B.H.Cowper, Syriac Miscellanies (1861)

B.H.Cowper, Syriac Miscellanies (1861).
Extracts relating to the First and Second General Councils, and various other quotations, theological, historical and classical.

SYRIAC MISCELLANIES;

EXTRACTS

THEOLOGICAL, HISTORICAL, & CLASSICAL.

TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH FROM MSS. IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM
AND IMPERIAL LIBRARY OF PARIS.

B. H. COWPER.

WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON;
AND
20, SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH.
---------
MDCCCLXI.

PREFACE.

THE following pages owe their appearance to no public desire to investigate the Syriac Literature deposited in the British Museum. England has produced some of the most successful explorers and discoverers of Syriac Manuscripts, and has at this moment a most precious collection of such MSS., which is unequalled by any other in Europe. But, unhappily, there is little curiosity among the general or even the literary public to know anything about the matter. When Robert Huntington made his collections in the 17th century, he was held in honour and rewarded with a Bishopric. When Claudius Rich procured his invaluable collection it was purchased by the nation ; and such modern names as Buchanan and Lee, are none the less remembered for their zeal in this department. Dr. Cureton we all pronounce illustrious in connection with this literature; he has been forward in promoting measures for procuring MSS., painstaking in their arrangement, diligent in their examination, and both accurate and learned as an editor. Dr. Etheridge also has |iv rendered good service to the cause as a compiler and translator. A few others have done something worth honourable mention, among whom is Mr. Payne Smith, the editor and translator of Cyril on Luke, and the translator of the third part of John of Ephesus' Church History. But beyond this, little has been done among us, and the deficiencies in this department are many and grievous. The MSS. in the British Museum have not been efficiently catalogued, and their full contents can only be known by wearisome personal inspection. We have no complete lexicon of the language; and only two or three Syriac English Grammars. There is very little general knowledge of even the old Peshito version, the most ancient, as to the New Testament, and still less acquaintance with other works. The immense collection in the British Museum has been stigmatized as a mass of Monophysitism, and thus depreciated by opprobrious epithets. And yet there is in some minds, happily an increasing number, a desire to know more of these things. This laudable curiosity ought to be gratified, and doubtless it will be eventually found that the MSS. in question are an important supplement to our knowledge on many subjects. The information and extracts they contain as to the Fathers, Creeds, Councils, and Church History, are considerable. In addition to versions of much that we already possess, there are many fragments and entire treatises hitherto unknown. This is true both of known and otherwise unknown authors. |v

The following miscellaneous matters owe their appearance to the request of the SYRO-EGYPTIAN SOCIETY, whose members feel a praiseworthy interest in this matter. They requested me to publish a few things in English in order to show what might be obtained from the Syriac MSS. with which I am acquainted. I cheerfully comply with this wish, and have thrown together, with a few supplementary observations, some of the extracts which I have made. These have been designedly few and brief. It would have been easier to select some one treatise, but perhaps not so well for the purpose intended. Hence there will here be found a diversity of quotations on a variety of subjects. Some of them I had already published, but I have thoroughly revised the translation of them and omitted many of the notes. Some of them are of little value, and yet all have peculiar features. Those on the first Nicene Council are the fullest, and to illustrate them I have added a remarkable Greek list of the Bishops who attended that Council, and a fragment of one in Coptic. I have also given a version of the Nicene Canons for comparison with the copies in Greek and Latin, and as this version, like the list of members, is from the oldest MS. of them yet known, it cannot fail to be interesting. From the same document I have copied a list of those who attended at the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381, and a few other matters. These lists are important in reference to the names of Bishops and of places, |vi as well as for the student of ancient geography. The fragments from Greek authors are obscure, and include some names with which I am otherwise unacquainted. Their chief interest arises from the fact that they clearly form part of some document of the nature of an apology, and are, therefore, in all probability, very ancient. It is well known that the apologists of the second and third centuries defended Christianity by copious citations from Pagan writers, and this is constructed on the same plan, as the conclusion shows. The extracts from Diocles may not be free from interpolation, but they claim to represent the first historian of Rome, a historian from whom, Plutarch tells us, Fabius Pictor drew largely. As to the extracts from Christian authors, they are merely specimens of thousands contained in the MSS., and yet present some points of interest. The matters drawn from the old Syriac Chronicle may furnish the student of history with a few facts, and among them the list of the first successors of Mahomet is peculiarly interesting. This MS. belongs to the 8th century, and is evidently a compilation from the Chronicle ascribed to Hippolytus, that of Eusebius, and others. The notice of two martyrologies is simply intended to show that at a very early period the legends of superstition were not confined to the Western world.

If any readers are disappointed with the selection I have made I shall regret it. But it must be borne in mind that my object has been somewhat peculiar, and |vii that this work is meant to meet the wishes of those who may take the trouble to investigate it. Yet even on such a text a large biographical, geographical, and chronological commentary might be written.

The version is for the most part very literal, and I have aimed rather to give the sense of the originals than to produce what is called a readable book. There are places where I may have missed the meaning, either because of the obscurity of the construction or the defects of our lexicons, which do not contain all the words.

I must express my thanks to the Council of the SYRO-EGYPTIAN SOCIETY for their kindness in promoting a publication for which they are well aware there can be no remunerative demand, and of which only a small number of copies have been printed. I have cheerfully done my part, and hope they will find in it at least a few things which will gratify them.

CONTENTS.

PREFACE
COUNCIL OF NICEA : Extracts from the Codex Syriacus, No 38, in the Imperial Library at Paris	1
Extracts from the Syriac MSS No 14,528, etc, in the British Museum	5
Nicene Catalogue of Fathers and Cities, by Theodorus Lector	25
Fragments of a Coptic List of the same	31
COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE: Extract from the MS No 14,528	34
THE COUNCILS OF ANTIOCH, ANCYRA, etc	40
FRAGMENTS OF GREEK AUTHORS	43
DIOCLES ON THE ORIGIN OF ROME, etc	48
FRAGMENTS OF CHRISTIAN AUTHORS	53
MISCELLANEOUS CHRONOLOGICAL ITEMS from the Syriac MS No 14,643	75
Notice of early Councils from the same	88
Ancient List of Mahomet and his Successors from the same	92
NOTICE OF TWO MARTYROLOGIES from No, 14,644	93
OBSERVATIONS	99

SYRIAN MISCELLANIES.

THE COUNCIL OF NICEA.

EXTRACTS FROM THE CODEX SYRIACUS 38 IN THE IMPERIAL
LIBRARY AT PARIS. P. 249, ETC, WRITTEN ABOUT A.D. 795.

Again:¹ Of the great and holy and oecumenical Synod of 318 holy Fathers, which was held at Nicea, the metropolis of Bithynia, in the year 636 of the reckoning of the Greeks, from Seleucus Nicator, king of Syria, which is the reckoning of the Edessenes; in the consulship of the illustrious Paulinus and Julianus: in the month Haziran, on the 19th thereof, the 13th before the calends of July, in the 20th year of the lover of Christ, the great Constantine, the faithful king, who, when these fathers had first assembled at Ancyra of Galatia, called them thence to Nicea, by his epistle to them, which is this:

"That there is nothing more honourable in my sight than the fear of God, I believe is manifest to every man. Now, because the Synod of Bishops at Ancyra, of Galatia, consented at first that it should be, it now seems on many accounts that it would be well for a Synod to assemble² at Nicea, a city of Bithynia, both because the Bishops of Italy and the rest of the countries of Europe are coming, and also because of the excellent temperature of the air, and also because I shall be |2 present as a spectator and participator of what is done. Wherefore I signify to you, my beloved brethren, that I earnestly wish all of yon to assemble at this city which is named, that is at Nicea. Let every one of you therefore, considering that which is best,³ as I before said, be diligent without any delay speedily to come, that he may be present in his own person as a spectator of what is done. God keep you, my beloved brethren."

When, therefore, at once, on this command, these Fathers speedily assembled at Nicea, on the day before named, they determined and drew up, all of them in common, with the Holy Spirit that was in them, a definition and confession of faith, that which is put beneath.

"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things which are visible, and of those which are invisible: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was the only One begotten of the Father. Now he is of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; and he was begotten, not made; equal in substance to the Father; by whose hands everything was, both those which are in heaven and those which are in earth; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down, and became incarnate, and became man, and suffered, and arose the third day, and ascended to heaven, and cometh to judge the living and the dead:

"As to those who say there was a time when he was not, and that before he was begotten he was not, and that he was of things which were not, or say that he was of another substance or of another essence, or who think the Son of God changeable or mutable, these the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes." |3

This is the faith which the Fathers drew up----first, indeed, against Arius, who blasphemed, and said that the Son of God was a creature; but afterwards also against all heresies, that is of Sabellius and Photinus; and against the heresies of Paul of Samosata, and of Manes, and of Valentinus, and of Marcion; and against every heresy whatever which sprang up against the Catholic Church; these the 318 Fathers condemned when they were assembled together at Nicea.

"Now we anathematize also those who say, like Paul of Samosata, that before Mary the Son of God was not, but took his beginning from his generation in the flesh; and that he who was of Mary was one, but the Word of God another, and deny the Son that he was the Word of God, who was eternally with the Father; by whose hands all things were, and without him nothing was; who for us became man, when he became incarnate of Mary the Virgin.

"And we, moreover, anathematize those also who say that there are three Gods, and deny that the Word, that is, the Son of God, is God."

Because of these things, those heresies which were before named were anathematized, and also the wicked madness of the Arians. Concerning the Faith therefore, thus did it seem good to all the 318 holy Bishops who were assembled together at the Sacerdotal Synod, those that is, whose names, and cities, and provinces, many of them, are these, which are written below.^⁴ But of a few of them the names were not written. For those were zealous who wrote; and also those servants of God, the bishops, zealous for the faith, of the Orientals especially, made it a care to receive the names; and they especially were required to sign, because in the west there was not as with them disputation concerning heresies, or concerning the division and disagreement about the Passover. For they did not say as Sabellius, "one person, with |4 three names, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost," but as it is in the definition of the Holy Synod at Nicea, which is above set down, "that the Father is one truly, and the only Son is one truly, and that the Holy Ghost is one truly," And it was also just and correct with them concerning the Passover. Therefore all of them were not found at the subscribing. Now those Bishops subscribed the orthodox faith thus, "Such a one, Bishop of such a city, and of such a province; so I believe as before written." Concerning the faith, then, all the holy Synod thus decided and wrote; and thus all of them subscribed and affirmed the definition which is before put down.

Now, concerning rules and canons ecclesiastical, these things seemed good, and pleased all who were assembled in the Sacerdotal Synod, before, and with, and in the presence of the lover of God, the great and faithful King Constantine, who not only brought to one mind the Bishops before written, and many others whose names are not written hitherto, since he sought and designed peace for the people of the Christians, but also since he was present at their holy assembly, and at the same time spake and heard, and declared those things which were befitting and best for the holy and universal Church of Christ. Since, therefore, when the matter was investigated, in order that all under heaven might celebrate the holy feast of the Passover, unanimously and at once, without contention, there were found three parts of the world which, with unanimity, and without variance, observed it, together with the Romans and Alexandrians; but one part only, that of the east, was found which was in uncertainty, and continued in strife aud confusion always; thus it seemed well pleasing to them, "that all questioning and strife being removed from the midst, thus also shall our brethren in the east observe the feast of the Passover as do the Romans and Alexandrians, and all others besides, in order |5 that on one day, with consent and agreement of voice, all Christians may offer praises and prayers." Therefore concerning this also all those subscribed who in the east had been divided with one another, and they ended and abolished strife. Now when this also was set right and came to a conclusion, while all the great and holy Synod was assembled, it determined and drew up those things which are written below.⁵

Here end the twenty ecclesiastical canons which were determined by the great and holy Synod of Nicea of 318 Bishops.

Again: twenty-four canons which were drawn up at Ancyra, a city of Galatia, by the Synod which assembled there. These canons were prior to those which were constituted at Nicea, but those of Nicea are written first, because of the authority of the great and holy Synod which was at Nicea. Now the names of the Bishops who were assembled at the Synod at Ancyra are these.

EXTRACTS FROM THE SYRIAC MS. NO. 14528 IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM. WRITTEN A.D. 501.

That there is nothing more honourable in my sight than the fear of God, is, I believe, manifest to every man. Now because the Synod of Bishops at Ancyra of Galatia consented formerly that it should be, it hath seemed to us on many accounts that it would be well for a Synod to assemble at Nicea, |6 a city of Bithynia, both because of the Bishops who from Italy and the rest of the countries of Europe are coming, and because of the excellent temperature of the air, and because I shall be present as a spectator and participator of those things which are done. Wherefore I signify to you, my beloved brethren, that all of you promptly assemble at the city which was named, that is at Nicea. Let every one of you therefore, regarding that which is best, as I before said, be diligent, without delay in anything, speedily to come, that he may be in his Own person present as a spectator of those things which are done by the same.

Constantine the King to the Bishops and nations everywhere. Inasmuch as Arius imitates the evil and the wicked, it is right that, like them, he should be rebuked and rejected. As therefore Porphyry, who was an enemy of the fear of God, and wrote wicked and unlawful writings against the religion of Christians, found the reward which befitted him, that he might be a reproach to all generations after, because he fully and insatiably used base fame; so that on this account his writings were righteously destroyed; thus also now it seems good that Arius and the holders of his opinion should all be called Porphyrians, that he may be named by the name of those whose evil ways he imitates: And not only this, but also that all the writings of Arius, wherever they be found, shall be delivered to be burned with fire, in order that not only his wicked and evil doctrine may be destroyed, but also that the memory of himself and of his doctrine may be blotted out, that there may not by any means remain to him remembrance in the world. Now this also I ordain, that if any one shall be found secreting any writing composed by Arius, and shall |7 not forthwith deliver up and burn it with fire, his punishment shall be death; for as soon as he is caught in this he shall suffer capital punishment by beheading without delay.

I believe in one God the Father Almighty, maker of all things, visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was begotten of the Father, only begotten. Now he is of the substance of the Father: God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; who was begotten and not made; of the same substance as the Father, by whose hand all things were made which are in heaven and in earth; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and became incarnate, and was made man, and suffered, and rose the third day, and ascended to heaven, and cometh to judge the living and the dead; And in the Holy Ghost. Now those who say that once he was not, and that he was not before he was begotten, or that he was from nothing, or say that he was of another substance or essence, or think the Son of God changeable or mutable, these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.

I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all tilings visible and invisible: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, who was begotten |8 of the Father, before all worlds, very God of very God, who was begotten and not made; of the same essence as the Father; by whose hands everything was made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down, and became incarnate of the Holy Ghost, and of Mary the Virgin, and became man, and was crucified for us, in the days of Pontius Pilate; and suffered, and was buried, and rose the third day according as the Scriptures say; and ascended to heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of his Father; and cometh again in glory to judge the living and the dead; of whose kingdom there is no end: And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Lifegiver, who proceedeth from the Father; who with the Father and the Son, is to be worshipped and glorified; who spake by the prophets: And in one Holy, Apostolic, and Catholic Church: And I confess one baptism for the remission of sins: And I hope for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Hosius, Bishop of Corduba, a city of Italy.⁸ Thus I believe as is above written.

Vito and Vicentius, presbyters of Rome, for our bishop (papa) we subscribe, for we thus believe as is above written.

Alexander of Alexandria. Secundus of Ptolemais.
Alpocration of Alphocranum. Dorotheus of Pelusium.
Adamantius of Canon. Gaius of Thmuis.
Arbetion of Barathu. Antiochus of Memphis.
Philip of Panephysus. Tiberius of Tauthatis.⁹
Potamon of Heraclea.

Daces of Berenice. Secundus of Teuchilibya.^¹⁰
Zopyrus of Barce. Titus of Paraetonium.
Serapion of Antipurgos.

Macarius of Jerusalem. Paul of Maximianopolis.
Germanus of Samaria. Januarius of Jericho.
Marinus of Sebastena. Heliodorus of Zabulon.
Gajanus of Sebaste.¹¹ Aetius of Lydda.
Eusebius of Caesarea. Silvanus of Azotus.
Sabinus of Gadara. Patrophilus of Beishan.
Longinus of Ascalon. Asclepias of Gaza.
Peter of Nicopolis. Peter of Aila.
Macrinus of Jamnia. Antiochus of Capitolias.
Maximus of Eleutheropolis.

Zeno of Tyre. Philocles of Paneas.
Aeneas of Accho. Gregory of Berytus.
Magnus of Damascus. Marinus of Thadmor.
Theodoras of Sidon. Anatolius of Emesa.
Hellanicus of Tripolis. Badonius of Alaso.¹²

Eustathius of Antioch. Zoilus of Gabala.
Zenobius of Seleucia. Bassus of Zeugma.
Theodotus of Laodicea. Gerontius of Larissa.
Ulpius of Apamea. Manicius of Hamath.
Bassianus of Raphanea. Eustathius of Aresthan.¹³
Philoxenus of Mabug. Paul of Neocaesarea.
Solomon of Germanicia. Siricius of Cyrrhus.
Papirius of Samosata. Seleucus, Chorepiscopus.
Archelaus of Doliche. Peter of Gindara.
Euphrantion of Balanea. Pegasius of Harba-Kedem.¹⁴
Palladius, Chorepiscopus. Bassonius of Gabala. |10

Nicomachus of Bostra. Severus of Sodoma.
Cyrnon of Philadelphia. Sopater of Barathena.
Gennadius of Esbonta.¹⁵ Severus of Dionysias.

Ethilhas of Edessa.¹⁶ Mareas of Birtha.
Jacob of Nisibis.¹⁷ John of Persia.^¹⁸
Antiochus of Resaina.

Theodoras of Tarsus. Paulinus of Adana.
Amphion of Epiphaneia. Macedonius of Mopsuestia.
Narcissus of Neronias. Taracondamantus of Aegae.
Moses of Castabala. Hesychius of Alexandria Minor.
Nicetas of Flavias. Narcissus of Irenopolis.
Eudaemon, Chorepiscopus.

Leontius of Caesarea. Gorgonius, Chorepiscopus.
Eupsychius of Tyana. Stephen, Chorepiscopus.
Erythrius of Colonia. Eudrames, Chorepiscopus.
Timothy of Cybistra. Doron, Chorepiscopus.^¹⁹
Helpidius of Comana. Theophanes, Chorepiscopus.

Aristacius of Armenia.²⁰ Helpidius of Comana.
Acrites of Diospontum. Heraclius of Zela.
Eutychianus of Amasea.

Philadelphus of Pompeiopolis. Eupsychius of Amastris.
Petronius of Junopolis. |11

Marcellus of Ancyra.²¹ Gorgonius of Ciaena.
Dicasius of Tyana. Philadelphus of Juliopolis.
Arcathius of Gadmeausa.

Theonas of Corycus. Eutychius of Smyrna.
Menophantes of Ephesus. Mithras of Hypaepa.
Eudion of Ilium.²² Macrinus of Julium.²³

Artemidorus of Sardes. Florentius of Ancyra Ferrea.
Sares of Thyatira. Antiochus of Aurelianopolis.
Etoemasius of Philadelphia. Marcus of Standum.²⁴
Pollio of Baris. Antiochus of Hierocaesarea.
Agogius of Tripolis.

Nunechius of Laodicea. Athenodorus of Dorylaeum.
Flaccus of Sanis. Paul of Apamea.
Procopius of Synnada. Eugenius of Eucarpia.
Pisticius of Azani. Flaccus of Hierapolis.

Eulalius of Iconium. Tarsicius of Apamea.
Telemachus of Adrianopolis. Patricius of Ampelada.
Hesychius of Neapolis. Polycarpus of Metropolis.
Eutychius of Seleucia. Academius of Papha.
Uranicus of Limen. Heraclius of Baris.

Callicles of Perga. Contianus of Seleucia.
Eurasius of Termessus. Patricius of Maximianopolis.
Zeuxes of Verabon.²⁵ Aphrodisias of Magidon.
Domnus of Aspendum. |12

Euphrosynus of Rhodes. Strategius of Lemnos.
Meliphron of Coos. Alitodorus of Corcyra.

Eusebius of Antioch. Letodorus of Cibyra.
Ammonius of Aphrodisias. Eusebius of Miletus.
Eugenes of Apollonias.

Stephen of Barata. Cyrillus of Thaumanada.
Athenaeus of Coracesium. Theodoras of Vasada.
Hedesius of Claudiopolis. Anatolius, Chorepiscopus.
Agapius of Seleucia. Paul of Laranda.
Silvanus of Isauropolis. Conatus, Chorepiscopus.
Postus of Panaemon. Tiberius of Lystra.
Antoninus of Antioch. Aquila, Chorepiscopus.
Nestor of Syedra. Eusebius of the Parochia of Isauropolis.²⁶
Hesychius, Chorepiscopus.

Eusebius of Nicomedia. Georgius of Aprusas.
Theognis of Nicea. Euhethius of Adrianopolis.
Maris of Chalcedon. Theophanes, Chorepiscopus.
Cyrillus of Cium. Rufus of Caesarea.
Hesychius of Prusa. Eulalius, Chorepiscopus.
Gorgonius of Apollonias.

Ecclesiastical Canons of the great and holy Synod of 318 Bishops, which assembled at Nicea, a city of Bithynia, and determined those things which are written below.

If a man suffers amputation by surgeons, in consequence of disease, or is mutilated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy. But if, when he is well, a man mutilates himself of his own accord, let him cease from his ministry if he is among the clergy, and henceforth let not him that is such be presented for ordination. And as this is manifestly spoken of those who deceitfully and wilfully dare to cut off their members, so if there be any who are mutilated by barbarians or |14 by their masters, but are otherwise, as to their conduct, found worthy of ordination to the priesthood, these the canon allows to enter the clergy.

2. Of those of the Heathen, who at their Baptism come to ordination for the Priesthood.

Since many things take place against the ecclesiastical canon, either of necessity or through haste, so that men newly come to the faith from the life of the heathen, and after they have been hearers a little time, come at once to the spiritual baptism, and at their baptism are presented for ordination to the episcopate or eldership, it is decided that henceforth no such thing shall be, because a certain time is required of a hearer, and much proof after his baptism, and this the blessed Apostle clearly shows, "Let his discipleship not be recent, lest being lifted up, he fall into condemnation and the snare of Satan." Now if in any of those who hurriedly after their baptism, forthwith have received ordination, as time passes before him, spiritual sin should be discovered, and he be convicted by two or three witnesses, let him be expelled from the clergy; and whoever contrary to this, dares to act against this great Synod, let him be deposed from the priesthood.

As to female visitors, the great Synod altogether decides that neither with a bishop, nor with an elder, nor with a deacon, nor with any one who is of the clergy, is it lawful that there should be a female visitor, but only a sister or an aunt, or one of such persons as are far from suspicion.

If possible, he who becomes a Bishop, ought to be constituted by all the Bishops of the province. But if this |15 cannot be, either because of necessity or that the way is long, it is required by all means that three be gathered together, and the rest consenting with them in opinion and by writing, the ordination may take place, but the confirmation of what is done shall be conceded in every province to the metropolitan.

As to what happens in a prohibition from the clergy, or from the rank of the laity, by the bishops in any one of the provinces, this opinion according to the canon [is to be held], that those who are ejected by some shall not be received by others; but let enquiry be made, whether through strife, or through contention, or through a similar cause in the Bishop himself, they are prohibited from the communion of the Church. But that the proof which is needed may be an acceptable matter, it seems good to us, that in every province, its Synod should assemble twice in a year, in order that when all the Bishops of the province are convened together, such questions may be tried, and so those who are clearly known to have disobeyed the Bishop may be prohibited by all the Bishops, until it appear either to the Bishop himself, or to the Synod, that they should show them mercy. Now let these synods be one before the fast of forty (days), that all contention being removed, the offering ³⁰ may be purely presented to God; and the other in the time of Tisri (autumn).

Let the ancient customs be retained in Egypt, and in Libya, and in Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria should have authority over all these: because to him of Rome also, this is customary. And so also in Antioch, and in the other provinces, let the primacy be maintained in the churches. Now let this be everywhere known, that if a man, |16 without the consent or permission of the Metropolitan, shall become a Bishop, the great Synod determines that he shall not be a Bishop. But if to an election, which is common to all,³¹ when it is orderly and according to the ecclesiastical canon, two or three, out of their contentiousness, shall be opposed, let the opinion of the majority obtain and be established.

Because the custom obtains, and ancient tradition, that the Bishop of Jerusalem should be honoured; while there is to him the rank of his honour, let there be also maintained for the Metropolitan his distinction.

Of those who sometimes call themselves Cathari, but who come to the Apostolical and Catholic Church, it seemed good to the great and holy Synod, that as they receive ordination, so they should abide in the clergy. But, before all things, it behoves that they confess in writing, that they consent to and observe the laws of the Catholic and Apostolical Church; now that is, that they commune with those who live in second marriage, and those who have denied in persecution, those to whom also a time is determined and limited when they shall be received; and who adhere in all things to what is defined in the Catholic and Apostolic Church. When, therefore, only they are found in a city or in villages with their bishops, and there are not in the city or town other clergy of the orthodox, having received ordination, let them remain in their character. But if in a place in which there is a bishop or presbyter of the Catholic Church, some of them come, it is evident that the Bishop of the Catholic Church retains the authority of his episcopate, but he that among the Cathari is called a Bishop, shall retain the honour of presbyter; now |17 that is, except it seem good to the Bishop of the Catholic Church that he cease to retain the name of the honour of the episcopate. But if this pleases him not, let him bestow on him the place of Chorepiscopus or of presbyter, that he may appear to be among the clergy, that there be not two bishops in a city.

If, perchance, untried persons become presbyters, or those who, when their conduct is enquired into, confess wherein they have sinned, and when they have confessed, any act in opposition to the canons and lay hands on them, such the canon doth not receive, because the Catholic Church requires unblameableness in everything.

Those who come to be clergy, of such as before denied in persecution, whether known, or because they were not examined and known of those who promoted them, this prejudices the ecclesiastical canon in nothing. When they are known, by all means let them be expelled from their degrees.

As to those who deny without constraint, or without confiscation of their goods, or without peril, or any other oppression, as happened in the tyranny of Licinius; it seemed good to the Synod, that, even if unworthy of compassion, kindness should be shown to them. Therefore all those who perfectly repent, shall spend three years among the hearers, if they are baptized, and seven years with the penitent; but let them commune two years with the people in prayer at the time of the offering, without offering.³² |18

Now those who have been called by grace, and showed their first zeal, and laid aside their girdles,³³ but afterwards return to their former vomit, so that some of them give gold and arrange by means of gifts to take their service again; let these repent ten years, after spending three years in the rank beneath that of hearers. Now, with regard to all these, it behoves us to examine the disposition and kind of repentance; and those who in fear, and tears, and patience, and good deeds, exhibit a conversion in deed and not in appearance, when they have fulfilled the period appointed for being lower than hearers, rightly participate in the prayer of the Eucharist, and the Bishop has authority to devise some kindness towards them. But those who receive it with indifference, and think the form of merely entering the church sufficient to them for conversion, let them by all means fulfil the time appointed.

As to those who depart from the world, let the ancient and canonical law be now also retained, that if a man depart from the world he should not be deprived of that provision which it is needful for him to receive; but if, after it is decided respecting him that he is dying, and he is admitted to communion, and receives the Eucharist, he again returns to health and continues in life, let him be only among those who are partakers in the prayer of the Eucharist. But generally, whoever departs from the world, and requests to communicate in the holy mysteries, let the Bishop give him the Eucharist, with much discrimination having made inquiry.

As to hearers who deny (those who are called Catechumens), |19 it pleases the great and holy Synod that they shall be three years with those who come not to the instruction (who are called Acroatae), and shall afterwards pray with the hearers, according to their former rank.

Because of the many disorders and contentions which take place, it is decided that this custom shall be utterly abolished, which is contrary to the canon, if it be in any place found, so that neither bishop, nor presbyter, nor deacon, shall change from city to city. Now, if after this determination of the great and holy Synod, any shall dare and allow himself to practice such conduct, let his arrangements by all means be nullified, and him be restored to the church where he has been bishop, or presbyter, or deacon.

Those who, exposing themselves to danger, and not setting the fear of God before their eyes, and not acknowledging the ecclesiastical canon, remove from their churches, whether elders or deacons, or such as are in any way inscribed in one of the orders of the clergy, these ought by no means to be admitted into another church, but let all influence come upon them to return to their places; but if they are obstinate and stay, let them be restrained from the communion of the church. And if any one shall dare to take a person who belongs to another, and bring him to ordination in his church, when the Bishop from whom he has removed does not consent, such ordination shall be void.

Whereas many who are in one of the orders of the clergy, while they run after profit and base gains, forget the divine |20 Scripture, which says, "He giveth not his money for usury," and when they lend exact so much per cent.; the holy Synod adjudges that, if after this determination any man shall be found to take interest, or in any way whatever shall use this practice, and demand a portion, or devises anything else for base gain, he shall be expelled from the clergy, and be alienated from his ministry.

It hath been made known to the great and holy Synod, that in divers places and cities the deacons give the Eucharist to the presbyters, when neither canon nor custom sanctions that such as have no authority to offer the Eucharist should give the body of Christ to those who offer it; and this also has been made known, that some of the deacons receive the Eucharist even before the bishops: let all these things therefore be removed, and let the deacons abide in their proper stations, knowing that they are the ministers of the bishop, and beneath the elders. Let them therefore receive "the Eucharist in order after the presbyters, either the bishop or a presbyter giving it to them. Moreover, it is not conceded to deacons to sit among the presbyters, because it is contrary to order and the canons. Now if any one will not be obedient to what is determined, let him be removed from his ministry.

With regard to those who have been of the heresy of Paul, and afterwards take refuge in the Catholic Church, we lay down a rule that by all means they should be baptised again: but if any of them in time past were in the clergy, if they are found to be without rebuke and without blame, let them |21 be baptised again, and receive ordination from some bishop of the Catholic Church: but if, when inquiry is made respecting them, they appear to be unfit, let them be expelled from their places; so also with regard to deaconesses, and all those who are in the ministry,³⁴ let this order be observed: but deaconesses we admonish that, because they are (such) in appearance, and have not received ordination, they will be altogether reckoned with the daughters of the world.

Because there are men who on the first in the week and on the days of Pentecost bow the knee: in order that everything may be worthily and uniformly observed in every province, it hath seemed good to the holy Synod that all of us should offer prayer to God, standing.

Again, a history of these Synods. Now the Synod of Nicea was assembled in the days of Constantine the Great; and its chiefs were Alexander, Archbishop of Alexandria; and in the place of the papa of Rome, Vinto and Vicentius, presbyters of Rome. ....

Again: now the Synod of Nicea was assembled because of the affairs of wicked Arius, who alienated the Son from the nature of the Father; and in that he was begotten of the Father, they called him "made," and a "creature," and (said) that he was not of the same nature as the Father.

It may not be uninteresting to append here a translation of a Creed, professing to be by Athanasius, from a Syriac MS. in the British Museum, No. 12,106, which was written |22 A.D.562. The volume contains, among other things, the treatise of Timothy of Alexandria "against the Council of Chalcedon," which includes a large number of extracts from the Fathers. The Creed bears evident marks of a Monophysite origin. I am not aware of its existence elsewhere.⁶³

We confess the Son of God, who before the worlds was eternally begotten; who in the end of the worlds was (born) of Mary in the flesh for cur redemption, as the divine Apostle teacheth, saying, "Now when the fulness of the time was come, God sent his son who was (born) of a woman," and he was Son of God and God in the Spirit, but Son of Man in the flesh. The one Son was not two natures, one which is to be worshipped, and another not to be worshipped, but one nature of God the Word, who became incarnate, and is with his flesh, to be worshipped with one worship: nor are there two Sons, one who is the Son of the true God and to be worshipped, but the other from Mary, the Son of Man, and not to be worshipped, being Son of God by grace as men also are: but he who was of God, and God, as I said, is at once Son of God and God; and he was not another who was also born of Mary in the flesh in the last days. As also the angel said to Mary mother of God, when she asked, "How shall this be, for I know not a man?"----"The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, and therefore that Holy One who shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." He therefore that |23 was born of the Virgin Mary was by nature Son of God and the true God, and not by grace and communication. In the flesh alone, he that was of Mary was Son of Man, but in the Spirit he was both Son of God and God, who bore our sufferings, as it is written, "Christ suffered for us in the flesh;" and again, "For he that spared not his own Son, but gave him up for us all." For he continued impassible and immutable in the divinity, as it is said by the prophet, "I am God and I change not," who died our death in the flesh for our sins, that he might remove death by death for us, as the Apostle saith, "Death is swallowed up in victory. O Death, where is thy victory? O Grave, where is thy sting?" And again, "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures." Now he continued incomprehensible and immortal in death, in the divinity, according to the impassible power of the Father, as Peter saith, "It was not possible that he should be holden of death." And he ascended to heaven and sitteth at the right hand of the Father, according to his flesh (viz.), that of the Word, which went up from earth, as was said by David, "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand," which is affirmed of our Lord both by him and by the Apostles. Now in the Divinity he is infinite, and every place is limited by him. With the Father, who is eternal, he is a son of eternity (= eternal), according to the paternal power which is ineffable, according to the teacher Paul, "Christ the power of God, and Christ the wisdom of God." And he coineth, being Son of God and God as is confessed, that he may judge the living and the dead, as the Apostle saith, "Who shall judge the hidden things of darkness, and reveal the thoughts of the hearts: and he shall render glory and contempt to every man as becometh him."

Now if a man teach other than these things from the divine Scriptures, saying that the Son of God is one, and the Son of Man who was of Mary is another who was made a son |24 by grace as we are, so that there are two Sons, one by nature Son of God, who was of God, and one by grace, the Son of Man who was of Mary; or if a man say that the flesh of our Lord is from above, and not of the Virgin Mary; or that the Divinity partook of the flesh, or was confounded or commuted with it; or that the Divinity of the Son was passible; or that the flesh of our Lord is not to be worshipped, inasmuch as it is that of the Son of Man, and is not to be worshipped as being the flesh of our Lord and our God: such a one the Holy and Catholic church anathematizes, since the divine Apostle enjoins it, saying, "If a man preach to you other than ye have received, let him be anathema."

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible:

And in one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was begotten of the Father, the only begotten. Now he is of the Substance of the Father; God of God; Light of Light; very God of very God; who was begotten and not made; of the same substance as the Father; by whom all things were made which are in heaven and which are on earth; who for us men and for our redemption, came down and became incarnate, and became man, and suffered, and rose the third day: and he ascended to heaven, and shall come to judge the living and the dead:

Now those who say that once be was not, and that he was not before he was begotten, or that he was from nothing, or say that he was of another substance or essence, or that the |25 Son of God was mutable or changeable; these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.

I shall insert here a version of two lists of Nicene Fathers. The first was originally printed by Zoega, and reprinted by Pitra in the Spicilegium Solesmense as part of a document which contains much in common with the extracts above given from the Paris MS. The second list is ascribed to Theodorus Lector, and has been only once printed in the original Greek by Morelli in his Bibliotheca MS., Graeca et Latina; Bassano, 1802. I owe my acquaintance with this list to the most severe of my critics in the Christian Remembrancer. However, fas est et ab hoste doceri, and I have translated both it and Dom Pitra's Coptic list for comparison with my own. Let it be observed, moreover, that Theodorus Lector, to whom the Greek list is ascribed, is referred by Cave to A.D. 520, or about 20 years later than the Syriac Catalogue was written down in the manuscript from which it has been copied.

"I think it instructive to put down here also the names of the Bishops who assembled at Nicea, as far as I could find them; and of what province and city each was; and the time in which they met."

Of Alexandria, Alexander. Of Ptolemais, Secundus.
Harpocration, Alphocranon. Of Pelusium, Dorotheas.
Zeno, Adamantius.³⁶ Of Thmuis, Caius.
Of Pharbaethus, Arbetion. Of Memphis, Antilogus.
Of Panyphis, Philippus. Of Tauthit�, Tiberius.
Of Heracleos, Potamon.

Daces of Berenic�. Sarapion of Antipurgos.
Zopyrus of Barc�. Secundus of Tauch�.³⁷

Macarius of Jerusalem. Paulus of Maximianopolis.
Germanus of Neapolis. Januarius of Jericho.
Marianus of Sebastenus. Heliodorus of Zabula.
Gainus of Sebaste. A�tius of Lydda.
Eusebius of Caesarea. Silvanus of Azotus.
Sabinus of Gadara. Patrophilus of Scythopolis.
Longinus of Ascalon. Asclepius of Gaza.
Petrus of Nicopolis. Petrus of A�la.
Marianus of Jamnia. Antipatros of Capitolias.
Maximus of Eleutheropolis.

Zeno of Tyre. Hellanicus of Tripolis.
Aeneas of Ptolemais. Philocalus of Paneas.
Magnus of Damascus. Gregorius of Berytus.
Theodorus of Sidon. Anatolius of Emesa. |27

Eustathius of Seleucia. Bassus of Zeuma.
Theodotus of Laodicea. Gerontius of Larissa.
Alphius of Apamea. Manicius of Epiphania.
Basianus of Raphanea. Eustathius of Arethusa.
Philoxenus of Hierapolis. Paulus of Neocaesarea.
Salamanes of Germanicia. Syricius of Cyprus.
Piperius of Samosata. Seleucus, Chorepiscopus.
Archelaus of Doliche. Petrus of Gindara.
Euphration of Balanea. Pegasius of Armocadama.
Phaladus, Chorepiscopus. Bassones of Tabul�.
Zoilus of Gabala.

Nicomacus of Bostra. Dionysius of Mesopotamia.
Cyrion of Philadelphia. Aithalas of Edessa.
Gennadius of Jebunda.
Jacobus of Nisibis. Severus of Sodoma.
Antiochus of Resiina. Sopater of Beritaneus.
Maraias of Macedonopolis. Severus of Dionysias.
Joannes of Persia.

Amphion of Epiphanea. Paulinus of Adana.
Narcissus of Neronias. Macedonius of Mopsuestia.
Moses of Castabala. Tarcodemantus of Aegea.
Nicetas of Phleias. Hesychius of Alexandria Minor.
Eudaimon, Chorepiscopus. Narcissus of Irenopolis.

Leontius of Caesarea. Elpidius of Comana.
Eutychius of Tyana. Gorgonius, Chorepiscopus.
Erothrius of Colonia. Eudromius, Chorepiscopus.
Timotheus of Cybistra. Theophanes.

.. . of Diospontum. Elpidius of Comana.
Eutychius of Amasea. Heraclius of Zola.

Marcellus of Ancyra. Gorgonius of Cinae.
Dicasius of Tarbia. Philadelphus of Julipolis.
Erichthius of Damaba.

Theonas of Cyzicum. Mithres of Hypyrpa.
Menophantus of Ephesus. Marianus of Troas.
Orion of Ilium. Paulus of Anora.
Eutychius of Smyrna.

Artemidorus of Sardis. Florentius of Ancyra Ferrea.
Seras of Thyatira. Antiochus of Hidron-Caesarea.^³⁸
Etoemasius of Philadelphia. Antiochus of Aurelianopolis.
Pollio of Baris. Marcus of Standon.
Agogius of Tripolis.

Nunechius of Laodicea. Eutychius of Seleucia.
Flaccus of Sanada. Araunius of Limena.
Pistus of Azana. Tarsicus of Apamia.
Athenodorus of Dorylleum. Patricias of Amblada.
Paulus of Apamia. Polycarpus of Metropolis.
Eugenius of Eucarpia. Academius of Papae.
Flacus of Hierapolis. Heracleus of Baris.
Hesychius of Neapolis.

Callicles of Perga. Cyntianus of Seleucia.
Euresius of Termissus. Patricius of Mazimianopolis.
Zeuxius of Syarma. Aphrodisius of Magyda.
Domnus of Aspendum.

Euphrosynus of Rhodus. Strategius of Lemnus.
Meliphron of Cous. Alitodorus of Cercyra.

Eusebius of Antiochia. Letodorus of Cibyra.
Ammonius of Aphrodisias. Eusebius of Miletus.
Eugenius of Appolonias.

Stephanus of Carata. Cyrillus of Oumandra.
Athenaeus of Gorpissus. Theodoras of Ou-Andala.
Edesius of Claudiopolis. Anatolius, Chorepiscopus.
Agapius of Seleucia. Paulus of Laranda.
Silvanus of Metropolis. Cyntus, Chorepiscopus.
Faustus of Panemitichus. Tiberius of Alistra.
Antonius of Antioch. Acylas, Chorepiscopus.
Nestor of Syedra. Eusebius of Paroechia.
Hesychius, Chorepiscopus.

Eusebius of Nicomedia. Gorgonius of Apollonias.
Theognius of Nicaea. Georgius of Prusias.
Maris of Chalcedon. Euethius of Adriana.
Cyrillus of Cyum. Theophanes, Chorepiscopus.
Hesychius of Prusa.

"We have been able to find the names of so many, but of the others we have thus far not found them. And the time of the Synod, as we find in the Annotations, was the consulship of Paulinus and Julianus, on the 20th of the month of May; and this was the 636th year from Alexander King of Macedonia's 19th year. The business of the Synod, then, was accomplished, and it should be known that after the Synod the King set out to the Eastern parts." |31

Becon and Ionocentus,⁴⁰ presbyters. We subscribe for our Bishop, who is of Rome; he believes as above written.

Athas of Scethia. Arbetion of Pharboethus.
Adamantus of Coeis. Antiochus of Memphis.
Tiberius of Thmuis. Petrus of Hnes.
Gaius of Panyos. Tyranus of Antinou.
Potamon of Heracleus Throis. Plusianus of Siout.
Dorotheus of Pelusium. Dios of Tkou.
Apoc .... ... prao .... Arpocrator of Alphocranon.
Philippus of Panephyson.

Sarapion of Antipurgos. Zopyrus of Bac�.
Dios of Paratonion. Secountus of Ptolmais.
Segentus of Teuchira. Takes of Berenice.

.............     Paulus of Maximianopolis.
.............     Januarius of Hiericho.
.............     A�tius of Dintia.
....... of Sebast�. Sabinus of Azotus.
Eusebius of Caesarea. Patrophilus of Scythopolis.
Sabinus of Cadara. Asclepas of Gaza.
Longinus of Ascalon. Petrus of Ialon.
Petrus of Nicopolis. Antochus of Gapetulius.
Macrinus of Jamnia. |32

Zeno of Tyre. Marinus of Palmyron.
Ananias of Ptolmais. Thadoneus of Lazos.
Magnus of Damascus. Anatolius of Emetsa.
Theodorus of Sidon. Philocalus of Panias.
Ellaticus of Tripolis. Synodorus of Antaratos.
Gregorius of Betus. Ballaus of Thersea.

Eustathius of Antochia. Archelaus of Perioche.
Zenobius of Seleucia. Euphrantion of Daneon.
Theodotus of Laodicia. Soilus of Gabalon.
Alphius of Apamia. Phalatus, Chorepiscopus.
Philoxenus of Hierapolis. Bassus of Seucmates.
Salamias of Cermanicus. Sabianus of Heraphantes.
Perperius of Samusata. Cerontius of Larissa.

Eustathius of Arethusa. Pigasius of Abogatana.
Paulus of Neocaesarea. Balanus of Carboula.
Siricus of Cyprus. Manicius of Epimia.
Seleucius, Chorepiscopus. Eliconos of Abalas.
Petrus of Cytalu.

Nichomacus of Bostra.         ............
Cyrion of Philadelphia.        ...... (Bata)neus.
Gennadius .......                     Dion .........

Ethalas of Edessa. Mereas of Macedonopolis.
Jacobus of Sirinus Joannes Persinus.
Antiochus of Risian�.

Theodorus of Tarsus. Mouses of Cataballa.
Amphion of Epiphania. Nicetes of Flavianus.
Narcissus of Erotanus. Eudumon, Chorepiscopus. |33
Paulinus of Adana. ..........
Macedo ...... Narcissus ... en ... polis.

Leontius of Caesarea. Stephanus, Chorepiscopus.
Eutychianus of Teana. Rodon, Chorepiscopus.
Erithrius of Collania. Gorgonius, Chorepiscopus.
Timotheus of Comana. Paulus of Spania.

Eularius of Sebastia. Eucromius, Chorepiscopus.
Euetheius of Sadola. Theophanes, Chorepiscopus.

Pancharius of Ancyra. Corconius of Cinae.
Dicasius of Tauias. Philadelphius of Heliopolis.
Erechthius of Tmausont.

Theonas of Cysicus. Eutychius of Smyrna.
Theophantus of Ephesus. Methres of Iemptsa.
Orion of Eli . . . . Macarius of Elion.

Artemetorus of Sardis. Acogius of Tripolis,
Sarapas of Thyadira. Brontius of Ancyra.
Ebdomasius of Philadelphia. Antochus of Aulilianopolis.
Pollio of Baris. Marcus of Tanton. |34

Nunechius of Laodicea. Athenasotorus of Merineus.
Flaccus of Synanta. ..........
Procopius of Sanata. ..........
Pistus of Ozana.

......... of Iconium. Patricius of Alateus.
Telemachus of Atrianopolis. Agathumius of Amordian�.
Hesychius of Neapolis. Polycarpus of Metropolis.
Eutychius of Sicion. Acatemius of Pampa.
Ouranius of Limena. Heraclius of Beresia.
Taracius of Apamia. Theodoras of Ousin.

COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.⁴²

"Four Canons of the Synod of Constantinople. In the 9th year of the government of Eucherius and Evagrius, in the month Ab, of the year 429 of the reckoning of the Antiochians.

"The Bishops which, by the grace of God, met in Constantinople from various provinces at the summons of the lover of God, Theodosius, determined.

"These definitions were made of the 150 Bishops who met in Constantinople, at the xeirotonia of Nectarius, the Bishop."

Cyril of Jerusalem.
Galasius of Caesarea [Mansi Thalassius. Gelasius].
Macarius of Jericho [Mansi, Macer].
Dionysius of Diospolis [Lydda].
Saturnilus of Sebastia [Samaria].
Rufus of Beishan [Scythopolis. Mansi Nicopolis].
Auxentius of Ascalon.
Alianus of Jamnia [Jabne].

Zeno of Tyre.
Paul of Sidon.
Nectabus of Accho [Mansi, Ptolemais].
Philip of Damascus.
Barchus of Panydos [Paneas; Caesarea-Philippi; Mansi, Pancadus].
Timothy of Berytus.
Basilides of Biblos [Byblos].
Mucimus of Arada [Aradus].
Alexander of Arca [Arce].

Meletius of Antioch.
Pelagius of Laodicea.
Acacius of Haleb [Aleppo, Mansi, Beraea].
John of Apamea.
Binus of Seleucia [Mansi, Bizus].
Eusebius of Hamath [Mansi, Epiphanea].
Marcianus of Seleucobolis [Seleucobelus. Mansi, Seleucopolis].
Patrophilus of Shizar [Mansi, Larissa].
Severus of Paltos [Boldo? Mansi. Patra]. |36
Flavian and Helpid, Presbyters of Antioch.
Eusebius of Kenneshrin [Sobo. Mansi, Chalcidensis].
Domnianus of Gabbala.
Basilianus of Eaphanon.

Agapius of Bozrah [Mansi, Agapius Bagadius].
Helpidius of Dionysiados [Dionysias].
Uranius of Adrados.
Chilon of Constantinos.
Severus of Neaspolis.

Theodotus of Mabug [Mansi, Hierapolis].
Antiochus of Samosat.
Isidorus of Cyrus [Mansi, Suriensis, etc].
Jovinus of Paran.
Mares of Dalic [Doliche].

Diodorus of Tarsus.
Corycus of Adana.
Hysichius of Epiphania.
Germanus of Corcos [Corycus].
Aeres of Zopyrus [Zephyrium].
Philomosus of Pompeiopolis.
Olympius of Mompseste [Mopsuestia].
Theophilus of Alexandria by Olympius, a presbyter. |37

Elladius of Caesarea.
Gregorius of Nysa.
Etherius of Tyana.
Bosphorus of Colonia.
Olympius of Parnassus.
Gregorius of Anzianzi [Nazianzum].

Symposius of Seleucia.
Montius of Claudiopolis by Paul, a Presbyter.
Philotheus of Irenopolis.
Hypsistes of Philadelphia.
Musonius of Calendaris.
Marianus of Dalisanda.
Theodosius of Antioch.
Artemius of Titiopolis.
Neon of Selinuntos [Selinus].
Montanus of Diocaesarea.
Eusebius of Olbius.

Helios of Paphos [Mansi, Julius].
Theoporphus of Triminthuntis [Trimethunton. Mansi, Theophilus].
Tychon of Tmessus [Tamassus].
Menemius of Citius [Citium].

Tryaeus of Egnon [Mansi, Troilus: Lagania].
Gaius of Lerba [Lyrba].
Longinus of Columbarsus [Colybrasus].
Theodulus of Corcasus [Coracesion]. |38
Hysychius of Catana.
Teuxianas of Ceson [Mansi, Cassa].
Midos of Panemus.
Heraclidus of Teichon.
Theodulus of Seilon [Sylloeum?]
Pamenius of Ariasus.

Amphilochius of Iconium.
Cyril of Eumenadon [Mansi, Manada or Omonada].
Aristophanes of Sopatra [Sabatra].
Paulus of Lystra.
Ainazus of Corinon [Mansi, Inzus].
Darius of Mistra [Misthia].
Leontius of Parton [Barate].
Theodosius of Hyd�.
Eustratius of Canon [Canna?]
Daphnos of Derb�.
Eugenius of Prusalon [Passala?].
Elurius of Isaura.
Severus of Amblada.

Optimus of Antioch.
Theuristius of Adrianopolis.
Attilus of Parastion.
Ananius of Adadon.
Postus of Limenon [Almenia].
Joninus of Salagason [Sagalassus].
Callinicus of Pomnadon [Pomanda?]
Eustathius of Metropolis.
Patricius of Perason [Baris].
Lycius of Neaspolis.
Lolianus of Sozopolis by Simplicius, a Presbyter.
Tyraeus, a presbyter of Amorion.
Euxenos a Presbyter of Apamea. |39
Helladius a Presbyter of Cynaeon.
Theosebius of Philomenon [Philomela?] by Basa a Presbyter.
Titiaeus of Myron.
Pionius of Comatos.
Eudemius of Patara.
Patricius of Eunoanadon [Mansi, Oenoanda].
Lupicianus of Dimoron [Mansi, Lymira].
Macedon of Casandon [Mansi, Xanthon].
Romanus of Pesalidos.
Hermaeus of Bubonan [Pappa, or Bubod of Lycia, Mansi Bubute, all doubtful].
Tyantinus of Araxus [Mansi, Theantimus, Araxa].

Nectarius of Aphias [Apia].
Theodoras of Eumenius. by Propatoros [Mansi, Profuturus], a Presbyter.

Euphronius of Nicomedia.
Dorotheus of Nicea.
Olympius of Neocaesarea.
Theodulus of Chalcedon.
Eustathius of Prusas.

Ternatius of Tomaeon. |40
Etherius of Carsadisus [Mansi, Chersonnesus].
Sebastianus of Anchialon.

COUNCILS OF ANTIOCH, ANCYRA, ETC.

The following items are not without interest. The creed of Antioch is not from the same manuscript as the lists of subscribers at Ancyra, Caesarea, Gangra, Laodicea, and Antioch, which are from No. 14,528, and are printed here for comparison with the Nicene Catalogue of Fathers:

Confession of Faith of the Synod which assembled at Antioch in the days of Gallienus the king, the heads of which were Dionysius of Rome and Dionysius of Alexandria; there was also at it Gregory the miracle-worker.

"We believe that our Lord Jesus Christ, who was of God and the Father, who was begotten before the worlds of the Spirit, but in the end of days, was born of a virgin in the flesh, is one compound person of heavenly Deity and human flesh; and also in this, that he is man, wholly God and wholly man; wholly God and with a body, but not in this, that the flesh is God; and wholly man, and with man, and with Deity, but not in this, that the Deity is man. So also wholly to be worshipped, and with the body; but not in this, that the body is to be worshipped: wholly to be worshipped, and with the Deity, but not in this, that the Deity is to be |41 worshipped; wholly increate and with a body, but not in this, that the body is increate; wholly made and with the Deity, but not in this, that the Deity is made; wholly co-essential with God, and with the body, but not in this, that the body is co-essential with God, as not in this, that God is co-essential with man, though with Deity in the flesh He is co-essential with us. For also when we say that He being in the Spirit is a partaker of the nature of God, we say not that He in the spirit is a partaker of the nature of man. And again, when we declare Him in the flesh a partaker of the nature of man, we declare him not in the flesh a partaker of the nature of God. For as in the spirit he is not con-natural with us; because he is herein co-essential with God: so in the flesh he is not con-natural with God, because he is partaker of our nature. Now these things we correct and approve, not the dividing of one person indivisible, but the unconfused peculiar confession of the flesh and of the Deity." ⁴³

Vitalius of Antioch of Syria.
Marcellus of Ancyra, Galatia.*
Agricolas of Caesarea, Cappadocia.
Lupus of Tarsus of Cilicia.
Basilius of Amas grmn Major (i. e. Amasea, of Armenia Major).
Philadelphus of Loliopolis of Galatia.* (Loliopolis is called Juliopolis in the Nicene List.)
Eusiteles of Nicomedia of Bithynia.
Heraclius of Zela of Armenia Major.*
Peter of Iconium.
Nunechius of Laodicea of Phrygia.*
Sergianus of Antioch of Pisidia.
Epidaurus of Perga of Pamphylia.
Narcissus of Neronias.*

Vitalitis of Antioch. Longinus.*
Sanctus. Germanus.*
Lupus of Tarsus. Heraclius of Zela.*
Valentinus. Gerontius.*
Leontius.* Amphion.*
Narcissus of Neronias.* Stephanus.*
Basilius of Amasea. Saadus.
Dicasius.* Salaminius.
Gregorius.* Erythraeus.*
Alphius (comp. Ulpius.)* Leontius.*

Eusebius.* Eulalius.*
Aelianus. Hypatius.
Eugenius.* Bassus.*
Olympius. Proaeresius.
Bithynicus. Eugenius.*
Gregorius.* Heraclius.*
Philetus. Basilius.
Pappus.

Of Palestine.                                           Magnus of Damascus* of Phoenicia.
Moses of Castabala* of Cilicia.
Manicius of Hamath of Syria.*         Aeneas of Accho of Phoenicia.*
Patricius.
Aetherius.                                               Anatolius of Emesa* of Phoenicia.
Jacob of Nisibis of Syria.*
Agapius of Seleucia* of Isauria.       Macedon of Mopsuestia* of Cilicia. |43
Peter of Gindara of Syria.* Of Phoenicia.
Corion (⁶⁶) of Philadelphia.* Of Palestine.
Theodotus,* Of Arabia.
(Theodotus?) Of Mesopotamia.
Of various provinces: Of Cilicia.
Of Coele Syria. Of Isauria.

Eusebius. (⁶⁷)* Hesychius.*
Theodorus. Manicius.*
Theodoras.* Theodotus.*
Nicetas.* Musaeus.
Macedonius.* Mucianus.
Anatolius.* Magnus.*
Taracondamantus.* Agapius.*
Aetherius.* Archelaus.*
Alphaeus (comp. Ulpius). Bassus.*
Mauricius. Siricius.*

FRAGMENT: CONTAINING EXTRACTS FROM GREEK AUTHORS. 14618, fol. 25 b. etc.^⁴⁵

"The life of the soul consists in the actions of the soul when they are kept from wrong, so that nothing should attach to them which can slay it (the life): for, except it slayeth itself, there is nothing that can slay it, because it is elevated and above the body, and is among spiritual things; neither can that death which ruleth the body see it, for it is conceived by it."

"Very powerful is the soul, and weakness approaches it |44 not, except by its voluntary carelessness, and except it be willing, nor are its treasures exhausted when its riches fail; nor is its life consumed, nor do its times fail, for it is not transitory, nor dissoluble, and it is exalted above the earth, and not very far from heaven."

"Whenever the soul is free, honour is from it, and it hateth those properties which impede it. The tongue sufficeth not to open and give room to the utterances of its pure fountains of the words of its wisdom, for it giveth and lacketh not, and enricheth and groweth not poor, and maketh wise the ignorant, and magnifieth the small: and the more it giveth of its own it goes on increasing, and becomes richer and greater."

"The soul in everything is famous; and after its cursory life, the death of the body is far from it, and approacheth it not, because it considereth and seeketh what is above death, and death cannot come unto it, and therefore they are in pain when separated from one another for a time."

"He that settleth his mind, that to nothing will he be persuaded, even if many wise, and writers, and scientific, and doctors, set themselves to persuade him, he is not persuaded, because he is persuaded of this only----that he will not be persuaded by man; and as for them they become children unto him. He also becomes unto them a stranger. Because of its imperfect utterance, and not because it is not persuasive does wisdom perish to itself; for it perishes from him, and he doth not perish from it."

Very beautiful is this, that when man is grand in his body, and holy in his person, he should have to come to the labour of discipline and of learning, that his mind may become unoccupied with odious thoughts, which hinder and disturb |45 instruction. And their words become illustrious when they spring from them as pleasant drink from a fountain which is not troubled. For the desire of woman and the lust of wealth are the treasures of want to fools and the stores of sins to adulterers."

"Men who know that they are mortal, to (supply) the need of food, are compelled to labour for gold, which has an appearance of yellow, and also causes its owners to possess its colour in the time of their death, and they leave it here, and it cannot enter Hades with them."

"He had taken captive the daughters of Darius. Now they were of surpassing beauty; and when it was told him of them, he would not even consent to see them, saying:----

" 'It is odious in warlike men to be set on fire by women whom they have taken captive; for as fire burns him that touches it, so beauty inflames its beholders with lust.'

"Now this man's action agreed with our precept, that he who sees a woman and lusts after her, has committed adultery with her in his heart. For even if he is restrained from the commission of adultery, and shall be delivered from the guilt, he cannot be free from having desired her in his mind. Now the end of the study of all those whom we mention, was their stability in the nights of their patience (?). Let us see, therefore, how they magnified the soul by their words----these famous ones in wisdom----when they said it was superior to death, and were anxious that a man should not neglect the life of the soul, and were wishful that we should abandon the uncertain hindrances of this world, and they taught that we should not be negligent of comely behaviour.

"Let us, therefore, consider that the race of man is of few days and of little joy; that all their quiet and all their happiness is for a short time and a few days, and their flower as |46 the grass which flourishes, and as the herb of the field which fadeth away. Therefore the true and special care of men----that is, if they are willing----is to regard what is above, and not upon the earth, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God. Let us, therefore, have our thought above; for, as when we rely upon what is beautiful in appearance, so shall our conversation be in this world; and let us fix our mind in heaven, wherein is our true place, and wherein is the upper Jerusalem, as the renowned of the men of our race have written, who are blessed of God."

"I wonder at the race of men, who, when they abhor odious things in words, run after them in deeds; and when they love things beautiful, flee from them as from things hateful; and it is not known how we may look on examples (?) and not resemble them; for they love what they hate and hate what they love; and that odious things are regarded as beautiful by those who hate them, and beautiful things as odious things by those who do them not.

"We greatly love victory in words without deeds, and this is condemnation and not victory, for who can give victory to him that is fallen? and that showeth the back in battle? or who can withhold victory from the warrior who dies upon his horse in the fight? For not by words is the victory, as the poor is not rich by words but by wealth."

"Whatever a man loves, to himself the profit is great, even if there is loss, and what he loveth not, to himself there is loss, even if there is abundance. Now who can proceed among troubled thoughts? for the disturbed fluctuate, and |47 the pure mind can direct its gaze to the haven of rest in which the shattered ships repose."

For what is difficult in thy sight, O Caria, thee, my son, I command, that even when thou sleepest thou shouldst not cease from enquiring.

"And how shall this be, for when I sleep I am like one dead; how shall I enquire when I sleep?"

"Give thy soul good and temperate habits in its acting, and concentrate (?) it by enquiry and its communion with knowledge, and occupy it with noble thoughts, and exercise (?) it in the understanding of the word of wisdom; and thou shalt not cause it to cease from thinking of the beautiful, and thou shalt cause it to run again after fair enquiry, and urge it to be full of the discoveries of wisdom, so that when thou fallest to rest, thy understanding may be occupied (?) in the good works of waking, and in thy sleep the sweet odour shall exhale within thy understanding, and thy tongue (?) shall utter a voice from the voice of the meditation of thy waking, so that thou shalt know how great is its power of investigation, that even when the body sinks, good habits prevail above it. Arouse thy senses, and say to thyself, that if thou wilt do what I say to thee, thou shalt not be like them that sleep: for from the oblivion which enters by sleep, behold thy heart is free through the noble thoughts of thy waking; and thou art not like the dead, in that thou art not without the motion of thoughts, and thou art different (?) from wakers, because if thou dost not move, there is no action, and that which thy heart devises in thy sleep thou canst not do.

"Love is affection unsatisfied, and in trials is free in that which is loved, and in prosperity burns with that which is desired.

"Equity is the mind which awards his own to every man, and as to itself so to every man uses discretion."

DIOCLES.----No. 12152.^⁴⁷

"Now there was after the division of tongues in the days of Peleg, a certain man of the sons of Japhet, and he was called Ag'ur (Agenor). This man went up from the east and came and dwelt on the sea shore, and built a city and called the name of it Ge'ur, which, in the Syrian tongue, is called Tyre. And he had three sons, Syrus his first born, Cylicus his second, and Punicus his third. Now Geur, their father, reigned in Tyre 13 years, and when he died he divided the land for his sons, and gave to Punicus, Ph�nicia, and to Cylicus, he gave Cilicia, and to Syrus he gave Syria.

"And in the time of Punicus was Heracles, a wise man, and a mighty man of strength, for he was a mighty man (or giant). He was amusing himself upon the sea-shore of Tyre, and saw a certain shepherd's dog which had caught a shellfish of the sea, called Conchylium, and was eating it, and the mouth of the dog was dyed with the blood of the shellfish. And Heracles called to him the shepherd of the flock and told him about the dog, and the shepherd at once brought wool and wiped the mouth of the dog with it. And the shepherd made for himself of the wool a wreath and put it on his head. And when the sun shone upon it Heracles saw the |49 wreath of wool that it was very splendid, and was astonished at its beauty, and he took the wreath from the shepherd.

"And another day Heracles took the shepherd and the dog, and went to the sea shore, and the dog saw a certain shellfish as he went along, and the dog ran and caught it, and Heracles snatched the shellfish from his mouth, and sent the shepherd to go to his flock. And Heracles walked all day upon the sea shore, and as soon as one of these shellfish came out of the sea, he ran and caught it quickly, and he collected 30 of them, and boiled them over the fire, and dyed white wool with their blood. And he gave it to a certain woman and she made him a robe of it, and he took and brought the garment to Punicus, King of Tyre, and when he saw it he marvelled at its beauty, and commanded that no other man should wear it, except the King alone. Moreover, he gave to Heracles authority to command for him, and wrote that he was the Father of the Kingdom. And this Heracles taught the dyeing of all beautiful colours, and showed and taught men how pearls go up from the sea.

In those days there was a man in the west country and his name was Romias, and he was a mighty man of strength; and in his days there was in the province of Cilicia a certain virgin beautiful of countenance, and she was made a priestess in the temple of Mars (Ares) the God. And when Romias beheld her, he longed for her, and went in unto her, and she conceived by him: and when she perceived that she had conceived by him she was in great fear, and kept herself, lest the priests of Ares the God should be enraged with her and slay her. And when she produced twins, their father took them and gave them to a certain woman, and she reared them. And when the children grew up and became men, their father gave them names, to the one Romlaus and to the other Romus, and they built the city of Rome and [ruled] it, and all their subjects they called Romans, after the name of their |50 father: and for this cause are the sons of Rome called Romans. And they built the Capitol, which is interpreted Head of the City, and it was one of the wonders of the whole earth. And they brought a great image, which was in Hylas, and went up and set it on the top of the Capitol, and it was a great wonder, the like of which was not in the earth. And they built the great demosion which is in Athens, and the Philosophers call it the demosion of Wisdom.

And there happened a quarrel between the two brothers, and Armelaus arose and slew Romus, his brother; and at once the city began to quake. And when the sons of Rome saw that their city quaked, they feared with great fear, and all its inhabitants sought to flee from it. And when Romulus saw that the sons of Rome were in commotion, he entered the temple of the goddess Pythonia, asking her to reveal to him why the city trembled; and she replied, "Because thou didst murder thy brother the city trembles and laments, for he built it with thee, and it will not cease quaking till it sees thy brother sit with thee on the throne of the kingdom, and command, and write, and summon with thee as before." And when this saying was heard in all the city, they met to stone Romlaus with stones, because he slew his brother. And he fled from them and went up to Athens; and when Punitus, the philosopher, heard it, he came and heard the words of Romlaus, and he promised him that if he would write Athens free, that the King of the Romans had no authority over it, he would go to Rome and pacify the sons of the city and their forces. And he confirmed this covenant which he made with him. And Punitus went to Rome, and talked with them, and said to them, "If ye receive your king in peace, this trembling will at once cease from your city, and it will quake no more; but if ye will not receive him, all your city will be destroyed." And at once the sons of Rome all met, and went up after their king to Athens, and when they arrived and came |51 and reached Rome all the city went out to meet him. And they answered and said to him, "If thou knowest that at thy entering our city the quaking will cease from it, come, enter with pomp and glory, and sit on the throne of thy kingdom; but if the trembling does not cease from us, thou shalt not enter." Now he promised them that the quaking should cease from the city. And this philosopher made an image of gold, like his brother, and set it with him upon the throne of his kingdom, and bade them that everything should be done and written as from the mouth of both of them. And they did so, and at once the trembling ceased from their city, and this quaking ceased by the wisdom of this man, and its inhabitants were at peace with their king. Hence the Romans took for a custom to write and command, "We say," "We command." And from that time Athens received its freedom, that the king had no authority over it, to do in it anything by force.

And this Romulus introduced equestrian representations (?) of pleasure, and he introduced gladiators (?) (martios), and he first introduced Veneti and Prasii, because he was afraid of the sons [of the Romans that] they might kill him as he had killed his brother. He first set up two men who were hostile to one another, one from the Veneti and one from the Prasii, and said, 'If the Veneti conspire against me, the Prasii will inform me: and if the Prasii conspire against me, the Veneti will let me know.' He [therefore set] two men before [an assembly] of the city as for pleasure, and clothed one in the Venetian clothing of the sea (i.e. blue) and the other in clothing of Prasian (i.e. green) like the grass of the earth. And he said if the one clothed in Venetian (blue) conquers, the sea will be quiet and the barbarians will not enter and get authority in the islands of the sea, because those who dwell in the sea gain the victory and those who dwell on the dry land are conquered. But if he that is clothed in Prasian (green) conquers, those who dwell in the dry land conquer and defeat |52 those who dwell in the water. And as soon as these two men come together to fight one with another, those who dwelt in the sea prayed that the Venetian might conquer; and those who dwelt on the land, that the Prasian might conquer. And from that time till now there have been these two factions of the kingdom of the Romans, the Venetian and the Prasian.

And Armelaus instituted the Brumalia, because he was a man fond of teaching, and fond of amusement, and fond of youth. And he commanded that, in the days of winter, men should invite one another, and many meeting together with one, and eating and drinking, should take their pleasure. And he ordered that every one of the letters of the alphabet should go in one after another, and every one of them should be invited on its day. And they called them Brumalia, which is interpreted in the Greek tongue, 'let us eat and drink what is others' (a)llotriofa&goi) that is 'for nothing' (gratis).

"And [he instituted the] rank of nobility at Rome: and gave the free born great honour of position and authority, that they might command and be obeyed. And he appointed that there should be heralds in the kingdom of the Romans, ----that is, that there should be ministers in the palace. And he sent to Athens and brought thence Gelasus, and Lathrus, the Philosophers, and he made for them an organ, that they might be amused with sweet sounds. And Armelaus instituted the stadium, and commanded that when the sons of Rome fought at the Capitol, children should be let down by a rope from the top of the Capitol, sitting upon a wheel, and holding out a crown for the kingdom (? to the victor, or a kingly crown), as came down to Nimrod the mighty man a crown, and that the kings should give gifts to these children when they returned and went up. Moreover, he appointed that the Romans should receive spoils (capta), in order that they might be supported all winter; and that in summer they might go forth to war against their enemies. |53

And he appointed and instituted augurs to convey and bring the response to (of) the Molosii from the hosts. Now the day on which the Romans go forth to war, they call Mars (Martius) which signifies victory. And [Armelaus] made and established at Rome great wonders, and various undertakings, and fair laws, and righteous ordinances. There was not among all the Romans a man who excelled in all knowledge and wisdom like him, or that more honoured those who have understanding. Therefore he was rich in his intellect, so that by its appearance and speech he would discern the evil from the good, and the false from the true. .......

EXTRACTS FROM CHRISTIAN AUTHORS.

Now Ignatius, who was in truth God-clad (Theophorus) and Martyr, who saw mysteries unutterable, that is to say by any other man, as also he signifies and says of himself, and apprehended with a humble mind.

"For I also, not by this that I am bound, can understand heavenly things, and angelic positions, and the ranks of principalities, visible and invisible: therefore, behold, I am a disciple."

"For the divine prophets lived in Jesus Christ. Therefore, also, they were persecuted, for by his grace they were inspired, that they might be persuaded who were not persuaded that there is one God who revealed himself through Jesus Christ his son."

"How can we live apart from him, whom also the prophets being his disciples in the Spirit, expected as a teacher? And, |54 therefore, he whom they righteously expected, when he came, raised them from the dead."

"Thou seest that they, who like the prophets, lived in Jesus Christ, that is in righteousness (were) pious doers, through the descent of our Redeemer to Sheol were profited, many of whose bodies arose and appeared for the confirmation only of the power of Him that descended to the lowest places of the earth as I said, and it was not the reward of the resurrection which is promised to all together in the day of righteous recompense."

"For on this account, also, was he preached to the dead also, that they might be judged, indeed, in the flesh as men, but live in God in the spirit. For not to the righteous but to sinners especially, and to those who went down in transgression was the Gospel preached, that they might judge themselves, pronouncing sentence upon their own soul humanly, and judging the flesh, and by the words of repentance subjugating and delivering their soul from the divine judgment, because, also, it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. In order that they might be judged, indeed, in the flesh as men; now this is as a man when he spares his soul, will judge himself: but they shall live in God in the Spirit."

"Then, that we should suppose that those who arose then at the time of our Redeemer's crucifixion, remained until this day, the saying of the Gospel does not permit, indicating plainly that they went to the Holy city, and appeared unto many. For this, that they appeared, showeth plainly an appearance for a certain time, for the belief, as we said, of the power of our Redeemer who broke the gates of brass and the |55 invincible bars of iron, of those which are beneath the earth. When, therefore, they had showed themselves who arose, again they laid down the bodies, and returned to their places, awaiting that resurrection which is common, and expected by every man."

"The origin of the heresy of the Nicolaitans. Now this was Nicolas, one of those deacons who were chosen at the beginning, as he makes known in the Acts. This man first introduced this way, being moved by a strange spirit, saying that there had been a resurrection to him, for he thought this, that the resurrection was that we should believe in Christ, and be washed, but he denied a resurrection of the flesh. Since from him many took occasion, heresies they set up, but especially arose from them those who are called Gnostics, of whom were Hymenaeus and Philetus, concerning whom the Apostle wrote, saying: 'They say that the resurrection has already happened, and overthrow the faith of many.' " |56

"Now, when there was great commotion, and abundance of dissensions at Corinth, at that time the Apostle was himself troubled, being anxious to return an answer to those who brought in false knowledge, and called in question the resurrection of the flesh; or to those who introduced the practice of the law, and wished to exclude the grace which is in Christ, which abounded among the Gentiles. And again, 'because we have the treasure in an earthen vessel, that the greatness of the power may be of God, and not from us.' "

"Now, what is our mortal flesh but those vessels before named, wherein, while the treasure of incorruptibility is deposited, it also makes incorruptible [ones for] the body, when (there is) faith in Christ, whom God raised from the dead when he became the first fruits of all, the flesh of our resurrection."

For holy Clement, Bishop of Rome, and a disciple of the Apostles, teacheth in the Epistle to the Corinthians thus:

"Who is among you therefore that is strong? Who is compassionate and full of love, let him say, 'If because of me there is disturbance, and contention, and schism, I will go whither ye wish, and I will do what is commanded of many, only let the flock of Christ have peace with the elders who preside over it.'

"[If, therefore, Paul is compassionate, and is a possessor of love, since on his account only there is disturbance, let him do what is commanded of many, according to the determination of this man and elder; and let him cease from this, that he should be chief, even if they be unwilling who adhere to him.] |57

Of holy Clement, chief of the Bishops, (Archbishop) of Rome, and martyr, concerning whom, says Eusebius, in the third of the Ecclesiastical Histories, that he was after Anacletus, who was after Linus, who was Bishop there. Now Linus was Bishop of Rome after Peter, chief of the Apostles.

"And let no man of you say that this flesh is not to be judged and not to rise. Know ye wherein ye are redeemed, wherein ye live, if it is not while ye are in this flesh? Therefore it behoveth you, that as the temple of God ye should guard the flesh. For as while ye are in the flesh ye were called, also in the body shall ye come. If Christ is the Lord, who redeemed us, who was at first indeed Spirit, but became flesh, and so called us, so we also in this flesh shall receive a reward."

"Heresy is a turning aside in doctrine, or, according to some, a turning aside in many doctrines, which adheres to one after another, and restrains those which seem to tend to this, that one may live well. Doctrine, indeed, is a certain rational apprehension, but apprehension is a habit and consent of the mind. Not only the ephectics (sceptics), but every man of doctrine, is wont to make some reserve, either through weakness of mind, or through the obscurity of the fact, or through the equal force of arguments."

"It is necessary to enquire why the Psalms are 150. |58 Because the number 50 is sacerdotal in the number of days And this is known from Pentecost, which is very famous, showing a cessation of labours, and rest and joy. And, therefore, we are commanded in these days not to fast nor to kneel. For of this it was a type and shadow also in the law again, that at that time the people of the sons of Israel kept a festival. Moreover, in the years of what is called the Jubilee among the Hebrews, this number of 50 was very great and excellent, wherein they had seven times seven, and wherein was a freedom of servants and remission of debts, and rest of the land from tillage, and the restoration of lands and fields and houses and other things, which had happened to be sold by their owners through some worldly want. The holy Gospel also makes known a remission of fifty, and a like number in the number to this and resembling it; now I mean 500, for not for nothing was remission given of 50 pence and of 500. Thus, therefore, God's praises, which were for the rebuke of enemies and the reception of grace, which is to the helpers of God, it behoves thee to hold, not in one number of fifty but three, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Now the holding of one number of fifty and of seven times seven, as we read, and a week of weeks, and also the beginning, which is after perfect weeks, is the number of eight, which showeth truly the new rest after the end of the world and the resurrection."

As holy Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, commanded in an epistle to Novatus, for since he said, "Not by my will are men divided," he wrote to him thus:

"If, as thou sayest, thou hast not come to this by thy own will, show that thou removest of thy own accord, for it |59 behoves thee to bear everything for this, that the Church of God should not be divided. And this martyrdom, that a man will not divide the church, is not less honour to him than that a man will not worship idols; but, as I say, it is even greater than that, for he is a martyr for himself. But now if thou persuadest and constrainest thy brethren to come to unanimity, thy victory is greater than thy sin, and that sin is not to be condemned, but this victory to be praised. But if thou canst not persuade them, deliver thy own soul."

[Therefore by all means it behoveth Paul to cease from this, that he should be chief, that the Church of God may not be rent because of him; and should restrain those who follow him, that they may not be schismatic, because it is a greater evil than any evil for the church to be divided].

"Now those who say that when he was scourged with whips, he was not in pain, or that when he was crucified he did not suffer, while the nails were fastened in him, as heretics we anathematise. Now we acknowledge that he truly suffered for our sins, and that his body was buried when it was without the soul, and that he arose truly from the dead the third day, and after the resurrection ate and drank together with his disciples truly and not in appearance only, and that he ascended to heaven, and is about to come at the end of the world, to judge the living and the dead; and that he will raise all the race of men from the dead, who will have the same nature of bodies, wherein when they died they were buried: but it is manifest that [they will be] incorruptible, as his own body was when he rose from the dead." |60

For a resurrection is spoken of that which falls and rises again, and not of that which falleth not.⁶⁸

For Eustathius, who was the pious pastor of Antioch, in the discourse against Photinus, that is to say Murinus, when he had before showed, that the Person of the Word is one, and his nature another, taught that the nature appears in three persons, to which your investigation before alleged adheres, which would leave the nature in a mere appellation, because he says that this is manifest in others, and that the beautiful Word of the Father is his Sister in part.

"The name of God, therefore, if it be indeed intelligible, is of a person. When we say three persons, by all means also, they say, there are three Gods. Now because it shows that there is a nature, when from its own something above nature has been taken; as of a man indeed laughter, of a dog barking, but they are called properties of natures, exhibiting the natures. We do not say three Gods, because we do not say three natures."

"For one is the Person indeed, but the nature another. If, therefore, the person had been God, when we say three persons, by all means we say there are three Gods. Now, since we say that the nature of the person is one, of necessity we say that there is only one God." |61

Justin, one of the anthors who were in the days of Augustus, and Tiberius and Gaius, wrote in his third discourse.

That Mary, the Galilean, who was the mother of Christ who was crucified in Jerusalem, had not been with a husband, And Joseph did not repudiate her, but Joseph continued in holiness without a wife, he and his five sons by a former wife; and Mary continued without a husband.

Theodoras wrote to Pilate, the governor, "Who is the man, that reproach falls upon him before thee, that he should be crucified by the sons of Palestine? If they righteously desire to do this, why dost thou not assent to their righteousness? But if they seek to do this unrighteously, why hast thou transgressed the law, and commanded what is far from righteousness?" Pilate sent to him, "Because he had done signs, I was unwilling to crucify him; but his accusers said he called himself king, and was a deceiver."

Josephus says that Agrippa, the king, being clothed in a robe adorned with silver, also saw a vision in the theatre of Caesarea. When the people saw his clothes flashing, they said to him, "Hitherto as a man we have reverenced thee, henceforth thou art above the nature of mortals!" And he saw an angel which stood above him and smote him unto death.

Chap. 1. Of a man who was called the wise Persian (or |62 Persian philosopher), who also wrote a book of epistles upon various matters. Who this wise Persian was; that is, what his honour or degree in ecclesiastical order was, or what his name or place of abode, we cannot confidently say, for he does not show us these things, or one of them in any place of his book which he wrote, nor elsewhere have we yet found it written, nor do we learn these things from any one who knows them particularly. However, as it seems to me and every lover of truth, we ought not to say and utter, as it happens, what we are not certainly persuaded of, and can give scarcely any proofs of. Now that he was a man of penetrating genius, and that the sacerdotal writings (Scriptures) were read and honoured by him as much as possible, his work shows. Moreover, that he was a coenobite and reckoned with the church clergy, may be known from his expressions. That he was a coenobite he shows in the epistle entitled a "Demonstration of the Sons of the Covenant," for thus were coenobites called then, as well as monks. Herein he writes thus: "Therefore this counsel is fair, and just, and good, which I give myself and you my beloved, that we monks receive not women, and virgins who have no husbands, for those who love holiness, it is right and just and comely, that even if it be by constraint, a man should be alone, and so it becometh him to abide; as it is written by Jeremiah, the prophet, that it is well for a man to bear thy yoke in his youth, and sit alone and be silent, because he taketh thy yoke upon him. For so my beloved, it becomes him that bears the yoke of Christ, to keep his yoke in purity." This shows that the man was a coenobite, who was called the wise Persian. That he was ranked with the clergy of the church, as I imagine those things show which are written in the beginning of the Epistle or Demonstration which is inscribed, "Concerning the strife and divisions which occur in divers places, because of glorying and haughtiness, and concerning |63 struggles about the headship," where we have it thus: "Let us all receive reason when we meet, that we may write this epistle to all our brethren the sons of the church in divers places: we the Bishops, and presbyters and deacons, and all the church of God, with all its offspring in divers places with us: to our dear and beloved brethren the Bishops, presbyters, and deacons, with all the offspring of the church that is with you, and all the people of God in Salec (Seleucia) and Ctesiphon, and in divers places, in our Lord, our God, and our Life Giver, who by his Christ hath quickened us and brought us to himself, great peace!" Behold he hereby shows that he was reckoned with the clergy, as we said.

But where was he? In the city of Nisibis, as is said by some, or in another part of those provinces, he has not at all shown us. But what thy brotherhood has written, that some say he was a disciple of the blessed Mar Ephraim, is false, for the form of his teaching is not like holy Mar Ephraim: nor does the difference of the times of their teaching permit us to say this, for he that is called the wise Persian was famous as a teacher in the year 648 of the Greeks, of Alexander, as he calls them. Moreover, in the year 655 and 656 of the Greeks; for he wrote in the epistle entitled "Demonstration of Death and the Last Times," thus: "These twenty-two discourses I wrote upon the twenty-two letters. I wrote the ten former in the year 648 of the kingdom of Alexander, son of Philip, the Macedonian, as is written at their close; and the twelve latter I wrote in the year 655, of the kingdom of the Greeks and Romans, which is the kingdom of Alexander, and in the year 35 of Shabor, king of Persia." Again, in the epistle entitled "Demonstration upon the Cluster," he says thus: "I wrote thee this epistle, my beloved, in the month Ab, of the year 656 of the kingdom of Alexander, son of Philip, the Macedonian, and in the year 36 of Shabor, the Persian king, who made the persecution in the year 5, when the churches |64 were overthrown; in the year there was a great destruction of martyrs in the east country, after I wrote thee these twenty-two heads (chapters), which I composed upon the letters one after another."

The year 648, in which he says he wrote and finished the ten former discourses, was the twelfth year after the Holy Synod at the city of Nicea, that is the first year after the pious decease of the faithful King Constantine. For the holy Synod at Nicea, met, as church histories show, in the year 636 of the Greeks, and in the twentieth year in part of Constantine's own reign. Constantine reigned in all thirty-one years: when, therefore, we deduct 636 years from 648, there remain twelve years as we said. When again we subtract the twenty years when the Synod met at Nicea, we have eleven remaining: which is one year before the writer finished the ten former discourses. If, therefore, it was the twelfth year after the Synod at Nicea, and one year after the decease of Constantine the King, when this Persian writer wrote and finished these first discourses, it is clear that it was before the year 648: that is, in the years of the life of King Constantine he wrote these discourses. This is also to be known from hence: the twelve latter discourses, which he wrote afterwards, he made after seven other years, for he wrote as we above set down, thus: I wrote these twenty-two discourses upon the twenty-two letters. I wrote the ten first in the year 648 of the Kingdom of Alexander, son of Philip of Macedon, as is written at their conclusion; and the twelve last I wrote in the year 655 of the kingdom of the Greeks and Romans, which is the kingdom of Alexander. When, therefore, we deduct 648 years from 655 years, seven years remain as we said; and when we add to these seven, one year in which he made the discourse upon the Cluster, the year 656 as he says, there become eight years, in which he made the thirteen last discourses. Altogether, from |65 the Synod of Nicea to the year 656, are 20 years. So that the times in which this Persian author wrote we find as far as possible by his book, before which, and especially before the year 648, we never find that Mar Ephraim taught or wrote, so that we should say he was before this Persian writer, and that he was his teacher or instructor.

Moreover, the times in which the blessed Mar Ephraim was famous as a writer, may be found from hence: for Theodorit, of Cyrus, wrote in chapter 31, of Book 2, of his Church history, when he speaks of Shabor the king, and the host of the Persians, that they came and made war against Nisibis, thus, "Then the admirable Ephraim was a wise writer, and was illustrious among the Syrians. The blessed Jacob, Bishop of the city, sought from him, that he would go up to the wall and see the barbarians, and cast upon them arrows and curses." Now this war happened in the time of Constantius the son of Constantine, a little before the end of the life of Constantius, as also is to be proved by the histories of the same from Chapter 29 of Book IV., when he speaks of the time of Valens the King. At that time were famous, Ephraim, the illustrious, in Urhi, and Didymus, in Alexandria, who wrote against the doctrines contrary to the truth. Now this period was near the end, in part of the life of Valens, as is to be seen by the histories. Therefore passing over what intervenes because of the length of the account, we find by comparison as far as possible, that it was nearly 50 years from the former period in which this Persian author wrote the 12 first discourses, to the time when the blessed Mar Ephraim wrote against the doctrines, that is after the Persians took Nisibis, and he left it and came to Urhi. In this way we assume that the Persian author wrote the ten first discourses in the eight years before the decease of the faithful King Constantine, When we take these eight years, and add twenty-five years which Constantius reigned, and three of |66 Julian and Jovinian, with fourteen from King Valens, they amount to fifty years as we said.

How long each of the Kings named reigned, is known thus: Socrates wrote in Chapter 40, Book I., of his Ecclesiastical History, thus: "Constantine the King lived sixty-five years, of which he reigned thirty-one years." The same, from Chapter 45, Book II.: "Constantius lived forty-five years, of which he reigned twenty-eight; three along with his father, and after his father's death twenty-five years." The same, from Chapter 16, Book III.: "Julian, therefore, in his fourth consulship, which he shared with Sallust, in the 20th of the month Thamuz, died in the land of the Persians, as I said above." Now this year was the third in a part of his reign. The same from Chapter 20, Book III., speaking of Jovinian the King: "In the place, therefore, above named, in the season of winter, he fell ill of a disease of his loins and died, in his own consulship and that of Varonianus his son, in the 17th of the month Shabet, when he had reigned seven months, and lived thirty-three years. Now there is in this third book, a period of three years and two months. The same from Chapter 35, Book IV., speaking of Valens the King, "He lived fifty years, having reigned with his brother Valeutinian thirteen years, and three years after his death." Since, then, there is a space of fifty years from the instruction of doctrine by the Persian author, to the time of the teaching of doctrine by the blessed Mar Ephraim, how can one say that the Persian author was the disciple of Mar Ephraim? It does not appear that this is true, as the examination which we have made above shows. And even if, at some part of the time, holy Mar Ephraim was contemporary with the Persian writer, probably Mar Ephraim was a youth in life and doctrine, and the Persian writer sufficiently advanced in years. Therefore, of him that is called the wise Persian we know not either his name or rank or place of abode; but yet |67 he was a coenobite, who was ranked with the Clergy of the Church, and he was not the disciple of the blessed Mar Ephraim. Thus in brief.

Chap. 2. On this that the Persian writer saith, that on the accomplishment of 6000 years this world will come to an end. As to what thy fraternity wrote, that the Persian writer says, that when 6000 years are fulfilled the end of the world will take place, I wish thee to know that many other Christians since the coming of Christ have held this opinion, as their language shows. Omitting these, on account of their number, let us come to a few of them for the confirmation of our saying. Bardesan, therefore, an ancient man, and famous in the knowledge of things, in a certain dissertation made by him on the conjunctions of the luminaries of heaven one with another, says thus: "two circuits of Cronos are 60 years," etc.

Holy Hippolytus also, bishop and martyr, wrote thus in the discourse upon the prophet Daniel: "For the first coming of our Lord in the flesh at Bethlehem was in the days of Augustus, in the year of the world 5500, and he suffered in the year 33 after his nativity," etc.

To this we shall add holy Mar Jacob, the teacher, who expresses the same opinion, in the sixth of the discourses made by him upon "the six days, writing thus," etc.

Similarly, also, the Persian writer, for he says in the Essay upon Love, as thy fraternity also wrote, thus: "Be not grieved, my beloved, at the word which I write unto thee," etc.

Chap. 3. On what the Persian writer saith, that when men die, the spiritual soul [literally: natural or psychical soul] is hidden within the body, etc.

In the Essay upon the Cluster, he says: "Noah lived till the 58th year of the life of Abraham, and that he was in Ur of the Chaldees, and there died and was buried." He says also that Shem lived till the 52nd year of the life of Jacob. |68 Know, therefore, oh lover of instruction, that according to the tradition of the Scriptures of the Jews, this writer makes all his calculations, and not according to the exposition of the LXX., nor according to the tradition of the Samaritans, aa also thou didst write before; but thou after the tradition to which the version of the LXX. adheres and consents, and especially in the account of the years of the Patriarchs, because wise authors testify that it is rather true than the others. From Adam to the Deluge thou holdest 2242 years, and from the Deluge to Abraham 943 years, and from Adam to Abraham 3185. From Abraham to the Exodus of Israel from Egypt 515 years, and from the Exodus to the commencement of building the Temple 480 years, as is written in the book of Kings [1 Kings, vi. 1]. From the commencement of building the Temple to its burning by Nebuchadnezzar 441 years, and from the burning of the Temple to the commencement of the years of the Greeks 280 years. The total from Adam to the commencement of the years of the Greeks were 4901 years; and from Adam to this year 1025 of the Greeks [A.D. 714] there are 5926 years, being 74 years short of 6000.

Now, not to leave unanswered the question, Why Noah did not admonish those of his time not to worship the image of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad? nor Shem those of his generation not to serve idols? We answer it briefly. Because of the liberty and domestic authority which God conceded to the race of men,----which, if it would, sinned; and, if it would, was righteous. It was on this account also, in the 100 years before the Flood, when they saw Noah planting and cutting down cedars, and making an ark as for deliverance, that they repented not and returned from their evil at that time, but were eating and drinking, taking wives and giving to husbands, till the Flood came and destroyed them all, according to the word of the Lord. Again, after the Flood, neither that Cainan. who, as has been said, was a great and wicked sorcerer, and |69 was therefore deified; nor all those in the times of Noah and of Shem were persuaded to refrain from their evil, if, indeed, they were warned by them. For they say well, that in the days of Serug men began to make images and to worship idols. If this is true, neither Noah nor his son Shem attained to that period which reaches from the Deluge to the time of Serug. It is known that, according to the version of the LXX., if the 130 years of Cainan are taken, there are 794. Now Noah lived after the Flood 330 years, 444 (464?) years less than 794. Shem lived after the Deluge 50 (300?) years, being 494 years less than the 794 years to Serug.

O lover of learning, Gregory, who taught the Armenians, as may be known from the words of the history about him, was by race a Roman, who came while he was a youth to the country of Armenia, either because of the persecution which Diocletian raised against the Christians, or for some other reason which we know not. And when he was educated in Armenia, and learned its letters and its tongue, his name spread and was famous, until he was of the attendants and domestics of King Tiridates, who then reigned over the provinces of Armenia, and this while he held his Christianity, and was not known except by a few, through whom it was made known to the King Tiridates. And he called Gregory to him, and asked him, and learned of him that it was so. And he used towards him blandishments and threatenings and various tortures, that he might be turned from his Christianity, and he would not. At last he took and cast him into a certain pit which was full of deadly reptiles and corruption (?) After he had been thirteen years in the pit, as his history says, but we, if yon please, will put three years only, the King went out for pleasure and the hunting of wild beasts, when God suddenly sent an evil spirit upon him, and |70 he was mad and went out of his mind and gnawed his own flesh. And he remembered the holy man, through the solicitude of his wife, and sent and brought him up out of the pit, and he prayed over him and he was healed. When this took place, by command of the King and the solicitude of the holy man, the provinces of Armenia came to Christianity. Then, because on all accounts bishops were needed, the King called some of his honourable men and committed to them Gregory, and sent them to Leontius, bishop and metropolitan of Caesarea, a city in Cappadocia, that he might appoint Gregory bishop. He having received the men, and done what they desired, dismissed them in peace and joy. Therefore, when the holy man had authority in the provinces of Armenia, he built churches and convents with the order of the King and the zeal of his nobles. And he appointed and set in them presbyters and deacons, giving them also laws and rules as seemed good to him. Afterwards, when the holy Synod met at Nicea, he also went up to the Synod, with holy Leontius, who made him Bishop. This is the simple and summary history of Gregory, the instructor of the Armenians.

Now we think it needful for the further confirmation of our account, to set down a few words from the history of this man, to this effect. When Diocletian held the government of the Romans, Tiridates was holding the government of the Parthians and Armenians. Tiridates was informed that in his palace there was a certain man whose name was Gregory, who feared not his gods, but was of the religion of the Christians. Having summoned him, he thought by many blandishments to move him.

And a little after, then the king began to say to him, "Thou earnest unto us a stranger and without a country, and thou hast been thought worthy by us of honour and great glory. How now darest thou reverence a God whom I do not venerate?" |71

And much further on: "Now the blessed one remained in the pit of noisome reptiles wherein he fell, thirteen years, being preserved from the noxious reptiles by the grace of God."

And further on: "And the king commanded his host to be assembled, that he might go out hunting. When this was done, and the chariots were yoked, and he went up to sit upon the chariot of his kingdom, the wrath of God was sent upon him, and an evil spirit smote him, and he was thrown from his chariot upon his face to the ground, and began to be mad, and to bite and devour his flesh with his teeth."

And further on: "Now the holy Gregory bent his knees upon the ground, and prayed to Almighty God to give health to the king. And behold, a voice from heaven was heard by him, saying, 'Gregory, be strong and manly, for I am with thee to the end. Thou shalt build to me churches, and shalt erect to me a house for the dwelling of my saints, and lift up their horn. And for this that thou hast prayed before me, lo, I have heard thee, and lo, I grant thee the request thou hast asked of me.' And when this was said to the saint, he turned to the king and touched his hands and his feet, and restored him to the stable nature of men by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ."

And again after other things: "Now when the king heard he rejoiced and glorified God; and commanded that those who were famous, and the elders, among the satraps and nobles, should assemble, and go with blessed Gregory to the country of Cappadocia, to the city of Caesarea, that the blessed one might forthwith receive the sacerdotal degree, and return to the land of Armenia. And after they went and entered Caesarea, they appeared before the blessed Leontius, the bishop there, and when these things were told him, he made Gregory a bishop, having assembled and brought to him the bishops who were under his hands." |72

Now that he was one of the 318 bishops at the Synod of Nicea, is known by the Acts of the Synod, wherein it is written also of Leontius, of Caesarea, of Cappadocia, that he was convened at the Synod. Holy Gregory Theologus also attests this of Leontius, for in the discourse upon the funeral of his father, he says, "That when the great Leontius passed through Arianzi to go to Nicea against the madness of Arius, he taught his father, and baptized him and made him a Christian."

Since these things are said of Gregory the Armenian, the time is also known wherein he was. Moreover, this also is known as we think, that he was not one of the three holy Gregories, we mean Gregory the miracle-worker (Thaumaturgus), the bishop of Nysa and the Divine (Theologus). His time was more recent than the Thaumaturgus, but older than of the other two. Thus, Gregory Thaumaturgus, who was bishop of Neocaesarea, a city in the country of Pontus, was famous in the time of King Aurelian, and was one of the bishops that met in the city of Antioch against Paul of Samosata; and Eusebius shows this, saying in Chapter 27 of Book VII., of his Church History; "The pastors who were in other churches, assembled from every place, because of this wolf, the destroyer of the flock of Christ. And all of them were assembled and met in the city of Antioch. Among these were especially celebrated, Firmilian of Caesarea, of Cappadocia, Gregory and Theodorus (Athenodorus?) who were brothers and pastors of the Churches of Pontus: and Helenus of the Church of Tarsus; and Nicomas of Iconium; and Hymenaeus of the Church of Jerusalem; Theotecnus of Caesarea of Palestine; Maximus, who gloriously conducted the brethren at Bostra; and many others whom no man could number." |73

From chapter 28: "When Gallienus had stood in the government fifteen years, Claudius arose one year. After him Aurelian received the kingdom, in whose days met many bishops at a Synod at Antioch, and the strange doctrine of Paul, who was chief of that evil heresy, was made known and contemned by every man expressly."

Now from Aurelian the king, and the Synod which expelled Paul the Samosatene, to the faithful King Constantine and the Synod at Nicea, were fifty-five years. Thus, Aurelian reigned six years; Taticus (Tacitus), six months; Probus, six years; Corus (Carus) and his sons, two years; Dioclesian, twenty years; Constantine to the Synod at Nicea, twenty years; all which years collected are nearly fifty-five as we said. So also from the Synod at Nicea to the holy Synod of 150, which met at Constantinople in the days of the great king Theodosius (at which was that godly pair, we mean Gregory, bishop of Nysa, and Gregory Theologus, the bishop of Sasima and of Nazianzum) there are again fifty-five years. Thus: We take eleven years of Constantine the Conqueror, after the Synod of Nicea; twenty-five years of Constantine and Constantius, and Constans his sons; two years of Julian; one year of Jovinian; fourteen years of Valentinian and Valens with Gratian; one year of Gratian and Valentinian the Little; all which collected are 55 years, as we said.

It is known therefore most clearly that this Gregory, the Armenian, was different from the other three named, as also we said above.

As to the last thing thou saidst, that if Gregory was faithful, what is this opinion which he taught the Armenians, not to put water with the wine in the cup of the Eucharist. Know that it was in his power to order them who were under his hands not to put water in the wine: whether he was faithful or not faithful, for ordering them to put water in the wine or not to put it, does not prove him faithful or unfaithful; for |74 even now there are many unfaithful who put water in the wine of the Eucharistic cup. But further, Gregory did not command them by no means not to put water in the wine; or that no one should receive the Eucharist but at the holy festival of the resurrection except elders and deacons and the bishop (babus); or that they should not make pictures in the churches, even if they report these things of him. But even if Gregory gave them this law as they say, they ought to consider that their Gregory is not greater and better than the holy Apostles, who delivered in almost all the churches under heaven to put water with the wine in the cup of the mysteries: Peter and Paul at Antioch and Rome and their provinces; Paul and John at Ephesus and Byzantia and their jurisdictions; Luke and Mark at Alexandria and Egypt and the places round about them; and of these the tradition was borne, and flowed and came to all other churches of Christians to this day.

There are therefore four seats of Patriarchs which attest the putting of water in the wine in the cup at the Eucharist; but for them there is not even one witness, except a custom which obtains among them. And since an Armenian asked thee where it is written that thou mayest prove to him from the Gospel that there was water in the cup which our Lord gave to his disciples, or that we ought to put water in the cup, let him be also asked to show from the Gospel that there was no water in the cup, or that we ought not to put water in the cup of the mysteries. But perhaps he says, it is written in the Gospel that our Lord said to his disciples, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I will not drink again of this product of the vine until I drink it anew with you in the kingdom of God." And by this, that he says "product of the vine," it is known that the cup was living wine, and not wine mingled with water. But let him return and hear. What then, in the kingdom of God. that is the period after his resurrection, when our |75 Redeemer ate and drank of his own free will with his disciples to verify his resurrection, when he tarried with them forty days, where is it written he and his disciples drank unmingled wine whenever they ate and drank? And who is so foolish as to say this, but he that says that the cup which our Lord took, and gave thanks and blessed upon it, and his disciples drank of it, had no water in it but only wine? But if a man would refute this perverse opinion as he ought, and those other matters of theirs which I put down above, there would be need of many words and a special treatise. But we, leaving this for the present, will come to another chapter of thy inquiries.

CHRONOLOGICAL ITEMS.⁶²

Kings of the Assyrians: Belus, 62; Ninus, 52; Shemiram, wife of Ninus, 42 years. From the 40th year of the reign of Ninus, in Asia, to the 20th year of Sardanapalus, we reckon 1196 years.

Pul; Adrashach, Assyrians.
Tiglath Pileser, Assyrian.
Shalmanezer, Assyrian.
Sennacherib, Assyrian.
Merodach Baladan, Chaldee.
Nebuchadnezzar, Chaldee.
Almorodach, Chaldee.
Belatshatzar, Chaldee.
Darius, Mede.
Darius, son of Shurus.|76

Judah was taken captive and the temple burned by Nebuchadnezzar in the second year of the 47th Olympiad. The sum of all the years of the Kings of Israel is 485.

Beginning of the twenty-seven Persians: Cambyses first reigned over Egypt 6 years. From him to Darius, 114. The Persians, 114. Of the Babylonians and Medes, first Cyrus, 30. Cambyses, 8. The Magians, 7 months. Darius, 36 years. Xerxes, 20. Titicnus, 7. Artachshcsheth, 41. Xerxes, 2 months. Sarginus, 7 months. Arisolthus, 19 years. Artachshesheth, 40 years. Artachshcsheth Uchomo, 26 years. Perses, son of Uch(omo), 4 years. Darius, son of Ershach, 6 years. Alexander of Macedon, 5 years. The sum of all these years is 225 and 11 months. They began in the 45th and ended in the 153rd Olympiad.

In the 114th Olympiad Alexander of Macedon died at Babel, and the government of Alexander and the Egyptians was divided. The first king was Ptolemy, the son of Arnoba. Ptolemy, son of Lagos, 40 years. Ptolemy Euergetes, 17 years. Ptolemy Philadelphus, 38. Ptolemy Philopator, 24. Ptolemy Euergetes, 35. Ptolemy Phiscon, 29. Ptolemy Soter, 14 years and 6 months. Ptolemy, who was Alexander, 17. Ptolemy Philadelphus, 8. Ptolemy Dionysius, 30. Cleopatra. 22. In all 296 years and 6 months, from the 114th Olympiad to the 187th.

In the 13th year of Alexander of Macedon, and Ptolemy son of Arnoba, Seleucus reigned over Asia, Babylon, and Syria. Seleucus Nicator was the first, 32. Antiochus Soter, 19. Antiochus the god, 15. Seleucus Callinicus. 21. Seleucus Ceraunus, 3. Antiochus the Great, 36. Seleucus Philometor, 12. Antiochus Epiphanes, 11. Antiochus Eupator, |77 1 year and 2 months. Demetrius Soter, 2. Alexander, 2, 8 months. Demetrius and Drometer, 3. Antiochus Sidetes, 9. Demetrius, 4. Antiochus Agrippa, 12. Antiochus Cyzik, 18. Philippida 2. In all 219 years and 10 months. From the 117th Olympiad to the 171st.

The Hebrews say that Cambyses was called Nebuchadnezzar the 2nd, and that Judith was in his days.

In the 16th of Darius, son of Vastasp, in whose days the Captivity returned, the building of the temple was accomplished in Jerusalem.

Josiah, son of Josedek, priest with Zerubbabel.
Joiachim, son of Jeshua.
Elisha, son of Joiachim.
Jodoa, son of Neshib.
Johanan, son of Jodoa.
Odias, son of Johanan. In his days Alexander built Alexandria, and came to Jerusalem and worshipped the Lord.
Jonias, son of Iddo and Eliezer. In whose days the Scriptures were translated by seventy wise men of the Hebrews.
Honia, son of Simeon, brother of Eliezer. In the days of that Simeon, was Jeshua, son of Simeon, called the son of Sirach. In the days of Honia, Antiochus Leo persecuted the Jews.
Eliezer, son of Mathitho.
Mathitho and his son. Juda Maccabi, 3 years.
Jonathan, 2 years.
Simeon, 8 years.
John, son of Hyrcanus, 35.
Aristobulus, after 470 years, united the crown with the chief priesthood, 1 year.
Antigonus Jani, who is Alexander, 20 years.
Saleca 9. Whose wife Alexandria, after his death, gave up the kingdom and priesthood to Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, her |78 sons, 34 years: And there was a dissension between them and Antipater, an Idumean, came to help Hyrcanus, and overcame Aristobulus: And when Aristobulus died, his son Alexander arose and warred with Hyrcanus and Antipater, until Herod, the son of Antipater arose, 37 years after the death of his father, and he overcame Alexander and reigned in his stead. Herod begat four sons, Heraclius (Archelaus) and Antipater, who was called Herod, Herod the tetrarch, and Philip; and after the death of Herod, Archelaus, his son, reigned 9 years, and afterwards the kingdom was divided into a tetrarchy.

Moses was after then, but before those whom the Greeks call Ancients, as Homer, and Hesiod, and much before Heracles, Musaeus, and Linus, Carion, Arcos, and Dioscurus, Asclepius, Dionysius, and all the sons of the gods, and Hermes and Apollos, and the other gods of the Greeks and their mysteries and services. Also before the doings of Zeus which are related by the Greeks, who say that all the records are more recent than Cecrops, and Inachus who reigned first in Attica, before whom Moses lived 350 years. From the second of Darius, when the Temple was rebuilt, to the fifteenth of Tiberius, when our Lord came and began his preaching, there were 548 years. From the second of Darius to the first Olympiad, there are 256 years or 64 Olympiads. The first Olympiad was in the time of Isaiah and his fellows. From the 45th of Cecrops to the sack of Ilion, were 330 years; and from the eightieth of Moses and the Exodus to Labaron and Samson, who lived at the fall of Ilion, we have the same number. Moses was, therefore, without doubt, in the days of Cecrops, who first ruled in Athens; and the Olive |79 appeared in the Acropolis in his days, and the name of Athena was given to the city. They say of Cecrops that he first found out the name of Dios, and made an image of Athene, and first established sacrifices which were not yet found among the Greeks, with other wonderful things.

The flood in Deucalion's time was after Cecrops, so was the conflagration in Pha�thon's days.

And the building of Dardania, by Dardanus, who is first mentioned by Homer, and the rape of Cyra, daughter of Zeus, and the mysteries of Demeter, the inscription of the altar which was in Eleusinia, the service of Triptolemus, the rape of Europa by Zeus, King of Troas, from whom Ganymede was carried away by the gods, in whose days was Tantalus, and Tityus, and Apollo sprung from Zeus and Leta. The coming of Camus to Thebes, and the birth of Dionysus was 200 years later than Cecrops. After these were Linus and Zythus and Apion, Musaeus, Europus, Minos, Prusas, Asclepias, Dioscurus, and Heracles, after whom was the sack of Ilium. Much later than this was Homer, and after him were Tha�es, Solon, and the rest of the seven wise men. After these was Pythagoras, the first named a philosopher; and after him Socrates, from whom the systems of the philosophers began.

Ninus and Shemiram first reigned in Athur. This Ninus, son of Belus, held all Asia to beyond the Hindui. From Abraham, who was in their times, to the great Flood, we calculate 1081 years, according to the Hebrew Scripture; and from the Flood to Adam, the first man, 2242. From Ninus and Shemiram to the fifteenth of Tiberius we reckon 2046 as the number of years from Abraham to Tiberius. From the fifteenth of Tiberius to the twenty-fourth of Constantine there were 300 years. From Abraham to the twentieth of Constantine there were 2344: from Adam to Abraham, 3323, and in all 5667. In Hebrew there are 86 |80 Jubilees of 50 years or 4300. From Adam to our Lord's Ascension there were 5522. From Adam to Alexander 5180, and from Alexander to the birth of Christ 310, and to his Ascension 342.

Of the strong kingdoms which were in all the earth. The first king who received a crown from God was named Sichon. Hamathus and the chief of the giants who held the kingdom of Sichon, 17 years. And those who followed, kings and giants, who held the kingdom, were 12, and they held it 140 years. After the giants, the Babylonians took the kingdom, their head, Anger Baladan, with six kings who followed him, and they held the kingdom 177 years.

After the Babylonians, the Arabs took the kingdom, and Sichon was their chief, with fifteen kings after him, and they governed 528 years. After the Arabians, the sons of Phars (Persians) took the kingdom, and their head was Hudarschachar, with thirteen kings after him, and they governed 490 years. After the Persians, the Babylonians took the government a second time, with Tiros their head, and twenty-four kings after him, and they governed 731 years. After the Babylonians, the sons of Athur (Assyrians) and Ninevites governed, with Esthatir, their head, and eighteen kings after him, who ruled 462 years. After the Assyrians and Ninevites, the Babylonians took the government the third time. The Medes and Persians ruled with Esharathchon their head, and 13 kings after him, who governed 330 years. After the Medes and Persians, the second time, the Macedonians ruled, with Alexander their head, and ten kings after him, who governed 143 years. After the Greeks, the Romans ruled, with Augustus their head, and thirty-two kings after him to the nineteenth year of Constantine, and they ruled 335 years and four months.

From the eighth of Nero and the Martyrdom of Paul and Peter to the thirty-second of Constantine, are 272 years: and |81 from Adam to the eighth of Nero, 5556 years. From Adam to the birth of Christ 5490, and from Christ to Constantine, 341.

Jerusalem was taken in the second of Vespasian, on the eighth of Elul. When Nebuchadnezzar took it, it had been built 1480 years and six months. It was first built by a Canaanite, who was called in the language of his fathers Melchizedec. David expelled the Canaanites, and settled his own people in it. After 477 years and six months, the Babylonians wasted it. From David to the overthrow by Titus were 1179 years. Neither its antiquity (2177 years) nor its wealth, nor its universal renown, nor its great glory sufficed to prevent its destruction.

In the year 309 of the era of Alexander of Macedon did our Redeemer appear in the world, and he was in the world thirty-three years, according to the evidence of the true books of the Archives of Edessa, which err in nothing, and which make everything known to us truly.

Ninus reigned 52 years; in his forty-second year he built the city of Ninus, in the land of Athur; the Hebrews call it Nineveh. Shemiram, wife of Ninus, reigned over the Athurians, 42 years, and many stories are related of her. She held Asia, and set up hills because of a flood, and built Babel.

When Abraham was 75 years old he received the promise. To Abraham, first of the prophets, the Word of God appeared in the form of a man, and foretold the calling of the Gentiles. Carus and Belus, the sons of Inachus, built a city at the fort of Antioch, on the river Orontes, in the 160th year of promise. All the years of the sojourning of the Hebrews in Egypt were 415.

Moses was 35 years old when Cecrops reigned in Attica, and hence to the sack of Ilium were 375 years. |82

Eupolemus wrote of Moses, "He was a wise man, who taught the Jews letters and laws. The Phoenicians received them of the Jews, and the Greeks of the Phoenicians. In the year 420 of the promise . . . Corinth was built, before called Eupora (Ephyre). The temple of Bedlus was built by Eririchthon, son of Cecrops, Epaphus, son of Zeus, son of Olympia [Io] built (Memphis?) when he reigned over Egypt the second time. Cadmon was built by Carmanus son of Semele. Dardanus built Dardania.

In the 5 Books of Moses are recorded the transactions of 3730 years, according to the translation of the LXX.

In the time of Joshua, Dionysius went out against the Hindui to war, and built the city of Nysa, on the river Hindus. Tyre was built 240 years before the Temple of Jerusalem, as Josephus writes in his third book [Antiq. viii. 3.] Of Carchedon (Carthage) Philistus says it was built by Carchedus and Azor, Syrians, at this time.

Shalmanezer first took captive the Israelites. He took ten tribes from Samaria, to Chaldea, and sent Assyrians to keep the land, and since they were zealous to keep the law of the Jews, they were called Samaritans, which is interpreted Keepers. The Latins were called Romans, and Romulus was their first king, and he built Rome. Numa Pompilius reigned there 43 years. He built the Capitol from the foundation, and gave money of wood, leather, and earthenware, instead of gold, silver, etc., as now. Glaucus, of Chios, discovered the welding (adherence) of iron. Tullus Hostilius was king of the Romans 33 years. He first used purple and a sceptre. His house was consumed with lightning, and he was burned with it and died.

The preceding extracts from No. 14643, are not consecutive in the MS. Those which follow are a rendering of the |83 conclusion of the volume from p. 92. They are in three sections.

EXTRACTS FROM CHRONICLE.

In the year 876, died Theodosius, patriarch of Alexandria, on Tammuz the 22nd, in the 13th.

In 871, Chosroes and his host went up to Antioch and laid |84 siege to it and took it, and led away its inhabitants captive, and laid waste many cities, and took many captives, and went down to his country and built a city for the captives he had taken from Antioch, and called its name Antiochosrun.

And again, in the year 884, Chosroes and his host went up again and besieged Dara, and sent Mazal Drahman, his satrap, and he went up to Antioch and burned Hemus (---- Hems or Emesa) and the house of Mar Julian, and went to Seleucia, and besieged it, and went to Apamea, which was surrendered to his will and burned, and he took its inhabitants captive and departed; and when he went down to his lord he laid siege to Dara, and took its inhabitants captive, and emptied it, and he put in it of his own people the Persians.

In the year 902, in the 9th (month), Chosrun went up to the land of the Romans when he was a youth, and he was received with great honour, and the Romans brought him down and set him upon his throne.

In the year 814 (914) in the 6th (month), in the month Ab, on the 23rd of it, the Romans slew Mauricius and his sons.

In the year 920, the 10th month, there was much snow in every place, and a severe frost, until the whole Euphrates was frozen in the night of Epiphany, and sheets of ice remained in it six days, and no boats traversed it, and many fishes died, and olive trees withered in every place.

In the same year Merida was taken; and in the same year Rosaina was taken in summer (?)

In the year 921, were taken Urhi, and Haran, and Callinicum, and Carcusium, and every place besides which remained on the east to the Euphrates: And in the winter the |85 Euphrates became the boundary; and in the 7th of Ab, of that year, Shahruroz crossed over to Zenobia and took it, for that city was the first taken on the west of the Euphrates.

In the year 922, the Persians entered Hamez, and found there much Oriental people, and sent them every man to his place: and in that year, in summer, the Persians and Romans warred at Mar Thomas of Hamez.

In the year 930 were annexed those from the parts of Canon and of Augin: and in Haziran of this year, Alexandria was taken.

In the year 940 (? 930) the Persians went out from Alexandria, and all the cities of Syria, in the month of Haziran, by the ordinance of God and not by the power of man.

In the year 934, they entered Asclepia, Crete, and the other islands, and the religious of Keneshro were taken, and there were slain of them about twenty men.

In the year 934, the Persians entered Rhodes, and took the commander there, and took down the captives to Persia.

In that year Heraclius, the king, went forth from his throne, and led a great army, and went down to Persia, and laid waste the land, and took many captives.

In the year 934 (? 938) in Shebet, died Chosroes, who conquered all the earth and reigned 40 years, and Shirui, his son, reigned after him seven months, and he died that year at its end, and his son reigned after him, and his name was Ardashir (Ardishir, D'Herb. i. 245.)

In the year 940 in Haziran, in the night was a great earthquake, and in Tammuz of that year, Heraclius, king of the Romans, and Shahruroz, the Patrician of the Persians, met |86 in Coelesyria, at a place in the north whose name is Arabissus Tripotamus (? ), and there they built a church and called the name of it Irene, and talked there one with another in peace, and consented that the Euphrates should be the border between them, and so made peace one with another.

In the year 945, Indiction the 7th, in the 4th of Shebet, at 9 o'clock in the evening, there was a battle between the Romans and the Teians of Mahomet, of Palestine, from the east to Gaza 12 miles, and the Romans fled and left Patricius, son of Jordan, (or the Patrician, Bar Jordan), and the Teians slew him; and there were slain there about 4000 poor souls (heads) of Palestine, Christians, Jews, and Samaritans: and the Teians wasted all the country.

In the year 947, Indiction the 9th, the Teians went forth into all Syria, and went down to the country of the Persians and conquered it; and the Teians went up to the rock of Merida, and they slew many monks in Kedar and in Banathu, and there died the blessed Simeon, janitor of Kedar, brother of Thomas the elder.

In the year 344, Stephen the Martyr was stoned of the Jews, in Jerusalem: and from that year Paul began to preach.

In the year 376, Jerusalem was wasted by Vespasian, and by Titus, his son; and in that war Josephus, the historian, was slain (?)

In the year 415, there was a great persecution of the Christians by Trajan, the wicked king, and Simeon, son of Cleophas, bishop of Jerusalem, nobly suffered martyrdom. |87

In the year 419, Trajan made Armenia a province, and in the same year Ignatius, who was a disciple of John the Evangelist, suffered martyrdom in Antioch.

In the year 479, Bardesanes, who promulgated the doctrine of Valentinus, was famous.

In the year (560? ) persecution arose against the Christians, through Valentinus (Valentinian), an Arian king.

In the year (563? ) Shabor, king of the Persians, wasted the Syrians, and Cappadocia; and in the same year the barbarians crossed over the river Danube and devastated the islands.

In the year 583, Aurelian the king made a persecution, and God smote him in battle, and he died.

In the year 611, there was an overthrow of churches by Diocletian, the wicked, and Peter, bishop of Alexandria, suffered martyrdom.

In the year 620, Constantine removed the throne from Rome to Constantinople. In the 26th year Constantine conferred liberty upon the Christians, and honoured and enlarged the Churches of Christ.

In the year 724, Armenia rebelled, and Anastasius the |88 king, sent an army and subdued it, and the king uttered coin of 40 denarii (? ), and of 20, and of 10, and of 5.

In the year 730, the bishops of Theodora the queen, were persecuted by Justin everywhere.

In the year 740, Zurac took up a great army of Persians to the Roman state, and fought with the Romans at the river Euphrates, and a multitude of the Romans were drowned in the Euphrates.

NOTICE OF COUNCILS.

In the year 427, in the days of Hadrian, the king, Sabellius arose against the Church, 117 years after the birth of Christ, and said that there was one Person in the Trinity, and that the body and blood which we receive from the altar is the Trinity. And forty-three Bishops met at Ancyra, of Galatia, and excommunicated him from the Church.

And in the year 530, in the days of Severus, the king, arose Paul of Samosata against the Church. He was Bishop of Antioch, and he called the Son of God righteous, as one of the ancient righteous who had been in the world. And this was 220 years from the birth of Christ. And all the Bishops assembled at Antioch, Dionysius of Rome, and Dionysius of Alpharno (i.e. Alexandria), and Gregory Thaumaturgus, and excommunicated him from the Church.

And in the year 640, in the days of Julian, the impious king, arose Eustathius against the Church, 330 years after the birth of Christ. And there assembled the Sons of the Covenant, who ate not flesh and took not wines, with the Sons of the Covenant who ate flesh and took wines; and there was a division in the Church, and seventy Bishops met in the city |89 of Gangra, and they read in the sacred Scriptures, and decided and said thus: "That after God had set apart for Aaron, the priest, the right shoulder and the jaw and the (appurtenances?) until Eli, the priest, the priests of Israel ate flesh, and no man was stumbled by them, because they ate it in rectitude and propriety, as God commanded by the prophets; and when the sons of Eli came and snatched the flesh from the people, Paul comes and decides it not (to be) for impurity but for gluttony, and says, 'I will never eat flesh, that I cause not my brother to stumble.' "

That of 318, met at Nicea, in the days of Constantine, the first Christian king, in the year 636, on the 19th of Haziran, in the 13th. In this was the overthrow of wicked Arius. From the birth of Christ, it was 326. Its heads were, Silvester at Rome, and Alexander the Great, of Alexandria, and Eustathius of Antioch, and Macarius of Jerusalem. There was there also the great Athanasius, who was a deacon, who ministered as a true son to holy Alexander. There was there also Eusebius of Cardabus (? Hosius of Corduba), who also in that of Saddica (Sardica) was found, with Eustathius of Ludion (?) Ethilhas of Urhi, Jacob of Nisibis, Antiochus of Resaina, Eusebius of Caesarea of Palestine, Eusebius of Nicomedia.

That of 150, met in the days of the great king Theodosius at Constantinople, in the year 691, in the month Ab (the 10th?). Herein was the overthrow of wicked Macedonius of Constantinople, from the birth of Christ 380 years, and from the (Council) of Nicea 55 years. Its chiefs were Timothy of Alexandria, and Meletus of Antioch, and Cyril of Jerusalem. And Nectarius came into the place of Macedonius. There were there also Gregory, the speaker of divine things, (Theologus) of Anzianzi (Nazianzum), and Gregory of Nysa, brother of Basil, and Anphilochius of Iconium, and Diodorus of Tarsus, Gelasius of Caesarea of Palestine, Rufus of Beishan, and Acac |90 of Haleb, Eulog of Urhi, Abrahan of Batnan, Mara of Amid, Betho of Tela, Helladius of Caesarea of Cappadocia, and Eutherius of Tryna (Tyana).

The first of Ephesus of 220, in the 13th consulate of Theodosius the Little, and the 3rd of Valentinus, in the year 740; 50 years from the preceding, and from the birth of Christ 430. Herein was the condemnation of Nestorius, on the 28th of Haziran. Its principals were, Cyril of Alexandria, and Celestinus of Rome, by means of those who were sent from him; Theodotus of Ancyra of Galatia, Syenasus of Dioscuria, Acac of Melitene, Valerianus of Macalla (?), Menas of Ephesus itself, and Jubilianus of Jerusalem.

The second of Ephesus, in the days of Theodosius the Little, in the year 760, and 450 from the birth of Christ, 19 years after the previous one, met through Flavianus of Constantinople, and Eusebius of Dorylaeum, on account of Eutyches, a chief monk. And they insisted to the wicked Eutyches that the body of our Lord was a partaker of our nature, and he confessed this which before he did not confess. They also urged him to confess that there are two natures in Christ, and because he would not confess this Flavian and the rest made his deposition. This cause forced King Theodosius to assemble the second Synod in Ephesus. Now its leaders were, Dioscurus of Alexandria, and Jubilianus of Jerusalem, and Stephen of Ephesus, and Eustathras of Bostra, and Amphilochius of Saida, and others; and when that was read before them which was done in the imperial city, they found that Flavian required Eutyches to confess the two natures, and they made the deposition of Flavian and of Eusebius. Afterwards they deposed Domius of Antioch, Renius of Tyre, Hiba of Urhi, Celenius of Bibulus, Theodoritus of Cyrus, Daniel of Haran, Spirion of Tela, Mari, a Persian, and others, who were in number 35. Eutyches presented a document, in which was the creed of the 318, and the God-clad fathers |91 anathematised all who had accused him in these things at Constantinople. They received him by this which deceived them as men, that wicked matter of ungodly heresy which was in his soul: for it is written that man sees into the eyes, and the Lord sees into the heart.

That of Chalcedon met in the days of Marcion, the king. There were 665 there, and it was three years after the preceding, and 453 years from the birth of Christ. It met in the year 763, and its chiefs were Leo of Rome, Anatolius of Constantinople, Maximus of Antioch, Jubilius of Jerusalem, Aninicus (?) of Saida, Hiba of Urhi, Theodoritus of Cyrus, Eusebius of Dorliaeus, Basil of Seleucia, in Isauria, Seleucus of Amasea, who, after they were found to be with Flavian, at Constantinople, in the deposition of Eutyches, when they saw that Flavian was condemned, returned and drew up a document at the second Council of Ephesus, and anathematized that opinion, and were there received. And, again, afterwards, they came to the Council of Chalcedon, when they saw that everything was done in opposition to this second Synod cf Ephesus; and at its dissolution, again they returned to their vomit as before, and went back to whatever they did in the second Synod of Ephesus, saying that they did them not willingly, but by compulsion. Now this was the opinion which they set up in Constantinople at the deposition of Eutyches, requiring us to confess two natures in Christ, which was anathematized in the second Synod of Ephesus. When they met in Chalcedon after they had deposed the holy and great confessor Dioscurus, they were asked by the principals and the senators who were with them to make a confession of faith. But they cried out and said, "It is not lawful for us to do this, and we do not venture, and dare not, for there is a canon which forbids us to do this." And after they had said this many times, and the chiefs did not persuade them, they were forcibly persuaded by the |92 chiefs, and they removed all their excommunications, for they anathematized themselves 35 times, saying that there were not two natures in Christ, but unity was in it.

MAHOMET AND HIS SUCCESSORS.

After he entered his city, and three months before he entered. From his first year, and how long every king, who after him ruled over the Mahagroye, lived, after they became kings, and how long there was faction among them: three months before Mahomed came.

PORTIONS OF TWO MARTYROLOGIES.

The following extracts are from a curious volume of great antiquity, the contents of which are indicated below, on page 97. I gave a further account of the volume in a paper on the Acts of Addi in the Journal of Sacred Literature for Oct., 1858.

The first extract respecting Sophia and her three daughters savours of a Christian allegory, and may have been originally such.

The second on Sharbel relates, beyond question, to a historical personage: its conclusion is, however, fictitious enough to satisfy the most ardent lover of ancient legends.

By the grace of God, the Gospel is disseminated in all the earth under heaven, by Jesus Christ the Redeemer of all the sons of men; that we should every man believe in God Almighty, and in Jesus Christ the only Son, and in the living and Holy Spirit, and that every man should abandon the worship of idols, and vain error, and should receive help to their souls, and the baptism of expiation for the remission of sins. When this word of life was preached by the Apostles, and by all the preachers, all parts ran with joy to baptism, and in faith the feet of the Apostles were kissed; for they were great and noble teachers of truth, and through them all of us came to the way of truth.

Now there was a certain woman of the great family of the house of Sallust, and her name was Sophia. She entered the city of Rome with her three daughters, fair virgins, and they hoped to receive the seal of Christ our Redeemer. And her daughters had grown up in wisdom and the Grace of God. Now their mother greatly rejoiced and praised God, because |94 the wisdom of God was found in the mind of her daughters: and she prayed the Lord to send help to his handmaids. And since these virgins were strong in the fear of God, and continued in fasting and prayer and vigils, they were acknowledged in the mind of every man; and in the years of youth they exhibited the conduct of martyrs and of apostles.

They went, therefore, according to their custom, on the first day of the week to pray in the house of God. And suddenly Satan moved the heart of Antiochus, one of the heads of the city, and he stood before Herodianus the king, and said to him, 'A certain woman and her three daughters, who came we know not whence, teach the women every day that they should worship one God and his Son Jesus Christ, and we are ourselves become strangers to our wives, for they do not come to meat, nor to drink, nor do they remove from these virgins, and so are they alienated (?) that even the praise of the gods is blotted out of the land.' And when Herodian the king heard this, he sent guards (?) after them, who took them and brought them to the palace of the king. And the believing virgins of Christ, with their mother, came with joy, and took each other by the hand, and when they arrived at the door of the king's palace, there were crosses imprinted on all their breasts. Now the virgins were fair, so that none of the spectators could look at their faces except as at the sun's rays, which are seen afar off and in a glass. The grace of God, moreover, was shed upon these virgins."

Their examination and martyrdom follows, and the story ends with the succeeding manifest imitation of the account of the death of Herod, given by Josephus.

"Now Herodian, the wicked king, died of many torments, for his bowels fell in the house (?), his flesh perished from his bones, his teeth dropped from his jaws, his arms were severed from his shoulders, the filth came from his mouth, everything in his whole body corrupted, and he cried with a loud voice, |95 and said, 'Lord God, who didst help the three virgin sisters and their mother, take my soul from me, for I know that what I endure is because of these three souls.' And when he had said this, he shrieked with a loud voice, and was rent in twain, and his flesh was scattered about, and his bones were not found: And all this happened unto him by prophecy."

"In the 15th year of the Emperor Trajan Caesar, and in the 3rd year of the reign of Abgar, the seventh king, which was the year 419 of the kingdom of Alexander, king of the Greeks, and in the priesthood of Sharbel and of Barsamia, Trajan Caesar commanded the governors of the provinces of his dominions to multiply sacrifices and offerings in all the cities under their jurisdiction. Those who did not sacrifice were to be taken and subjected to scourgings, and tortures, and bitter affliction, and all kinds of torments, and afterwards to suffer capital punishment by the sword. And when the command arrived at the fort (or castle) of Adasa of the Parthians, there was held a great feast, on the eighth of Nisan, and the third day in the week, and the whole city assembled," etc.

After a long narrative of what ensued, the following curious statement occurs:----

"And when the executioners had entered the city, the brethren and young man ran and stole the bodies of both of them, and deposited them in the sepulchre of the father of 'Abshalmo, the Bishop, on the 5th of Elul, on a Friday.

These memorials were written on paper by me, Marinus |96 and Anatolius, notaries, and put in the archives of the city where the records (chartae) of the kings are laid up.

Now this Barsamia, the bishop, was the teacher of Sharbel, the priest. He was in the days of Binus (Fabianus) Bishop of Rome, in whose days all the manhood of Rome was collected together, and they cried to the governor of the city and said to him, "There are many strangers in the city, and they cause the prostration and the burdening of everything. We therefore request thee to order them to depart out of the city." And when he had given orders that they should remove from the city, the strangers assembled, and said to the governor, "We ask of thee, my Lord, also to give orders that the bones of our dead should be taken away with us." And he ordered them to take the bones of the dead and to go forth. And all the strangers gathered together in order to take the bones of Simeon Cephas and of Paul, the apostles; and the men of Rome said unto them, "We make you no grant of the bones of the apostles." And the strangers said to them, "Learn and observe, that Simeon Cephas was of Bethsaida, of Galilee, and Paul the apostle was of Tarsus. a city of Cilicia." And when the men of Rome perceived that the matter was so, permission was accorded. And when they raised them and removed them from their places, in that same hour there was a great earthquake, and the edifices of the city came to fall, and it was near its overthrow. And when the mon of Rome saw, they returned and besought the strangers to remain in the city, and that their bones should be restored to their places. And when the bones of the apostles were returned to their places, there was a calm, and the tremblings ceased, and the winds were still, and theair was clear, and all the city was glad. So when the Jews and the heathens saw this, they ran and fell at the feet of Fabian, the bishop of their city; the Jews crying out, "We confess Christ whom we crucified, that he is the son of the |97 living God, He of whom the prophets spake in their mysteries." And the heathens also cried and said to him, "We renounce images and statues wherein is no profit, and we believe in Jesus the King, the Son of God, who came, and who will come again; and would that there were no other doctrines in Rome or in all Italy!" These also denied their doctrine as the heathen (Jews?) denied, and confessed the doctrine of the apostles which was preached in the Church.

We have finished in this writing the histories of select martyrdoms (or testimonies): That of King Abgar, and the doctrine of Addi the apostle, and the Finding of the Cross, and the Finding of the Cross the second time, and the martyrdom of the blessed Cyricus, the Bishop, and the doctrine of Simeon Cephas, and the doctrine of the apostles, the history of Mar Abraham Cydonius, and the triumph of the blessed Mar Sabas (or the old man) Julian, and the martyrdom of Sophia and her three daughters, Pistis, Elpis, and Agape, and the martyrdom of Jacob Maphasco (or the mutilated), and the martyrdom of Sharbel, and the memorials of Mar Cosmas and of Mar Damian, his brother, true physicians (?), and the history of a man of God. They are fourteen in number.

OBSERVATIONS.
=======

1. ¹ When a volume contains a number of articles, it is customary for the second and subsequent to commence with the word again. It will be observed that the Council of Nicea is called a Synod of 318, although it is subsequently admitted that so many did not subscribe the Acts. The reckoning of the Greeks here alluded to is the well-known era of the Seleucidae commonly regarded as commencing B.C. 311. The Syrian Chronicle from which extracts are given in these pages says that it commenced B.C. 310. It will be noticed that the same reckoning is here called that of the Edessenes, and it is elsewhere termed that of Alexander. The date here assigned to the Council is June 19th, the same as that given by the more ancient document quoted at p. 7. It is well known that the date here assigned to the Council, so far as the day of the month is concerned, agrees with some, and differs from others of the ancient authorities. The statement that the fathers assembled in the first instance at Ancyra of Galatia, appears to rest solely on the authority of this manuscript and the one quoted at p. 7. Supposing it to be true, it seems to intimate that the questions brought before the Nicene Council, had already come before a Synod at Ancyra. That it was the well-known Synod of Ancyra held about A.D. 314, seems very improbable, and we must infer, that the reference is to a Synod of which no other traces have been brought to light, and one which preceded by a very short time, the one held at Nicea.

2. ² The expression "for a Synod to assemble" is in the original literally, "that it should assemble," or "that there should be an assembly." As it regards the genuineness of the letter ascribed to Constantine, a few words may not be out of place. The reviewer of the "Analecta Nicaena" in the Christian Remembrancer, objected to |100 this document, although it has been accepted by the learned Dom Pitra in the Spicilegium Solesmense, and by the writer of the article in Herzog's Real Encyclopadie on the Nicene Council, as well as by others. It is well-known that Eusebius in his life of Constantine, (lib. iii. cap. 6) states that the Emperor summoned the Bishops, or to use his own words, "convoked an oecumenical Synod, summoning the Bishops by respectful letters to make haste from every place." Eusebius goes on to say that the Emperor promised and arranged for the transport of the Bishops, etc. The letter of Constantine is also mentioned by other writers; but as far as I can ascertain, no such document was discovered until I met with a copy in the British Museum. Since then I have found a second, and a third at Paris. The copies differ but very slightly. I have, however, printed here both the one from Paris, and the first I met with in London. And now, to return to the question of genuineness, I will only repeat the statements I made to my reviewer in my reply to his censures:----Allow me to extract from my private notes the heads of argument upon which I relied. Individually some of them may be weak, but taken together I fancy that they will at least prove that I no more write before I think, than before I read. 1. The Letter is not inconsistent with the account given of it by Eusebius. 2. It contains some things which he says were in it, and which it would appear he quoted from it. 3. Its main statements accord with historical facts so far as we can ascertain. 4. It was undeniably written in Greek, as is proved by peculiar Greek idioms which occur in it, and by the statement made at the end of the book, of the contents generally. 5. It was certainly extant in the 5th century, as it must have existed before it was translated (A.D. 501). 6. It concludes with a formula which Constantine employed in like cases. 7. All the documents associated with it are genuine. 8. No motive can be assigned for its forgery. 9. Another copy of it exists with the same title in a separate and most ancient manuscript. 10. Others were more likely to let it fall into oblivion than the Syrians to forge it. 11. A forger would have made it include all that Eusebius says of the summons to the Council. 12. Some of the difficulties suggested by it are a presumption in its favour, because a forger would have avoided anything calculated to provoke enquiry, if not suspicion. So much for its genuineness. But I do not regard the title of this letter as having formed part of the original document, and I suppose this general circular was accompanied by others, varied according to circumstances, and relating to transport, provision, find such details. |101

As this question of a second Synod at Ancyra, out of which the Nicene Council appears to have been developed, is one of historical importance, I will add a few other remarks. In his second apology against the Arians, Athanasius quotes a letter by Julius of Rome in which these words occur, "The Bishops who came together at the great Synod at Nicea (not without the counsel of God), agreed that the business of a former Synod should be tested at another." In reference to which as an "old custom" M. de Broglie, in his L'Eglise et L'Empire Romain, (vol. ii. p. 428), asks whether the writer "refers to a special decree of the Nicene Fathers, which we have lost, or simply to the conduct which they had tacitly authorized by their example in submitting Arius to a new judgment when he had already been condemned at Alexandria?" My own idea is that the allusion may be to the Ancyrene Synod of the Syriac documents. In any case, time will probably show their true meaning.

As to whether the Pope must take part in calling a general Council, it will be seen that Constantine's letter makes no allusion to him specifically. He does say, as I understand it, that "the Bishops of Italy and the other countries of Europe are coming," but this gives no more prominence to the Bishop of Rome, than to the Bishop of any other place, and the absence of such distinction will be accounted for by every man in his own way.

3. ³ This expression is not very transparent. The participle signifies to consider, have regard to, and is so used in Rom. iv. 19; Phil. iii. 17, etc. The word rendered "best" usually denotes "excellent, or more excellent;" and the whole clause, as I take it, means that each of the Bishops is to have regard to what is good, and devise what shall be profitable.

4. ⁴ Doubtless the names were appended to the original document, but they are omitted in the Paris copy.

5. ⁵ The decisions contained in the preceding extracts are partly contained in the Spicilegium Solesmense, in Coptic (vol. i.) The last of them relating to the Passover or Easter has been also recently printed in the fourth volume of the same work. I printed an account of this Paris fragment with some extracts in the Journal of Sacred, Literature, for January, 1860, in which I remarked as follows:----It serves to confirm some, and to throw fresh light upon others, of the notices of this celebrated and venerable assembly. True, it gives us few new facts and raises one or two difficult |102 ques tions; but it is of importance on several accounts. In the first place it is, as we before said, a consecutive narrative, in which the various decisions of the Council seem to follow each other in the order in which they were adopted. Supposing this to be the case, we have here the nearest approach to a Libellus Synodicus, or minutes of the Council, which, so far as we know, has yet been discovered. A curious question suggested by the document used for the Analecta Nicaena is here again raised, namely, what can be meant by the Bishops being first assembled at Ancyra, and summoned thence to Nicea by the letter of Constantine? Are these the only existing traces of an unrecorded Synod at Ancyra? We must leave to others the resolution of this difficulty. It would appear, moreover, that the attendant Bishops twice subscribed, once to the Confession of Faith, and once to the decree concerning the observance of Easter. The account given of the absence of the names of so many of the western Bishops is worthy of notice, although not absolutely new. On several important points, as to the date of the Council, the number of the canons, etc., the document agrees with the best attested records.

6. ⁶ The Ancyrene list here given varies considerably from that given below from the older manuscript.

7. ⁷"God keep you, my beloved brethren," appears to have been the usual formula with which Constantine concluded his epistles.

8. ⁸ Corduba was in Spain and not in Italy, a pardonable error of the scribe. The cities and towns were not always in the provinces to which they were assigned. The Syrian names of places are often written in imitation of the Greek genitive case. As far as I could I have written them in the nominative.

9. ⁹ Tauthatis may be for Tauthas or Tauthis. I have been unable to identify it.

10. ¹⁰ Teuchilibya probably for Teuchira of Libya. Except it be Tauche, and Libya then belongs to the following line.

11. ¹¹ Sebaste, Sebastena, and Samaria, all appear to be the same, in which case we have three Bishops for one city,

12. ¹² Alaso, i.e. Alasea, Lazo, or Lasa, called Callirhoe by the Greeks. Jerome places it on the border of the Canaanites towards Sidon.

13. ¹³ Aresthan, now Restan or Rostan; the Greek Arethusa on the Orontes. |103

16. ¹⁶ Ethilhas of Edessa or Urhi. Socrates (i. 6) cites Alexander of Alexandria calling Ethilhas one of the Arian apostates.

17. ¹⁷ Some of the original works of Jacob appear to be now in the British Museum, in Syriac.

18. ¹⁸ John, as a Persian bishop, could be scarcely under the jurisdiction of the Roman See.

20. ²⁰ Aristacius or Aristaces is said by the Armenians to have been the son of Gregory the Illuminator, the apostle of Armenia.

21. ²¹ Marcellus of Ancyra. The Latin lists give Macarius and Pancarius, but the Greek agrees with the Syriac.

23. ²³ Julium or Julia. The Greek has Marianus of Troas. Did the Romans call Troas, Julia, to distinguish it from Ilium?

26. ²⁶ The Parochia of Isauropolis. Strabo (568) alludes to old and new Isauropolis. Which was the Parochia? I suppose the new city.

27. ²⁷ Trobon may be Ternobus or Trinabus in Moesia. The Greek omits the name.

28. ²⁸ Divio, i.e. Dijon. I am not sure of this, and the Greek does not assist me.

29. ²⁹ Female visitors. The Syriac is one word, and merely denotes persons staying or lodging in the house.

30. ³⁰ Offering, i.e. the Eucharist. I have sometimes so translated the word, but the Syrians said "offering."

32. ³² The penitent was permitted to attend at the Eucharistic service, but not to partake of the elements. |104

33. ³³ Girdles represented military service, and were laid aside by those who left that service.

34. ³⁴ Ministry here seems to include all kinds of service in the church, whether of those who were ordained or of those who were not.

35. ³⁵ This Greek list will help to explain and confirm the Syriac, which it more closely resembles than any other.

36. ³⁸ The second and third Egyptian names are written as here printed, without distinguishing the person from the place.

37. ³⁷ Tauch�, or Tauche of Lower Libya. The numerals are not in the Greek.

40. ⁴⁰ Becon and Ionocentus. I have followed the uncouth spelling of many of the Coptic names.

42. ⁴² The following extract is given mainly because of its interest to the student of ancient geography, although it is interesting for other reasons. The allusions to the lists in Mansi's great work will show that we have here many new readings, and it deserves attention as the most ancient catalogue of this council extant. It will be observed that both here and at page 7 we have the date given according to the reckoning of the Antiochians, and as that era commenced B.C. 48, the Council of Constantinople is correctly placed in A.D. 381. In the following list, the words in brackets, without references to Mansi, usually consist of my own inquiries and suggestions. It will be observed that the Syriac list often gives the Oriental names of places, but not always. Thus we have Beishan, Accho, Haleb, Hamath, and Shizar, for Scythopolis, Ptolemais, Chalybon, Epipbaneia, and Larissa. But we also have Diospolis, etc., in the Greek forms. Some of the places I have failed to identify, and the discussion of them here would occupy too much space.

43. ⁴³ I find that the preceding confession is already known. The three lists which follow differ in several respects from other extant copies. In the first, Loliopolis is an error for Juliopolis.

44. ⁴⁴ The Laodicean list is otherwise unknown, but is unhappily |105 imperfect. The Paris MS. already quoted embodies most of it, however, in the list for Antioch, which I here give as I there find it.

Taracondimantus.
Bassus.
Eustathius.
Musaeus (Moses?)
Manicius.
Macedonius.
Agapius.
Theodorus.
Theodosius.
Theodotus.
Alphaeus.
Agapius.
Archelaus.
Petrus.
Eusebius.
Anatolius.
Jacob.
Conon.
Narcissus.
Antiochus.
Paulus.
Siricius.
Alexander.
Mucianus.
Patricius.
Etherius.
Petrus.
Magnus.
From the provinces.
Of Upper Syria.
Of Phoenicia.
Of Palestine.
Of Mesopotamia.
Of Arabia.
Of Cilicia.
Of Isauria.

The repetition of names in this list is sufficient to prove it compounded of two or more lists. The presence of Jacob of Nisibis, at Laodicea, shows that the council was held prior to 348-9, when he died, if we may rely upon the Syriac Chronicle, from which I print some extracts.

45. ⁴⁵ These extracts are written in a very obscure style, and are evidently taken from some apology or defence of Christianity, the writer of which embodied them in his treatise. What apology it was I cannot say. Neither have I traced the extracts to their sources. Indeed some of the names of the authors are quite unknown to me.

46. ⁴⁶ This inscription seems quite out of place, but I give it as it stands.

47. ⁴⁷ Respecting the passage from Diocles, I made the following remark in the article of the Journal of Sacred Literature already referred to:----"At pp. 201----205 of his work, Dr. de Lagarde publishes an extract from a certain Diocles, respecting whom he gives no further information. This Diocles appears to have been Diocles of Peparethus, an ancient Greek historian, to whom, according to Plutarch in his life of Romulus, Fabius Pictor was largely indebted, |106 and who was the first historian of the foundation of the Roman state. The only other reference to Diocles which we remember is in Festus Pompeius. The substance of what is given as from Diocles, may be found in the Paschal Chronicle, the Chronicle of John Malela and others, who will be found mentioned in the edition of the Chronicon Paschale, published at Paris in 1698, at p. 503, note 1. As it appears in the Analecta Syrica the passage is imperfect, and in some places very obscure."

48. ⁴⁸ These extracts from Ignatius have been overlooked by the learned Canon Cureton in his Corpus Ignatianum. In the article quoted in the preceding note I made some observations upon them, which I will here repeat, as they sufficiently describe their character:----" They are taken from a volume of Extracts from the Fathers on sundry points of Christian Doctrine. Some of them are already known, and the whole appears to be interspersed with the observations of the compiler. The passages are five in number, three of them being already known, and two new. 1. A short extract from the epistle to the Trallians, section the 5th. 2. One from the epistle to the Magnesians, section the 8th. 8. Another from the same epistle, section the 9th. 4. This we have been unable to trace, but it relates to the statements contained in 1 Peter, iv. 6. 5. This is described as from an epistle to Anastasia, a deaconness. Doubtless some spurious Ignatian document, of which this is the only trace which has been discovered. We think it best to give this passage as it stands in the Syriac, in order that our leaders may judge for themselves."

As to the Anastasian fragment, I observed:----Probably no one will plead for the genuineness of this passage, and for ought we know it may be found elsewhere under some other name than that of Ignatius; but it cannot be denied that it is deserving of attention both on its own account, and for the honourable name it bears. Who Anastasia was is of course unknown. The form of the name, taken in connexion with the subject of the quotation, would suggest the possibility that it is the invention of the writer. This, however, is not conclusive, because the name is one which occurs in ancient church history. It is moreover a curious fact that Suidas records a correspondence between Chrysogonus a confessor, and Anastasia a martyr, of the fourth century. This correspondence consists of four letters, of which the first and third are ascribed to Anastasia, and the second and fourth to Chrysogonus; but they contain nothing like the passage given above. |107

49. ⁴⁹ The signs of the Zodiac here given as according to Bardesanes, are probably the same as were current among the Chaldean philosophers, and in Assyria in the second century.

50. ⁵⁰ This extract is curious for two reasons. It professes to explain the peculiar doctrine of the Nicolaitans, who, it will be remarked are usually charged with immorality of which nothing is said here. It also explains the much debated clause on the statue of Hippolytus, in which allusion is made to a work of his to Severina. This extract enables us to say that Severina was the mother of Severus, and that she not only listened to the teaching of Origen, but of Hippolytus. Whether Mammea was a Christian, may be considered as probable, but is still uncertain.

51. ⁵¹ Clemens Romanus is not often quoted from in the Syrian manuscripts, and the accompanying extracts have eluded the vigilance of the editor of the Corpus Ignatianum.

52. ⁵² This is the only extract from Clemens Alexandrinus I have yet discovered among the Nitrian manuscripts. The circumstance is one for which I cannot account.

53. ⁵³ Origen also, as far as I can ascertain, is represented by a single extract in the Syrian manuscripts. The passage is fanciful and uninstructive, but I give it as nearly as I can.

54. ⁵⁴ The letter of Dionysius of Alexandria is given, I find, by Eusebius, but I print it for comparison with his copy; and to show the use made of it, I have, as in some other cases, added a portion of the context in which it stands. Dionysius died in or about. A.D. 264.

55. ⁵⁵ John of Jerusalem, died about A.D. 416. It was in his time that the pretended discovery of St. Stephen's relics took place, as stated in the inscription of the extract.

56. ⁵⁶ This short sentence from Methodius is merely given because identical with an expression of Tertullian's referred to in the foot note, Methodius is supposed to have died early in the 4th century as a martyr. Fragments of his work in defence of the resurrection are extant.

57. ⁵⁷ Eustathius of Antioch was at the Council of Nicea, and strongly opposed Arius. The extracts are remarkable for saying that Photinus was the same as Murinus. Certainly one is a translation of the other. There is extant a document bearing the name of Murinus of |108 whom nothing is known. Photinus was the contemporary of Eustathius.

58. ⁵⁸ I have found no such passage in Justin, as the one here fathered upon him.

59. ⁵⁹ Theodorus is probably a fictitious person, except the name be a mistake for Tiberius, who was at one time believed to have corresponded with Pilate about Jesus Christ.

60. ⁶⁰ This passage in the original is closely connected with the two preceding, and is well known.

61. ⁶¹ George, it seems, lived in the earlier part of the 8th century, and appears to have been a Bishop among the Arabs. He addresses the treatise from which the extracts are taken, to a friend who resided at Banab or Banabe, which was in Mesopotamia, near the Euphrates (see Ptolemy v. 18). This treatise has been printed by Dr. de Lagarde, and is taken from a volume containing more by the same writer (Add. MSS. 12154. See also 12144, 12165). The style is prolix, but the author says some things at least in which the Chronological student will be interested. His notices of "the wise Persian," whom I take to be Jacob of Nisibis, are by no means unimportant; and his account of Gregory the Armenian is positively valuable, so absolutely have his followers encumbered his history with fables. I have merely given the headings of the last four chapters. For the Mar Jacob alluded to on p. 67, see also p. 83.

62. ⁶² The manuscript from which these items are taken is of the 8th century. It contains much that is in Eusebius, but also many things neither in his Chronicle nor in any other with which I am acquainted. In the quotations I have followed the spelling of the original as to proper names generally. It would require a commentary to explain and illustrate all the peculiarities and difficulties of this curious document. The chronology is of course the one which dates from B.C. 311, or, as the writer says 310 before Christ. To facilitate the use of it, I will first give the Syriac names of the months, which have the same number of days as the Roman.

January. ...Canon the latter.
February.. .Shebat.
March...... Adar.
April........Nisan.
May.........Eyar.
June........Haziran.
JuIy.........Tammuz.
August.. ...Ab.
September..Elul.
October .....Tishri the former.
November. .Tishri the latter.
December...Canon the former. |109

In the miscellaneous items, from p. 75 to 88, there are inaccurate calculations, and other errors and obscurities, but some of these are of small importance. Belus is regarded as the first king of Assyria and Sardanapalus as the last. To this latter a place is assigned at least 820 years B.C., and Abraham is made contemporary with Ninus. It will be observed that under the head of Kings of Babel, we commence with Pul and Adrashach; who this Adrashach was is not clear, but he and Pul are the first of five Assyrians, followed by four Chaldeans, a Mede, and Darius, son of Shurus (?) The first year of the 50th Olympiad was 580 B.C., and the second year of the 47th was 591. The list of Persian kings from Cambyses to Alexander is curious, but somewhat incorrect. Titicnus (i.e. Artabanus, I suppose), is put down for seven months, and the actual sum of years is then 236 and 11 months. Arisolthus should be Darius Kothus; Artaxerxes Ochus is transformed into Artachshesheth Uchomo, or the Black; Perses takes the place of Arses; and Darius Codomanus is termed the son of Ershach. The reference to the Olympiads is also wrong.

In the next list, we find Arnoba for Zenobia, and the sum of the years is 274 and six months, although we require as many as are stated, neither is the order of the monarchs always the same as we find elsewhere. The list of Syrian kings also requires examination. It will be seen (p. 77) that Judith is regarded as having lived under Cambyses, here identified with the Nebuchadnezzar of that book.

Without tracing all the details, I will refer to a few. Cecrops found out the name of Dios (Zeus), merely invented it, according to the well-known fable. Some of the Greek classical names are considerably altered, as Camus for Cadmus, and Bedlus for Belus. The reference to Sihon as a king of the Arabians instead of the Amorites is curious, but some of the details in this account are obscure.

At p. 81, the Alexandrian era is made to commence B.C. 309, although 310 is elsewhere given, and 311 generally assumed as the correct reckoning. The Archives of Edessa, here alluded to, werevery famous; but, if we may judge from the extracts stamped with their authority, not always to be trusted. We here get an intimation that Carus (i.e. Cres) and Belus were the sons of Inachus. The Tripolis erected by Xanthus is the Triopa Lesbum of Eusebius. For Carmanus, on p. 82, I should read Cadmanus or Cadmus.

At p. 83, Chosroes is regularly termed Chosrun in the MS. Cabas is the Greek Cabades. There are some dates here which |110 require a word of explanation. Thus the year 848, the 9th of Shebat, the third, should be A.D. 537, February 9, Indiction the third. There is, however, an error, either in the year 848, for 837, or in the Indiction. The next instance, AD. 565, July the 22nd, Indiction 13, is correct. On p. 84, the date 802, the 9th, should be the 9th Indiction; 910, the 2nd, should be the 2nd Indiction; 904, the 6th, should be the 6th Indiction; 915, the 7th, should be the 7th Indiction; and 920 should be the 10th Indiction, and not the 10th month. I need scarcely add that the Indictions were periods of fifteen years each, and it will be observed that the word is itself found in the MS. as copied on p. 86. On this page it will be seen that Arabissus has applied to it an epithet which I have written Tripotamus, but I am by no means certain of its true meaning. The chronicler supplies here a record of painful interest. He states that on February 4th, A.D. 634, a battle was fought near Gaza, between the Teian (Arab) followers of Mahomet and the Romans, in which the Saracens were victorious. This would seem to have been the first or nearly the first victory gained by the Mohammedans in Palestine, soon however to be followed by the conquest of the country. The next entry records their invasion and successes in Syria, and with this the series of events terminates. Those which follow appear to be merely omissions from the preceding pages.

If the reader will turn back to p. 84, he will find reference to Antiochosrum, for which he may refer to Procopius on the Persian Wars, bk. ii. chap. 14. Mazal Drahraan is in the MSS. written as one word. Hemus may stand for Emesa, but I am not sure that Imma, near Antioch, is not meant. In the year 902 Domitian persecuted, etc., ought of course to be Chosrun. There are a few names of places in the succeeding pages which I have failed to identify; nor do I remember to have met with the name of Zurac, the Persian general referred to on p. 88.

In the notice of several Councils there is very little to detain us. Yet I cannot say why Alexandria is called Alpharno (p. 88), and Antioch Ludion (p. 89) except by sheer neglect. Hiba (p.90) is the well known Ibas of Edessa; Aninicus of Saida seems to stand for Arnphilochius of Sida in Pamphylia, rather than for Damian of Sidon, both of whom were at the Council. Eusebius of Dorliaeus is Eusebius of Dorylaeum.

The account of Mahomet and his successors is a precious little chapter of history. The name of Mahomet is written both with a final t and a final d as in the text. In the title of this piece a word, which I believe to have been "prophet," has been erased, and has |111 been supplied in brackets. The term Mahagroye occurs elsewhere, as at the close of the Paris MS. from which the first extracts in this volume are taken: "Epistle of the blessed patriarch (Athanasius, A.D. 684) to the effect that a Christian should not eat of the sacrifices of the Mahagroye who now rule." It seems applied to the followers of Mahomet as such, from the same root as Hegira (flight); and I understand it to mean "fugitives" or "wanderers." The period included in this table is 104 years, one month (not five months), and two days.

The short extracts from two martyrologies are specimens of a large class. It will be seen that they are like all legends of a similar character. Yet there is one in the volume from which I have taken these (a MS. of the sixth century) of extreme interest. I may refer to the journal and article mentioned at p. 93, for a notice of it, and here I will only say that I speak of the acts of Addi, and that I concluded the article in question with this note. After referring to Eusebius, History lib. i. 12, and ii. 1, I remark: ----"On examining those portions of Eusebius which are here referred to, several curious facts are at once elicited by comparing them with the fragments before us. In the first place, both relate to the same series of events, of which the former part is related by Eusebius, and the latter by the Syriac fragment. Secondly, both profess to emanate from the public archives of Edessa. Thirdly, both Eusebius and the Syriac speak of a certain Abdos, son of Abdos (Abdu bar Abdu). Fourthly, both of them speak of the preaching and miracles of the evangelist, and of his success. All these (and others might be pointed out) suggest that we have here a portion of the very document from which Eusebius derived his information. This appears to be an almost necessary inference; but on this very account it encourages the suspicion that the statements made by Eusebius are not all true. He found them in his record, and supposed them to be of some antiquity; but if he had read on to the end, or reflected, he would have seen that the composition was quite a recent one. Mention is made in it of Zephyrinus of Rome, who died about A.D. 202, and of Serapion of Antioch, who lived till after A.D. 210. Besides, it is added that the account was written after all the events it records----that is, of course, after the last of them. It therefore would seem, to be most probable, and almost certain, that the document was composed at or about the middle of the third century. If this be the case, Eusebius's authentic contemporary narrative was not written at Edessa till at most three-quarters of a century before the date at which his own work ends. The whole |112 question is curious, and by no means without interest and importance, especially if it appear that we have here stumbled upon one of the original sources of a remarkable chapter in the Father of Ecclesiastical History. The Greek and Latin writers after Eusebius, who refer to the subject, need not be considered, as they merely borrow from him."

67. ++ A distinct declaration of assent to the decisions of the Council follows this name, and a similar one comes after that of Theodorus.