Imágenes de páginas
[ocr errors]

gods as other heathens did; we have proofs of it in some of his fragments undoubtedly genuine.

2. Beside this, there is a fragment of a work ascribed to him, which was first published by Dr. Hudson, and has been since repeated in the bishop of Rochester's edition of Longinus. It is to this purpose.

• And for a conclusion of this whole discourse concerning Greek orators, and their manner of writing, I now just mention Demosthenes, Lysias, Æschines, Aristides, Isæus, Timarchus, • Isocrates, Demosthenes, Crithinus, and Xenophon, to whom must be added Paul of Tarsus, • of whom I may say, that he first excelled in an argument which is not of the demonstrative • kind.'

This fragment was received by Dr. Hudson from L. A. Zacagni, who transcribed it from a very good manuscript of the gospels preserved in the Vatican library. But Fabricius plainly declares his opinion concerning this last clause relating to Paul of Tarsus, that it is not genuine : nor have I any thing to say in favour of its genuineness : probably it was added by a Christian..

3. However, I shall here insert some curious observations upon this fragment ascribed to Longinus, in which a testimony is given to St. Paul's abilities as an orator. I have received them from the learned Mr. James Merrick without any prohibition to publish them: and I believe my readers will be pleased with seeing them here.

• I transmit to you,' says Mr. Merrick, "an observation communicated to me in conversation * some years since by a very ingenious friend, which may deserve to be considered in any future

disquisition concerning the authenticity of the fragment. Δημοσθενης ο και Κριθινος is one of the 'orators mentioned in it: by which person my friend understood Dinarchus to be meant, alleging, • that a commentator on Hermogenes (Syrianus, if I rightly remember) affirms, that Dinarchus

was called Ayuoco: vns Kpi@ivos, which name, as the above-mentioned gentleman supposed, was designed to intimate, that the eloquence of Dinarchus bore the same proportion to that of • Demosthenes, that barley bears to wheat. From this curious discovery, (for such it seems) 'made by my learned friend, who also added, that hordeaceus rhetor occurs in Suetonius de • Illustr. Rhetor. cap. 2. I am inclined to draw this conclusion, That we owe the words, • Anuortevas o na Kpelivos, if they originally stood in the fragment, of which I am speaking, not to • Longinus, but to some less knowing critic, who having somewhere met with Ampoo bevus Kpsbevos

, ' was not aware, that it was a name given to Dinarchus, but thought that it had belonged to an

orator whose real name was Demosthenes, and who was also called Kpi@ivos, in order to distinguish • him from the more celebrated orator of that name. If, therefore, we admit the fragment as genuine, we should, I imagine, read Aervepxos, o nau Aqueco bevus Kpiorvos,

• P. S. Not having an opportunity of consulting the comments on Hermogenes, I have looked • into Fabricius's Bibliotheca Græca, and find there, Vol. iv. p. 434, Dinarchus mentioned in • the Index of Authors quoted by Hermogenes, and styled Hordeaceus Demosthenes. Again : • in the same volume, p. 467, I find him mentioned in the Index of Authors taken notice of in • the Comments of Hermogenes, (but placed by mistake after Diodorus,) by the title of xpıb.vos - Demosthenes.'

Whether this fragment be rightly ascribed to Longinus or not, these observations will be allowed to be curious.

Κορωνις δ' εςω λοίο σαντος και φρονημαίος Ελληνικά Ilaps ouv9E0EWS 295wv. Lib. de sublimi oratione sect. 39. Δημοσθενης, Λυσιας, Αισχίνης, Αριστειδης, Ισαιος, Τιμαρχος, Longinus ipse testatur se de hac satis copiose tractasse in Iσοκρατης, Δημοσθενης και και Κριθινος, Ξενοφων, προς τελοις duobus commentariis. -Extat et similis argumenti liberinter Παυλος ο Ταρσευς, όν τινα και πρωτον φημι προϊσαμενον δούμαλος Dionysii Halicarnassei opera, de quo lib. 3. c. 32. Εx illis avonocerX78. Longini fragm. 1. apud Pearce. p. 259. Longini petitum videtur testimonium de Rhetoribus, quod ex

b Hoc Longini de Rhetoribus testimonium extat in præ- codice MSS. Vaticano Evangeliorum cum Hudsono Zacagstautissimo codice Evangeliorum Bibliothecæ Vaticanæ Ur- nius communicavit. -Postrema de Paulo Apostolo a Chris. binatis, signato Num. 2. Quod mecum communicavit Laur. tiano homine adjecta sunt. Fabric. Bib. Gr. 1. iv. cap. 3). Alex. Zacagnius. Hudson.

T. iv. p. 445.





His testimony to the scriptures of the Old Testament.

Numerius, * of Apamea in Syria,' says Suidas, “a Pythagorean philosopher. This is the marr who charged Plato with stealing from the writings of Moses his sentiments concerning God, • and the original of the world, saying: “ What is Plato, but Moses in Greek ?!" },

The same saying is in Clement of Alexandri' And Numenius, the Pythagorean phi• losopher, writes expressly : “ What is Plato, but Moses in Greek ?"

The same is also quoted from Clement by Eusebius in his Evangelical Preparation.

Eusebius presently afterwards « quotes · the first and the third book of Numenius concerning • What is Good: Where Numenius speaks of the rites and institutions of several nations, par* ticularly the Brachmans, the Jews, the Magians, and the Egyptians: and mentions Jannes • and Jambres, two sacred Egyptian scribes, who, when the Jews were expelled Egypt, being • reckoned very skilful in the magical art, were by common consent chosen to oppose Musæus, • [meaning Moses,] who was very powerful in his prayers with God, that they might remove • the calamities brought by him upon that country.

Numenius is quoted several times by Origen in his books against Celsus : I shall take notice of those places by and by. He is also quoted twice or thrice by Theodoret. I do not recollect that he is at all quoted by Augustine in any of his works, nor by Cyril of Alexandria in his answer to the emperor Julian. Porphyry, as quoted by' Eusebius, chargeth Origen with reading and borrowing from Plato, and Numenius, and Cronius. Porphyry says, thats the Commentaries of Severus, Cronius, Numenius, Gaius, and Atticus, Platonic philosophers, were read in the school of Plotinus. He likewise says in the same work, the Life of Plotinus, that'" Amelius was very diligent in learning the opinions of Numenius, and out of them composed Commentaries of near an hundred books. Finally, Porphyry, in his book De Antro Nympharum, quotes Numenius and his friend Cronius.

From Macrobius * we learn, that Numenius was reproached by some with having divulged or exposed the Eleusinian mysteries, and to be avenged of him, Ceres and Proserpine appeared to him in a very strange manner.

We now return to Origen : who quotes the first book of Numenius the Pythagorean, concerning What is Good, or Concerning the Good : and" a book of his concerning the Immortality of the soul. And still once more after this manner: 1" know also that Numenius, a • skilful commentator upon Plato, and well acquainted with the Pythagorean doctrines, in many

και Νομηνιος, Απαμευς, απο Συριας, φιλοσοφος Πυθαίορειος. habitu meretricio ante apertum lupanar ludere prostatutes, &c. Ούτος εσιν και την το Πλαίωνος εξελέξας διανοιαν, ως εκ Μωσαϊ- Macrob. Somnium Scip. I. i. cap. 2. p. 9. κων τα περι Θε8 και κοσμο γενεσεως αποσυλησασαν, και δια Contr. Cels. I. i. p. 13. § 15. τελο φησι τι γαρ εςι Πλαίων, η Μωσης ατζικιζων ; Suid. V. m Ibid. I. v. p. 269. § 57. Νομηνιος. . • Clem. Str. 1. i. p. 342. Par. p. 411. Oxon. » Εω δ' οιδα και Νομηνιον τον Πυθα ορειον- πολλαχο i L. ix. cap. 6. p.

411. " Ib. cap. 7. et 8. p. 411. συ/γραμμαίων αυ7α εκτιθεμενον τα Μωύσεως και των τροφίμων, « Μεσαιω γυν, τω Ιεδαιων εξησησαμενω, ανδρι γενομενω Θεω και εκ απιθανως αυλα τροπολοίανία, ωσπερ εν τω καλεμενω ευξασθαι δυναλωλαίω. Ιb.

Εποπι, και εν τοις περι Αριθμων, και εν τοις περι Τοπε . Εν συνην γαρ αει τω Πλαιωνι- τοις τε Νομηνι8 και δε τρίλω περι τ' απαθα εκτίθεται και σερι το Ιησε ισοριαν τινα, , K povie. H. E. 1. vi. cap. 19. p. 220.

το ονομα αυ78 λείων, και τροπολούει αυτην τερον δ' επιλελευγ& De Vita Plotini. cap. xiv.

n Ibid. cap. iii.

μενως, η αποτελευμενως, αλλά καιρα, εςιν ειπειν.-- - Λλλ' εκ Νεμηνιος και ο τελε ελαιρος Κρονιος. De antro Nymph. εν εκεινη σεμνυνομεθα αποδεχομεθα δ' αυτον μαλλον Κελσε και p. 263. Vid. et p. 271.

αλλων Ελληνων, βεληθενία φιλομαθως και τα ημετερα εξελασαι, * Numenio denique inter philosophos occultorum curiosiori και κινηθενία ώσπερ τροπολοδεμενων, και ο μαρων συσγραμμαίων. offensam numinum, quod Eleusinia sacra interpretando vul- Ib. I. iv. p. 198. § 51. gaverit, somnia prodiderunt, visas sibi ipsas- Eleusinias Deas



• places of his writings has quoted the books of Moses and the prophets, and has allegorized • them in no improbable manner: as in his book called the Epops, and in his books concerning • Numbers, and those concerning Place. And in his third book concerning What is Good, he • relates a history concerning Jesus without mentioning his name, and allegorizeth it: whether rightly or not, I do not now stay to inquire. He also relates a history concerning Moses, and Jannes, and Jambres. Not that I think this a matter to be much boasted of: nevertheless,

we have more reason to be pleased with him, than with Celsus and other Greeks: forasmuch • as he had read our scriptures, and candidly paid a regard to them as no contemptible writings, “and worthy to be allegorized.'

To this passage of Origen there is a reference in Grotius, of the Truth of the Christian Religion, or in the Notes upon him: where it is said, “ that · divers heathen authors have made * mention of Jesus, as Suetonius, Tacitus, the younger Pliny, and many others. And Origen, * in his fourth book against Celsus, lets us know, that in Numenius the Pythagorean there was a * history concerning Jesus.'

Having now, as I think, paid a due regard to the quotations of Numenius, which are in our early Christian writers, I must take the liberty to say, that the time of Numenius is uncertain. And I cannot but doubt, whether he lived after the coming of our Saviour. Says Tillemont: * It is thought, that we ought to place about the time of Marcus Aurelius the celebrated phi• losopher Numenius, of whom Eusebius and Theodoret have made great use in their arguments * with the heathens. Theodoret does in effect say that he lived after Christ.' Nevertheless that manner of speaking seems to shew that Tillemont hesitated : for Theodoret speaks plainly enough, if we could rely upon him, as accurate and well informed. Having quoted Plotinus, he says: • And many other like things are said by him, and Plutarch, and Numenius, and * others of that sect. For a these men living after the coming of our Saviour, have joined

many parts of the Christian theology with their own doctrines.' And Origen likewise in the place before referred to, speaks in this manner. First he quotes Chrysippus, and then adds : - The è like things may be seen in the latter philosophers who lived not long ago, as Plutarch, • and Numenius, in his second book of the Immortality of the Soul.

J. Tollius, in his notes upon a fragment of Longinus, where Numenius is mentioned, supposeth he lived in the times of the ' Antonines : and Jonsius likewise thought it probable, that s Numenius flourished in the time of Antoninus the pious. And indeed it is easy to shew, as Jonsius has done, that Numenius lived before Origen, and some others, who read him, or have quoted him: but I do not perceive any marks of his real time alleged from any.

I therefore am still in suspense. It is, I think, remarkable, that Suidas, who tells us in whose reigns lived Plutarch, and Dion Cassius, and Dion Chrysostom, and Aristides, and Numenius the orator and many others, says nothing of that kind of Numenius the philosopher. He knew that he was of Apamea in Syria, but does not mention the name of the emperor in whose time he lived. And Numenius, as we have seen, is often joined with Plato and Cronius : but the time of Cronius is uncertain, so far as I know. Nor have I observed any thing in the quotations of the works of Numenius, made by Eusebius, or others, that can determine his

age: for any thing that is observable in those quotations, he might live when gentilism was at its height, and in all its splendor. He was acquainted with the writings of Moses and the prophets: but I discern not any references to the scriptures of the New Testament. That history concerning Jesus, which Numenius had allegorized, as Origen says, ' without naming him,' may have been soinewhat different from what has been generally apprehended. Perhaps it related to Joshua, successor of Moses 'in the government of the people of Israel. For if that history had related to the Lord Jesus, it might be expected that we should see it repeated over again in

• Testantur idem et Pagani — ut Suetonius, Tacitus, • Η δη δε και παρα τισι των νεωθερων, και χθες και πρωην Plinius junior, et post hos multi. Historiam quamdamn de relevaguaywy. Ut supr. 1. v. sect. 57. Jesu etiam apud Numenium Pythagoricum exstitisse, docet . Floruit sub Antonino et Vero, Apamea Syriæ oriundus nos Origenes contra Celsum quarto. Grot. de Verit. Rel. Chr. -Hujus dicebatur Plotinus scripta compilåsse. Defendit

autem Plotinum Amelius libro De Differentiâ Doctrinæ Plo-Théodoret dit en effet, qu'il a vécu après Jésus tini et Numenii, quem Porphyriu inscripsit: ut est apud PorChrist. L'Emp. Marc. Aurèle, art. 31.

phyrium in Vitâ Plotini. Toll. in Longin. p. 248.

ö Si conjecturæ hæc res committenda, sub Antonino Pio Μελα γαρ δη την τε Σωτηρος ημων επιφανειαν ελοι γενο- Numenium floruisse dixerim. J. Jons, de Scriptorib. Hist. μενοι, της Χριστιανικης θεολολιας πολλα τους οικείους ανεμιξαν Philosoph. 1. iii. cap. 10. p. 264. sosois. Ibid.

1. ii. sect. 2.


c Gr. Aff. I. ii.



Eusebius or Theodoret, or some other writer since Origen. After all, as I apprehend, such a reference as that in Origen is of little importance: he has not quoted the passage; nor so much as hinted what was the subject of the history.

I could not omit Numenius, as he has quoted Moses and the prophets, and allegorized some part

of their writings : but I know not when he lived. I put him down here, being desirous to join him with Amelius and Longinus, two learned critics and philosophers. Numenius, as we learn from Origen, made use of Moses and the prophets,' and allegorized some parts of them. If he had lived after the publication of the books of the New Testament, it is reasonable to believe that he would have made use of them likewise. As it does not appear that he took any notice of them, it seems to me probable that he lived before the rise of the Christian religion.



1. His time and character. II. How the Christians are mentioned by him in a letter to the senate of Rome.

III. His conduct toward Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch. IV. His persecution of the Christians.

1. Aurelian," a man of mean original, but of a severe disposition, and a great captain, having performed good services in the times of Valerian, Gallienus, ard Claudius the second, was, after the death of this last, proclaimed emperor in the year 270, and died in 275. Some have ascribed to him a reign of six years: but now it is the opinion of the best chronologers that he did not complete his fifth year, and died after he had reigned four years and four months and some days.

II. Flavius Vopiscus of Syracuse is the sixth and last of the Augustan writers, but not the worst of them: for he is generally reckoned as learned a man and as regular an historian as any of them.

In his Life of the Emperor Aurelian, he makes mention of a letter of his to the senate of Rome, written, probably, in the beginning of his reign in the year 270, or € 271, upon occasion of an incursion made into Italy by some people of Germany.

• There " is,' says Vopiscus, • a letter of Aurelian concerning the Sibylline books, which I • insert here to confirm the account which I have given. “ I wonder that you, holy fathers, • have so long hesitated about opening the Sibylline books: just as if your consultations were • held in some church of the Christians, and not in the temple of all the gods."

The meaning of the emperor is very evident. The Christians were reckoned a profane and atheistical sort of men, without temples, without rites and ceremonies, or however, averse to all the rites of the public establishment. The emperor tells the senate, that they were as backward to open those books, which should inform them what sacrifices ought to be offered up for the good of the public, as if they were so many Christians met together who were averse to all sacrifices, and not the Roman senate sitting in the temple of all the gods, the very place of whose assembly admonished them of their duty, to take in the direction and assistance of the gods in this difficult conjuncture. This

passage affords a good argument that the true Sibylline books which were in the hands of the Romans, and were still made use of by them, were full of heathen superstition, and not agreeable to the Christian doctrine or worship, as some have supposed. This is manifest from the whole context before and after this letter of Aurelian. There are divers other proofs of it, occurring in the Lives of the Roman emperors, written by these Augustan historians, particularly in the Life of Gordian the third, written by Julius Capitolinus, and in the Life of Gallienus, written by Trebellius Pollio.

* Aurelianus, modicis ortus parentibus, a primâ ætate in- quoque indidi ad fidem rerum. Miror vos, Patres Sancti, genio vivacissimus. &c. Vopisc. Aurelian. cap. 4. p. 420. tamdiu de aperiendis Sibyllinis dubitåsse libris, proinde quasi

b Vid. Pagi ann. 275. num. ii. iii. Bası). ann. 270. in Christianorum ecclesiâ, non in templo deorum omnium, num. vi.

tractaretis. Vopisc. Aurelian. cap. 20. p. 463. c Vid. Basnag. ann. 291. num. ii.

e Vid. annot. in Vopisci loc. et Basnag. ann. 271. num. ij. Est epistola Aureliani de libris Sibyllinis. Nam ipsam et ante Dom. 4. num. x. xi.

But that is not now our principal concern. The design of alleging this passage is to shew, that Vopiscus the Augustan writer, and the emperor Aurelian, were not unacquainted with the Christians and their principles.

However, there is another thing which may be observed here : that this passage may lead us to think, Aurelian was not free from superstition. And there are some other things said of him, which may concur to support this supposition. For his mother is said by Vopiscus to have been a priestess of the temple of the Sun, which was in the place where his parents dwelt: and this her son appears also to have had a peculiar respect for that deity. This is an observation for which I am indebted 4 to Mr. Mosheim: and I have brought it in here for the sake of some things which may follow hereafter.

III. For there are some other things concerning this emperor in Christian writers which must now be taken notice of.

Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, was deposed by the second council held in that city upon his account in ° the year 269, and Domnus was appointed in his room: but Paul being supported by Zenobia, kept his seat for some time after that, till near the end of the year 272, or the beginning of 273, when Aurelian was master of Antioch. • Paul' therefore,' says Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, having fallen from the faith, and from the episcopate, • Domnus took upon him the care of the church of Antioch. But when Paul refused to leave • the house of the church, a petition was presented to the emperor Aurelian, and he rightly • determined the matter, giving orders that the house should be delivered to them to whom the

bishops of the Christian religion in Italy and Rome should write. Thus,' as Eusebius adds, • the forementioned person was with great disgrace thrust out of the church by the secular * power.'

IV. Upon that history, and particularly upon that passage of Eusebius, divers remarks were made formerly & which need not be repeated here. I proceed to the only thing farther to be observed concerning Aurelian, that by divers Christian authors he is reckoned among the persecutors of the church. Sulpicius Severus quite omits him in his catalogue. Nevertheless Eusebius, presently after the place just cited, adds : • Thus was Aurelian affected toward • us at that time, but in the farther advances of his empire his mind was altered towards us,

owing to the advices of some men about him, so that he raised a persecution against us. • Much discourse there was every where about it. But the divine justice arrested him, when "he was just signing the edicts against us: so, as it were, holding his hand, that he should not • perform what he had designed; and thereby manifesting to all men, that the princes of this • world can do nothing against the churches of Christ, but when God allows it for our correction • and amendment.'

In Jerom's Latin edition of the Chronicle of Eusebius it is said, that when i Aurelian had ' raised a persecution against us, he was terrified by lightning that fell near him and his companions, and soon after he was slain between Constantinople and Heraclea.'

Orosius * speaks much to the like purpose, and makes this the ninth persecution.

• Fuit terræ motus eousque gravis imperante Gordiano, ut quam superstitiosior, Deorumque commentitiorum studiosior civitates etiam terræ hiatu cum populis deperirent; ob quæ, fuit. Mater ejus sacerdos fuerat solis-et filius idcirco sacrificia per totam urbem, totumque orbem terrarum, in- solem summi Numinis loco per totam vitam venerabatur. gentia celebrata sunt. Et Cordus quidem dicit, inspectis Orationem, quâ Valeriano de honoribus ab eo acceptis gratias Jibris Sibyllinis, celebratisque omnibus, gua illic jussa vide- agit, his verbis claudit : Dii faciant, et Deus certus Sol, ut et bantur, mundanum malum esse sedatum. Jul. Capit. Gor- Senatus de me sic judicet. &c. &c. Moshem. ut supr. p. dian, cap. iii. 22. p. 118.


e See Vol. i. p. 622, &c. + Pax igitur Deùm quæsita, inspectis Sibyllæ libris, fac. i H. E. I. vii. cap. 30 p. 282 D. tumque Jovi Salutari, ut præceptum fuerat, sacrificium. 8 See Vol. i. p. 623, 624. Treb. Poll. Gallien, cap 5. p. 198.

" H. E. I. vii. cap, 30. p. 283. B. © Matrem quidem ejus Callicrates Tyrius, Græcorum i Aurelianus quum adversum -nos persecutionem movisset, longe doctissimus scriptor, sacerdotem templi Solis, in eo vico, fulmen juxta cum comitesque ejus ruit; ac non multo post រំ in

quo habitabant parentes, fuisse dicit. &c. Vopisc. Aurelian. inter Constantinopolim el Heracleam in Cænophrurio viæ vecap. 4. p. 420.

teris occiditur. Chr. p. 177. U Vix eo inter Imperatores ante Constantinum M. quis- * Novissime, cum persecutionem adversus Christianos agi

« AnteriorContinuar »