Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Philip of Side, Fragments (2010)



The fragments of Philip of Side

[Translated by Andrew Eastbourne] [1]

A catalogue of the fragments is given by Katharina Heyden, who lists all the fragments and discusses them: Die Christliche Geschichte des Philippos von Side: Mit einem kommentierten Katalog der Fragmente, in M. Wallraff (ed.), Julius Africanus und die christliche Weltchronistik (Berlin, 2006), pp. 209-243.

 

Fr. 1
[On Adam and Eve]

[From Cod. Bodl. gr. 120, fol. 300r and Paris. Suppl. gr. 685, fol. 10r. — Greek text printed by D. Serruys, "Autour d'un fragment de Philippe de Side," in Mélanges d'archéologique et d'histoire 26 (1906), pp. 335-359 (p. 336 for the text of these two mss.; on p. 346, Serruys prints the parallel material from Paris. gr. 1712, where Philip's name is not cited). Wirth, Aus orientalischen Chroniken, pp. 208-9, had earlier printed somewhat more text as the fragment from Paris Suppl. gr. 685.]

Paris. gr. 1712[2]

Bodl. gr. 120

Paris. Suppl. gr. 685

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some say, from tradition, that Adam spent one hundred years in Paradise.  Others, that he was formed at the third hour, transgressed at the sixth, and was cast out at the ninth…

 

 

 

 

 

…and this took place through seven years, as some of the presbyters / elders declared.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1) Note that Philip of Sidde in the twentieth tome of the Christian History says that Adam spent one hundred years in Paradise, and was cast out.  And after another hundred years[3] he knew Eve his wife and produced Cain, and after three years [produced] Abel, and after thirty years, Seth.[4]  This [information] is from the tradition.[5]

(2) But others say that he worked[6] seven years in Paradise[7] and from the transgression, from the first hour[8] of that day until the sixth hour, he was cast out.[9]

 

The Hebrews have 22 letters, and 22 books, and 22 generations from Adam to Jacob.  And on the sixth day of the second week, it is said that Eve was created, and 40 days after Adam's creation he entered in order to work[10] in Paradise.[11]

(1) But Philip of Side in the 22nd tome of <the> Christian History says that Adam spent 100 years in Paradise.  And after being cast out, he spent another 100 years[12] and he knew Eve and produced Cain the accursed, and after three years [produced] Abel, and after 100 years, Seth.


Fr. 2
[On Athenagoras and the heads of the Alexandrian catechetical school] 

[From Cod. Barocc. 142, fol. 216r line 40 – 216v line 15 (i.e., following the material classified by Heyden as Fr. 4 and Fr. 6).  — First edited by H. Dodwell, Dissertationes in Irenaeum (Oxford, 1689), p. 488; Greek text more recently edited by G. C. Hansen in Theodoros Anagnostes Kirchengeschichte, GCS 54 (Berlin, 1971), p. 160; cf. text and tr. by P. Nautin, "La continuation de l'Histoire Ecclésiastique d'Eusèbe par Gélase de Césarée," Revue des Études Byzantines 50 (1992), pp. 175-8.  — For a thorough consideration of the manuscripts (with facsimiles), and the historical accuracy of the information provided, see B. Pouderon, "Le témoignage du Codex Baroccianus 142 sur Athénagore et les origines de l'école d'Alexandrie," Chapter 1 of D'Athènes à Alexandrie:  Études sur Athénagore et les origines de la philosophie chrétienne (Québec, 1997), which appeared earlier (with different pagination) in G. Agroud, Science et vie intellectuelle à Alexandrie, Ier à IIIe siècle après J.-C. (Saint-Étienne, 1994), pp. 163-224 and in Archipel égéen (Tours, 1992), 1: 23-63.]

As Philip of Side says in the 24th logos:[13]  Athenagoras was the first to lead the school[14] in Alexandria; he flourished in the times of Hadrian and Antoninus,[15] to whom also he addressed his Embassy-speech[16]on behalf of the Christians—a man who lived as a Christian in the very philosophers' cloak, and who was at the head of the Academic school.[17]  This man—before Celsus—was eager to write against the Christians, but when he read the divine Scriptures in order to make his arguments more precisely, he was seized by the Holy Spirit in such a way that, like the great Paul, he became a teacher instead of a persecutor of the faith which he was persecuting.  Philip says that Clement, the author of the Stromateis, became a student of this man, and Pantaenus [a student] of Clement.  And Pantaenus himself was also an Athenian, and a Pythagorean philosopher.  But Eusebius says that Pantaenus became Clement's teacher—and he mentions him as a teacher in his Hypotyposeis.  And this Pantaenus, according to Philip, had Origen as student and successor in the headship of the school after him.  But according to Eusebius, [it was] Clement and after Clement, Origen.  Still, in one way or another, Origen was fourth head of the Christian school.[18]  After Origen, Heraclas; after him, Dionysius; after him, Pierius; after Pierius, Theognostus; after him, Serapion; after him, Peter the Great, the bishop, who became a martyr.  After Peter, Macarius, whom his fellow-countrymen called "Politicus"; after him, Didymus; after Didymus, Rhodon, who moved the school, according to Philip, to the city of Side, the same [as Philip's home city], at the time of Theodosius the Great.  Philip says that he was a student of this Rhodon, concerning whose knowledge of literature / argument,[19] both our own and that of those outside [the Church], he provides copious attestation. 

The teachers:[20]  Athenagoras (1); Pantaenus (2); Origen (3); Heraclas (4); Dionysius (5); Clement (6); Pierius (7); Theognostus (8); Serapion (9); Peter the martyr (10); Macarius Politicus (11); Didymus (12); Rhodon (13).


Fr. 3.1-5
[Fragments contained in De gestis in Perside / Religionsgespräch am Hof der Sasaniden]

[The exact delineation and attribution of the fragments are uncertain and depend on one's interpretation of the role Philip of Side's material played in the composition of the Religionsgespräch, which should be examined in full for a complete picture of the testimonia and fragments in context.  Fr. 3.1 and 3.2 are more certainly to be connected with Philip of Side; Fr. 3.3-5 are classified by Heyden as "mit zweifelhafter Zuweisung." — Greek text edited by E. Bratke, "Das sogenannte Religionsgespräch am Hof der Sasaniden," TU 19.3 (1899)—the standard reference point; but now most recently, and with a more extensive survey and collation of mss., P. Bringel, Une polémique religieuse à la cour perse:  le De gestis in Perside.  Histoire du texte, édition critique et traduction (diss. Sorbonne, 2007).  Page numbers in the text below refer to Bratke's edition; section numbers refer to Bringel's edition (unless otherwise stated, her edition of the "long recension"—pp. 288-494); references to "Bringel's text" normally introduce my own translation of her Greek text, not her (French) translation, and general references to Bringel's comments refer to footnotes ad locc. in her edition.]

Fr. 3.1
[From the Story of Cassander]

[p. 5]

11. Cassander died, leaving behind a sister, called Doris; she was the daughter of Pylades, who had been killed in Greece.[21]  Attalus the king of the Lacedaemonians[22] lusted after her; and when they went to bed together, she, having a sword inside [the room], planted it in his heart and took control of the kingdom.  And once this had happened, she acquired[23] great fear.  And his brother Philip went to live in Achaea[24] and there taking as wife the sister of Calliopus their general, named Alisbis [p. 6], he was seeking to destroy Doris and her people.  And they were afraid.  For all the peoples around her, being enamored of her beauty, were helping her.  For she would not give herself in marriage to just anyone.

But since they were all afraid of her—for she had attacked many and had destroyed them all—the Achaeans decided at that time to send an embassy to Delphi and to receive an oracle there about this matter.  And they, after setting out, asked Euoptia the priestess at the water of the Castalian [spring], for themselves to know the object of their coming.[25]  She, having tasted the spring water, answered thus:  "Philip, <child of Olympias, of Pella, going to places above Asia>, will strike the higher ring that circles everything with his all-powerful arm."[26]

12. But they, deriding and cursing her, said:  "Thrice-accursed one, we asked about a woman; we did not ask about a man who came from Macedonia, did we?"  But she said to them that unconquerable times[27] had begun to arise; for indeed she herself [i.e., the woman] and that man, and those with him, would vanquish everyone.

And they departed, with insults for the prophetess, and went off to the temple of Athens.  And while a priestly cloth was being woven and fine purple was being applied to it, they came with a will and burst in.  The priestess, Xanthippe, said to them with a burst of anger:  "You have entered here at an evil hour, you reckless and unruly[28] ones!"—and they, becoming displeased in turn, mistreated her and said:  "You are unworthy of any honor; [p. 8] you are foreign to the priestly disposition—and you are disgracing the purple, which the gods granted to royalty, by which those who wear it possess honor and glory.  Stop speaking strange things!  Depart from your wineless drunkenness, you arrogant huckster!"  But she said to them:  "You have brought these charges not against me, but against those who cannot be insulted.[29]  Nevertheless, receive a secure oracle and go your way:  'A certain youthful man, who is the effectual conception of a mingling bed, having the unconquerable weight of God's unconquerable scale,[30] will circle the boundless world like an egg, capturing[31] all with his spear.'"  But they, blowing on her,[32] withdrew, speaking unlawful things against the gods.  And they said, "We do ourselves no good, if we do not go to Phoebus Apollo the Great!"

13. And they went to the temple of Apollo and said by way of entreaty:  "You victorious and pure well-pleasing[33] gods, why do you treat your servants in this way—asking[34] to win a womanly war?  You throw us into a warlike war!  Do not act this way, you immortals, true masters, who have granted to us the greatest material things as gifts; instead, give us clear signs.[35]  What, then, will happen to us?"  And immediately a voice came in invisibly speaking as follows:  "The tripod turning a third turn, the prophet is the root;[36] [p. 9] for [there are] three-fold of these [oracles]; a certain light-bringer, heaven-sent to earth's plain, passing by,[37] dwells within matter, forming for himself a body in the womb of a maiden.  And her name is twice seventy-six.[38]  He, demolishing the lordships and every holy object of your reverence,[39] will transfer the reward of all glory to the heights of his all-blessed wisdom."

Fr. 3.2
[Aphroditianus' Story][40]

[p. 11]

19. Christ was known to Persia[41] from the beginning.  For nothing escapes the learned jurists of that country, who investigate all things with the utmost care. The facts, therefore, which are inscribed upon the golden tablets,[42] and laid up in the royal temples,[43] I shall announce—for it is from the temples there, and the priests connected with them,[44] that the name of Christ has first been heard of.  The temple of Hera, surpassing even the royal palace, which temple King Cyrus, who was knowledgeable in all piety, built, and erected golden and silver statues of the gods in it, and adorned it[45] with precious stones—not to digress with a detailed description of that ornamentation… 

Now about that time (as the inscribed tablets testify), the king having entered the temple, with the view of getting a dream-interpretation, was addressed by the priest Prupippus[46] thus:  "I congratulate you,[47] master:  Hera has conceived." 

And the king, smiling, said to him, "Has she who is dead conceived?" 

And he said, "Yes, she who was dead has come to life again, and begets life."  [p. 12]

20. And the king said,  "What is this?  Explain it to me." 

And he replied, "In truth, master, you have come here at just the right time. For over the whole night the images, both the males and the females, continuously danced, saying to each other, 'Come, let us congratulate[48] Hera.'  And they said to me, 'Prophet, come forward; congratulate Hera, for she has been loved.'  And I said, 'Who was able to be loved[49]—she who does not exist?'  They reply, 'She has come to life again, and is no longer called Hera, but Urania.[50]  For the mighty Helios has loved her.' Then the females say to the males, disparaging the matter, 'Pege[51] is she who was loved; for it was not Hera, was it? She espoused a carpenter.'  And the males say, 'She has rightly been called Pege, we admit.  But her name is Myria;[52] for she bears in her womb, as in the sea, a vessel conveying a myriad.  And if she is also [called] Pege, let it be understood thus:  This stream of water sends forth a perennial stream of spirit; it contains but a single fish, taken with the hook of divinity, and with its own flesh sustaining the whole world, while it dwells [there] as though in the sea. You have well said,  "She has a carpenter"[53]—but not a carpenter whom she bears from a marriage-bed.[54]  For this carpenter who is born, the child of the chief carpenter, framed by his most sagacious skill the triple-constructed celestial roof,[55] and established by his word this dwelling with its triple habitations.'[56]  Thus, then, the statues continued to dispute with each other concerning Hera and Pege, and [at length] with one voice they said:  'When the day is brought to completion, we all, male and female, [p. 13] shall know the matter clearly.'  Now, therefore, master, tarry for the rest of the day.  For the matter shall certainly receive full clarity.  For that which has emerged is no common affair."[57]

21. And when the king remained there and was watching the statues, the harpers of their own accord began to strike their harps, and the Muses began to sing; and all the creatures that were within [the temple], whether quadrupeds or birds (made of silver and gold), were uttering their own characteristic voices.  And as the king shuddered, and was filled with great fear—he was about to withdraw, for he could not endure the spontaneous tumult—the priest said to him, "Remain, O King, for the full revelation is at hand which the God of gods has chosen to make plain to us."

22. And when these things had been said, the roof was opened, and a bright star descended and stood above the pillar[58] of Pege, and a voice was heard to this effect:  "Mistress Pege, the great Sun[59] has sent me to make the announcement to you, and at the same time to serve you in your giving birth—as he produces blameless offspring with you, who are becoming mother of the first of all ranks [of being], bride of the single divinity with three names. And the child born without seed is called the Beginning and the End:  the beginning of salvation, and the end of destruction."

When this voice had spoken, all the statues fell upon their faces, with Pege alone still standing, on whom also a royal diadem was found to have been fastened, having on its upper side a star set with precious stones of carbuncle and emerald.  And up above [i.e., in the sky], the star stood still.[60]

23. And the king forthwith gave orders[61] to bring in all the wise interpreters of signs, as many as were under his dominion. And when the heralds hurried them along with their trumpets, they all assembled in the temple. 

And when they saw the star [p. 14] above Pege, and the diadem with the starry stone, and the statues lying on the floor, they said:  "O king, a divinely inspired and royal root has risen, bearing the stamp of a heavenly and earthly king.  For Pege is the daughter of Karia the Bethlehemite,[62] and the diadem is a kingly mark, and the star is a celestial announcement of marvels on the earth. Out of Judah has arisen a kingdom which shall destroy all the memorials of the Jews.[63]  And the prostration of the gods upon the floor anticipated the end of their honor.  For he who comes, being of more ancient dignity, shall shake those who are new in it [i.e., dignity]. Now therefore, O king, send to Jerusalem.  For you will find the Son of the Omnipotent God being carried in bodily form in the bodily arms of a woman." 

And the star remained above Pege, who has been named Urania, until the magi went forth, and then it went with them.

24. And then, in the depth of evening, Dionysus appeared in the temple, unaccompanied by the satyrs, and said to the statues:  "Pege is no longer one of us, but stands far above us, since she gives birth to a human being who was conceived by divine Fortune.   O priest Prupippus!  What are you doing sitting here? An action, indicated in writing, has proceeded against us, and we are going to be convicted [p. 15] as false by a person in action.  The apparitions we produced, we produced; and that which we ruled, we ruled.[64] No longer do we give oracular responses.  Removed from us is our honour. We have become without honor and glory.  There is one, one alone, out of all, who has received again his proper honour."

25. They said:  "Do not be disturbed.[65]  No longer do the Persians exact tribute of earth and air.  For he who established these things is at hand, and he brings tribute of actions to him who sent him—he who renews the ancient image, and puts image together with image, and brings the unlike to likeness.[66]  Heaven rejoices with earth, and earth itself boasts at receiving heaven's boast.[67]  Things which have not happened above, have happened below.  He whom the order of the blessed has not seen, is viewed by the [order of] the miserable.  Flame threatens those; dew is present for these.  It [was] the good fortune of Karia to give birth to Pege in Bethlehem, and it [is] Pege's grace to become heaven-desired and to conceive grace of grace.[68] Judaea has bloomed, and our affairs are withering immediately.[69]  To Gentiles and foreigners, salvation has come; to the wretched, relief is provided in abundance.  Rightly do the women dance, and say, 'Lady Pege, Stream-bearer, you who have become mother of the heavenly light-giver, you cloud that brings the world dew after heat, remember your servants, dear mistress.'"[70]

26. The king then, without delay, sent the magi under his dominion[71] with gifts, with the star showing them the way.  And when they returned, they narrated everything to the men of that time—those very things which were also written on leaves of gold, to the following effect:

 

27. For when we came to Jerusalem, the sign, together with our arrival, [p. 16] disturbed everyone.  They say, "What is this?  Wise men of the Persians are here, and along with them an appearance of a star?"  And the foremost of the Jews asked us what was going to happen, and the reason for our coming.  And we said:  "He whom you call 'Messiah' has been born." And they were confounded, and dared not oppose us.  But they, for their part, said to us, "Justice of Heaven!  Tell us what you know."  And we said to them:  "You have the disease of unbelief; and neither without an oath nor with an oath do you believe, but you follow your own ill-advised intentions.  For the Christ, the child of the Most High, has been born, putting an end to of your law and synagogues.  And it is for this reason that, struck as it were by a most excellent oracle[72] as with a dart, you do not hear with pleasure this name which has come up against you suddenly."  And they then, taking counsel together, urged us to accept their gifts, and tell no one such a thing [as the news] from this land [of theirs], lest a revolt rise against us.[73]  But we said:  "We have brought gifts in his honor, with the view of proclaiming those mighty things which have happened in our country on occasion of his birth—and you bid us take your gifts, and conceal the things which have been made known to us by celestial divinity, and neglect the commandments of our own king?  Or do you not know what an experience of the Assyrians you once received?"  And they became afraid, and after beseeching us repeatedly, they sent us away.

When the one who was ruling over Judaea sent for us [p. 17] and had some converse with us, and asked us questions, we said to him [things] at which he was thoroughly disturbed.[74]  We departed from him, without giving any greater heed to him than to any worthless person.

28. And we came to that place to which we had been sent, and saw the one who had given birth and the one who had been born, the star indicating to us the lordly babe.  And we said to the mother:  "What are you called, O renowned mother?"  And she says:  "Mary, masters."  And we said to her:  "Where do you come from?"  And she said:  "From this district—[the district] of the Bethlehemites."   "Have you not taken a husband?"  She says:  "I have only been betrothed, with only pre-nuptial arrangements having been concluded; but my thoughts are divided.  For I had no wish at all to come to this [state of affairs].  But while I was giving very little concern to it, at the dawn of a certain Sabbath—at the rising of the sun—an angel straightway appeared to me bringing me the good news of offspring, all of a sudden.  And I was disturbed, and cried out, 'Let it not be so to me, Lord, for I do not have a husband.'  And he persuaded me to believe, that it was by the will of God that I would have the son."  And we said to her:  "Mother of mothers, all the gods of the Persians have called you blessed:  Your grounds for boasting are great, for you have transcended all women of renown, and you have become manifestly more queenly than all queens."

29. The child, moreover, was seated on the ground, being, as she said, nearly two years old, and having in part the likeness of the one who bore him.  For she was small in stature even when holding her head up, and had a delicate body; and she was the color of wheat; and she had her hair bound up with a simple, very beautiful hair-style.  And as we had along with [p. 18] us a servant quite skilled in painting, we brought back with us to our country a likeness of them both; and it was placed in the temple in which the oracle was given,[75] with the following inscription:  "In the heaven-sent[76] temple, the power of Persia dedicated this to Zeus Helios, the great God, King Jesus."

And taking the child up, and bearing him in our arms, each of us in turn, we saluted him and worshipped him, and presented to him gold,[77] addressing Him thus:  "[We give] to you what is your own; we lavish you [with gifts], O powerful one in heaven.  Things unordered would be ordered in no way other than by your presence.  In no other way could things above be brought into conjunction with things below, but by your descent.  Service is not carried out to such a degree, if only a servant is sent, as when the [master] himself is present; neither [can so much be achieved] when the king sends only his satraps to war, as when he is there himself.  It was quite fitting for your methods, for you to deal in this manner with the rebels."[78]

And the child smiled and leaped at our fawning and our words. And when we had bidden the mother farewell, and when she had shown us honor, and we had glorified her as was necessary, we went to the place in which we lodged.

30. And when evening came, there appeared to us someone terrifying and awesome,[79] saying:  "Get away quickly, lest you fall prey to a plot."  And we, in fear, said:  "And who is it that is plotting against so august [p. 19] an embassy, O general of God?"  And he replied:  "Herod—but get up immediately and depart in safety and peace."  And we speedily mounted our strong steeds and departed from there in all earnestness; and we reported all that we had seen in Jerusalem. 

Behold, then, such great things have we told you regarding Christ; and we know that Christ has become our Savior.[80] 

But you, by your ways, are opposed to him, slandering his pain and suffering all the time.  For speaking unworthy things, and doing still more unworthy things, are a mark of hatred.[81]

[p. 45]

84. …And the same presbyter [i.e., Philip] recounted[82] that the day on which the star appeared in the temple—that same day, every year, until the Lord was taken up [into heaven], all the statues would produce[83] their characteristic utterance, and so that entire city there was transfixed, beholding the great marvels and the yearly appearance of the star.

Fr. 3.3
[Prophecies of "Learned Greeks"—Ophianus, Elibatus, Trachelaphius]

[p. 31]

52. "Why should I unfold[84] the Hebrews' prophecies and not our own?  Ophianus [p. 32] Pertillaeus[85] spoke in his 'Laws' as follows:  'Oh my!  How the Caspian Gate has been adorned—it has received a mountain stone, which hands did not hew out, but rather grace discovered, and narrowed the whole Gate all around by means of it.  Not only did it strengthen it, but it also opened it when it had been closed—the stone having become way and door.  The door leads to an august door, and the way draws one to a pure way, as all those who see it shout:  "Great is the dominion of the gods, whose will for action is more easily realized."'[86]  And Elibatus, who wrote down innumerable laws, when speaking On Eucles towards the end,[87] says, 'A frightful cloud settled upon a mountain and cast a single stone upon the earth, and strengthened all its foundations.  And how shall a single stone prevail over the entire [earth]?  Did not one God alone create the universe?'  And Trachelaphius, speaking Against the Falsely-Named, demonstrates his mastery also in the following solid reasoning:[88]  'Who deceived those who trust in Dionysus so as to say about him that he, being forever without a beginning, was born from an unravished virgin?  They clothe him with another's dignity.  For the one without a beginning, being[89] of the substance that is forever without beginning, takes hold of mortal substance without receiving it as a violation.  For that which he formed, he shall not consider an violation, when he takes it up.  There, a virgin—[p. 33] unsullied in her body and having no falsehood in her tongue—supplies virginal flesh; [this process is the] activation of all grace dwelling within [her].[90]  I marvel at the flux-bound taking hold of the flux-free—knowing this:  that some have been deified on account of their promulgation of laws; others, because of their nobility of life and their conspicuous purity in other respects, because of which it is fitting to honor them; but to go after heavenly honors is beyond all audacity and above all blasphemy.'"

Fr. 3.4
[Virtuous Pagans]

[p. 19]

32. …"There have been Christians [p. 20] indeed, but there have also been pagans,[91] who practiced the utmost virtue.  King Cyrus had very attractive female bodyguards[92] where he slept:  he was sharpening his desire, but also correcting it by such trials.  He used to say that all glory was worthy of the heavenly power alone.  He loved his fellow man so much that there was no poor man or even the least captive in Persian territory, because of his constant bestowing of benefits upon everyone.  And Concencrates,[93] who was truly a philosopher, possessed one single rough cloak—he lived near the peak of Masgabala, being terribly worn out by the snow and cold; and the wise Neoctetius said to him:  'You will perish, wise man, and die because of the heat and cold.'  And he said:  'If I die to those here [on earth], I shall live by my future hope.'  He asked:  'What [hope] is that?'  And the other said, 'Truly, I am directing my attention to a certain other life, and offering myself myself to it.  For the Providence of God will not disregard those who have labored during the day:  in the evening it will deem them worthy of reward and rest.  Every day I see the heavens and the things of earth that seem good diminishing and decaying.  And this takes place because of our "exasperations,"[94] which show beforehand that everything here below perishes.  But those who have acquired the virtues above do not die, as they are spoken about and answered with eternal remembrance by them.'  This man only ate fruit, and drank a little water once a day, not wishing to know anything else [p. 21] of what belongs to the world, [but] practicing death every day.  And this is sufficient.  And Dichorianus, who published so many things about God, and who used to say that he was nourished by these things, and not by those which harm the body—after preserving impassibility of body and mind for 90 years, while he was dying said:  'Glory to you, righteous Justice, who changed my [mind] regarding what was honorable.'  And there are many others of whom the book-lovers know—both Christians and true philosophers.  But let us leave off for today, and tomorrow we [will] inquire into the rest.  If it is desired by the will of heaven that we come this far, we [will] achieve resolution of further questions in turn."

Fr. 3.5
[The Shepherdess and Coatus]

[p. 42]

80. …"…I once learned of a woman, a shepherdess, in the settlement of the Arigbanes.  One Coatus, son of Coatus, fell in love with her and sent her gifts, so that she would come to an agreement with him.  But she, seeing the gifts, laughed and said to the messenger, pointing to her sheep:  'Behold my gifts and my children, from which I am nourished by divine grace.'  And he came away to her and with splendid promises he urged her to accept him.  She said to him:  'Shall I defile the undefiled cloak which grace has given to me?'  Coatus said:  'Miserable girl, this law has been established from above for the propagation of the race.'  The shepherdess:  'A law has been established for me not to acquire more than I have.'  After much pleading to no effect, he ordered that she be starved to death.  And so, on the third day, when she was about to expire, she uttered cheerful words as follows:  'O heavenly Father of your genuine children, O unsullied bridegroom of those who are in the bloom of beauty, I come to you, thrice-desired Lord, giving back to you without complaint that which you gave to me—virginity, forgiveness of sins, an existence without property, a truthful tongue, a heart unacquainted with wickedness—ever intent on the hope that is to come, which I have honored and whose joys I am now by all means going to meet.'  And thus she expired.  [p. 43] His father, learning this, ordered that he be hung head-downwards on a tall post in the middle of the city, so as to be eaten by birds."


Fr. 4.1 - 4.7
[Expansions of Eusebius' HE / Fragments of Papias, Hegesippus, Pierius]
[Attribution questionable]

[Found interspersed with extracts from Eusebius in Cod. Barocc. 142, fol. 212r-216r, i.e., preceding in this ms. the material classified by Heyden as Fr. 6 and Fr. 2; Cod. Oxon. misc. 61 (Auct. E.4.18), fol. 136r-143r (unedited); nos. 3-6 also in Cod. Athous Vatopedi 286 fol. 91r-218r. — Greek text edited by C. de Boor, "Neue Fragmente des Papias, Hegesippus und Pierius in bisher unbekannten Excerpten aus der Kirchengeschichte des Philippus Sidetes," TU 5.2 (1888), pp. 169-71. — De Boor (pp. 173-4) argued that these are fragments of Philip of Side, and that the use and expansion of Eusebius observable in them is consistent with what we know of his method; but his argument for this is partly tied to his attribution of the material labeled by Heyden as Fr. 6, now more convincingly attributed to Gelasius of Caesarea.  Pouderon, "Le témoignage," pp. 10-11, 62-63, and Hansen, Theodoros Anagnostes, pp. xxxvii-xxxviii, point out that at the very least De Boor's case for these fragments remains unproved.  Heyden, p. 224, however, revives De Boor's appeal to the reference to John Chrysostom in no. 6 as one remaining point in favor of Philip of Side's authorship; and as another, notes the fact that Gelasius of Caesarea is not otherwise attested as providing information on the pre-Constantinian period, and thus any attempt to attribute this material to him would be problematic. — In the translations below, the italicized material is directly from Eusebius, whether verbatim or paraphrased; the normal text represents the additions made by our author to Eusebius' history.]

Fr. 4.1

Africanus, in a "Letter to Aristides," has written the best treatment concerning the apparent discrepancy in the genealogy, as regards the family lines,[95] in the evangelists Matthew and Luke.[96]  And Africanus was from the village of Emmaus in Palestine, to which Cleopas and company travelled,[97] and which later, through Africanus' embassy, received the status of a city and was renamed Nicopolis.[98]

Fr. 4.2

Philip, the one who baptized Candace, the Ethiopian,[99] was not an apostle, but one of the seven servers / deacons who had been appointed to serve alongside Stephen, the first martyr.  And he says that Candace was the first[100] of the Gentiles to be baptized.[101]  Philip [means] "mouth of torches";[102] Herodias [means] "deceived";[103] Herod [means] "glory of skin"[104]—according to Pierius.[105]

Fr. 4.3

Domitian, the son of Vespasian, having demonstrated many wicked [qualities / acts] to the Romans who were governmental officials, was the second to conduct a persecution against the Christians, surpassing Nero's savagery.  During this, he also banished the Apostle and Evangelist John to Patmos.  But after meeting the sons of Jude (the Lord's brother), and coming to know the men's virtue, he called a halt to the persecution against us.[106]  And Hegesippus also makes reference to their names, and says that the one was called Zôkêr, and the other James.[107]  And he also gives other indispensable information.

Fr. 4.4

The majority of the ancient [Christian writers] do not accept the Epistle of John, since they consider it to belong to some other John.  But the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" and the [Gospel] said to be "of Peter" and [the one said to be] "of Thomas" they completely rejected, saying that these are the writings of heretics.[108]  And there are other false Gospels as well, the [Gospel] "according to the Egyptians," and [the one] "according to the Twelve," and [the one] "according to Basilides."[109]

Fr. 4.5

Clement, in the third book of the Stromata, by way of combating those who disallow marriage, asserts that Peter and Paul and Philip had wives.  And in the seventh Stroma he says that Peter's wife was even made perfect through martyrdom.[110]  And Pierius too, in his first discourse[111] of those On the Pascha, asserts strongly that Paul had a wife and dedicated her to God for the sake of[112] the Church, renouncing his association with her.

Fr. 4.6

Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, who was a hearer of John the Theologian, and a companion of Polycarp, wrote five books of the Lord's logia.[113]  In these, he enumerated the Apostles after Peter and John, Philip and Thomas and Matthew, and recorded Aristion and a second John—whom he called a "presbyter"—as disciples of the Lord;[114] and thus, some think that the two Epistles, the short and general ones, which are in circulation under the name "John," belong to this John, because the ancient [Christian writers] only accepted the first [Epistle of John as genuine].  And some erroneously considered the Apocalypse to belong to this [John] as well; and Papias is also mistaken regarding the Millenium—as is Irenaeus, because of him.[115]  Papias in the second book says that John the Theologian and James his brother were killed by the Jews.  The aforementioned Papias related, as something he had heard from the daughters of Philip, that Barsabas, who was also called Justus, when he was being put to the test by the unbelievers, drank a viper's poison in the name of Christ and was preserved unhurt.[116]  He also relates other marvellous stories, in particular the one about Menahem's mother, who was raised from the dead.[117]  Concerning those who were raised from the dead by Christ, [he relates] that they lived until Hadrian.  And Chrysostom, in the 1st Homily of the second section on the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, says that both those who were raised from the dead at the time of the cross [i.e., the crucifixion of Jesus] and those [who were raised from the dead] before them—all died.[118]

Fr. 4.7

Pierius, a presbyter of Alexandria,[119] flourished at this time, and in Pontus, Meletius the bishop—men who were amazing with respect to their learning.[120]  And Pierius, in his first discourse … renouncing his association with her.[121]  And I also read quite a number of his other indispensable works and especially the one Concerning the Mother of God and the one On the beginning of Hosea.  And Theodorus, a certain court-pleader in Alexandria, writing in epic verse, says in his 13th book that Pierius and Isidorus his brother suffered martyrdom[122] and have a very large shrine in Alexandria.  And in his discourse On the Life of the Holy Pamphilus, Pierius himself provided very much help in the divine Scripture.


Fr. 5.1 - 5.7
[Constantine and the Council of Nicaea]
[Attribution questionable]

Fr. 5.1
[The Beginning of Constantine's Reign:  Relations with Barbarian Tribes]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.4.2-5 [p. 7, lines 7-28 Hansen][123]

And first he determined to call back to himself those cities that were rebelling against Roman overlordship—some by words, others by force of arms, and others by good treatment and kindness.  For he decreed a lighter tax-burden for them, and gave them equal rights of commerce; he put an end to their rebelliousness and madness wisely, more by calmness than by frightening them, since he knew that the peoples of the Sauri[124] and the Frangi[125] and the Germani were lovers of novelty and had a strong inclination toward rebellion against their rulers, and often treated their own thoughts as law.  He also subdued the Spani and the Brettani and the islands in that area, and the remaining tribes and all those who are witnesses of the setting of the sun—who, they say, know whether it is really submerged in the Ocean or goes around the water and returns back to us by another route.  And he took the barbarian tribes there by force of arms, making use of a side-task to further his [primary] task.  For, subduing some, making others subject to tribute, and making others friends instead of opponents and intimates instead of ancient enemies, he brought them in as allies, not causing distress or laying siege to anyone, and being eager for the salvation of others.  For where God acts as one's ally, everything is rightly guided and he raises up on high the human reason.  With this sort of God-loving thought, Constantine, most faithful in all things, crossed to the right-hand side of the Rhine, passed many mountains, many unnamed rivers, with a small army, conquered many barbarian peoples, brought over to his side ten tribes of Gauls and Frangi and Spani, and finally brought his army to the mountains of Italy.

Fr. 5.2
 [Discussion of the Plausibility of the Sign that Appeared to Constantine]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.5.2-7 [p. 8, line 15 - p. 9, line 20 Hansen]

This story seems to the unbelievers to be a myth and a fiction composed to flatter our opinions, but to those who have become accustomed to believe the truth, the proof of the event is manifest.  For God, the "painter" of this omen, demonstrated afterwards through the outcome that the gracious gift of the writing [in the sky] was truthful.  But if I am not yet persuading [you about] what I write (for I am transcribing histories of earlier [writers], because of my task [mentioned] a little earlier of collecting the useful events of that man's life), still you should not fail to believe in the subsequent events—that which, in our own generation, those who stood in battle with Constantius the son of Constantine saw with their own eyes and [thus] cured ancient unbelief with more recent sights.  If those who dispute these things are Hebrews, the stories that are contained in their books and are believed are much more unbelievable than these—marching in the sea, water forming a wall, walking in the water, and God speaking in a bush, a flame giving laws, the resounding of a trumpet in the desert without an actual instrument, angels ranged together for battle and the "chief generals of the Lord's forces"[126] fighting on behalf of the army, and "stones of hail"[127] and missiles of fire being cast instead of the usual spears—and yet, all of us who are right-minded give assent [to these stories] without [skeptical] examination.  For nothing is impossible when God wills it.  If, on the other hand, those who do not accept this marvel are Greeks, I can cite many things which I do not wish to speak about—how many prophecies the oracle-mongers proclaimed for Alexander, when he was preparing to cross over for the battle at the Granicus and the contest with Darius (and yet their fictions do not have manifest proofs); and how a "daimonion"gave prior indication to Socrates the philosopher regarding the outcome of things that should not be done; and the things written about Pythagoras of Samos by that man's disciples.  I will leave unmentioned the fictions of the poets, and how they related that some of the famous [heroes] in them[128] even fought side by side with some of those who were considered gods by them,[129] so that no one will think that I am comparing mythical events with true events, things that were never done with things that were.  For the grace of Christ, ever since it bloomed among men, has been, is, and will continue to be a medicinal remedy and a source of healing, <as it has appeared> in heaven and on earth and in the sea, in plants and trees, and in clothes—those who have experienced it know this, and I will set forth [such occurrences] at the appropriate time as my history proceeds.

Fr. 5.3
[Constantine and Crispus against Licinius]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 1.11.19-21 [p. 18, line 18 - p. 19, line 2] and 1.12.1 [p. 21, lines 1-9 Hansen]

1.11

(19) …But the others,[130] as many as agree with the true account of Eusebius Pamphili,[131] say that both the Father, Emperor Constantine, and the son, Emperor Crispus, dividing the army, rushed out against the impious tyrant—the son, Crispus, to the region of Asia, marching with the army that was with him, while the father, Constantine, in Europe, accomplished his journey with the bodyguards [i.e., the Praetorians] around him.  (20) But the God-hating one, full of all impiety and savagery, came from the East, arrogantly drawing up against them with as large an army as possible.  And arriving at Nicomedia, and recognizing and knowing that the soul of God-loving Constantine revered the priests of God, and that he held them in honor at all times, he paid off the bishop of Nicomedia, Eusebius, who had long since defected to his side in opposition to the pious Emperor Constantine.  [Licinius] thought that by using him and his associates he would destroy Constantine—who was hedged around by the invincible weapons of God.  (21) The extraordinary[132] Eusebius made a compact with him, being prevailed upon by promises from Licinius, his equal in impiety…[133]

(32)…But from here I shall move on to the events of the Ecclesiastical History that lie before us

1.12

(1) So, when Licinius rushed out from Nicomedia to Byzantium with the army that was with him, against the Emperor Constantine who was there at that time, and the contingents of soldiers on the one side were surrounding the Christ-bearing Emperor, then Licinius—that sinner—seeing this, and contemplating the fact that he was bereft of his own armies, which had deserted to the protection of the stronger side, at first was anxious to hide in Chrysopolis[134] in Bithynia (this is the sea-port of Chalcedon)—but since he could not do this, and saw that he was now lying face-down under the feet of the Emperor Constantine, he gave himself up…

Fr. 5.4
[Succession of Bishops in Alexandria—and Arius]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.1.13f. [p. 23, line 28 - p. 24, line 9 Hansen][135]

2.1

(12) So, when the Church of Christ our Savior throughout the world was enjoying deep peace, this [peace] having been obtained for it by God, the universal King, through his servant Constantine and his children, (13) after the death of the divine Peter, bishop of the Alexandrian Church, who had been made perfect by the very act of martyrdom and had bound his brow with the incorruptible crown of the contest, the Church there was bereft [of a leader] for one year.  And after this year, the throne of that same holy martyr Peter was allotted to Achillas, (14) a man who was strong, noble, holy-minded, and pre-eminent with very great piety and wisdom, as the ancient unerring writings describe; he, after frequent urging, received Arius and made him a deacon.  (15) But after this man [i.e., Achillas] had lived on only five months, the authority of high-priest[136] over the Church of Alexandria was received by Alexander, a man who was honored in every respect by both the clergy and laity of the church; small in stature, generous, well-spoken, capable, loving God, loving his fellow man, loving the poor, good and gentle to all as much as anyone ever has been.  He himself too installed Arius into a position—that of presbyter, nearest to himself…

Fr. 5.5
[Constantine Speaks at the Council of Nicaea][137]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.7 [p. 34, line 17 - p. 42, line 9 Hansen]

2.6

(2) To them,[138] the most praiseworthy Emperor directed a discourse of moral exhortation and teaching, for praise and glorification and thanksgiving to the God of all, who had granted him such favors; he spoke somewhat as follows:[139]

 

2.7

(1) Many most manifest paths toward well-doing have been laid out for the human race by the nurturing righteousness of Almighty God, not least that one which is quite conspicuous, most spectacular—that one which he prepared for us all, more grandly than any marvel, in the main point[140] of the most holy law of the universal Church:  the Lord's prayer-house of Faith.[141]  (2) We see that the peak of this [building] has gone up all the way to the sparkling stars, while we recognize that its foundations—even as the work is still only beginning—are so deeply and faithfully rooted, by God's will, that the whole inhabited world perceives it.  (3) Now then, from the aforementioned peak that completely overtops all others, through to the end of the exit, there is seen a smooth and level course, endowed with the brilliance of light.  Its façade, adorned with a star-shaped seal, is supported by columns, twelve in number, brighter than snow, immoveable in their placement in Faith—eternally, by the power of our Savior's divinity.  (4) When we also receive the righteous faith that comes from the soul, the Architect of this amazing work brings home to our minds the awesomeness of his everlasting law.  Whoever wishes approaches the gates of this [structure], but in no way other than with the impulse of a holy and pious desire, with only the confidence of a pure mind.  (5) And the Savior's plan has added to this [building] a certain marvellous brightness of ornament.  What I mean is that on the inside, people's faith, honored over the entire course of the wall of the Lord's house with blooming garlands,[142] assembles immortality's fruit, brings the holy products of human life into the open and makes them manifest—and next, in turn, the heavenly glory on the outside, which is [also] garlanded, as the struggle is constantly arising, or rather constantly rising,[143] sketches out the prizes; and the depictions [of these] adorn the full completion of this same work with the appropriate praise.  (6) And this same house of the Lord is protected by only two guards; divine fear[144] on the one hand comes into the thoughts of some, as an inducement to self-control, and on the other hand for those who are right-minded their praise directed toward God is ever-present, as a prize for understanding.  For as these two [guards] are placed at the front doors of the most holy place, righteousness is received by wide-open gates, and this [righteousness] having been given a home within, it remains there in purity; but unrighteousness is not allowed to approach the gates, but is shut out from this place and banished.

(7) O brothers most honored, and worthy of all praise, these facts so clear have led me into the brightness of the eternal and immortal light, so that I will not stand far away and be rendered out of harmony with the truth by any wavering faith.  (8) But what shall I proclaim first?  The pattern of blessedness,[145] which has been compressed and hidden within my breast?  Or the divine benefits in my regard <that have been bestowed> by Almighty God?  Of these deeds, which are numerous, it would seem sufficient for now to say that this same God of ours, the Father of all, quite rightly made my mediocrity[146] subject to himself.  Believe me, most honored brothers, and apply an unprejudiced faith to what I say; even if my mind, having been satiated with God's favors, seems very much to be blessed,[147] nevertheless, as the proof of the truth shows, neither voice nor tongue are fully able to carry out the mind's commands—and rightly so.  (10) For since the greatness of his benefits is without measure, although the mind, which is an exalted thing, possesses the lower "places"—the body—the path of the tongue, being confined in a truly narrow place, being more or less reprehensible,[148] remains altogether silent.  For which of us is so ready for reasoning that he would utter such a self-confident speech, whereby he would presume to pronounce glorious praises easily, and worthy praises perfectly, to the all-powerful God and creator of all the most beautiful things? (11) If someone were to think only about the magnificence of the one who ordained the law of his birth, he would consider with full knowledge that nothing can be found which would be able to be spoken as something worthy of God.  (12) Then what should the devotion of my mediocrity speak about, except that which the divine Word of truth makes manifest?  The greatest act of worship must consider wisely whether it will be able to reach his greatness in the very things that are spoken about him, whether some error will not cause him to stumble.  (13) And would that a liberal abundance of speaking would suffice for me, your fellow servant, to render him those praises (which are worthy of proclamation) that our divine Savior, the guardian of all things, made known by the calm assent of his divinity, in the "prologue" of his presence here, when for the sake of our benefit he deigned to receive the dwelling-place of a holy body from a virgin, thus displaying the proof of his own compassion.

(14) Where, then, shall I begin?  With his teaching and his dignity?  Or rather, with the divine teachings of which he himself appeared as sole teacher on his own account, with no one teaching him?  Or rather, with how so many people revived through his wise provision,[149] as many as cannot be encompassed by a number, with a small amount of nourishment and the tiniest loaves of bread and only two fish?  By his divine provision he also caused resurrection, using a certain short staff,[150] after the death of Lazarus, and brought him back again into the brightness of the light.  (16) But how could I speak of his holy divinity, by virtue of which, when he saw that a certain woman was <suffering from> a hidden <illness>, deeming her worthy of simple contact with himself, he rendered her well again, and free from all disease?  (17) And who could worthily speak about his immortal deed, by which a certain man who had been worn out by a major chronic wasting disease, lying there with all his limbs hanging loose and splayed out, was suddenly strengthened by divine healing and put upon his shoulders the very pallet on which he had lain; and, pouring forth praise and thanksgiving, he ran through the country and local territory?  (18) Or rather, his divine and steady walking, when he stepped upon and trod down the savage sea on foot, and stilled the fluidity of the deepest sea with his divine feet, and made his way in the midst of the waves, bounded by no measure of depth, as though he were on dry land?  (19) Or rather, his gentle patience, by which he, being conqueror in all things, tamed the stubbornness of the foolish people and, once it was tamed, removed it far from them and subjected their savagery to [his] law?  (20) Or rather, the clearest, the greatest [attributes] of his divinity, by which we live, in which we are well-pleased, we who not only look forward to the hope of the coming blessedness, but in some way as it were already possess it?  (21) What more do I dare to say, even with my exiguous cultivation of discourse, except this—what the purity of my devoted soul ought to understand:  What the omnipotent God, who dwells in heaven, is like in relation to the whole human race, and especially and preeminently in relation to righteousness, which is most beatiful and greater than any praise—considering that he deigned <to receive> a body—the holiest, as befitted his divine spirit—and to dwell in it, and thus to work salvation for [all] human bodies. 

(22) Therefore, since concerning the all-powerful order of God, so entirely holy and salvific, the measureless madness of the enemies,[151] thrown into confusion as though by some cloud, does not hesitate to offer an interpretation, perverse and destructive, I shall attempt to set forth [my views] briefly, as far as the faith and devotion of my soul have abundant resources for speaking.  (23) For indeed, the malice of these men, <just like that> of the pagans, puts on display such a kind of shamelessness that they are not afraid to say, with an impious mouth, that the all-powerful God did not do, did not wish to do, all that is revealed in the divine Law.  (24) O, such impious speech, that calls down on itself and deserves every extreme punishment:  It desires, truly insanely and rashly, to make the glory of this divine benefaction—a glory that cannot be comprehended by any human being—disappear.  (25) For what is more worthy of God than purity?  This has come forth from most holy association with the source of righteousness, passed like a flood through the whole circumference of the world, and put the powers of the most holy virtues on display for the human race.  But they, considering these virtues at first to be hostile to themselves, suffered <the fate> of the Assyrians—and with these leading the way as a bad example, the other nations were persuaded to go along with them.  (26) In these things, just as we perceive it in our own experience, we see that the divine compassion of God our Savior has been at work, when the same [Savior] day by day and year by year commanded many of them, who were being plagued by the sting of fiery madness, to rise to the patient endurance of the Savior's healing.  And yet not even so is the greatness of such generosity able to come with favor in the eyes of the others, <because of> human ignorance of the fact that the divine lordship is able to raise up every people, and to make it secure once it has been raised to a height, <and> likewise, to demolish and destroy.  (27) But things would have turned out more adversely for human affairs, if God, who is all-powerful, had <not> given himself the task of doing everything, by the quiet nod of his own divinity.  For human madness would have become even more long-lived, and human stubbornness, which knows no bounds, would have destroyed all souls, nor would the other most numerous things,[152] which in the disorder of the world still perform their orderly duties, have been able to appear—(28) rather, all things would have quickly perished, together with [human] ignorance of God; and the unrighteousness of malice and jealousy would have remained, not as in a few people, but rather, no one would have been found opposed to jealousy, with the [various] religions diffused largely and broadly into the souls of men to such an extent that through the baseness of these men, the light of this brightness of ours would have been obscured for them, and they would always have been deprived of it. (29) Therefore, no word that has been spoken will be able to drag my faith out of my soul; for, when nothing base stands in the way, it is accompanied by a perfect power, the living Word of truth, which is alone all-powerful, the guardian of all things and protector of our salvation.  Thus he [i.e., God] seems, in a certain manner, lavishly to bestow intimacy with his most holy Word, to preserve <….>[153] of the one who frees [us], and to provide for us the brightness of the light.  (30) So then, for what reason do the people of all the nations even now fail to discern the heavenly light, despise the most glorious Holy One, and go after earthly things,[154] which have no substantial truth, no brilliance of pure brightness, no authority of celestial divinity?  (31) What unworthy behavior!  Even to this day, not at all falling short in impiety, and not looking toward their duty, they fail to see that they are falling down because of their wretched error; they do not cease to defile the brightness with these filthy works of the world—that is to say, by setting up wood and stone and bronze and silver and gold and these sorts of earthly <materials> for worship, and promising themselves a hope of life from these, building temples for them with striking ornaments, and in this way increasing and adding to their worship because of the fact that the greatness of the buildings (constructed by them!) produces a sense of wonder worthy of their own gaze.  (32) So then, when they are seen to do this, it is clearly discerned—even if for the most part they themselves in their arrogance do not perceive or see it—that they are caught openly boasting over their own works.  Thus, we do not see how great and how vast is God, the ruler of all, who is also master and judge of all, whom some [of us] unwittingly[155] <outrage> with their very confidence in their own virtue (as they see it).  (33) For it was by virtue of his arrangements that the form of our bodies received its due shape.  The same [God] bound together the connections of all our limbs with the strongest sinews, so that in every action we pursue we might keep the vigor of our united parts[156] without tiring.  Then, when this had been brought to completion by his saving arrangement, he also breathed spirit into us, so that all these [physical parts] would be able to move and flourish, and granted vision to our eyes, set them in our head for our understanding, and within this place [i.e., the head] he enclosed the reasoning process of all our thinking.  (34) For this reason, if any right-minded person were to examine the logic of these arrangements, and leave off the rest—which cannot be comprehended either with words or numbers—he would be able, with a little reflection, to see and to understand the eternal and salvific authority of the immortal God.  And a man will not be able to trap that one [i.e., God] with the snares of any kind of error, when it is possible for him to see that everything that has come to be is [as it is] by the power of God, as he himself has wished all these things to be. (35) But so that we may be able to see that a certain unlawful way of life in the world brought about people's ignorance of God, the reasoning process of sin having first been produced in the wretched souls of those stupid people because of the Enemy's deception, we can receive clear proof concerning this from the divine law.  (36) For ever since that time, when the divine and holy command was not kept with the appropriate diligence by those two people who had been formed in the beginning, after that, the flower of this name[157] was born.  And it became continual and increased still further, from the time when the aforementioned two were cast out by God's will.  (37) And the physical world itself was brought along with human stupidity to such a point that he pronounced sentence against the Orient and the lands of the Occident.  And the very excess of the Opposite Power took possession of human thoughts and made them dim.  (38) Yet even in this situation, the untiring compassion of the all-powerful God is both holy and immortal.  For in all the days and years that have passed, God has been setting free from this burden—through me, his servant—numberless multitudes of people who had been enslaved; and he will bring them out into the perfect brilliance of the eternal light.  From these [facts], most beloved brethren, by virtue of a certain special providence and the glorious favors of our immortal God, I am confident that in future I shall be even more highly regarded for my very pure faith in him.

(39) Therefore, let this most holy gathering of your sanctity receive me, and do not suffer the most chaste Church and the the doors of the pure mother common to us all to be set in opposition to me.  Even if the reasoning power of my soul, while it very much even now is seeking the complete purity of the universal faith, does not think it right for this to be granted too easily, nevertheless it urges and reminds me—and it has displayed its own reverential brow as a seal of the most beautiful virtues; and it has begun to lay hold of the gates of immortality and to knock on them—so that you too will consider it right to grant me straightway the goodwill of your brotherhood, with a view only to the harmony and peace of the universal Church.  (40) For this is fitting with respect to God, harmonious with respect to the faith of the universal Church, and beneficial with respect to our common affairs,[158] so that [in the end] we may all together offer a response, worthy of the most highly honored peace that has been granted to us by God, to the one who has favored us with it.

(41)[159] For it would be truly terriblemost terrible!if, when our enemies have been destroyed and no one is still daring to resist, we attack each other and provide pleasure and laughter to those who are ill-disposed, and taking different sides in discussion of divine matters while also having the teaching of the all-holy Spirit in written formFor the Gospels and Apostolic books, and the utterances of the ancient prophets, clearly teach us what it is necessary to think concerning the divine.  Therefore, throwing off all belligerent strife, let us receive the resolution of our questions from the divinely inspired words [of Scripture]." 

Fr. 5.6
[Supporters of Arius at the Council of Nicaea]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.12.8-10 [p. 47, lines 5-19 Hansen][160]

(8) When these things were expressed by them—or rather, through them, by the Holy Spirit—those who endorsed Arius' impiety were wearing themselves out with murmuring (these were the circles of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea, whom I have already pointed out earlier), and yet they were looking with favor on the "hirelings" of Arius, certain philosophers who were indeed very good with words; Arius had hired them as supporters of his own wickedness, and arrived with them at that holy and ecumenical council.  (9) For there were present very many philosophers; and having put their hopes in them, as I have said just now, the enemies of the truth were reasonably caught, along with the one who actually taught them their blasphemy.  The Holy Scripture was fulfilled in him and in them, which says, "Cursed is everyone who has his hope in a mortal man, and whose heart has departed from the Lord."[161]  (10) For truly, the blasphemous heart of the fighter against God, Arius, and of those who shared in his impiety, departed from the Lord—they dared to say that the Son of God, the creator of the universe and the craftsman of both visible and invisible created natures, is something created and something made.

Fr. 5.7
[The Arian Philosopher and the Simple Old Man]

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.13 [p. 47, line 20 - p. 50, line 5 Hansen][162]

 

2.13

(1) A certain one of the hirelings of Arius, a philosopher, who was marveled at much more than all the others, contended much, indeed very much, on Arius' behalf with our bishops for very many days, with the result that there was a great lecture every day arising from their verbal encounters:  the crowd of those who were gathering would rush together, and the philosopherwould put forward the impious blasphemies of Arius against what was said by the holy council, saying about the Son that "there was a time when he was not," and that "he is a created being, made from nothing, and from a different substance[163] and existence[164] [than the Father]."  (2) On behalf of these abominable doctrines of Arius, he had a great struggle, and [sent forth] his "showers" of arguments, as he raved against the Son of God and attacked the chorus of those holy priests[165]--the enemy of human salvation was speaking in him and through him.  (3) But the defenders of the truth, our bishops, calmly brought to bear against him the necessary and appropriate counter-arguments, on behalf of the Apostolic doctrines, imitating the great prophet and king, David, who said, "I was made ready, and I was not disturbed."[166]  For they burned through the philosopher's convoluted propositions by means of the divine word, as though with fire through hempen fibers.  (4) But even so, the philosopher continued to be confident in his diabolical facility with arguments, and began to shoot his arrows against the truth proclaimed by the bishops, applying good and glib responses to all the considerations advanced against him—so he thought—and, slippery as an eel, he struggled to solve the issues raisedFor in the midst of what he thought he was contriving for his own benefit, slipping out of the logical arguments that were being brought quite powerfully against him, he was caught, on the basis of is own words, and collapsed along with them.  (5) But even so, in an arrogant frenzy, he moved against the most peaceful council, hoping to defeat the invincible power of the unconquerable Spirit of Christ that was in them.  (6) But God, "who catches the wise in their cunning,"[167] in order to demonstrate that his kingdom does not stand "on talk but on power,"[168] not only powerfully silenced the wicked demon that was speaking in the philosopher, but even cast it out, through one of his servants who was there.  (7) For a certain man, one of the holy confessors who was present at the council, with as simple a nature as any other of the saints [has had], and one who knew nothing "except Jesus Christ, and him crucified"[169] in the flesh according to the Scriptures, was with the bishops and saw the philosopher swooping down to attack our holy bishops, and arrogantly engaged in his malicious disputation; he asked the bishops, the priests of God, to give him an opportunity for discussion with the philosopher.  (8) Then, the holy bishops on our side, perceiving the man's simplicity and his lack of experience with letters, tried to persuade him not to put himself into the fray, for fear that it would provoke laughter among the malicious enemies of the truth.  (9) But he, not content with this, approached the philosopher and said to him, "In the name of Jesus Christ, the Word of God who is always with the Father, listen to the doctrines of truth, O philosopher."  And the other said to him, "Go ahead and speak."  And the saint said to him, "There is one God, who created the heavens and the earth and the sea, and all things that are in them, who also formed man from the earth and subjected everything to his Logos and to the Holy Spirit.[170]  (10) This Logos, O philosopher, we know and worship as the Son of God, believing that for the sake of our redemption he was made fleshand was born and became a man, and that through the suffering of his flesh on the cross and his death he freed us from eternal condemnation, and that through his resurrection he procured eternal life for us; and we have hope that as he went up into the heavens he will come back and will judge us concerning all that we have accomplished.  Do you believe in these things, O philosopher?"  (11) And the philosopher, as though he had never had experience of words spoken in opposition to him, was dumbfounded and fell silent just like that, as though he were mute and speechless, after saying to him, in a most pitiable voice, only the following:  "I too think this is so, and I think no differently that as you have just said."  (12) And the old man said to him, "If you believe that this is so, O philosopher, stand up and follow me, and let us hurry to the church, in which you will receive the sign of this faith."  (13) And the philosopher, transforming his whole self toward the true reverence for the God of the universe, stood up and followed the old man and, turning around, said to his disciples and to all those who had gathered to hear [the discussion], "Listen, men.  As long as I was enthusiastic for arguments, I would place words in opposition to words and would overturn the matters presented to me by my skill in speaking; (14) but now that instead of words, some divine power has come forth from the mouth of my interlocutor, my words no longer had the strength to resist this power.  For neither is a human being able to stand in opposition to GodTherefore, if any of you is able to understand, as I have now come to think, he shall believe in Christ—and let him follow this old man, in whom God spoke.

(15) In this way, the philosopher recovered and, being illuminated and becoming a Christian, rejoiced to have been beaten by the old man.

And when this philosopher had been baptized and was joined to the Church of God and found relief and exulted, the council rejoiced over the mighty acts of God.


Fr. 6.1 - 6.7
[History from Diocletian to Constantine]
[Attribution to Philip questionable at best] 

[Originally known in part from Cod. Barocc. 142 (= B), fol. 216r, lines 11-39; thus, directly precedes in this ms. the passage classified by Heyden as Fr. 2, and follows Fr. 4.  Other mss.: Cod. Paris. gr. 1555A (= P); Cod. Athous Vatopedi 286 (= V).  — De Boor, "Neue Fragmente," pp 165-84, attributes this sequence of excerpts to Philip of Side; at p. 173 he stresses the mention of Philip of Side by name, but this relates primarily to the fragment on the Alexandrian school; De Boor, "Zur Kenntnis," p. 487 n., interprets the phrase that begins fr. 2, "as Philip of Side says…," as a phrase of attribution for the material here classified as fr. 6, but that is unlikely.  More convincingly, Hansen, Theodoros Anagnostes:  Kirchengeschichte, GCS (Berlin, 1971), p. xxxviii, and Nautin, "La continuation," pp. 178-81, argue for attribution of all but no. 1 here to Gelasius of Caesarea, pointing to (a) the parallel between no. 2 and Photius's description (Bibl. cod. 89) of Gelasius of Caesarea's prologue, and (b) parallels with Theophanes' Chronography, especially because Theophanes cites material from no. 3 here explicitly as from Gelasius, and (c) parallels with the text of "Gelasius of Cyzicus."  Cf. also Pouderon, "Le témoignage," pp. 11-12. — Greek text printed by De Boor, "Neue Fragmente," pp. 182-4; newly edited by Hansen, Theodoros Anagnostes, pp. 158-9, but omitting the material before no. 2, and with a different numeration; Nautin, pp. 174-8, prints Greek text with a French translation.]

Up to this point Eusebius writes.[171]

1.[172]  Constantius the Great, the father of Constantine, produced these sons from his two wives:  Constantine, son of Helena; Dalmatius; Constantius.

 

[Diagram—remains of family tree in bottom margin of Barocc. 142 fol. 216r][173]

 

[This first part is on the left-hand side of the page:]

 

    ---------------------------------------------

    |             |             |            |

Helen wife   Constantine   Constantius   Constans

of Julian

     

 

[This part is mid-way between left- and right-hand sides of the page; no connection is indicated with the previous chart:]

 

      /\

Gallus Julian

 

2.[174]  Cyril, the bishop of Jerusalem, was the maternal uncle of Gelasius of Caesarea, and he himself when he was dying obligated[175] Gelasius in writing to [compose] the history of the events after Eusebius and of those about which Eusebius did not write. 

3.[176] Diocletian and Maximian Herculius both reigned over the Romans together, and with shared counsel they laid aside their royal power and took up again the rank of private individuals; and in the sight of the army they installed as emperors Constantius the father of Constantine, and another Maximian, [also called] Galerius.  But when they changed their minds and wished to rule again, they were killed[177] by a common decree of the Senate.

4.[178]  Theotecnus, who was plotting against the Christians in Antioch, entered the cave in which Maximian used to sacrifice to the demons and indeed received oracles.  On the basis of a demonic oracle he [i.e., Theotecnus] enjoined on him [i.e., Maximian] the persecution against the Christians.  And Maximian, in obedience to this man, rekindled the persecution against us.   And he also urged on his fellow-tyrants to do the same, bringing forward the demons' oracle as though it were indeed some great commandment.

5.[179]  When Diocletian went to war against the usurpers in Alexandria,[180] he had Constantine, who was very young, as an ally and counsellor.  When he [i.e., Diocletian] saw that he [i.e., Constantine] showed excellence, he was moved with devilish envy and was eager to destroy him by treachery.  But God preserved him and returned him safe, after escaping the plot, to his father, who was on the point of death.  And in the sight of the army, his father proclaimed him as emperor, giving him many commands on behalf of the Christians, and thus he "fell asleep"[181] in peace.

6.[182] When Constantius died, the following were left behind as rulers:  Constantine the Great administered the territory of his father[183]—this was from the edge of Europe as far as the Ionian Sea; Maxentius held Rome and [the territory] as far as the Ocean; Severus having died of an illness, the Roman Senate voted Licinius emperor, by way of doing a favor for Constantine, who had made Licinius his brother-in-law through his sister Constantia.  And Maximian held sway over the region of the East.

7.[184]  Licinius, for fear of the emperor Constantine, worked his treachery against us secretly.  But later, he drew up his forces against us openly.  At that point, Constantine grew angry against Licinius.  And after war had occurred between them, Licinius was taken alive in Chrysopolis.  He [i.e., Constantine] commanded him [i.e., Licinius] to live quietly in Thessalonica, but when he was plotting rebellion again, and was going to take up arms, he ordered him killed.


Fr. 7.1-2
[Chemical processes for treating copper and iron]
[Attribution to Philip questionable at best] 

[For the text, see Berthelot, Collection des anciens alchimistes grecs (Paris, 1888), Livraison [= vol.] 3, Greek text pp. 346-7; French tr. pp. 330-332.  (Note that the Greek texts and French translations follow independent page numbering, in each case continuing the numeration of the previous volumes.).  — P. Lambeck (Lambecius), Commentatorium de Augustissima Bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi, 2nd ed.  A. F. Collarius (Vienna, 1780), vol. 6, pp. 406-7, attributed them to Philip of Side on the basis of the mention of a "Philip" (cited by Heyden, p. 228 n. 95), but this seems quite unlikely.  Heyden, p. 228, sees a reference to Philip II of Macedon; Berthelot, Fr. tr., p. 331 n. (continued from p. 330), interprets it instead as a reference to a successor of Alexander (e.g., Philip V).]

Fr. 7.1
[5.4 Berthelot]

"Dyeing" of the copper found among the Persians, recorded from the reign of Philip.[185]

 

(1) Take the upper thuthia,[186] as much as you wish, and pound it finely and sift it with a very fine sieve.  Put it into an earthenware vessel, and put on top of it oil of whatever sort you wish, whether common or sesame-oil.  Take it up again in your hands; mix the oil with the thuthia and grind it in the earthenware receptacle until the thuthia is saturated with the oil and does not absorb any more of the oil.  And when you see that it has absorbed enough, add again and mix in still more of the same oil, until it becomes like mud.  And [then] take some of the crimson/palm-paste,[187] the red [pigment] called natêph by the Arabs, one-fifth of the amount of thuthia, and place it on top of the previously softened thuthia in the earthenware vessel, after breaking it [i.e., the pigment] up into small pieces—not too many, nor too large.  Heat an oven with the most intense fire; put the vessel in the oven; then, cover the opening of the oven with mud until the following day, because the thuthia is going to be burnt and become black.  And the next day, take it out, crush it and sift it with a fine sieve.

(2) And when you wish tο dye the above copper—no better is dyed in Persia—take two parts of fine Cyprian copper, and one of the powder that has been prepared with the thuthia beforehand.  Break up the copper into very small parts, as many as you can, and mix the powder in with it; put both into a crucible, and use the bellows vigorously, until the copper bubbles up along with the powder.  When it bubbles, add further coals, together with much bellows-work, until the two are united together.  And if you wish to make sure of the beauty of the color, take an iron implement with a bent end, and pull out [some of the material] with its end, and look at it.  If the color is pleasing, stop using the bellows; but if if is not yet pleasing, keep up the bellows-work and add more coal.  For the more you use the bellows and coal, the better your material is rendered.

Fr. 7.2
[5.5 Berthelot]

"Dyeing" of the Indian iron, recorded at the same time.

(1) Take 4 pounds of soft iron and cut it up into small pieces.  Take bark of the palm-nut—called elileg among the Arabs—15 mil.[188] in weight; and also belileg, with the insides similarly cleaned out, that is, the bark alone—4 mil. in weight; and amblag, similarly cleaned out—4 mil.; and of the above-mentioned glass-makers' magnesia (feminine magnesia),[189] 2 mil.  Pound all this together, not too finely, and mix it in with the 4 pounds of iron.  Put it into a crucible—and level out the place of the crucible before applying the flames; for if you do not do this, so that it does not move this way and that, there will necessarily be problems in the melting process.  Then, after this, add the coals, and heat up the crucible until the iron melts, and the [other] materials are united with it.  And the 4 pounds of iron require 100 pounds of coals.

(2) Note that if the iron is quite soft, it does not need the magnesia, but only the other materials.  For the magnesia dries it out to excess, and it becomes fragile.  But if it is soft, there is need of it [i.e., the magnesia?] alone, so that it is higher.  For this accomplishes everything.

(3) This is the first, the royal work, with which they are concerned to this day, and on the basis of which they fashion the "marvelous" swords.  It was discovered by the Indians, and was passed on to the Persians, and from them it came to us. 


[1] This translation was commissioned by Roger Pearse and made public domain 19th March 2011. 

[2] This ms. represents an unpublished Byzantine world chronicle, the so-called "Ps.-Symeon," running from Adam to A.D. 963.  It was a source of George Cedrenus, in whose text this same parallel phrasing appears, ed. Bekker, vol. 1 (Bonn, 1838), p. 12.  For Ps.-Symeon and the relationship with Cedrenus, cf. M. Wallraff et al., Iulius Africanus:  Chronographiae, GCS n. F. 15 (Berlin, 2007), p. xlvi.

[3] Gk. χρόνοι.

[4] According to the LXX, Adam was 230 when he begot Seth, by contrast with the MT, which puts his age at 130.

[5] Since the details of Adam's chronology do not all agree with an extant canonical or non-canonical account of Adam, Serruys (pp 338-9) posits a lost apocryphal life of Adam as Philip's source.

[6] Gk. ἐργάσασθαι.

[7] Cf. Jubilees 3.15, 17.

[8] Gk. ἀπὸ ὥραν πρώτην [sic].

[9] Cf. the time-frame put forward by the Cave of Treasures 5, which puts Adam's formation at the 1st hour of the 6th day, his entry into Paradise at the 3rd hour, Adam and Eve's dishonor at the 6th hour, and their expulsion at the 9th hour.  The timing is not the same, at least in the current state of the text of Bodl. gr. 120, and also contradicts the seven years mentioned in the first part of the note here, but still seems to indicate some relationship.  A. Su-Min Ri, Commentaire de la Caverne des trésors(Leuven, 2000), pp. 167-8, further compares the Cave of Treasures time-frame to that of Rabbinic Jewish sources.

[10] Gk. ἐργάσασθαι.

[11] Wirth prints this first passage, while Serruys ignores it.  The explicit turn to Philip of Side makes it less likely that this first passage also derives from Philip.

[12] Gk. ἔτη.

[13] Either Book 24 of his History, or the 24th volume of the (1st?) Book.  Photius (Bibl. cod. 35) says that each of Philip's bibloi contained multiple logoi; Socrates, HE 7.27 calls the smaller divisions tomoi.

[14] Gk. διδασκαλεῖον.

[15] Athenagoras' work is in fact addressed to Marcus Aurelius (Antoninus) and Commodus.

[16] Gk. ὁ ὑπὲρ Χριστιανῶνπρεσβευτικός (sc.λόγος); the mss. of Athenagoras' work give it the title πρεσβεία περὶ Χριστιανῶν—translated by Crehan (ACW), for example, as "Embassy."

[17] Gk. τῆς Ἀκαδημαϊκῆς σχολῆς προϊστάμενος.

[18] Gk. διατριβή.

[19] Gk λόγοι.

[20] This list does not entirely agree with the previous account—the position of Clement is strangely shifted.  It is quite likely that this change is due to a copyist's confusion.

[21] Gk. τοῦ εἰς Ἑλλάδα ἀναιρεθέντος;..  Note the unclassical use of the preposition εἰς.

[22] Alternatively, following a variant reading (mss. FG):  "of the Macedonians."

[23] Gk. φόβον ἐκτήσατο πολύν—not that she "had" fear in that she was afraid, but that she "acquired" the (respect and) fear of others.

[24] Gk. τοὺς Ἀχαιοὺς κατέλαβε.  Alternatively, "conquered the Achaeans."

[25] Gk. γνῶναι αὐτοὺς ἐφ' ᾧ παρῆσαν.

[26] Bratke reconstructs plausible wording after the name "Philip" on the basis of mangled indications in the manuscripts and also the cues apparent in the context:  namely, their response to the oracle shows that the oracle has mentioned a woman, and a man from Macedonia; and Aphroditianus' comment in §14 (p. 9) makes clear that a prediction is made that can be taken as referring to "the Macedonian" and to Christ.  Bringel, by contrast, marks the words following Philip as a crux, having little confidence in any reconstruction.  In connection with this consultation of the oracle, there is a further major textual variant:  In a couple of manuscripts, a fairly long sequence of text is either substituted for (ms. Q) or added to the end of (ms. N) the oracular response translated above; this additional text runs roughly as follows [minor discrepancies do exist in the witnesses]:  "Late, a certain one will make his way to this much-splintered earth, and without a misstep will become flesh, and by the untiring bounds of divinity he will dissolve the destructive force of incurable passions / sufferings; and ill-will shall arise for this one at the hands of an unbelieving people, and he will be hung up to a height as one condemned to death.  And having willingly suffered to bear all these things as well, at death he will be lifted up into eternal life."  The supposed prophecy of Christ is much clearer in this additional text, which may well have been added specifically to alleviate the annoyace of a too-obscure prophecy.

[27] Gk ἀήττητοι καιροὶ; Bringel translates, "un empire invincible," but it is not clear why.

[28] Cf. Lampe s.v. ἀνακόλουθος.

[29] Bringel's text, with an additional word:  "against the gods, who cannot be insulted."

[30] Bringel's text, using other variants:   "a leader having the unconquerable power of the unconquerable God."

[31] Gk. ἁλῶν; the reading and its significance are debatable.

[32] This motif is odd; perhaps, as Bringel suggests, some magical / imprecatory power is envisaged.

[33] Gk. εὐάρεστοι; Bringel's text has ἄρευστοι ("unchanging").

[34] The participle is in the nominative case—grammatically, then, it ought to be describing the gods; but the context seems to require a reference to the envoys and the occasion for their consultations.  Some emendation is likely required.

[35] Bringel cites the Diccionario griego-español s.v. δῆλος for the LXX use of the word as a masc. noun connected with divination; cf. also (e.g.) Muraoka, Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, s.v.

[36] Gk. πυθμεύει; the sense is obscure.  Lampe (s.v.) glosses the verb as to "give the base of a series" and arguest that its appearance in this context implies that with this third oracle, the full understanding is revealed.  Bringel translates, "va jusqu'au fond" ("goes to the bottom"—i.e., of the tripod / cauldron, to fetch the oracles).

[37] Gk. παρείς; Bringel, printing a different variant (σπαρείς), translates, "une fois engendré" ("having once been engendered"—or "sown")

[38] The letters of Μαρία, when interpreted as numerals, add up to 152.

[39] Gk. πᾶν ἱερὸν ὑμῶν σέβας.  Bringel translates, "toute votre majesté sacrée" ("all your holy majesty").

[40] Adapted from ANF translation (attributed to Julius Africanus).

[41] Gk. ἐκ Περσίδος ἐγνώσθη.  Alternatively, this could be translated, "became known [to others] from Persia."

[42]ἐν ταῖς χρυσαῖς ἀρκλαρίαις—but this term which from the context must mean "tablets" (cf. πτυχαί a little later) is not attested elsewhere.  Bringel points out that an apparently related word, ἄρκλα (= Lat. arca [?]), is found in a number of late texts.

[43] The order of the Greek words should mean, "the holy palaces"—but perhaps emendation is in order.

[44] Bringel does not include the phrase, "and the priests connected with them," in her text.

[45] "them" Bringel.

[46] The mss. give several different variants for this name.

[47] Lit., "I rejoice with you."

[48] Lit., "rejoice with."

[49] ANF translates a variant reading:  "How was she able…?"

[50] Urania means "heavenly / celestial."  The re-naming seems to play on perceived etymological connections between Hera and "earth" or "aër" (i.e., the cloudy, thick lower atmosphere, as opposed to the higher, more rarefied "ether").

[51] Pege means "spring," "source," or "stream."

[52] Cf. the Tübingen Theosophy, pp. 26-27 Beatrice.

[53] Bringel, choosing a variant reading:  "You have well said, 'She espoused a carpenter'; for she has a carpenter…"

[54] Perhaps the quotation of the "females" continues on to the end of the sentence.  In any case, this does not quite reflect what they were reported as saying earlier—"she espoused a carpenter"—unless the variant chosen by Bringel is correct.  Bringel translates the last part of the sentence, "mais il ne vient pas de son lit, le charpentier qu'elle met au monde."

[55] Bringel, choosing a slightly different variant:  "framed…the triple-constructed sky as a roof."

[56] I.e., land, sea, and sky (ANF).  Bringel translates, "ce firmament à trois habitations."

[57] Bringel excludes this last sentence from her text.

[58] Or, "statue."  Gk. στήλη.

[59] Gk. Ἥλιος.

[60] Bringel points out the parallel shining gem-stone described by Lucian, De dea Syria 32.

[61] Bringel, following a different variant:  "The king, having watched this, gave orders…"

[62] The name Karia is obscure; one textual variant at the next occurrence is "Makaria" (blessed), which might make more sense.

[63] Variant reading:  "kings."

[64] I.e. (as Bringel points out by citing the parallel of Pilate's words at Jn. 19.22), he is saying that their time of producing apparitions and of ruling is over.

[65] Gk. μὴ θροβάδει.  This is Bringel's text and interpretation .  Bratke's text, Μιθροβάδῃ, would introduce quite inexplicably a Mithrobades—the preceding verb then could be interpreted either as "they said" or "I said" or "Say" [to Mithrobades], with the following words possibly still part of Dionysus' speech.

[66] As Bringel points out here, the last few phrases allude to Gen. 1.26, and Christ's work in restoring the "image" of God in human beings, and leading them to the "likeness" of God.

[67] I.e., the Son of God ("heaven's boast") is now to be born on earth.

[68] Bringel has a slightly different text, and further imagines a supplement so that the first part of this sentence refers to the birth of Christ, not (as I have read it) to the prior birth of Pege (i.e., Mary).  She translates as follows:  "Karia a le bonheur de voir Source mettre un enfant au monde à Bethléem.  Source a la grâce d'être désirée par le ciel et de concevoir le bienfait de la grâce"—I have underlined the supplement she adds.

[69] Bringel's reading, quite possibly correct, omits τὰ ἡμέτερα ("our affairs") and leaves the verb "is / are withering" to be connected to Judaea.

[70] Instead of δέσποινα ("mistress"), Bringel's text gives οὐρανία ("Urania / heavenly").

[71] Bringel's text, slightly more logically, here reads "sent [some] magi of those under his dominion."

[72] Here Bringel's text reads "by madness" (ὑπὸ μανίας) rather than "by an oracle" (ὑπὸ μαντείας).

[73] Or rather:  "lest a revolt rise [against them] toward us"—that is, fearing that the people of Judaea would revolt against the high priests and convert to the good news of the Messiah announced by the magi.

[74] Or, "we spoke to him until he was thoroughly disturbed."

[75] I.e., the voice heard in §22, or the divine manifestations and their interpretations more generally.  Bringel interprets this sentence differently:  "Il fut consacré dans le temple, où il se trouve avec l'inscription que voici."

[76] See Bringel ad loc. for a long exploration of the term διοπετής and its significance.

[77] Bringel's text reads:  "gold, frankincense, and myrrh."

[78] Gk. ἀντάρτας.  The "rebels" would be rebellious / sinful humans in general.

[79] Bringel's text:  "a certain terrifying angel."

[80] It is not clear whether this sentence is part of the report of the magi or part of the enclosing speech.

[81] Bringel's text includes a sentence at this point to conclude the account of the magi, and a further phrase to introduce Aphroditianus' final comments:  "And those are the marvellous narrations of the inspired magi.  And [here are] mine."  I would argue, however, that the account of the magi should be understood to have concluded either after the words, "Christ has become our Savior"—or perhaps even after the statement, "we reported all that we had seen in Jerusalem."  The address to "you," who are slandering and opposing Christ, seems to revert to Aphroditianus' situation.

[82] Gk. ἱστόρησε.

[83] Gk. ἀπετέλει.

[84] Here I follow Bringel's text; Bratke's has an infinitive instead of a finite verb.

[85] Bringel:  "Pertelaeus."

[86] Gk. τὸ θέλειν τὸ πρακτικὸν ἑτοιμότερον.

[87] Lit., "in those at the end"—it is unclear whether "those at the end" refers to particular "laws" in his collection (so Bringel), or generically to the end of his text.

[88] Gk. ἐπικρατεῖ καὶ στερεὰ ταῦτα.  The text and precise sense are unclear.  Bringel, with different accentuation, interprets the first word as a dative noun that could be interpreted as the addressee:  "to Epicrates"; as a verb [with Bratke], the basic idea is to "prevail over"—which I am rendering, "demonstrates his mastery" since there is no object specified.

[89] Here, Bringel's text has the additional word "progeny."

[90] This phrase is a sentence fragment added to the rest; I suspect that some words have fallen out in transmission.

[91] Gk. Ἕλληνες.  Note that the first example is Cyrus the Great of Persia—demonstrating clearly that for the author, "Hellenes" is not an ethnic term but refers to pagans.

[92] In the reading preferred by Bringel, the bodyguards are not female.

[93] This name (unknown otherwise) is the reading favored by Bringel; Bratke does not choose between ms. variants here, printing simply an ellipsis in the middle of the name:  C…encrates.  Wirth, p. 200, reports Noeldeke's suggestion that the Cynic Crates may be the distant inspiration for this reference.

[94] Gk. παροξυσμοί; the precise reference is obscure.

[95]ἕνεκεν τῶν γενειῶν De Boor; γενειῶν must be emended either to γενῶν ("families / family lines") or to γενεῶν ("generations").  The former is a term that appears repeatedly in the excerpts from the letter provided by Eusebius, and so is more likely correct.

[96] Cf. Eus., HE 1.7, where Eusebius gives an excerpt from this treatment; also, 6.31.3.  For a modern reconstruction / edition of the letter, see W. Reichardt, Die Briefe des Sextus Julius Africanus an Aristides und Origenes, TU 34.3 (Leipzig, 1909).

[97] Cf. Lk. 24.13, 18.

[98] On the embassy and the change of status of Emmaus, including Africanus' role in promoting it, see Eus., Chron. II (2: 178-9 Schoene); Jerome, De viris illustribus 63.

[99] Some garbling has taken place here:  Candace was the name / title for the Ethiopian queen, but the articles used here in Greek with both "Candace" and "Ethiopian" are masculine rather than feminine; and of course, according to Acts 8.26-38, Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch who was a court official [δυνάστης] of Candace, not Candace herself.

[100] Gk. πρῶτον—this could be masc. (conflicting with Candace) again, or neut. (adverbial).

[101] Cf. Eus., HE 2.1.1, 13—verbal parallel especially in this last sentence.

[102] Gk. στόμα λαμπάδων.  Fancifully, from Hebrew:  pî + lapîd(îm).  Cf. Wutz, Onomastica Sacra, p. 444 / Lagarde, Onomastica Sacra, p. 203:  στόμα χειρῶν ἢ στόμα λαμπάδος; Wutz, p. 444 / Lagarde, p. 223:  στόμα λαμπάδων.  For all the "etymologies" in this fragment, cf. also Wutz, p. 35.

[103] Gk. ἀπατωμένη. Wutz, p. 35, notes that this is not paralleled in the onomastic material, and suggests a Syriac "etymological" connection.

[104] Gk. δερματίνη δόξα.  Fancifully, from Hebrew:  ‘ôr + hôd.  Cf. Wutz, p. 475 / Lagarde, p. 205:  δερμάτινος ἐπίδοξα; Wutz, p. 475 / Lagarde, p. 217:  δέρματος δόξα.  Cf. also Wutz, p. 477.

[105] De Boor, p. 181, notes the appearance of these three names together at Mt. 14.3 (and Mk. 6.17), which appears to imply that the etymologies formed part of a comment on that passage.

[106] Cf. Eus., HE 3.17-20, including an excerpt from Hegesippus provided by Eusebius.

[107] The names do not appear in the Hegesippus extract supplied by Eusebius, and they might be expected to if Hegesippus gave them at all, since the beginning of the passage quoted seems to be introducing them to the reader for the first time.  For the names, cf. the late Index Apostolorum attributed to Epiphanius, and edited by T. Schermann, Prophetarum vitae fabulosae (Leipzig, 1907), p. 113.  (Note also that a version of this, although not including this specific information, appears in Cod. Barocc. 142, fol. 284—see sigla in Schermann, p. 107.)

[108] Cf. Eus., HE 3.25 (also 3.24.17-18), although this text does not closely preserve Eusebius' classification.  Eusebius records doubts about the 2 and 3 John, not (as here apparently) 1 John; for the "Gospel of the Hebrews" he notes disagreement.

[109] These others are listed together by Origen, Hom. in Luc. 1.

[110] Cf. Eus., HE 3.30; the reference to Clement's 3rd book is just earlier, at HE 3.29.1, and the passages of Clement summarized here from Eusebius' quotations are Strom. 3.6.52.5-53.1 and 7.11.63.3-64.1.  For Paul, Clement cites 1 Cor. 9.5 and appears to be interpreting Phil. 4.3, where Paul addresses a σύζυγος, as an address to his wife.

[111] Or "book" (Gk. λόγος); but from Jerome, De viris illustribus 76, this work appears to have been homilies on Hosea orally delivered at Easter; and Photius (Bibl. cod. 119) speaks of 12 λόγοι (of which he particularly mentions the one "on the Pascha and Hosea") contained in one βιβλίον.

[112] Gk. διά (Cf. Sophocles, Lexicon s.v. διά 3).

[113] Gk. λόγια, a derivative of λόγος that usually means "oracles."  Eusebius here describes these as five books "of explanation of the Lord's logia."

[114] The precise point of the word "after" (Gk. μετά) is not entirely clear here, although it does at least serve to put Aristion and John in a separate category from the first list.

[115] Cf. Eus., HE 3.39 (with some information possibly also taken from 3.25).

[116] Cf. Eus., HE 3.39.9; but the fragment here provides some slightly different information.

[117] De Boor, pp. 171-2, suggests that this refers to the same incident that Eusebius mentions as an (anonymous) resurrection in HE 3.39.9.  Menahem:  The Greek spelling of the name is Μαναϊμ(ος)—cf. 2 Kgs [4 Kgdms] 15.14-16, on the reign of Menahem, spelled Μαναημ in LXX, but Μαναϊμ in Byzantine chroniclers.  Harnack, in an editorial note to De Boor here, suggests a connection with the Μαναην who appears in Acts 13.1 as one of the "prophets and teachers" of Antioch (NRSV transliterates this name as Manaen).

[118] This is apparently a reference to Hom. in 1 Cor. 40.2 [PG 61: 349, NPNF translation online: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.iv.xli.html]; Chrysostom cites Old Testament resurrections and Lazarus, as well as those "at the time of the cross."

[119] De Boor notes the necessary correction from the ms. reading "Antioch."

[120] Cf. Eus., HE 7.32.26.

[121] De Boor notes, "wie Nr. 5"—i.e., this sentence repeats the wording of no. 5 above (and so De Boor did not print the whole sentence again).

[122] Gk. ἐμαρτύρησαν.

[123] Cf. Eus., VC 1.25, which Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 195, considers to be a source that Philip is expanding here.

[124] Hansen (in app.) suggests that this is possibly to be read as a reference to Sauromatae.

[125] I.e., the Franci.

[126] Dan. 10.13; Jos. 5.14.

[127] Jos. 10.11.

[128] I.e., in the poems--or perhaps "among them," meaning "among the pagans."

[129] This part of the sentence appears to be corrupt; I have translated in accordance with my sense of the point, which would require a correction of τινες to τινας, τινας to τισί, in addition to the deletion of αὐτοῖς endorsed by Hansen and the use of the variant ἐξιστόρησαν not adopted by Hansen.

[130] With this phrase, the anonymous compiler turns from "Rufinus" (mentioned at 1.17) to another source.

[131] Cf. Eus., HE 10.9.4, which is the source of some of the wording here.

[132] Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 194 n. 45, notes the ironic use of this word.

[133] At this point the anonymous compiler adds a letter from Theodoret, HE 1.20, to confirm the account (cf. Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 194).

[134] From this point, Hansen identifies a fragment of Gelasius of Caesarea in addition to the suggestion that the account is derived from Philip.

[135] Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 195, identifies the following as one (or two) of a whole series of possible "additions" to the basic framework of 2.1.12 - 2.6.1.  In general here, the anonymous compiler is following Gelasius of Caesarea, but Hansen considers some passages likely to have come instead from Philip; in the passage translated here, he points out the style (asyndetic lists of qualities) and the attribution to unspecified "writings."  Needless to say, the precise boundaries of what belongs to Philip here are difficult to draw; I have put into italics material that Hansen definitely does not attribute to Philip's voice, but some of the rest may not be Philip's either.

[136] I.e., bishop.

[137] This account, including its rhetorically composed oration, which is most unlikely to reflect Constantine's actual words on this occations, is quite different from Eusebius' contemporary account (Life of Constantine 3.11-12).

[138] I.e., the assembled bishops.

[139] While the narration leading up to this section comes from Gelasius of Caesarea, the introduction to the speech is modelled on the description given by Theodoret, HE 1.7.11; the words preserved verbatim are printed in italics.

[140]κεφάλαιον; the precise reference is obscure.

[141] The descriptions of the church building that begin here seem to be a metaphor for the Church as a whole, or rather for the gathering of bishops at the Council of Nicaea; if this latter suggestion is correct, Hansen's emendation, ἡτοίμασε ("he prepared") for the mss. ἤθροισε ("he gathered together") seems unnecessary.

[142]στέφανοι, sometimes translated "crowns."

[143] I have adapted the figure here; literally, "being born" and "growing."

[144] I.e., the "fear of the Lord."

[145]εὐδαιμονία.

[146] A modest reference to himself—"mediocrity" as opposed to (e.g.) "majesty" or "highness."  Lampe suggests "your humble servant" as a possible equivalent.

[147]εὐδαιμονεῖν.

[148]ἀδόκιμος.

[149]πρόνοια; alternatively, "providence" or "forethought."

[150] Variant reading:  "speech."  Jesus was frequently represented with what seems to be a "magic wand," especially in connection with the Lazarus story, although this does not correspond to the Biblical text (hence the apparent correction represented by the variant reading here); see R. M. Jensen, Understanding Early Christian Art (Routledge, 2000), pp. 120-24.

[151] I.e., the teaching of Arius, as Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 188 n. 31, notes.

[152] This appears to be a reference to natural phenomena like the movements of the stars.

[153] Hansen, following Lietzmann, suggests "the knowledge" as the most likely supplement here.

[154]τὸ γήινον; perhaps, as Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," p. 139, suggests, supply "light" rather than the more generic "things."

[155] λανθάνουσιν; alternatively, "secretly."

[156]ἁρμονία.

[157]προσηγορία.  The "name" in question seems to be a reference to sin, but "name" seems inappropriate; one suggested emendation is "wickedness" (πονηρία).

[158] I.e., the general political and social life of the Empire.

[159] At this point, the text of Theodoret becomes the model; additions to that text are left in plain type, whereas the words taken from Theodoret are in italics.

[160] This passage is identified by Heyden, "Christliche Geschichte," p. 227, as a fragment of Philip, but not by Hansen, either in his article, "Eine fingierte Ansprache" or in his edition of the Anonyme Kirchengeschichte.

[161] Jer. 17.5.

[162] Here, Hansen, "Eine fingierte Ansprache," pp. 195-6, argues that Philip has reworked Gelasius of Caesarea's narrative, whose version can be reconstructed from Rufinus and Georgius Monachus.  Especially significant is the conclusion, where there seem to be both a lightly revised version of Gelasius' concluding statement, and then in addition to that a sentence more freely composed, but with elements from Gelasius' statement still visible as the framework of construction.  In Hansens' edition of the Anonyme Kirchengeschichte, he indicates in detail which words and phrases he considers to be additions to Gelasius' narrative; in this translation, the additions (by Philip) are in plain type, whereas the originally Gelasian narrative is in italics.

[163]οὐσία.

[164]ὑπόστασις.

[165] I.e., bishops.

[166] Ps. 118[119].60.

[167] 1 Cor. 3.19.

[168] 1 Cor. 4.20.

[169] 1 Cor. 2.2.

[170] Alternatively, "caused everything to subsist by means of his Logos and the Holy Spirit."

[171] This comment (concluding the series of excerpts from Eusebius that precedes it in the mss.) is extant in mss. BV.

[172] Extant in ms. B.  Nautin, p. 182, suggests that this is originally a reader's marginal note that was later brought into the main text.

[173] See facsimile reproduction of this folio in Heyden, plate 2a.  De Boor, "Neue Fragmente," p. 182, considers this to be connected to the account of Constantius' children that appears in the main text, although it is not in close physical proximity.

[174] Extant in mss. PB.  This note seems to be directly summarized from the prologue of Gelasius of Caesarea's continuation of Eusebius' history (see Photius, Bibl. cod. 89).  Cf. Nautin, p. 178.

[175]κατέκρινεν.

[176] Extant in ms. P.

[177]ἀναιροῦνται.

[178] Extant in ms. B.

[179] Extant in mss. BV.

[180] Lit., "…against those who tyrannized over the Alexandrians."

[181] I.e., died.

[182] Extant in mss. BV.

[183]τὴν πατρῴαν διεῖπεν ἀρχήν; lit., "…managed his father's rule / empire."

[184] Extant in mss. BP.

[185] Alternatively, "from the beginning of Philip"—but the phrase seems to imply a dating formula, and thus a king's reign, as the heading of the following section shows; also, some mss. supply further information:  "…Philip of Macedon—such (copper) as is on the gates of the Hagia Sophia"; with a subtitle:  "the making of tawny copper."

[186]  This thuthia is called "upper" in the sense that it has been produced by sublimation to the upper part of the furnace / oven, according to Berthelot, Fr. tr., p. 331 n. 3, identifying the substance as zinc oxide (see the introduction, Livr. 1, pp. 239-40, where this is referred to as [artificially manufactured] cadmia).  As Berthelot's note argues, the word thuthia is attested late; along with the mention of the Arabs, it indicates that this portion of text at least was probably written between the 7th and 11th centuries.  (Cf. also introduction, Livr. 1, p. 268.)

[187] Gk. ἀπὸ τοῦφοινικοπαστίλλου; Berthelot:  "la couleur de palmier."  The first element of the word is used both for the palm tree and for red/purple dye.  Berthelot suggests that this was a derivative of arsenic, perhaps equivalent to the cobathia red / arsenic sulfide (realgar) which was treated as equivalent to palm-cinders as early as Zosimus' time (see Fr. tr., p. 185; see also the introduction, Livr. 1, pp. 244-5, on cobathia).

[188] This abbreviation appears in the Greek text, but Berthelot translates it as "parts," and so it appears not to be a standard unit of measure.

[189] Berthelot, p. 332 n. 4, identifies this as "oxyde de fer ou de manganèse"—i.e., so-called "black magnesia" (see the introduction, Livr. 1, pp. 255-6).


Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

This text was commisioned and uploaded by Roger Pearse, Ipswich, UK, 2010. This file and all material on this page is in the public domain - copy freely.

Greek text is rendered using unicode.


Early Church Fathers - Additional Texts