Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

are

of St. John, but a statement of Euse-| tary contains five distinct objections bius has been interpreted as repre- made against the Apocalypse by senting Caius to have rejected the “ Caius the heretic,” together with the Apocalypse and attributed it to Cerin- answers to these objections made by thus. For he tells us 1 that among the Hippolytus. Dionysius of Alexandria heretical writings rejected by Caius had stated that some of his predeceswas a book of Revelations purporting sors who rejected the Apocalypse had to be written by a great apostle, but gone over the whole of the book, critiascribed by Caius to Cerinthus, in cising every chapter. Dr. Gwynn's which the author professes to have extracts make it pretty clear that Caius been shown by angels that after the was one of those whom Dionysius had resurrection Christ's kingdom should in his mind; for it is exactly in this be earthly, that men should inhabit detailed criticism that Caius deals in Jerusalem, should be the slaves of lusts these extracts. We do not know and pleasures, and should spend a thou- whether Hippolytus had given Barsasand years in wedding festivities. Yet lîbî any authority for describing Caius there were strong reasons for rejecting as a heretic, and it is quite possible the interpretation that under this de- that the Church of Rome, at the beginscription we are to recognize the bookning of the third century, may have that we know under the name of the tolerated among its presbyters differApocalypse. The author of that book ences of opinion as to the reception of does not himself claim to be a great St. John's Apocalypse, such as apostle ; le nowhere describes millen- known to have existed among orthodox nial happiness as consisting in sensual men for more than a century later. gratifications; and he holds, concern- Yet as far as the new evidence goes it ing our Lord's divinity, a doctrine tends to increase suspicion as to the quite opposite to that which in all ac- sufficiency of the proof on which it had counts is attributed to Cerinthus. It been asserted that Caius was a presbywas further urged that Caius, a pres- ter of the Roman Church. byter of the Roman Church, was not II. The Syriac extracts from Hiplikely to have written against a book polytus just mentioned enable us to which we otherwise know to have been recognize that Epiphanius has been received by that Church.

drawing from Hippolytus in the section Yet within the last five years unex- of his work on heresies in which he pected light has been thrown on the leals with the opponents of the Gospel personality of Caius, and it has become and Apocalypse of St. John. Another certain that, whatever may have been small contribution to our knowledge of his relation to the Roman Church, he Hippolytus has been made in the next was not only distinct from Hippolytus, “ lind” we have to record, viz., a consbut was in controversy with him, and plete copy of the fourth book of his on this very subject of the Johannine commentary on Daniel, which writings. The new evidence was pub- found in the library of a Greek theologlished by Dr. Gwynn in 1888,2 from a ical college in an island in the Sea of British Museum manuscript of a Syriac Marmora. The fourth book of the commentary on the Apocalypse by a commentary, being that which deals twelfth-century writer, Dionysius Bar- with the prophetic chapters vi.-xii., is salîbî, which had not previously been the portion of the work which had most edited, and apparently not even read attraction for Christian readers, and so by any Syriac scholar acquainted with

Was

3

3 It was first published in a series of articles in a ecclesiastical antiquity. The commen

Greek periodical at Constantinople, 'H 'EKK7.1101

αστική 'Αληθεια, the first of these articles appear2 In Hermathena, vol. vi., p. 397, vol. vii., p. 137 ; ing in May, 1885. These were made known to Engee also Harnack, “ Die Gwynn 'schen Cujus- und glish readers by the Rev. J. H. Kennedy in a sepHippolytus-Fragmente,” in

Unter- arate tract, the " Commentary of Hippolytus on suchungen, Band v. Heft 3; Zahn, Gesch. d. neut. Daniel," Dublin, 1888, and afterwards more fully kanons, Band ii, Hälfte ii. Abth, ii, 973.

by Dr. Bratke, Bonn, 1891.

1 H. E. iii, 28.

Terte und

many extracts from it had been tran- | cover. The fruit of his visit was the scribed that the new discovery adds but recovery of a work, not indeed of little to what had been already known much importance as throwing light on of Hippolytus's system of prophetic any disputed questions of doctrine or interpretation.

history, but yet of high interest as addThe chief novelty in the chapters ing to our scanty store of the products previously unknown is that they give of Christian thought in the second cen us reason to ascribe to Hippolytus the tury. Eusebius in his “Ecclesiastical fixing of our Lord's conception and his History” (iv. 4), when he comes to nativity to March 25 and December 25 treat of the reign of Hadrian, states respectively, as we still celebrate them. that an apology had been addressed to In an earlier work he had fixed the that emperor by Quadratus, of which conception for April 8; and his influ- several copies were extant, and he himence on the calendar calculations of the self had one. He then quotes from it Roman Church was so great that it had one sentence exhibiting the early date not been easy to guess why his date of this apology ; for the author states had not been adopted. Now we know that subjects of some of our Lord's that the correction was made by Hip- miracles had survived to his own time. polytus himself, and explanations have Eusebius goes on to state that another been offered of the chronological con- apology had been presented to the same siderations that prompted the change. emperor by Aristides, of which also

Simultaneously with Bryennius's re- several copies were extant; but he covery of Clement's Epistles a Syriac does not say that he had got a copy translation came to light which gave an himself, and he makes no extract from independent authority for the text.1 it. In this work he gives no further Something of the same kind has taken information about Aristides ; but in his place with respect to this commentary “Chronicle” he calls Quadratus a on Daniel, but the second authority hearer of the apostles, and describes still awaits publication.

Aristides as an Athenian philosopher. III. The third acquisition we have Jerome and other writers who mention to mention comes from a source to those two apologists inspire no confiwhich we have been indebted before – dence that they knew anything more namely, the same convent on Mount than they had learned from Eusebius. Sinai where Tischendorf found the Si- Quadratus has by some been identified naitic MS. It was visited in 1889 by with one whom we know to have been Mr. Rendel Harris, who found there Bishop of Athens in the second censuch intelligent caretakers of their lit- tury, but apparently at too late a date erary treasures as to make us believe to make it probable that he could have that if Tischendorf did not exaggerate met any survivor of the Apostolic age ; his own merit in rescuing Bible manu- and reasons have been given for thinkscripts from lighting fires, the monks ing that the apologist was more likely must have wonderfully improved in to have been an Asiatic than an Athecultivation during the last forty years. nian. What reason there was for callCertain it is that their appreciation of ing this Aristides Athenian is the value of their manuscripts has so unknown. An old French traveller far advanced that Mr. Harris, foresee- brought home news that a copy of his ing that there was no likelihood of his apology had been preserved in a monbeing permitted, like Tischendorf, to astery a few miles from Athens, but carry off a valuable manuscript, wisely search thereupon made for it in that went provided with “ink-horns and neighborhood proved unsuccessful. photographic apparatus,” in order to be The first trustworthy tidings of it able to convey to the Western world came from a different quarter. We full knowledge of what he might dis- omitted to tell in our last article that

an

1 Published in antotype in Bishop Lightfoot's ? It was published by him in Texts and Studies, "Clement of Rome" (1890), vol. i.

vol. i.

10

the Mechitarist monastery at Venice, | light on the New Testament canon which had furnished an Armenian used by Aristides, because New Testatranslation of Ephrem's commentary ment quotations are, as a general rule, on Tatian's “ Diatessaron," also pub- absent from writings addressed lished in 1879 an Armenian translation heathen. The work of Aristides merely of a fragment which purported to be the contains a few echoes of New Testaopening of the “ Apology of Aristides."ment language, his most striking coinDoubts were raised by some learned cidences being with the Epistle to the men as to the correctness of this title, Romans. but they have been set at rest by Mr. IV. We have next to acknowledge Harris's discovery among the Sinaitic another omission in our former article ; treasures of a complete copy of a Syriac but we do so without much shame, for translation of the “ Apology of Aris- that article would have assumed portides."

tentous length if we had attempted to And here we have a new illustration make our enumeration of finds quite of the truth of the saying, “ To liim exhaustive. We might, however, have that hath shall more be given;" for included in our list a Greek text of the scholars have repeatedly found that the Acts of the Scillitan martyrs, discovered gain of one piece of knowledge brings and published by Usener in 1881. A with it the means of adding another. Latin form of these acts had been preMr. Robinson, in whose accession the viously known, but only through manuCambridge theological school finds scripts so late and so corrupt that the some consolation for recent terrible date of the African martyrdoms relosses, had accepted Mr. Harris's Syriac corded had been left in obscurity. The text of Aristides, with his translation text of these manuscripts could not weil of it, for publication in the first number be reconciled with a date earlier than of the Texts and Studies, of which he A.D. 200 ; yet the name of the proconwas the founder. While he was search - sul who presided over the trial is given ing in a Vienna library for texts of as a Saturninus, apparently the same as African martyrdoms, of which we mean he who, according to Tertullian, was the to speak presently, it chanced that his first to draw the sword against the Chriseye was caught, in glancing through tiaus ; and other facts forbid us to assign the well-known medieval story of so late a date as 200 to the beginning “ Barlaam and Josaphat," by words of the persecution of the Christians in that he recognized as having been read Africa. Usener's discovery removed by him, before he left Cambridge, in this difficulty by enabling us to make in the proof sheets of Mr. Harris's trans- the date as given by the later manulation of Aristides. Examination showed scripts a correction, which indeed the that the author of this romance, when sagacity of a French scholar, Renier, had his story required him to introduce an already divined, and instead of “ Præsiapology made by a Christian advocate dente bis Claudiano consule” to read before a heathen king, had econo- “Præsente bis et Condiano Consulimized the labor of composition by in- bus." The proper name “ Præsente" corporating the “ Apology of Aristidles.” had been taken for a participle and had The result is to give us the Greek origi- puzzled transcribers ; and so the true nal of much that we should otherwise date was disguised, viz., A.D. 180, the have known only through the Syriac year of the second consulship of Præeand Armenian translations, and to sens with Condianus. afford materials for a fairly trustworthy

But much discussion arose out of the restoration of the text of Aristides. As fact that it was a Greek manuscript we have already indicated, the recovery which cast this light on the date of an of an ancient exposure of the follies African martyrdom. It had become a and vanities of heathenism does not commonplace with Church historians to contain much bearing on modern con- admit that the earliest Christian Church troversies; nor does it even throw lof Rome had been formed out of men

[ocr errors]

who habitually used the Greek lan- or corrected what he took to be misguage, and that Greek remained for takes in the Latin. some time the liturgical language of We ourselves adopted Mr. Harris's that Church ; but it had been sup- opinion in a notice of his discovery posed that we could find in northern which appeared in this review at the Africa the beginning of Latin Chris- time, for we thought that, in the abtianity and the birthplace of the Latin sence of evidence how far the African translation of the Bible. Yet it has Church was bilingual (or possibly tribeen contended that these opinions lingual) in the second century, we were were too hastily formed, that the Ro- not in a position to deny that Greek man settlers in Africa were not likely Acts might have been liturgically read to be very different in culture and edu- in the commemoration of martyrdoms, cation from those who remained in and that we therefore were not entitled Italy, and that the African Church to disregard the evidence of superior probably began, like the Roman, by antiquity which Mr. Harris found in the being a Greek-speaking Church. Greek Greek form. Mr. Robinson, however, words are found in that most precious though admitting the Greek form to be relic of the early African Church, the older than the current Latin texts, was account of the martyrdom of Perpetua ; persuaded from internal evidence that and the great African Tertullian was it was itself a translation from an orignot only able to read Greek, but wrote inal Latin which he believed research some treatises in that language. Use- might discover. And he verified his ner's discovery seemed to throw new anticipation by himself finding older light on the first language of the Afri- Latin texts both of the Acts of Percau Church ; and a controversy arose : petua and of the Scillitan martyrdoms. Was this Greek text of the Scillitan Mr. IIarris has consequently abandoned martyrdoms, which was confessedly his opinion of the priority of the Greek older than the current Latin texts, the of the former acts, and with regard to parent of all the Latin versions, or the latter Mr. Robinson thinks that it was it itself a translation from a lost is scarcely probable that the theory of Latin original ? Usener and Hilgenc a Greek original will be revived after feld took the latter view ; Aubé, Re- the publication of the present Latin nan, and others took the former view, text." and Bishop Lightfoot, though with Now to speak first of the earlier docsome hesitation, was disposed to agree ument, the Scillitan Acts, there can be with them.

no doubt that the Greek and Latin This controversy was renewed by a forms are not independent. new find. Mr. Rendel IIarris maile in criticism of martyrdoms great use is to the library of the Holy Sepulchre at be made of the study “Les Actes des Jerusalem the surprising discovery of a Martyrs,” which Le Blant offered as a Greek version of the Acts of Perpetua,1 supplement to Ruinart's “ Acta Sinwhich we have just mentioned, and cera.”

From the details there prewhich had been justly valued, not only sented of the methods of ordinary as one of the most affecting and most Roman magisterial investigation we see authentic stories of a Christian martyr- at once that both the Greek and Latin dom, but as one of the earliest speci- Scillitan Acts take up the story in the mens of Latin Church literature. Mr. middle. We do not find the ordinary Harris was of opinion that this Greek opening of identification of the accused test was the original from which the person by asking his name, father's previously known Latin texts had been name, country, and rank. There is no translated, and he pointed out passages indictment and wo questioning on the where the Greek cleared up obscurities subject of the charge, but in both ver

In any

sions the report of the trial begins with * He published it as a separate little voiume. ** The Acts of the Martyrdom of Perpetua and ? Published by him, Texts and Studies, vol. i., Felicitas," London, 1890.

pi, ii,

the judge's offer of the emperor's par- | martyrs is named, and the exquisite don if the prisoners will return to a phrase "regnant cum Patre et Filio et better mind. The Greek and Latin re- Spiritu Sancto' has been rejected." ports of the questions and answers that “ It is impossible to believe that the followed are in complete correspond- Latin could have been produced by alence, the most important difference breviation of the Greek." being that in the Greek acts the mar- With regard to this we have to say tyrs are spoken of with the prefix üylos, that if the Greek is an expansiou of the ó üyros ETEpūtos, etc., where the Latin Latin it is an expansion made by some simply has “ Speratus,” etc. We can- one having knowledge independent of not doubt that the Latin here more the Latin, which contains no note of truly represents the sources whence the place whence the martyrs came or the account was derived. The Roman of that where they were buried. Thus courts were provided with a staff of if the Latin be supposed to contain the official reporters who at trials took down form of the martyrdom annually read the questions of the magistrates and the in the Church of Carthage, nothing answers made by the accused. Chris- forbids us to suppose the Greek to be a tians were often able to obtain, either contemporary document drawn up for by favor or by purchase, these official the use of Christians elsewhere. But minutes of the proceedings at the ex. when Mr. Robinson speaks of this amination of their confessors, and it is Greek as an expansion of the Latin he needless to say that the official acts strangely omits to notice that the orig. would contain no such title as iylos. inal of this Greek conclusion is to be But these official minutes have not only sought not in the Latin but in the Marbeen the basis of some of the most tyrdom of Polycarp, which had been authentic acts of early martyrdoms, but published some twenty years before, they have also furnished a model to and which served as a model for many which the forgers of spurious acts have subsequent stories of martyrdoms. frequently conformed. And this pre- This martyrdom ends with giving the vents the albsence of such titles from late ανθυπατεύοντος Στατίου Κοδράτου βασιλείbeing in itself a decisive proof of supe- οντος δε εις τους αιώνας Ιησού Χριστού, ώ ή δόξα, rior antiquity. For instance, one of K. 7. 2. It is impossible to doubt whence the shorter Acts of Perpetua, the com- the African martyrologist borrowed his parative lateness of which is acknowl- contrast between the changing sway of edged by everybody, contains no such earthly rulers and the eternal reign of titles.

Christ. Now, though we do not conBut the most important difference is test the originality of the main body in the conclusion. In the Latin it was, of the Latin acts, we are not without “ Et ita omnes simul martyrio coronati doubt as to the conclusion ; for the forsunt, et regnant cum Patre et Filio et mula " regnante Christo," of which Spiritu Sancto per omnia secula seculo- Polycarp's martyrdom affords the earlirum. Amen.” The Greek is : Éteheuson- est example, came to be extensively σαν το ξίφει, μηνί Ιουλίω ις' ήσαν ούν ορμώμενοι adopted. Lightfoot ? gives a number of οι άγιοι από Ισχλή της Νουμηδίας, κατάκεινται δε examples from Ruinart’s « Acta SinTehnolov Kapdayévvns untPoróhEWS. {uaptúprav cera,” and he refers to Blondel, “De éni lépoavtos kaì KhavdiavoÛ TÛV UTÚTwv kai Formule regnante Christo' in VeteΣατουρνίνου ανθυπάτου, καθ' ημάς δε βασιλείοντος rum Monumentis Usu,” who fills sonme του Κυρίου ημών Ιησού Χριστού, και πρέπει πάσα twenty pages (pp. 371, sqq.) with inδόξα, κ. τ. λ.1

stances of the use of the formula. PosOn these endings Mr. Robinson re- sibly if Eusebius had copied for us the marks : “ The close of the piece has conclusion of the Lyons martyrdoms it been altered and expanded in the might be found that they ended in the Greek, in which the locality of the same way. The formula “regnante"

2

1 Terts and Studies, vol. i., pt. ii., pp. 116-17.

. Ignatius, i. 636.

« ZurückWeiter »