvfJLOS re rrj<i 8aifj,ova>crr)<; aipeo-ews . . ,Sai- 
 Ti? a)v /cal f^avKaSr]^ . . .TV </>ou/iei>o<? eVt rrj fj,avLa l . 
 
 But perhaps most striking of all is the way in which he plays 
 with the name of Meletius the bishop of the churches in Pontus 
 (H. E. vii. 32) : o Se Me\er(o? (TO /*e\t r% 'Arrt/c^? eicd\ovv avrbv 
 
 1 Similarly Titus Bostrensis adv. Manichaeos, Prol. : 6 5 Mai'r^s K papfidpuv Kal 
 rrjs /j-avias avrrjs ii
 
 74 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 ot OTTO 7rat8eta<?) TOIOVTOS %v olov av <ypdyjreie ns rwv Kara travra 
 \6ywv eveica TeXeturaToz/. 
 
 There can be no reason to doubt, then, from the cases of word- 
 play which we find applied in Eusebius to proper names, that 
 Euthalius has been imitating a literary peculiarity of the 
 Ecclesiastical History : and in the case of the play upon the 
 name of Stephen, he was found guilty of the theft, flagrante 
 delicto. 
 
 And it follows from this that when we read his description of 
 the attractive Melete who ensnares holy fathers in her net, and 
 calls her fyepwvvfjios, we are to expect a pun. Moreover when in 
 Eusebius we find that he uses in connection with his <epa)i/u/u,&><>, 
 the expression <e/3&W//.o9 ry 7rpocrr)<yopia, we can scarcely doubt 
 that when Euthalius describes Miss Melete as rr)v evTrpoa-tfyopov, 
 rrjv Travv (}>epu>vv/j,ov, he means, not that she is affable, or easy of 
 access, but that she is rightly named : so that the repetition of two 
 almost equivalent expressions accentuates the belief that there is 
 some play upon the word 1 . The only thing left to determine is 
 what the word-play consists in. According to Prof. Robinson it 
 is nothing more than a play upon the alternative meanings of 
 Study and Training : in support of which it might be pointed out 
 that Eusebius, whose cast-off garments furnish Euthalius' ward- 
 robe, uses the word in both senses. So much might be readily 
 admitted. 
 
 But to this explanation there are objections from every 
 quarter: Eusebius in the cases which we have quoted plays 
 almost exclusively upon titles and proper names, such as Cynic, 
 Irenaeus, Theodotos, Theotecnos, Porphyrite, Maxys, Manes, and 
 Meletius. The only exception, and that is more apparent than 
 real, is when he describes the disease called Anthrax and says it 
 was rightly named. 
 
 Euthalius also in three cases (Stephen, Saul, and Paul) expounds 
 proper names ; and the presumption, therefore, is that something 
 of the same kind is involved in the description of Melete as 
 <f)p(avvfj.o<; and einrpo(Tijyopo<;. The conditions are perfectly 
 satisfied by the assumption that the person addressed is named 
 Meletius. Euthalius might, to be sure, have called Meletius 
 and left us to imagine what he meant, but it answered 
 
 With which previous explanation of mine, I see Mr Robinson agrees.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSfiBlUS. Vo 
 
 his purpose just as well to call Melete (f>pci'vv/j,o$, the father 
 Meletius having been already mentioned in the context. 
 
 On Prof. Robinson's supposition, we have a play upon words 
 which is (i) obscure, and (ii) not of sufficient importance in view 
 of the space which is occupied by the praises of Melete. From 
 the very beginning of the prologue to the Acts the play upon the 
 word betrays itself, and the allusions to Study are kept up almost 
 to the end of the prologue. It is evidently the nucleus of the 
 composition. Is it possible that one doubtful oscillation between 
 the senses of Study and Training could have exercised such an 
 influence upon the mind of Euthalius as to colour the whole of the 
 dedication of his work ? 
 
 But this is not all : we are able to shew that the name of 
 Meletius was a name that was commonly played with. When I 
 first announced that I believed there were traces of the erasure of 
 this name in the Euthalian prologue, it never occurred to me 
 that a parallel instance could be found of the literary trick which 
 I had, as I supposed, unearthed. I simply saw that Euthalius 
 made puns (often bad ones 1 ), and suggested that he had made one 
 more than the three of which he was proved to be guilty. But I 
 discovered subsequently, and added a note to that effect, that 
 Gregory of Nazianzus had called Meletius of Antioch his ' honey- 
 sweet' friend, in the following lines: 
 
 Carm. xi. 1521 rov ov8' ovrep K6K\v)TO KOI Kakov^vov 
 o rfv ' MeXtro? yap TpoTos teal TOVVOJAO,. 
 
 If Gregory of Nazianzus played with the name of his 
 Meletius, there was certainly nothing against the supposition that 
 Euthalius might have treated one of his friends in a similar 
 manner. 
 
 But surely the case is immensely strengthened when we find 
 amongst the names upon which Eusebius plays the very name of 
 Meletius; for we have shewn conclusively that Euthalius appro- 
 priates the ideas and language of Eusebius freely, and that he 
 imitates him in playing upon the name of Stephen. Why then 
 should there be any difficulty in the supposition that Euthalius 
 has also borrowed from Eusebius the idea of playing upon the 
 name of Meletius ? And is not this hypothesis further strengthened 
 
 1 I refuse to credit Eusebius with SaOXoj OTI fodXevev or with IlaOXoj 6Vt
 
 76 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 by the fact that in the very same sentence, as Mr Robinson 
 admits, Euthalius plays upon his own name ? I consider, then, 
 that my case, so far from having been rendered hopeless, or 
 reduced to an unnecessary piece of ingenuity in the face of Prof. 
 Robinson's investigations, is in reality very much stronger than I 
 had at first imagined it to be 1 . 
 
 A further test of the accuracy of the solution will lie in the 
 fact that it helps us to clear up some of the remaining obscurities 
 in the text of Euthalius. 
 
 For instance in the opening sentences of the prologue to the 
 Acts, we are told of students of the Scripture in quest of 
 immortality, who seek to realize the blessing of the first Psalm, 
 
 TOU? Trepl rov delov \6yov \6yovs e/Ltyu,eXeT7;/Lta vvtercap re 
 icai p,e6* rj/jiepav, ry a$wv avrwv reOeivrai ^fv^, a\rj0a)<; TO T>;? 
 dy\ao<f>eyyov<> teal pa/capias ravrrjf [r/300^?] rffAeporpajdevTes, icai 
 TWV evaperwv avrfjs icai 6eiu>v KapTrwv dTroyev(rd/jivot. 
 
 The passage is difficult to understand, and Zacagni, apparently 
 in despair, has inserted de suo the word rpotyfjs and translates as 
 if people were ' daily fed upon this blessed meat ' ! But this will 
 not do : rjp.eporpwOevr^ cannot mean 'supplied from day to day' ; 
 if it means anything it means 'gently pierced'; but as a matter of 
 fact, there is no such word. And certainly if Tpo<}>fj<; were rightly 
 restored, the author could not go on to speak of 'tasting her 
 divine fruits,' i.e. the fruits of the rpo(j>Tj. But suppose we leave 
 out the word added by Zacagni and read the clause 
 
 TOO rrjs dy\ao(f>yyov<f Kal /jt,atcapias ravTijs [pepy rpwdevres 
 'smitten with passion for this resplendent and blessed creature,' 
 we see that all that is necessary to the sense is a satisfactory 
 feminine antecedent to the clause. And this is at once supplied 
 by writing /ie\eTi;i/ for e/A/LteXeV^/ia, which thinly disguises it. 
 The personification of /LteXeTT? is the key to the perplexity of the 
 passage. 
 
 We will now pass on to the more difficult question of the 
 genuineness of the Martyrium Pauli which is usually attached to 
 the Euthalian prologue to the Pauline Epistles. As we have 
 pointed out, this question is not really much affected by the 
 
 1 The only alternative would be to credit some lost book of Eusebius with the 
 playful preface addressed to Meletius, who would in that case be Meletius of 
 Pontus, who was seven years in hiding in Palestine during the persecution 
 recorded by Eusebius and in constant intercourse with that father. But we do not 
 need to resort to this hypothesis.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 77 
 
 solution of the previous one. We might find a Meletius to whom 
 Euthalius could dedicate his work almost anywhere in the fourth 
 century. So that it is not necessary to decide the Meletian 
 question before discussing the Martyrium. It must, however, be 
 remembered that the dependence of Euthalius upon Eusebius is 
 a factor in the solution of both questions, and this dependence is 
 a proved and demonstrated fact. 
 
 Let us see whether it has any bearing upon the discussion 
 by which Prof. Robinson seeks to shew the dependence of the 
 Martyrium upon the Pauline prologue, and its non-authenticity 
 as a work of Euthalius. 
 
 On p. 29 of his Euthaliana Mr Robinson prints for the purposes 
 of comparison the passages of the prologue which correspond to the 
 Martyrium ; as follows : 
 
 Prologue to Pauline Epistles. 
 Z. 522. AvTodi ovv 6 paKapios 
 TlavXos TOV Ka\ov dyatva dya>vio~d- 
 fjLtvos, cos <pqo~iv avTos, Ttp TU>V Itpavi- 
 K<OV XptcrroO /jLapruptav crrecpai/cp KaTf- 
 K.o(rp.^dr). 'Pcop.a?oi fie irepiKci\\(o~iv 
 OIKOIS Koi J3a<ri\fiois TOVTOV Xen^ai/a 
 
 Ka6tlpaVT(S fTTfTflOV aVTtS flV^/JLTIS 
 
 rffjifpav irai>T)yvpiovcri rfj TT po rpiaiv 
 Ka\av8<dv 'louXi'tof irepnTrj Ilai/e- 
 fiov fJir/vos TOVTOV TO fiapTVpiov eopra- 
 (ovres. 
 
 Z. 532. *Ev6a Si) o-vvtfir) TOV Ilav- 
 
 \OV TpiaKOCTTtp tKTtp fTfl TOV O~ 0) - 
 
 Trjpiov irddovs rpttr/catSeKaTco 8e Ne- 
 ptavos fJ.apTvpfj(rai, i(pfi TTJV KffpaXr/v 
 
 MapTvpiov IlauXoi; TOV 'ATrotrroXou. 
 'ETTI Nepcoi/os TOV Kat'trapoy 'Poo/xaicoi/ 
 ffiapTvprjo-fv avTodt TLavKos o diro- 
 OToXor, i(pfi TTJV Kf(pa\f)V diro- 
 is, fv rw rpiaKOCTTa Kal e c rco 
 TOV creorjjp/ou Trddovs, TOV 
 
 Z. 533. Ilepl 8f TTJS 8fvTpas 
 (aTroXoyias) ev ff Kal reXftoOrai TW 
 KO.T avTov /xaprupi'ft), (prjalv KTC. 
 "EtrTiv ovv 6 iras \povos TOV <r)pvy- 
 
 fJ.UTOS HavXoV KT. 
 
 Z. 529. 'AvayKalov 8e ij 
 /Spa^et Kal TOV \pOVQ9 
 (o(rao-6ai TOV Krjpvy/iaTOS IlavXoi;, e/c 
 TO>V xpoviKW Kavovwv EvtrfjSiov TOV 
 IIap,<piXoi> TTJV dva.K(pa\ai<ao~iv TTOIOV- 
 
 fJifVOS. 
 
 Havffj,ov fj.rjvos TJTIS 
 X/yotro av irapd 'Pco/xat'oir TI irpo 
 Tpia>v KaXavftwv 'lov\ia>v, naff* rjv 
 fT\fi(adr] 6 dyios aTrooroXo? TCO KOT' 
 avTov fj.apTvpi(j) e^KocrraJ KCI\ eWartp 
 
 fTfl TTJS TOV O~<i>TTJpOS l^/iCOJ/ 'l^CToC XptO"- 
 
 TOU Trapoucrtas. 
 
 "EQ-TIV ouv 6 iras XP OVOS * v 
 ffiapTvpr)o~f TpiaKocria TpidnovTa UTT) 
 ptXpi TTJS Trapovo-rjs TOVTTJS VTraTfias, 
 
 TfTOpTTjS fJifV 'A.pKa8lOV TptTlJS 8f 'Ol/CO- 
 
 piov TCOK 8vo d8f\(f)Q)v avTOKpaTopcw 
 Avyovo~T(av, fvvaTTjs lv8iKTiwvos TTJS 
 TTfvrfKai8fKafTr]piKfjs TTfpiodov, prjvbs 
 'lovviov fiKocrTT) fvvaTr) 7/jLtepa. 'Ecr?;- 
 fictHrapi)V aKptjScof TOV %povov TOV 
 fj.apTvpiov IlavXov OTroorToXou. 
 
 We have printed this passage with the spaced type by which
 
 78 EUTHAL1US AND EUSEBIITS. 
 
 Prof. Robinson indicates the coincidence between the two sets of 
 statements. His first remark upon these coincidences is that the 
 comparison ' disposes of Zacagni's view that it is the work of the 
 early Father from whom Euthalius borrowed his chapter-divisions, 
 for it is redolent of Euthalius : the only question is whether it is 
 not too redolent.' It will be recognized at once that this question 
 of redolence has been somewhat complicated by the proved 
 dependence of Euthalius upon Eusebius. The prologue itself has 
 ' an ancient and fish-like smell.' Almost every word of it is from 
 Eusebius, as we will shew in detail. And consequently when 
 Mr Robinson makes his first general criticism of the Martyrium 
 by saying that ' it is almost inconceivable that a writer who has so 
 great a wealth of expression as the author of the Prologue should 
 repeat his own language in this slavish manner,' we may very well 
 reply that the objection disappears as soon as it is found that the 
 wealth of language is an illusion, and that the repetition is a 
 repetition of the words of some other person. There is no law of 
 criticism which expresses in the language of minute probability 
 the chance that a person who has made a patchwork out of some 
 other person's writings will repeat the offence or which affirms the 
 extreme unlikeliness that he will put the stolen pieces together a 
 little differently. We come now to three detailed objections 
 which Mr Robinson makes to the authenticity of the Martyrium, 
 which would be fatal if they were all correctly taken, without the 
 possibility of reply : we will take them in order : they are intended 
 to demonstrate that the Martyrium is a later document, produced 
 by an epitomiser working on the former. 
 
 1. At first the author of the Martyrium embodies from the 
 Prologue the Roman date for June 29, viz. rj irpo rpiwv 
 Iov\icov ; but later on he gives the date as nrjvbs 'lovviov 
 
 2. It is objected that the phrase in the Martyrium r<a tear' 
 avrov fiaprvpito is extremely harsh, whether avrov be referred to 
 Paul or Nero; but in the Prologue it is quite clear that it is 
 referred to Nero. The obscurity in the Martyrium is due to the 
 careless work of the epitomiser. 
 
 3. The strongest objection of all lies in the fact that the 
 Martyrium places the actual martyrdom on June 29th, which is 
 a deduction from the fact that the Roman Church kept the
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 79 
 
 festival of SS. Peter and Paul on that day, which we know from 
 the Liberian catalogue (A.D. 354) to have been simply the day 
 of the Deposition in A.D. 258. This mistake, according to 
 Mr Robinson, was not made by the author of the Prologue. 
 
 These are formidable objections ; it only remains to see 
 whether they can claim to be insuperable. 
 
 Probably the best way to proceed will be to try and get a clear 
 idea of how much of the matter quoted from the Prologue is 
 Euthalius and how much Eusebius. 
 
 To begin with, the adverb avrodi, which stands at the head of 
 the first extract, is a Eusebian word, probably the most frequent 
 adverb which he employs, and quite one of his style-words, as any 
 one may see by turning the pages of the History. In Eusebius it 
 never stands, as far as I know, at the beginning of the sentence, 
 and never is far removed from the preceding note of place. 
 Euthalius is struck with it and gives it a prominent position, but 
 at the same time it is thirteen lines of the text since Euthalius 
 has mentioned Rome 1 . Probably in the passage of Eusebius upon 
 which Euthalius was working the matter was better arranged. 
 
 The words that follow ro3 TWV lepoviicwv XpttrroO fiapTvptov 
 <rT6<f>dv(t> /caT/coo-/^ij6r) we have already shewn to be Eusebian. 
 
 We are next told of the Depositio Martyrum, and the curious 
 words are used 7repiKa\\ecriv otVot? KOL /3a<TfXetot9. 
 
 Is it Euthalius or Eusebius that speaks of the churches in 
 which the martyrs' bones are laid as 'gorgeous and palatial 
 dwellings ' ? Let us turn to the oration of Eusebius at the conse- 
 cration of the Church at Tyre: we find (H. E. x. 4) that he speaks 
 of Christ as having filled the world with his royal dwellings (@aa-i- 
 XiKfov OIKWV avrov) which are adorned with 7repiKa\\rj Koa-fjujfiaTa 
 re Kal dvaOrjuara. Later on in the same discourse he twice 
 speaks of the Church at Tyre in the same style, calling it TOV 
 fia(ri\iov ol/cov (pp. 473, 478) and a little later on again it is TOV 
 peyav KOI (SacrtXiKov el; cnrdvTwv olicov by which he describes the 
 Spiritual Church. We may be pretty sure that Euthalius is 
 working over some Eusebian statement. 
 
 The expression TOV a-wTrjpiov TrdOovs is easily seen to be from 
 
 1 The Eusebian usage may be seen from scores of passages ; there are three in 
 the beginning of H. E. iii. 5 irpos rCov avrodi ffTpa.Toirt8tava.vayope\)0els...TOVTov af/Toffi 
 rijs iiriffKoiri)! dpbvov...Tois a^uroffi 5oKi/j.ois 5i' diro/coXityewj ttcdofffrra. The commonest 
 use of the word is in such phrases as ^ atroOt e/rKX7<r/a, ^ airroOi irapoiKta.
 
 80 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 the same source ; it is Eusebius' regular term, and occurs not only 
 prominently in the Chronicon, but throughout the History: e.g. 
 Mart. Pal. Prol. TT}? rov autrrjpLov rrrddovs eoprrjs, Mart. Pal. 11 
 ravro rov a-djrrjplov fiaprvpiov irddovs. Cf. also H. E. viii. 2, 
 x. 3. We should not, of course, dwell on comparatively colourless 
 expressions like these, if we had not proved that Eusebius was 
 the principal source for Euthalian language, a fact which entitles 
 us to make identifications of common words and turns of speech 
 as well as rare ones. 
 
 The expression rpio-KaiBeicdra) 8e ^ep(ovo^...d r Trorfn)6evra is 
 based partly upon the Chronicon, where the years of Nero are 
 counted separately, but can also be illustrated from H. E. ii. 25 eVi 
 ra? Kara rwv diroaro\,a>v eTTijpdrj o-(payds' HatJXo? 8?) ovv eV 
 avrr)<; 'Pa>fjLi)$ rrjv ice<f>a\r)v anror \nf\6r\vai /ere., where the only thing 
 we miss is the %i<f>et which occurs both in the Prologue and in the 
 Martyrium. We have already shewn that Euthalius had pilfered 
 from this passage. 
 
 Coming now to the disputed passage ev rj KOI re\tovrat T&> 
 /car' avrov fiaprvplo) we find that this is not Euthalius but 
 Eusebius (H. E. ii. 22), Bevrepov &' e-Trifidvra rfj avrfj TroXet, rc5 
 /car' avrov r\eicodfjvat fiapTvpiw. And the obscurity which 
 attaches to the phrase /car' avrov will be found to be involved in 
 Eusebius himself, so that the Martyrium is actually nearer to 
 Eusebius than is the Prologue. 
 
 As there seems to be no doubt that Euthalius has transcribed 
 a number of sentences from this chapter of the History it will be 
 convenient to set down the very words of Eusebius, indicating what 
 Euthalius has borrowed in spaced type : 
 
 rovrov 8e <&fjcrros VTTO Ne/3&)i>09 8id8o%o<? Tre/iTrerat* Ka6' ov 
 evos 6 HaOXo?, Seo^io? eVi 'PeJ/^? ayerai. \\plo~r- 
 avru> avvr)v, ov KOI etVorw? a-vvai^fJidXwrov irov 
 r<5v 7ri<rro\<av d"rroKa\el. xal Aovtcds 8e 6 T9 Trpa^et? 
 r<av aTrocrr6\ci)v ypa<f>fj TrapaSou?, eV rovrot? Kare\v<re rrjv 
 l&ropiav, oierlav o\i)v eVi rrjs 'Pcoyu.^? rov HavXov averov 
 ^larpi^fai ical rov rov eov \6yov a^toXuTco? 
 Tri(Tijfjir)vdf^evo<f. rore fj.ev ovv [Euthal. add. eVt 
 d7ro\oyr)O'dfj,evov [Euthal. add. rov FlauXof] avOis eTrl rrjv 
 rov tCT)pvyfj,aro<; SiaicovLav Xo^o? ^X ei o"retXao-^at rov 
 dir6<Tro\ov, Bevrepov 8' eTTi&dvra rrj avrfj TroXet, rat tear* avrov
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 81 
 
 I suppose we must explain /car' avrov here by reference to 
 Ka6' ov at the beginning of the chapter *, but the harshness of the 
 construction is as great in Eusebius as in the Martyrium, and no 
 argument for a later date of the Martyrium can be deduced from 
 the expression in question. Mr Robinson's second objection, there- 
 fore, falls to the ground. 
 
 The strongest objection is, no doubt, the third, which is based 
 upon an apparent confusion between the Martyrdom and the 
 Depositio of the Apostles which, according to Robinson, exists in 
 the Martyrium but not in the Prologue. Did Eusebius say any- 
 thing about the Depositio, and did he say it clearly ? We have by 
 this time little reason to confide in Euthalius as an independent 
 investigator : and the prejudice is in favour of the use of Eusebian 
 matter. It is very unfortunate that just at this point we lack 
 the reference which would decisively clear the matter up, for 
 Eusebius' book of Martyrs to which he several times refers in his 
 history is not extant. No doubt it contained the Martyrdom of 
 the great Apostles as well as of later worthies. We may, however, 
 get some light upon the matter by referring to H. E. iii. 31, where 
 Eusebius records the death of John and Philip and says Hav\ov 
 p,ev ovv KOI Herpov rrjs TeXevrf]*; 6 re xpovos teal 6 T/JOTTO? real 
 Trpoaert 6 Trjs fjuera rrjv aTra\\cvyr)v rov ftiov TWV a-KtjvcaiMaTwv 
 avroav tcaTade(7a><} ^c3po<?, 77817 Trporepov r^fjuv 8eSij\o)rai. Here 
 Karddetris is the equivalent of the Latin depositio, and while at 
 first sight it seems that Eusebius is speaking of the later Depositio 
 and carefully distinguishing it from the Martyrdom, the previous 
 passage in the History to which he refers (H. E. ii. 25) shews 
 conclusively that this is not his meaning: he is describing the 
 Depositio of SS. Peter and Paul in the Vatican and in the Church 
 on the Ostian Way. Now this very chapter is one of those from 
 which we have already convicted Euthalius of borrowing ; and we 
 say therefore that not only is the language of the Prologue at the 
 point in question Eusebian language ; but that it certainly does 
 not refer to the Catacombs, for the resting places of the Martyrs 
 are splendid churches, in the plural ; this must mean the Vatican 
 and the church on the Ostian Way. It appears therefore that the 
 confusion between the Martyrdom and the Depositio exists equally 
 
 1 It is Eusebius' way of describing coincidence in chronological position : vide 
 Chronicon passim. 
 
 H. H. 6
 
 82 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 
 
 in the Prologue and the Martyrium. This would seem to meet 
 Mr Robinson's third objection. 
 
 And now as to the method of dating the Martyrdom or 
 Depositio. In the first place, while we have reason to regard 
 Eusebius as the proximate source for both the Prologue and the 
 Martyrium, the actual date given, the 5th of Panemus, is older 
 than Eusebius. We can see this by comparing Eusebius' method 
 of dating Martyrdoms in the account of the Palestine Martyrs. 
 For example, we have SavOiKos firjv 09 \eyoiT 1 dv 'AvrpiXXto? 
 Trapa 'Pto^tatot? * Ae<r/oy (JHJVOS eftSc/ip, Trpo CTTTO, elBwv 'lovviwv 
 \eyoir av Trapa 'Pto/zatW * and so on, from which it is clear that 
 the months used by Eusebius, writing at Cesarea, are the Roman 
 months with Syro-Maedonian names ; the Syro-Macedonian 
 calendar has, therefore, been displaced. It is not unreasonable to 
 suppose, then, that a reference to Panemus in the account of 
 Paul's Martyrdom, where Panemus is clearly the Syro-Macedonian 
 month and not the later Roman substitute, belongs to an earlier 
 time than Eusebius. If he found it in his sources, he was almost 
 bound to explain it. The document from which our information 
 comes must have contained more than the allusion to the fifth 
 day of Panemus. But even with the attached Roman date there 
 is still some ambiguity ; for Panemus itself has become ambiguous : 
 and we may regard it as certain that the calendar which in 
 Eusebius' time had been changed from Syro-Macedonian arrange- 
 ment to Roman arrangement, while retaining the names, would in 
 the end take up the Roman names as well as the Roman arrange- 
 ment of the months : and these names amongst a Greek-speaking 
 people will appear as Greek names. It is therefore quite natural 
 that we should find in the Martyrium in the passage in which the 
 writer brings the dates down to his day, the statement that the 
 Martyrdom is commemorated on the 25th of June. 
 
 I do not see, then, that any convincing reason has been brought 
 forward for making the Martyrium later than the Pauline Pro- 
 logue, or assigning them to different hands. Euthalius is proved 
 to have been an epitomizer of previous materials ; why should we 
 assume a second epitomizer to go over what Euthalius has collected; 
 he was quite capable of doing the summarizing himself, either by 
 
 1 That is the 7th of Desius is the 7th of Tune, and so constantly. Notice the 
 agreement of the Eusebian method of dating with the language of the Martyrium : 
 JITIS \tyotT SLV rapA 'Pw/xa/otf.
 
 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 83 
 
 going over his prologue and picking up the allusions, as Prof. 
 Robinson thinks was done, or by going once more, which is the 
 likelier hypothesis, to the sources from which he had derived his 
 information. 
 
 The probability that Euthalius went to his sources for the 
 summary which we find in the Martyrium is increased by the 
 appearance in the reckoning of the Eusebian phrase tfris \e^ovr av 
 in connection with the equivalent date. 
 
 There are other reasons for refusing to Euthalius the extreme 
 antiquity with which Mr Robinson wishes to credit him. One of 
 them has been pointed out by Zahn in TheoL Lit. Blatt for Dec. 20, 
 1895 ; he shews that in Euthalius' list of quotations there is one 
 which is professedly taken from the Apostolic Constitutions (Acts 
 xx. 35), to which pseudapostolic work an extreme antiquity was 
 therefore assigned in Euthalius' mind. But Zahn points out that 
 the quotation in question does not appear in the first form of the 
 Constitutions, the Syriac Didascalia, which belongs to the third 
 century, and that the Constitutions in their later form can hardly 
 have existed as early as 370 and may be later than 400 A.D. Zahn 
 suggests that a later hand should be credited with this quotation ; 
 but this is quite unnecessary; the difficulty only arises from a 
 wrong chronological idea about Euthalius. 
 
 A further consideration of some weight is to be found in the 
 fact that Euthalius speaks of Eusebius in a way which implies 
 that he had been some time dead and had already acquired a 
 literary canonisation. At the close of the Pauline prologue he 
 imagines an objector who refuses to believe the details of Paul's 
 second captivity on the ground that there is nothing of the kind 
 mentioned in S. Luke. And the reply is that we should, on such 
 a point, receive the testimony of Eusebius the Chronographer, and 
 of his History. For it is those who follow the teaching of the 
 Fathers and accept their traditions who will attain unto eternal 
 life. The idea of replying to such objections comes from Euseb. 
 H. E. ii. 22, but the manner of making the reply in which such 
 deference is paid to the opinion of Eusebius, who is styled the 
 Chronographer (which can hardly be a contemporary title), shews 
 that Euthalius is writing after the death of Eusebius, and probably 
 some time after. Now Eusebius died in 340. It would seem, 
 therefore, a very unlikely supposition to assign Euthalius, with 
 Prof. Robinson, to some date between 330 350 A.D.
 
 ambrtoge: 
 
 PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 Series 9482
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A 001 454 305 2