All this is proposed to be considered, upon the supposition that Porphyry and the christian writers speak of one and the same Bardesanes. But I do not allow that to be certain, and out of doubt: for methinks it may be very well questioned, whether Jerom, when he quotes Bardesanes the Babylonian, means the same whom he has several times mentioned as a christian, or a heretic. However I maintain that our christian writers are not mistaken about the time of Bardesanes, whom they speak of as living, and being an author, in the reign of Marcus Antoninus. And I take it for granted that I have said enough to clear them from all suspicion of mistake in this matter. XIII. Eusebius has given a short account of Apollonius, who suffered martyrdom at Rome in the time of Commodus; probably in the year 186 or 187. He says, that' 'Apollonius was celebrated for learning and philosophy.' Being accused before Perennis, [præfect of the Prætorium,] 'Perennis desired him to give an account of himself before 'the senate, which he did, in a most eloquent apology for 'the faith pronounced in that assembly: and was then sentenced to lose his head, as by a decree of the senate.' Eusebius adds: They who are desirous to read what 'Apollonius said before the judge, his answers to the 'interrogatories of Perennis, and his whole Apology in 'the senate, may find them in the collection which I have 'made of the ancient martyrdoms.' Which collection is lost. Jerom has given Apollonius a place in his Catalogue" of Ecclesiastical Writers. He calls him a senator of Rome.' Being commanded to give an account of his faith, he 'composed an excellent piece, which he read in the senate. But nevertheless he was beheaded for Christ, by order of 'the senate.' There are difficulties attending some parts of the history of Apollonius, which I pass over, considering him at present chiefly as an author. Jerom says, he read his Apology in the senate, which is not said by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History. However he deserves to be reckoned an author. If he only pronounced the apology, it might be taken down from him in writing. Eusebius is express, that this whole apology' might be read in his collection of the Acts of Martyrs. 6 1 Απολλώνιον ανδρα των τοτε πιτων επι παιδεια και φιλοσοφια βεβοημενον. H. E. l. v. c. 21. p. 189. C. Πασαν τε την προς την συγκλητον απολογίαν. Ibid. D. ■ De V. I. c. 42. Jerom, in another work, mentions Apollonius among some of the most eminent christian writers. He is there placed with Greek authors: but in his Catalogue, in the article of Tertullian, he says, that father was then reckoned the first of the Latin writers, after Victor and Apollo'nius;' where he seems to mean the same person. Possibly the reason of this different way of reckoning may be, that Apollonius delivered his apology to the senate in Latin; but in Jerom's time it was extant only in Greek, in the Acts of the ancient Martyrs, collected by Eusebius. XIV. Rhodon is spoken of by Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, under the reign of Commodus. Jerom P says, he flourished in the times of Commodus and Severus : they both say, he was a native of Asia. I shall confine myself to the account which Eusebius gives of his works. He says, that Rhodon wrote several books; among others one against the heresy of Marcion, which he assures us was then divided into several parties. He relates a conference which he had with Apelles, one of them, then an old man, whom he confuted and exposed. In the same book,' says Eusebius, which he inscribes to Callistion, he informs us, that he had been instructed by Tatian at Rome, and says that Tatian had composed a book of 'difficult questions, for the explication of several obscure 'places of scripture: Rhodon at the same time promises to put out a distinct work, containing a solution of those questions. There is extant a commentary of his upon the six days' work of the creation.' r 6 XV. Victor, as we are informed by Eusebius, succeeded Eleutherus, bishop of Rome, in the reign of the emperor Commodus. He says, that upon occasion of a difference about keeping the time of Easter, Victor en'deavoured to cut off from the common unity all the churches of Asia, together with the churches in their neighbourhood, as holding things contrary to the right faith and by letters proscribed, and declared excom'municated, all the brethren in those parts:' for which he was reproved by Irenæus, and other bishops, as acting contrary to the laws of peace and charity. 6 t There was before this a synodical letter, upon the same • Scripsit et Miltiades contra gentes volumen egregium. Hippolytus quoque et Apollonius, Romanæ urbis senator, propria opuscula condiderunt. Ad. Magnum, ep. 83. al. 84. P De V. I. c. 37. r H. E. l. v. c. 22. init. 4 L. v. c. 13. Και τηλιτεύει γε δια γραμματων, ακοινωνήτως αρδην παντας τους εκείσε ανακηρύττων αδελφες. L. v. c. 24. 192. B. C. 'Ib. p. 192, 193. p. 6 6 question, written" by the bishops assembled at Rome, which had Victor's name prefixed. V Jerom in his Catalogue says: Victor, the thirteenth bishop of the city of Rome, wrote about the question of Easter, and other small pieces. He governed the church 'ten years under the emperor Severus.' In his Chronicle Jerom says, that in his time there were extant some books of Victor concerning religion, which were tolerably well written though perhaps he speaks rather of the bulk than of the merit of his books: they are not in being now. There are extant, however, some letters ascribed to him, but without ground, as is generally allowed. 6 XVI. Bacchylus, bishop of Corinth, successor of the fore-mentioned Dionysius, is mentioned by Eusebius, with Polycrates bishop of Ephesus, Serapion bishop of Antioch, and others, who had left testimonies of the orthodoxy of 'their faith in writing.' He afterwards speaks of a letter written by Bacchylus, about the time of celebrating Easter. Jerom in his Catalogue says: Bacchylus, bishop of Corinth, who flourished in the time of the emperor Severus, 'wrote an elegant book about Easter in the name of all the bishops in Achaia.' I suppose he means the epistle mentioned by Eusebius. 6 XVII. Theophilus, bishop of Cæsarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, are likewise mentioned by Eusebius in the fore-cited place, together with those who had testified the orthodoxy of their faith by their writings. Afterwards he says, that there is extant an epistle [about the question of Easter] in the name of the bishops of Pales'tine assembled in council, over whom presided Theo'philus, bishop of Cæsarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Je'rusalem. Eusebius has mentioned some particulars of this letter, and transcribed a passage out of it. Jerom says, that Theophilus, bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine, in the time of Severus, composed, together with the other bishops of that country, a very useful synodical 'epistle against those who kept Easter, with the Jews, on 'the fourteenth day of the moon.' " Και των επι Ρωμης δε όμοιως αλλη περί τε αυτού ζητήματος, επισκοπον Bikтopa onλovoa. L. v. c. 23. p. 190. D. ▾ Cap. 34. Cujus mediocria de religione extant volumina. p. 171. * Vid. Basnage, Annal. 192. sect. 8. Pagi, Critic. in Baron. 196. sect. 3. Tillemont, Mem. Ecc. T. iii. St. Victor, Article viii. y H. E. l. v. c. 22. p. 190. A. B. • Elegantem librum scripsit. De V. I. c. 44. b H. E. l. v. c. 22. d Ibid. c. 25. Ib. c. 23. p. 291. A. c Ibid. c. 23. e De V. I. c. 43. Jerom has no particular article in his Catalogue for Narcissus. He speaks of him, however, in the chapter of Alexander, who was afterwards colleague or coadjutor of Narcissus in the church of Jerusalem. Narcissus lived to a great age. There are several remarkable stories concerning him in Eusebius, which we may have occasion to take notice of some other time. 6 There have been published Acts of the council of Cæ'sarea, concerning the Question of keeping Easter.' But they are with good reason suspected, and rejected, by i several learned men, as not genuine. XVIII. Having given, beside catholic writers, a short history of Bardesanes, whom Eusebius does not allow to have been completely orthodox, and others called an heresiarch, I shall conclude this chapter with Symmachus. Before the nativity of our Saviour there was no other Greek version of the books of the Old Testament, but that called the Version of the Seventy. In the time of Origen there were, beside that, the versions of Aquila, (who lived in the reign of Adrian,) Theodotion, Symmachus, and two or three others which are anonymous: though these last seem not to have contained a translation of all the Old Testament, but of some particular books only. The exact age of Symmachus is not certain, some reckoning him a writer of the second, others of the third century. It is likewise disputed, which version of the Old Testament was first made; that of Theodotion, or Symmachus. Petavius thinks Theodotion's was first in the order of time: Hody,' and most other learned men, are of a different opinion. I shall put down here only an observation of Hody: It is not easy to determine the year, or the reign, in which either Theodotion or Symmachus made their versions; but it is certain that Theodotion's was published before Irenæus wrote his work Against Heresies,' because he is there cited. And it is probable that Symmachus had not then published his version; because, f De V. I. c. 62. Vid. Hieron, ibid. et Eus. H. E. 1. vi. c. 11: h lbid. c. 9, 11. This point may be seen argued in Du Pin, Dissertation Prelim. I. i. c. vi. sect. 5. Huet, Origeniana, p. 256. Montfauçon, Præliminaria in Hexapla Origenis. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. T. ii. p. 336, &c. Tillemont, Mem. Ecc. T. iii. Origene, Art. viii. et note x. beside Hody, as above, 1. iv. See likewise Dodwell, Diss. Iren. iv. c. 40. when Irenæus quotes Aquila and Theodotion, he makes no mention of Symmachus, though there was the same reason for mentioning him as the other too. This argument seems to me sufficient to show, at least, that Irenæus was not acquainted with the version of Symmachus, if it was then published. I speak of Symmachus at the end of the second century, which is very little different from P Cave's computation, who has fixed the time of his flourishing at the first year of the third century. r Epiphanius says, that Symmachus was a Samaritan, and one of those whom they call wise men but meeting with some disappointment in his ambitious views among his own people, he turned Jew. He must have been converted afterwards to christianity, for Eusebius and others call him an Ebionite: and it is not improbable, that this is what Epiphanius means, when he says Symmachus turned Jew; he considering Ebionitism as a sort of Judaism. According to some" ancient authors, the Ebionites, or some branch of them, were called Symmachians from him. ▾ I enlarge no farther on the history of Symmachus, which may be seen in Hody, who has likewise collected a great number of ancient testimonies relating to him. Our chief concern at present is with a passage of Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History. 6 Having given an account of Origen's labours in the Old Testament, and particularly of the editions of his Tetrapla and Hexapla; in the former of which were the versions only of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, together with that of the Seventy; Eusebius proceeds in the following chapter: Moreover it ought to be observed, that Symmachus, one of those interpreters, was an Ebionite. These Ebi'onites are such as say, Christ was born of Joseph and • Mary, and suppose him to have been a mere man: and contend that the law ought to be kept after the manner of the Jews, as we have before shown. And to this day P Hist. Lit. p. 64. W • L. iii. c. 21. al. 24. 4 Σύμμαχος τις Σαμαρείτης των παρ' αυτοις σοφων. κ. λ. De Mens. et Pond. c. 16. p. 172. B. Vid. et Synopsin Scriptur. apud Athanas. T. ii. p. 203. Euseb. H. E. 1. vi. c. 17. Dem. Ev. 1. vii. cap. 1. p. 316. C. Hieronym. De Vir. Ill. cap. 54. Suidas, V. Qpıyɛvnç. Theodoret. Hær. Fab. l. ii. cap. i. • Ambrosius seu quis alius in prologo commentariorum in epistolam ad Galatas: et Augustinus in lib. i. contra Crescen. cap. 31. Vid. Vales. ad Euseb. vi. 17. ▾ Ubi supra, 1. iv. c. 1. sect. 7. κατα Και ὑπομνήματα δε το Συμμαχε εισετι νυν φερεται εν οἷς δοκει προς το ατθαιον αποτεινομενος ευαγγελιον, την δεδηλομενην αίρεσιν κρατύνειν. |