PRET ARCHIVE WWW

Crosswalk Bible Study Tools
Words/Verses:
Located Where:
 Which Version:  
  Tools!         HELP / OT Tools |NT Tools

Tools: WWSB | Google Books | TexCrit | Vine's | Gk-Lex-Alts-Vars | Aramaic-Lex-Lex2 | Gk/Hb Font | X-late | HYPERpreteristarchive.com

Website Color Key


Preterist Charts

Not One Stone Left Upon Another : The catastrophic fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 forever changed the face of Judaism—and the fate of Christians in the Holy Land

"Jesus predicted it 37 years before it happened. Herod Agrippa II and his sister Bernice, who heard Paul's testimony at Caesarea (Acts 26), tried hard to prevent it, as did the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (our main source of first-century information). But the fall of Jerusalem and the burning of the Temple in A.D. 70 happened nevertheless, and it was a catastrophe with almost unparalleled consequences for Jews, Christians, and, indeed, all of subsequent history."
Samuel Lee

PRETERIST SAMUEL LEE TRANSLATOR OF

'My Eusebius'

Preliminary Disserations on Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, on the Theophania

 

"EVER since his translation of Eusebius's 'Theophania,' my father's mind had been more or less occupied on the subject of Prophecy, and he became convinced that the views which he entertained, known as the Preterist, were those held by the early Church. The subject was one of absorbing interest to him during the few last years of his life, and as a child I can remember the animated conversations between him and my mother on Prophecy in their walks about our beautiful garden, or in the leisure of meal times, she holding the more general and popular opinions of the restoration of the Jews to their own land, etc. " - A Brief Memoir

EMPHASIZES
EUSEBIUS' PRETERISM

"From this reasoning of Eusebius, it is evident that he believed that the End had come. And in this there can be no doubt, I think, he was right; but as this involves a question very ill understood at this day, it may be right to offer a few words here, as to what is meant by the End."

"Now, our Lord has identified his predictions (Matt. xxiv. and Luke xxi.) with these of Daniel. In the former (ver. 14.) He says: " then shall the END come. When ye therefore shall see the abomination... spoken of by Daniel the prophet" (ix. 27; xii. 11.)..." then shall be great tribulation" (ver. 21. comp. Dan. ix. 26; xii. 1.) ', ver. 34, "This generation shall not pass till all these things be," i. e. commenced (comp. ver. 8.). In the latter (Luke xxi. ver. 22.) " These be the days of vengeance, that ALL THINGS which are written MAY BE FULFILLED" (i. e. in them). That the terms, latter days, last days, end of the world, ends of the world, the fulness of time, refer to the times of the Apostles, and those immediately subsequent to these, the Concordance, with the parallels marked in our common Bibles, will be sufficient to shew."

 

Church History
Christian History Main
Study Archive

Click for PreteristArchive.com Home

Instaverse Bible Verse and Commentary Lookup

Click For Site Updates Page

Free Online Books Page

Historical Preterism Main

Modern Preterism Main

Preterist Idealism Main

Critical Article Archive Main

Church History's Preteristic Presupposition

Study Archive Main

Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA Main

Josephus' Wars of the Jews Main

Online Study Bible Main

1-1000

EARLY CHURCH

Andreas
Arethas Caesarea
Aphrahat
St. Athanasius
Augustine
Barnabus
Pseudo-Baruch
Venerable Bede
Chrysostom
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Clement Alexandria
Clement of Rome
Pseudo-Clementines
Cyprian
Ephraem
Epiphanes
Eusebius
Gregory
Hegesippus
Hippolytus
Ignatius
Irenaeus
James
Jerome
King Jesus
Apostle John
Lactantius
Luke
Mark
Justin Martyr
Mathetes
Matthew
Melito of Sardis
Oecumenius
Origen
Apostle Paul
Apostle Peter
"Solomon"
Sulpicius Severus
Tertullian
Victorinus

 

"The work is pleasurable for the time being, but then there is a hope that when I am dead it shall speak, and shall give God the glory when my tongue and tongues shall have ceased."

'"Eusebius," or "The Theophania," translated into English, with notes, from an ancient Syriac version of the Greek original, now lost. By Samuel Lee, Cambridge, 1843. Syriac version, edited from an ancient MS. Printed for the Society for the Publication of Oriental Texts. London, 1842.

'Eusèbe, Évéque de Césarée, en Palestine, au commencement du 4ème siècle, fut, comme on le sait un des hommes les plus érudits et les plus éloquents de son temps. On lui doit entre autres ouvrages une histoire ecclésiastique très-estimée. Il assista au Concile du Nicée, y porta la parole devant Constantin, et ce fut lui qui rédigea contre Arius la formule de foi orthodoxe, que les Pères du Concile adoptèrent, en y ajoutant seulement le mot ὁμούσιος, ou consubstantiel, expression qu'Eusèbe n'admit, à la vérité, qu'avec peine. La répugnance qu'il manifesta au sujet de ce mot, et plusieurs passages d'un commentaire sur les Psaumes dont il est auteur, l'ont fait assez généralement considérer comme partisan des opinions d'Arius. Aujourd'hui son orthodoxie n'est plus douteuse, grâce à la précieuse découverte qui a été faite d'un de ses ouvrages dont on ne connaissait que le titre. La gloire de venger la mémoire de ce savant prélat, était réservée à un des ministres les plus distingués de l'Eglise Anglicane, qui est en même temps un des Orientalistes, Européens les plus instruits, les plus laborieux, et aussi les plus célèbres. M. Samuel Lee dans son zèle infatigable pour les travaux d'érudition Orientale qui ont rapport à la religion, a trouvé la traduction Syriaque dulivre dont il s'agit. Cet ouvrage, dont l'original Grec est perdu, traite précisément du sujet délicat de la divinité de Jésus-Christ, à laquelle on accusait ce Père de l'Église de ne pas croire. Ce livre, intitulé ΘEOΦANEIA, c'est-à-dire la manifestation divine (en Jésus-Christ), nous dévoile la véritable pensée d'Eusèbe, et on ne peut douter après l'avoir lu, que le saint prélat n'ait cru à la vérité fondamentale de la religion chrétienne, vérité sans laquelle elle n'est qu'une secte philosophique. M. Lee, a publié le texte et la traduction de ce traité, il en met en relief les doctrines, et il conclut à l'orthodoxie d'Eusèbe. Nous ne le suivrons pas dans ses consciencieux recherches, et nous n'entreprendrons pas non plus d'analyser le traité de l'Evêque de Césarée. Il nous suffit d'appeler l'attention des savants sur la double publication de M. Lee, une des plus intéressantes qui aient paru dans ces denières années.

[Translation]

'Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, in Palestine, at the beginning of the 4th century, was, as we know, one of the most learned and eloquent men of his time. We owe to him, among other works, an ecclesiastical history which is much esteemed. He was present at the Council of Nice, spoke before Constantine, and it was he who drew up the formula of the orthodox faith against Arius, which the fathers of the council adopted, only adding the word ὁμούσιος, or consubstantial, an expression which Eusebius, in truth, admitted but reluctantly.

'The objection which he entertained in regard to this word, and several passages from a commentary on the Psalms, of which he was the author, caused the impression that he was a partisan of the opinions of Arius. Now his orthodoxy is no longer doubtful, thanks to the valuable discovery which has been made of one of his works, of which the title alone was known. The glory of justifying the memory of this learned prelate was reserved for one of the most distinguished ministers of the English Church, who is also one of the most enlightened, painstaking and celebrated of European Orientalists. Mr Samuel Lee, in his untiring zeal for the works of Oriental learning which relate to religion, has found the Syriac translation of the book in question. This work, of which the original Greek is lost, treats in a special manner the vital subject of the Divinity of Jesus Christ, in which this Father of the Church is accused of not believing. This book, entitled "The Theophania," that is, the Divine Manifestation (in Jesus Christ), unveils to us the real faith of Eusebius, and one cannot doubt, after having read it, that the good prelate believed in the foundation truth of the Christian religion, a truth without which it is but a philosophical sect. Mr Lee has published the text, and the translation of this treatise, and, in a learned preliminary dissertation, he has given an epitome of the doctrines, and thus established the orthodoxy of Eusebius. We will not follow him in his conscientious researches, and we shall not undertake to analyse the treatise. It is sufficient for us to call the attention of the learned to the double publication of Mr Lee, one of the most interesting which has appeared of late years.'

 

Early Christian History

THE DISCOVERER AND TRANSLATOR OF LONG LOST EUSEBIUS BOOK IS STRUCK BY THE FULFILLED ESCHATOLOGY FOUND THEREIN, BECOMING THE FATHER OF FULLY PRETERIST SYSTEMS

The Theophania, or Divine Manifestation of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

BY

EUSEBIUS
Bishop of Caesarea
(c. 265 - 340) 

Digitized by Roger Pearse

"Eusebius never allows the doctrine of Christ's second coming any importance in his historical scheme.  There is no sense of a new kingdom which will at some future date break in upon the existing historical structure, righting what is wrong and establishing justice." Frank S. Thielman

Translated and Edited from an ancient manuscript recently discovered by
 SAMUEL LEE
 Lee's Preliminary Disseration on the Theophania

Be sure to read Lee's preliminary dissertations on this work: "the old and elementary system passed away with a great noise; all these predicted empires have actually fallen, and the new kingdom, the new heaven and earth, the new Jerusalem--all of which were to descend from God, to be formed by His power, have been realised on earth ; all these things have been done in the sight of all the nations"  (Lee's Dissertations)

CLICK HERE FOR PDF FILE OF ENTIRE BOOK

"But the things which took place afterwards, did our Saviour, from his foreknowledge as THE WORD or GOD, foretel should come to pass, by means of those which are (now) before us. For He named the whole Jewish people, the children of the City; and the Temple, He styled their House. And thus He testified, that they should, on their own wicked account, bear the vengeance thus to be inflicted. And, it is right we should wonder at the fulfilment of this prediction, since at no time did this place undergo such an entire desolation as this was.  He pointed out moreover, the cause of their desolation when He said, "If thou hadst known, even in this day, the things of thy peace:" intimating too His own coming, which should be for the peace of the whole world. But, when ye shall see it reduced by armies, know ye that which comes upon it, to be a final and full desolation and destruction. He designates the desolation of Jerusalem, by the destruction of the Temple, and the laying aside of those services which were, according to the law of Moses, formerly performed within it. The manner moreover of the captivity, points out the war. of which He spoke; "For (said He) there shall be (great) tribulation upon the land, and great wrath upon this people : and they shall fall by the edge of the sword." We can learn too, from the writings of Flavius Josephus, how these things took place in their localities, and how those, which had been foretold by our Saviour, were, in fact, fulfilled. On this account He said, "Let those who are in its borders not enter into it, since these are the days of vengeance, that all may be fulfilled which has been written." Any one therefore, who desires it, may learn the results of these things from the writings of Josephus.

Frank S. Thielman
"When the persecutions of Maximin called for the more "primitive" apocalyptic conceptions of traditional Christianity, Eusbius was willing to use them.   But with the triumph of Christianity at the Milvian bridge, he conveniently "shelved" other-worldly aspirations and praised with "unconcealed" joy the establishment of God's rule on earth in the form of Constantine's empire.  Jean Sirinelli speaks for many when he says that Eusebius never allows the doctrine of Christ's second coming any importance in his historical scheme.  There is no sense of a new kingdom which will at some future date break in upon the existing historical structure, righting what is wrong and establishing justice." (Another Look at the Eschatology of Eusebius of Caesarea Vigiliae Christianae, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Sep., 1987), pp. 226-237 doi:10.2307/1583992)

Sirinelli's Review of Eusebius' Theophany
"The Second Coming is treated by Eusebius as not an essential event, and even less like a culminating event, but only as one element which plays a symmetrical part as that of the theophanies of the Old Testament, compared to the first coming." (Loose translation from French)


(By André Thevet)

E U S E B I U S

BISHOP OF CAESAREA

ON

THE THEOPHANIA

OR

DIVINE MANIFESTATION

OF

OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST,

TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH WITH NOTES, FROM AN ANCIENT SYRIAC VERSION OF THE GREEK ORIGINAL NOW LOST ; TO WHICH IS PREFIXED A VINDICATION OF THE ORTHODOXY, AND PROPHETICAL VIEWS, OF THAT DISTINGUISHED WRITER.

INSCRIBED BY PERMISSION TO
HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND,
CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.

BY SAMUEL LEE, D.D.

D.D. OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HALLE; MEMBER OF THE SOCIÉTÉ ASIATIQUE OF PARIS; OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF RHODE ISLAND, AMERICA; CANON OF BRISTOL, RECTOR OF BARLEY, HERTS., REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, &c.

CAMBRIDGE:

PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

DUNCAN AND MALCOLM, 37, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON.

M.DCCC.XLIII.

TO HIS GRACE

HUGH DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND,

&c. &c. &c.

CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, THIS ENDEAVOUR TO RESTORE TO THE Christian Church A LONG LOST WORK, AND TO VINDICATE THE OPINIONS, OF ONE OF ITS MOST LEARNED AND LABORIOUS PRELATES, IS, IN TESTIMONY OF A DEEP SENSE OF OBLIGATION FOR THE MANY MUNIFICENT FAVOURS CONFERRED ON THE UNIVERSITY, IN WHICH HE HAS THE HONOUR OF BEARING OFFICE, BY HIS GRACE'S PERMISSION, MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED, BY THE TRANSLATOR AND EDITOR.

PREFACE.

HAVING now to discharge the very agreeable duty of presenting to the Christian Church (in a translation), a long lost work of one of its most learned and laborious Pastors, my first duty will be, to give the best account I can of this Work ; my second, to describe the Manuscript from which it has been taken ; my third, to lay down the principles by which I have been guided, both in editing the Syriac text of this Manuscript, and in making and illustrating my English Translation of it. When I shall have done these things, I shall,--because some of the opinions of my author have been branded as heretical, and some others will in all probability be considered as groundless and untenable, I mean those which contain his views on Prophecy,--give as brief and candid a review of these opinions as I can : leaving it to the reader to make the conclusions for himself, which he shall deem right and just.

I am well aware of the responsibility attaching itself to an undertaking so perilous, as that of offering to the learned of Europe, for the first time, a work coming from a man so learned, so celebrated, and so often eulogized and condemned, as was the Bishop of Caesarea and Father of Church History. But, for the purpose of satisfying this responsibility to the best of my power, I now proceed, in the first place, to give all the account I can of the Work which I have the honour and pleasure of presenting to the public.

The first, and probably the only, mention of this Work which occurs in any ancient Father of the Church, is to be found in the catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers' by |4 Jerome. And in this, all that this Father says,--after speaking of some of Eusebius's other works,--is, "qeofanei/aj libri quinque," i. e. Of the Divine Manifestation, five books. After him, Suidas says "qeofanei/aj lo&goi e/," which is a mere echo of the words of Jerome. Harles, in his edition of the Bibliotheca Graeca of Fabricius, speaks of it in this manner. (Vol. vii. p. 408). "Eu0aggelikh_ qeofa&neia, bis citatur in catena in Lucam in cod. Vindobon. caesareo xlii., teste Lambecio comment, tom. iii. p. 166. not. 4. conf. supra nr. 8. Harl".--" Fragmentum ex Eusebii opere deperd. Theophania Evang. e cod. Coislin. Gött. 1740. 4". And again, p. 395, nr. 8, speaking of the work of our author against Marcellus, he says: " Hos quinque Libros adversus Marcellum Labbeus putat innui ab Hieronymo in Catalogo cap. 81. et Suida, quando inter Eusebii Scripta memorat libros quinque peri\ qeofanei/aj. Videtur enim hoc idem illi esse quod qeofanei/aj. Sed id tamquam incertum omitto, quum Hebed Jesu quoque in catalogo Librorum Chaldaicorum memorat Eusebii librum de ortu divino"

The Catalogue of Hebed Jesu, here referred to, will be found in the Bibliotheca Orientalis of Asseman, tom. iii. pt. 1, and the place in p. 18 of this: where, after speaking of the Ecclesiastical History of our author, Hebed Jesu says, [Syriac], i. e. and the Book on the Divine Manifestation. Asseman refers us, in a note, to Cave's Historia Literaria, p. 95, where mention is made of this work of Eusebius, entitled peri\ qeofanei/aj, libri quinque; but Cave tells us nothing more about it, than that it is a work not now extant.

But the thing most worthy of remark here, is Asseman's referring us to Cave at all; when, if the work had existed in the Library of the Vatican, he would, in all probability, as he has done in many other places, have given us a detailed description of it. It may be added that, although Asseman has given us very extensive lists, in this work, of |5 Syriac books deposited in the Vatican, he has never once spoken of this as being there. And the same might be said, with respect to the present very learned librarian of the Vatican, who has, in his erudite and laborious work entitled, "Scriptorum Veterum nova Collectio," said much, and edited some works, of Eusebius, and even given several fragments from our Theophania; yet he has nowhere informed us, that either the Greek text, or the Syriac version, of this Work is to be found there. I may perhaps conclude therefore, that it is not known to exist in that library.

The Citations as noted above in Fabricius, will be found in the following Work, pages 216, 321-2. The Fragment printed at Göttingen in 1740, also mentioned by him, will be either reprinted or noticed hereafter in this Work, if it can be obtained before the last sheet goes to press.

It must be evident, I think, from what has now been said, that the work of our author entitled the Ecclesiastical Theology, noticed above, could not be the same with that entitled the Theophania, or Evangelical Theophania,--for by this latter title is our Work designated in the Catena of Vienna:--while it must be equally certain, that a work by Eusebius bearing the title assigned to it by Jerome, did exist in the Syrian Church : and, as no reason can perhaps be assigned why the Syrians should forge such a work, it is probable, that this is the very work so described by Jerome.

Again, from the fragments of this Work hitherto brought to our notice, (see the places referred to above,) it seems sufficiently certain, that this is the work of Eusebius so described by Jerome. I would add, let the reader also examine in the following pages, the very many places marked as corresponding word for word, with several in the undoubted productions of our author. In our Second Book, for example, a very considerable number of the Sections or Paragraphs, are found to be identically the same with many |6  occurring in the "Oratio de laudibus Constantini:" while in our Fifth Book, the far greater part is also found word for word in the " Demonstratio Evangelica;" not to insist on several others, found either in the "Praeparatio Evangelica," the Ecclesiastical History, or some other work of our author, as shewn in the Notes.

There are also certain peculiarities in the writings of Eusebius which may be mentioned here; they are these: It is customary with him, though not constantly, to commence a subsequent book with the matter, and occasionally with the words, which closed the preceding one. The close and commencement of the First and Second, and of the Second and Third books, respectively, of the "Praeparatio Evangelica" will supply examples of this; as will the corresponding ones of our following Work, and more particularly those of the Fourth and Fifth.

To this may be added the Style of Eusebius, which is universally allowed to be any thing but simple and obvious. His periods are often long, and his style both inverted and involved. He seems moreover, to have been studious to avoid the language in common use, and often to have be-iaken himself to that peculiar to the poets. This latter consideration could not have affected our original text, which is only a translation; while the former has, to a very considerable extent. For our Translator, anxious to shew himself faithful in the discharge of this his duty, has so closely followed his original by endeavouring to render it word for word, that his translation may occasionally be considered as obscurity personified ; the Syriac very ill admitting of either inversion, or involution, of style. Several instances of this sort,--to which many more might have been added,--will be found in the Notes attached to the English Translation. Another consideration is, his Platonic manner of speaking of the Deity as a self-existing Being, and with reference to which, no other can be said (properly) to exist, |7 of which we shall speak more particularly a little farther on. His manner of speaking of the Son has too its peculiarities; His being God of God, begotten of God, proceeding from the Father; hence complete, and in all respects like Him; His having ever been, and still being, with, and in, the Father ; extending Himself nevertheless throughout all things, and meekly lowering Himself to converse with men, and the like ; which will be more particularly noticed hereafter. His occasional allusions moreover to the things passing under his own eyes, as the sufferings of the Martyrs (p. 50) ; the state of the Church of Caesarea over which he presided, may all be considered, I think, as genuine evidences that Eusebius was the author of this Work ; and to these may be added his reasoning generally after the manner of Plato, and in many instances, his adopting the terms used by that philosopher.

From these considerations, I think it must be sufficiently evident, that our Work is a copy of the genuine Greek work of Eusebius, so long lost.--But if not, let it be supposed for a moment that it is a forgery, and that some Syrian was the author of it, who, the better to secure its reception, attached the name of Eusebius to it. I would now ask, Where are we to look for the man, among the writers of the Syrian Church, equal to this task ? Philoxenus of Mabug, and Jacob of Edessa1, had, no doubt, ability sufficient to compose a work on the same subject; but neither of them, |8 nor yet any other Syrian writer, of which I have any knowledge, had any thing like the vigour and learning evinced in this. Much less likely is it, that in such an attempt the Syriac language would have been subjected to the unnatural contortions and involutions so visible in this Work, or that it would be found to have copied Eusebius word for word, to the extent noticed above.

Nor is it in any degree probable, that such an imposition could ever have been practised upon the learned of the Syrian Church. Besides, the original of the Theophania must have been in existence when this Syriac work first made its appearance, and indeed for a long time after; which would have effectually given the lie to any attempt of this sort had it been made. And to this, its unquestioned reception in the Syrian Church, affords full and sufficient testimony.

Having then disposed of this question, let us now approach our second, which is to give some account of the Manuscript from which our Work has been taken.

Sometime in the year 1839, the Rev. Henry Tattam of Bedford, who is an excellent Coptic scholar, formed the resolution of visiting Egypt for the purpose of procuring Coptic manuscripts, in order to complete, if possible, an edition of the Coptic Scriptures. At the suggestion of his friends a subscription was set on foot, for the purpose of assisting in defraying the expense of this undertaking, and this subscription was headed by a contribution of £300. by government. Individuals contributed to a small extent: and Mr. Tattam accordingly set out for Egypt. In a short time he returned, having procured some good Coptic manuscripts, of which a list has been printed and circulated; and also about 50 volumes of Syriac manuscripts2, some of which were of an extreme age, and very valuable. |9

These manuscripts Mr. Tattam sent to me, with the request that I would give him some account of their contents ; and, at the same time, say what I thought their value might be: which I did as soon as my other engagements would allow. It was in looking over these manuscripts that I had the extreme pleasure of discovering that of which the following Work is a translation. Knowing then, as I did, the extreme rarity of this Work; in other words, that no other copy of it was known to exist, I requested Mr. Tattam to allow me to take a copy of it before it should leave my hands, in order that the Work might not be lost, whatever might happen to this MS. Mr. Tattam, with the disinterestedness for which he is so remarkable, instantly gave his consent, allowing me moreover to retain the MS. as long as I might want it: and, although he soon after disposed of the collection generally to the trustees of the British Museum, he was so obliging as to make this stipulation, that I should be allowed to retain this MS. as long as I might deem it necessary.

My first business now was, to make a correct copy of this very rare and valuable Codex, as far as our work was |10 concerned ; and I accordingly copied it out myself with all the expedition I could command. Soon after I had done this, I applied to the Society lately established in the Metropolis for printing Oriental Texts, requesting they would print it, and thus multiply the copies, so as to ensure the safety and permanency of the work. To this request the Committee of that society very graciously acceded. The work was accordingly put to press, and printed by Mr. Richard Watts, a tradesman long and well known for his ability in printing Oriental works generally3. In his hands it had moreover the advantage of being printed in a Syriac type, which was made some years ago under my own inspection, for the purpose of printing a Syriac Bible for the use of the Syrian churches in Malabar. I will add here, that during the passing of the sheets through the press, I collated every one of them with the MS., so that I do trust the Syriac text, now some time completed, will be found as neatly and correctly printed, as the greatest care on the part of both the editor and printer could be expected to insure.

The MS. containing our Work, is very neatly written in the Estrangelo, or old Church-hand-writing of the Syrians, on very fine and well prepared skin. It is of the size of large quarto, each folio measuring about 14½ inches by 11½, and containing three columns each of the width of 2¾ inches, as may be seen in the fac simile prefixed to this Work. The exterior margins average 2½ inches in width, the interior 1¼; and the space between the several columns is about 5/8 of an inch. The MS. contains 245 folios; 71 of the first of which contain a Syriac translation of the Recognitions of St. Clement, as they are called. The 83 |11 next following, the work of Titus Bishop of Bostra4, (or Bozrah) against the Manicheans ; the next 76 folios contain our Work of Eusebius ; the next 14, Eusebius's account of the Martyrs of Palestine, as published in the 8th book of his Ecclesiastical History ; and the last folio, Encomiums on their excellencies, entitled, [syriac]. This last work is incomplete, some leaves having been lost from the end of the MS., and on this account the original date of the MS. has not come down to us in its close, as is usually the case.

We have nevertheless on the reverse of the fourth folio, after the conclusion of our Work, written on the outside margin of one of the folios of the Tract on the Martyrs of Palestine, the following Inscription in a bold, but rather unsightly hand, and in the common Peschito character ;

[Syriac] 

See, my brethren, if the latter part of this ancient book has been cut off, and has perished together with that (with) which its writer closed and completed it ; it was thus written at its end, viz. that "This book was written in the city |12 of Edessa of Mesopotamia, by the hands of a man named Jacob, in the year seven hundred and twenty and three, (and) was completed in the month of the latter Teshrin." (February). And, just as that which was written there, I have also written here without addition. And the things which are here, I wrote in the year 1398, in the (aera) of the Greeks (i. e. the Seleucidae).

If then we are to take the first of these dates, as given in the aera of the Seleucidae, and this Note as containing a true statement respecting the age of our MS., A. D. 411 will be its date, and its age 1432 years ! The date of this Note is, we are told, that of the Greeks (or Seleucidae), that is, A. D. 1398, corresponding to A.D. 1086, just 757 years ago, when, as its author tells us, this manuscript was such as to merit the appellation of ancient!

I was once inclined to think that our MS. could not be so old as this first date made it, and that the year 723, must be that of our common aera; which would give 1120 years for its age; and that this, both from the appearance of the MS., and from some other considerations, was nearer the truth. Yet I must confess, as I have never seen, or heard of, a Syriac MS. bearing a date in our common aera; and, as all Syriac MSS. said to be written at Edessa, do,--as far as I know,--always bear dates according to the aera of the Seleucidae; I do not see how this date can be given in our common aera.

As to the appearance of the MS., although it certainly is in very perfect and clean condition, yet as the climate of Egypt, in which it has been kept probably for many centuries, is extremely dry, it is by no means impossible that the fresh appearance of the MS. is anything more than the nature of the case requires. There certainly are MSS. in the same collection bearing a date, making them but little short of 1300 years old, and yet appearing in quite as sound a state of preservation as this does, but which, as written on |13skins of a description greatly inferor to this, do not present so clean and bright an appearance. Asseman too, gives us an account of a Syriac MS. of a gospel, preserved in the library of the Vatican, which was written in the year of our Lord 78 5 : and this he affirms was, in his day,--about 100 years ago,--as plain and perfect as ever it was.

From this it should seem, that it is impossible to say how long a MS. written on good skin and well preserved may endure; and consequently, how unsafe it is to pronounce positively on the age of any MS., merely from its appearance. The colour of the ink must in all such MSS. as Montfaucon and others have well remarked, necessarily have faded ; but to what precise extent, it must, as before, remain undefined for many reasons. The ink in our MS. is so faded though not, I think, to so great an extent as is observable in the Beza MS. at Cambridge. But this might have been occasioned by the place, or manner, in which that MS. was preserved, which was apparently less favourable than that of ours. This question therefore, I am disposed to leave in the state of uncertainty, in which I found it.

I said, in my Preface to the Syriac edition of our Work, that the MS. from which it was taken was, probably not less than a thousand years old. I was not then aware that |14a date was to be found in it. I am not sorry however to find, that I had greatly underrated its age, as this must be a good evidence to my readers, that I had no disposition to exaggerate.

It may be suggested however, that this very early date might be that of the MS. from which it, or some other prior to it, was copied: it being no uncommon thing with copyists to transcribe, with MSS. which they copy, their dates also; so that a MS. of very modern date, may, in its epi-graphe, carry with it one of the highest antiquity. To this I would answer: If we are to ascribe any credit to the Note given above, this MS. must have been considered an ancient one 757 years ago: and to such a MS. we cannot, perhaps, ascribe an age less than 600 or 700 years: if we take the least of these, the age of our Codes will be 1357 years: if the greatest, 1457 : while the date, actually ascribed to it by the Note, makes it 1432 years old, just twenty-five years less than this last computation would make.

There are however some considerations, which would at first sight seem to prove the contrary, and which indeed operated forcibly on my mind in this way, when the very early date given to our MS. first occurred to me: they are these: First, Eusebius died about A.D. 340. If then our MS. was written A. D. 411, this must have happened 71 years only after the death of the author of the original Greek work. We shall now have therefore 71, or a few more years, for the period within which our Syriac translation was made, and, as it appears to me, must have been copied6 out several times |15 before our MS. could have been written; which might seem too little. I see no reason however, why this Work of Eusebius,--which must have been a popular one,--could not have been translated into Syriac very soon after it was published : and if so, the Syriac version might have been copied out times innumerable, before the date of our MS.

When the school of Edessa was first founded, I have not been able to discover. It is certain however that it was, and had been, a considerable time in vigorous operation before A. D. 411, the date assigned to our MS7. Our Work might therefore have been translated into the Syriac at Edessa, even during the lifetime of its author, or at least early enough to have allowed of our MS. being copied there in A.D. 411, after innumerable copies had been taken from the autograph of the translator, and from one another.

But there are, I think, better reasons for supposing that our translation was not made at Edessa at this early period, but rather in Palestine. We are told by Asseman (l. c. p. CMXXV.), that there were, both at Caesarea and at |16 Scythopolis, (the Bethshan of the Old Testament) in Palestine, schools of sacred literature; and that at Scythopolis the business of interpreting from the Greek into the Syriac language, was vigorously carried on; and, that to this fact our author himself has given his testimony8: as also have both Socrates and Sozomen the historians.

If this may be relied on, it is not improbable that our translation was made during the lifetime of Eusebius, and it might be under his inspection, and that of Patrophilus who was then Bishop of Scythopolis. And I think there are certain peculiarities of language in it, tending to shew that it was not made at Edessa, which are these: We never find the form of the feminine plural in verbs9, as we constantly do in the works of Ephrem, Jacob of Edessa, and other writers of that school. The pronoun of the first |17 person plural is rather of the Hebrew, than the Syriac, form. The pronominal forms, [Syriac], never occur in the language of Edessa; nor does the adverbial [Syriac], nor the impersonal [Syriac], nor the combination [Syriac] in the sense of immediately, nor the occasional redundancy, and even defect, of the relative pronoun [Syriac] , as far as my knowledge goes: all of which will be found marked in the Notes. I am therefore inclined to believe, that our translation was not made at Edessa, but in Palestine.

The language of this translation,--allowing for the instances just mentioned,--appears to me to be the purest Syriac10, and such as might be well expected in a work of so ancient a date. I have already remarked, that its order is very greatly inverted, and its collocation involved, from its having been made servilely to follow the Greek original. Of this any one will satisfy himself, by comparing any of its sections with the places pointed out, as found in Greek, in some of the still existing works of Eusebius : which,-- although it has had the effect of giving me a great deal of trouble, as it will any reader of the Syriac text,--is nevertheless a circumstance of infinite value in other respects; and particularly, as it has preserved to our times a most exact copy of an original Greek work of our author, which has, no doubt, been long ago lost.

There is another advantage arising from the circumstance of so much of this work's being still found in the |18  Greek of its author, which is this; we are hence enabled to judge of the extent of Greek learning possessed by the translator. And this, I am induced to believe, was very considerable. I have pointed out in my notes, some instances in which I think he has erred; I am nevertheless bound to say, that I believe his translation to be, upon the whole, quite as accurate as are the best translations hitherto published of the Greek works of Eusebius.

It has been stated above, that our MS. is written neatly and correctly for the most part, and in the ancient character termed Estranghelo. I have now to say that it is entirely without vowel marks, and that the interpunctuation is frequently such, as to supply nothing whatever towards a just conception of the construction of the text. That the Syrians had a system of interpunctuation answering, in some respects, to that afforded by the accents of the Hebrew Bible, I have no doubt; yet I must say, that hitherto this has not been satisfactorily developed. Mr. Ewald has indeed endeavoured to do this, in a work published at Gottingen in 1832, entitled "Abhandlungen zur Orientalischen und Biblischen Literatur;" in which, at p. 103 and following, he has treated on the "accentuationssystem" of the Syrians according to some MSS. found in the Royal Library at Paris; and this, I have no doubt, he has done with all good fidelity. Yet I must say, the system made out by him, receives but very little countenance from any ancient MS. hitherto seen by me. The older writers seem to have adopted a system much more simple, and less encumbered with marks ; the more modern ones, particularly the Maronites,--to whom we owe the interpunctuation of the greater Polyglotts,--appear to me to be the real authors of his system. However this may be, all I have done in printing our Syriac text has been, to follow the MS. as closely as I possibly could; I say this, because cases occur in which it is scarcely possible to say, whether the Copyist intended the |19 point to stand on the line of the text, above it, or below it. Some remarks will be found, in my notes, on the use of Ribbui, ( [Syriac] ) the mark commonly attending the plural number in nouns, and occasionally in verbs, in which our MS. seems to be singular. In this case too, I have rigidly adhered to the MS.

The rules, under which I have proceeded in making my translation from the Syriac, are the following. As I professed to undertake the office of a translator, and not of a commentator, I thought it right to confine myself as closely to my original, as the nature of the case and my best endeavours would enable me. If therefore, I have followed my original as closely as I could, I trust I have not done this to such a degree, as to have made my English either harsh, or difficult of apprehension. Where I found the Syriac greatly obscure, I generally added a note, and referred to the Greek, if accessible. And, for the better understanding of the mind of my author, I have occasionally pointed out parallel passages occurring in the Fathers, who were either prior to him, and therefore probably imitated by him, as Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Tatian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, and others; or, who succeeded him, particularly Theodoret, who was evidently a great imitator of him. I have also cited such passages from the classical, and other writers, as my author either referred to, or commented upon, as Herodotus, Thucydides, Diogenes Laer-tius, Plato, Aristotle, Josephus and others; which cost me much time and trouble. I did not however deem it necessary to make a collation of all, or of any, of the Greek or Latin Fathers for this purpose: all I have done, or intended to do, was, to mark down such coincidences as occurred generally in my reading, during the time in which I was engaged in this work. Many other similar passages might doubtless be found in the writings of the Fathers of the Church, and particularly in Justin |20Martyr, Tatian, Tertullian, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, Arnobius, Lactantius, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, which I leave to the greater industry and time of others, who may choose to follow out the enquiry. Such illustrations and notes as are given on the Syriac text, were intended for the use of students who may be induced to read that work. I trust I have, in this way, provided a very useful Chresto-mathy for the advancement of Syriac literature.

The divisions, i. e. the paragraphs, or sections, which I have made in my text, both of the Syriac Edition, and of my English Translation, are in all respects exactly what I found them in the MS. I have however added numerals for the purpose of facilitating reference, either from the Syriac Text to my Translation, or from either of these to the original Syriac Manuscript. I might indeed have made a more equal distribution of these paragraphs or sections, but I thought it would be best, for the reasons just now given, to abide by the old one. I thought too, that, if the original Greek should be discovered hereafter, it might be as well not to alter this division of the text,-- particularly as it is one of a very ancient date,--for the purpose of affording the fullest opportunity for seeing what its ancient state was, and thence the more easily to verify the identity of such work, should it indeed ever be found.

I will now add a few remarks on the Work itself, and as to the period at which it was probably written. I think I may say, that the Work itself is worthy of the piety and learning of the deservedly celebrated Father of Church History. As a brief exposition of Christianity, particularly of its Divine authority, and amazing influence, it has perhaps never been surpassed. The work of Theodoret, entitled "Graecarum affectionum curatio" lately reprinted by Dr. Gaisford, is certainly more full on the particular points which it was intended to illustrate: but then it owes much to the industry and learning of our author, and is less comprehensive in its |21 context. The Stromateis of Clemens of Alexandria, and the "Civitas Dei" of Augustine, are perhaps more abundant on particular questions; while the work of Clemens is less orderly, and both of these take a less extensive range of inquiry, and are not so well adapted for general reading. When we consider the very extensive range of enquiry occupied by our author, the great variety both of argument and information which it contains, and the small space which it occupies; we cannot, I think, avoid coming to the conclusion, that it is a very extraordinary work, and one which is as suitable to our own times, as it was to those for which it was written. Its chief excellency is, that it is argumentative, and that its arguments are well grounded, and logically conducted. If it once or twice appeals to the power of Christianity in inducing many to devote their lives to a state of virginity, and to some other things quite unessential to vital religion ; we should bear in mind, that this was the foible of his day, and that, of the thousands who may be found both able and willing to deprecate and blame this, not so much as one perhaps will to follow his virtues, or give any thing like such evidences of real learning, and of Christian piety and zeal.

As to the period at which it was written, I think it must have been, after the general peace restored to the Church by Constantine, and before either the "Praeparatio," or the "Demonstratio Evangelica," was written. My reason for the first of these suppositions is: Our author speaks repeatedly of the peace restored to the Church; of Churches and Schools restored, or then built for the first time : of the nourishing state of the Church of Caesarea; of the extended, and then successfully extending, state of Christianity : all of which could not have been said during the times of the last, and most severe persecution. My reasons for the second of these suppositions are, the considerations that whatever portions of this Work are found, either in the "Praeparatio," |22 the "Demonstratio Evangelica," or the " Oratio de laudibus Constantini," they there occur in no regular sequence of argument as they do in this Work: especially in the latter, into which they have been carried evidently for the purpose of lengthening out a speech. Besides, many of these places are amplified in these works, particularly in the two former as remarked in my notes; which seems to suggest, that such additions were made either to accommodate these to the new soil, into which they had been so transplanted, or, to supply some new matter, which had suggested itself to our author. And again, as both the "Praeparatio" and "Demonstratio Evangelica," are works which must have required very considerable time to complete them, and which would even then be unfit for general circulation ; it appears probable to me, that this more popular, and more useful work, was first composed and published, and that the other two,--illustrating as they generally do, some particular points only,--argued in order in our Work,-- were reserved for the reading and occasional writing of our author during a considerable number of years, as well for the satisfaction of his own mind, as for the general reading of the learned. It appears probable to me therefore, that this was one of the first productions of Eusebius, if not the first after the persecutions ceased.

Of the authors cited in the following pages, I have not always had it in my power to quote either the latest or the best Editions. In many cases I could consult those only which happened to be in my own possession, not only because it is not always in my power to be within the precincts of the University, and to avail myself of its Libraries; but also, even when there, its Libraries are neither large nor rich in this respect.

I have in some instances written the proper names as I found them in my Syriac original, which I could hardly avoid, both as it appeared to be my duty to represent this |23 rather than any other exemplar, and also because the nature of the passage occasionally required this.

If I have in any instance failed to seize the sense of my author, I can only say, by way of defence, that I have done the best in my power to ensure accuracy in this respect. I have spared no pains, and have thought no inquiry too great, to do justice to him. Still, as Syriac Literature is but in a state of infancy among us, whether as it respects the character of the Grammars, Dictionaries, Authors, or other helps of this sort; if I have any where failed, I may perhaps hope for the indulgence which the nature of the case requires: and nothing beyond this do I wish. In all such cases, I shall be most happy in receiving suggestions which may improve my Work, and shall be as ready both to adopt these, and to be thankful for them. Of the Work itself I may say, If it has cost me much labour and research, and crowded upon me an increase of labour, depriving me in many instances even of necessary relaxation and exercise; it has nevertheless brought with it pleasures, which I shall ever remember with the greatest thankfulness. To have had the privilege of restoring to the Christian Church, a Work of one of its brightest ornaments as a Scholar and Theologian in the best of its days, is indeed an honour of which few can boast: while the satisfaction of hoping, that it may be instrumental for ages to come, in bringing many to the knowledge of the truth, is more than sufficient to repay any labour which its restoration might have cost.

I have now to express my thanks to the Syndics of the University Press, for their liberality in taking upon themselves the principal part of the expense incurred in printing this Work ; and to add, that I hope this will not have been thrown away on the present occasion.

[Selected Footnotes: some were omitted which required transcribing Syriac but were of no interest to the non-Syriac speaker]

1. 1 If we may rely on the date of our MS. however, presently to be noticed, this Translation must have existed long before the times of either of these writers.--It is worth remarking too, that not only was this work written long before the appearance of Mohammed, but, the MS. itself was written nearly 200 years before he was born!--which may be considered as supplying tolerably good matter for proof, that no expectation was then entertained of the coming of such a Teacher as he was, or that the Scriptures underwent any alteration afterwards for the purpose of opposing him. This argument has been stated more at length in the latter part of my "Martyn's Persian Controversies."

2. 1 These he purchased at the monastery of the Blessed Virgin in the desert of Nitria (or Askit. The Coenobium Scetense of Asseman.), situated on the west of the Nile, and somewhat more than 80 miles from Cairo. Asseman visited this Monastery in 1715, when he tells us its Library did not contain more than about 200 Volumes. Of these he requested to have a hundred, but could not get more than nine or ten good authors, with a few others. (Bibl. Orient. Tom. i. Pref.) But in his Catalogue of the " Codices Nitrienses," ib. pp. 561--572, he gives an account of 34 Codices. Some of which were perhaps obtained on a former occasion by his Cousin Elias (ib.); from which, according to Peter Benedict their Editor and Translator, were the Works of Ephrem Syrus published at Rome, in 1737--43. I am greatly rejoiced to find, that Mr. Tattam has just returned from a second visit to this same Monastery, and has brought with him another collection of Syriac Manuscripts, from which, I trust, much valuable matter will be extracted and brought before the public.--It is evident that many of the MSS. brought to England by Mr. Tattam, had passed through the hands of Asseman, from certain marks found in them: and this I think is true of ours, as certain pencil-marks are found in it, which could hardly have been placed there by an Oriental.

3. 1 London, printed for the Society for the publication of Oriental Texts, sold by James Madden and Co., 8, Leadenhall-street. 1842. To this I prefixed a short Preface, referring the reader to the more ample one intended to go forth with this Work.

4. 2 The Metropolis of Arabia Petraea. Syr. [Syriac] or [Syriac] Gr. and Lat. Bostra. Arab, [Arabic] Basra. Assem. Bibl. Orient. Tom. iii. p. ii. p. DCCXXX. Not to be confounded with the Bozrah, [Hebrew] of Jerem. xlix. 13, of the Idumeans, nor with that of the Moabites, ib. xlviii. 24. Reland's Palestine, Lib. in. p. 666. Edit. 1714. Where we are told that this Bishop was present at the Council of Antioch, A.D. 363. This work of Titus was printed by Canisius, in the original Greek : the text, however, is any thing but good and exhibits many Lacunae, which this very ancient Syriac translation would well supply.

5. 1 Assemani. Bibl. Orient. Tom. ii. p. 486. His words are: " Erat quoddam Evangelium Edessenum (hoc est Syriacum Edessae exaratum) pervetustam quidem, sed clarum ac dilucidum, ex quo ne jota quidem unum deletum fuerat, legebatur autem clarius quam libri recens exarati, et unus dumtaxat prior quinternio prae antiquitate ex eo exciderat. Ad ejus vero calcem ita scriptum erat." (I omit the Syriac,. and give Asseman's translation of it.) "Absolutus est sanctus iste liber Feria quinta, die 18. Canun prioris (hoc est, Decembris) Anno Graecorum 389. (Christi 78.) propria manu Achaei Apostoli, socii Mar Maris Discipuli Mar Adaei Apostoli, cujus Oratio nobiscum sit Amen." If any reliance is to be placed on this document, it will follow, that this Syriac Gospel (and it does not say which Gospel is meant) was translated from the Greek probably before the death of the last Evangelist!

6. 1 My reason for this opinion is grounded on the fact, that many of the proper names found in this MS. are so deformed by the mistakes of the Copyists, as to make it extremely probable that many Copies had been made from the Translator's Autograph, before our Copy was written: e.g. p. 71, we have [Syriac] for [Syriac] or the like: p. 131, [Syriac] for probably; a corruption so great as to bid utter defiance to critical conjecture, had we indeed had nothing else to rely upon: p. 148, [Syriac], Herododus, for Herostratus: to which many others might be added. There are also some other errors, such as [Syriac], for [Syriac] see pp. 187, 223, 302, 276, &c.,--all of which, as far as they have occurred to me, I have corrected in the notes.

7. 2 According to Asseman (Bibl. Orient. Tom. iii. p. ii. p. lxix.) it had been established from time immemorial: his words are, "In urbe Edessa Scholam fuisse Persicae gentis, ab immemorabili conditam, in qua sacras literas Christiani Juvenes......docebantur." And ib. p. CMXXIV--v. we are told, that Eusebius of Emesa studied during his infancy at Edessa, but finished his education under our author in Caesarea of Palestine. His words are (after Socrates, Lib. ii. cap. 6), " Eusebium Emessenum Episcopum testatur ab infantia imbutum fuisse literis in schola Edessenae urbis, quae illi patria erat, humaniores deinde hausisse literas, sed tandem reversum esse ad scripturas sacras sub magisterio Eusebii Caesareae Episcopi, et Patrophili Episcopi Scythopolitani."

8. 1 L. c. quoted by Asseman. His words are, " Scholae sacrarum literarum in utraque urbe erant. Caesareae nimirum, ubi Pamphilus martyr bibliothecam, ut supra dixi, instituerat et Scythopoli, ubi officium Interpretis de Graeca in Syriacum linguam vigebat, ut in Actis Martyrum Palaestinae ab Eusebio Caesareensi collectis de S. Procopio martyre legitur," &c. "Socrati suffragatur Sozomemis," &c. Lib. in. cap. v. The martyrdom alluded to, occurred in the first year of the persecution of Dioclesian, and it is the first in our author's work on the Martyrs of Palestine. The passage is, as found in our MS., in these words : -- 

[Syriac]

His family was of Baishan (Bethshan), and he ministered in the appointment of the Church in (three) different particulars. First he was a Reader: in another appointment, he interpreted the Greek Language in the Aramaic (Syriac.) And (in) the last, which was superior to the former ones, he was opposed to the powers of wickedness, and the Demons trembled before him.-- Asseman gives, " Hic genere quidem Hierosolymitanus erat; in Basan autem urbe.--morabatur": differing considerably from our MS. 

9. 2 As [Syriac]

10. 7 It partakes in no respect of the corrupt dialect, termed by Adler "Hierosolymitana," as noticed in his work on the Syriac Versions of the Scriptures, and as found in a MS. discovered by him in the Library of the Vatican.

BOOK I

THEOPHANIA.

THE FIRST BOOK OF EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA ON THE DIVINE MANIFESTATION.

1. THOSE who say on the constitution of the whole of this great and beautiful world, and on the diversified subsistence and manifold structure of the heavens and the earth, that it has neither beginning nor governour; and that there is no Lord, and no Providential care (existing); but that it has arisen of itself, casually, undesignedly, and by blind (lit. foolish) accident, however this may have happened, are altogether impious and godless1: on which account they are excluded from the divine assemblies, and with propriety shut out from our holy temples. Because, neither can they themselves possess a house without contrivance and care; nor can a ship be well constructed with its appurtenances, without a shipwright; nor a garment be woven, without the art of weaving; nor a city |2be built, when the science of the architect is wanting. And, as they themselves confess these things, I know not by what estrangement of the intellect it is, that they do not consider the courses of the sun (as being) according to their manner; the changes of the moon, according to their appointments; the (several) orders of the stars, as in their due course; and the revolutions of the curvatures of the heavens, and the recurrence and changes of times and seasons2. And again with these, that (they do not consider) the weight of the mountains (as regulated) by the balance3; the equalization of days and nights; the unimpeded production of the animals; the traditionary and unchanging succession of life of long duration; the herbs of every sort of flower which spring out of the earth; the provisions for all the animals, as suitable for each; their several senses; the members of the body; their properties of excellence, and as located in their (several) situations, so that (men) see with their eyes, and feel with their hands: which they also say, is obvious to the blind. So that with atheistical affirmations, and injurious wickedness of mind, |3 (they assert) that there is no work either of wisdom, of the WORD OF GOD, or of Providence (evinced in all this); but they imagine on the contrary, that (all) is of blind fortune, and happens just as it may be, without object or end. These same therefore are, as being atheistical, driven far away from the Divine hearing (of the Word), and entirely from the society of those who fear God.

2. The company too of the Polytheists, on the other hand, set in order against the preceding, seems to me to be in extreme error;----that they err, as children in intellect, who change the worship of the Maker of the world, the Governour of all, the God who is over all, for (that) of the things which are of Him; and (hence) honour the sun, the moon, and the rest of the parts of the universe, the primary elements, the earth, water, air, and fire, with the name due to Him, who is their Maker and Creator; and call those Gods4 which never existed; nor had existed, nor had been (so) named, had not the Maker5 of the universe, THE WORD OF GOD, willed that they should exist. Nor do they appear to me better than those who leave the chief Architect, to admire the excellency of workmanship (visible) in the houses of kings; the wrought cielings7 and the walls; their many coloured and flowered pictures; their roofs variegated with gold and sculpture of precious stones; and attribute to these the praise and wisdom due to their Artificer; which they ought to ascribe, not to the things seen, but to Him alone who is their chief Architect; to confess Him to be the cause of their wonder, and of these many works |4of wisdom. For He alone is wise who supplied the cause, that these many things should thus be. These differ, therefore, in no respect from mere infants. Nor do those whose admiration is expended on the lyre with its seven strings,----the (mere) instrument of music,----but not on him who is the inventor of its structure, nor on him who knows its use, nor yet on his wisdom. Nor (again) do those who leave him who is eminent in war, to adorn his spear and shield with the crowns of victory. Nor do those who honour the streets, squares, buildings, temples, gymnasia----things inanimate----with the admiration due to the great king, who caused the erection of such chief city of his kingdom: when it was right they should admire, neither the pillars nor the stones, but the great maker and lawgiver6 of these instances of wisdom.

3. In7 conformity with these (considerations) also, we make this same (Being) the (efficient) cause of all which we see with the eyes of the body; not the sun, the moon, nor any other of the things in the heavens. It is becoming too, that we should confess them all to be the works of wisdom: but not, that we should honour or worship them by means of any similitude of Him, who is their Maker and Creator. From the contemplation of these too, we both praise and worship, with the whole affection of the soul, Him who again is known, not by means of the bodily eyes, but only by the mind which is pure and enlightened; |5Him (I say) who is the King of all, THE WORD OF GOD. For no one ever graced the (mere) body of any wise and intelligent man, (or) his eyes8, head, hands, feet, or the rest of his flesh, much less his external clothing, with the title of wisdom; nor yet has termed the vessels in the houses, nor the service-vessels, of the philosophers, wise; while every thinking person has expressed his wonder at that concealed, and unseen, mind which is in man.

4. Thus, and more particularly,----before these visible ornaments which are (but) the bodies of this whole universe, and which have been fabricated from one (species of) matter,----let us express our wonder at that unseen and invisible WORD, that Maker and Adorner of the exemplars9 of all things, who is the ONLY (begotten) WORD OF GOD: whom, the Maker of all, He who is beyond all, and above all being, generated of Himself as a ray of light from His own Godhead, and constituted Him both the Leader and Governour of this whole (world). |6

5. For it was impossible that this perishable being of bodies, and this Nature of reasonable creatures (such) as it now is, could be brought near to God the Governour of all, on account of its exceedingly great imperfection. For He is an Essence beyond and above all, which can neither be described, comprehended, nor approached; and (which) dwells in the glorious light, to which nothing can be compared,----as the Divine words declare10. For this had no existence, and out of nothing did He send it forth. And (hence) it was greatly different, and very far removed, from the nature of (His) Essence. Well therefore did He, the fulness of all good, the God of all, first appoint a Mediator11, the Divine Power, His ONLY (begotten), who should be sufficient for all12; who could accurately, abundantly, and as present, hold converse with His Father4, receive of His inward and secret (nature), and be meekly lowered to the form and manner of those who were (so) far removed from His princely state. In no |7other way could it be either glorious or right, that He, who is beyond and above all, should be mixed up with matter that is perishable, and with a body. On this account, the DIVINE WORD entered by a (sort) of commixture into this whole, and bound together the bands (as it were) of all things, by means of the Divine power which is incorporeal: leading on and carrying forward, and governing (the whole) by every species of wisdom, as it seemed good to Him. 

6. The proof then, of this conclusion is obvious. For, if those which we usually term the primary elements of all,----the earth, water, air, and fire, were themselves the constituent portions of the universe, and are constituted of a mixed nature, which we even see with our eyes is the case,----and, if the essence of all were one, and that comprehending the whole, and were (as) the Mother and Nurse (of all these things), as those who are subtle in these matters love to term it; and were without figure and visibility, and wholly destitute of soul and of reason;---- Whence, one may ask, was it, that this world was made to consist of that of which it now does? Whence also the distinction of the (several) elements? And whence the |8 concordant course of those things which were adverse to agreement? And, Who commanded this heavy element of earth, to ride over that of humid matter?

7. And, Who is He that has caused water, the nature of which is to run downwards, to take an opposite course, and to ascend to the clouds?

8. And, Who is He that has so constrained the power of fire, that it shall insinuate itself into wood? and has made it to mix itself up with things which are in their natures opposed to it?

9. And, Who has attempered this cold air with the power of heat; has released these from their (natural) contentions with one another, and has reconciled them (as it were) to love?

10. Who is He that has distinguished the race subject to mortality with the character of extension, and drawn it out to the length of the life which is immortal?

11. Who is He that has so formed the Male, fashioned the Female, and associated them both as one compound, and (thus) discovered one source of generation for all animal life?

12. Who is He that changes this fluent generating seed from its fluid, perishing, and senseless state, and makes it (that) of the generation of animal life?

13. Who is He that performs even to this time all these things, and innumerable others beyond them, and which exceed all wonder and astonishment?

14. Who is He that daily and hourly, secretly and by a power that is invisible, effects the generation and changes of these things?

15. But, the efficient Cause of all things is justly said to be that worker of miracles, THE WORD OF GOD. For THE WORD OF GOD who is Almighty, has in truth |9extended himself into every thing: above into the heights, and beneath into the depths, has He drawn out His incorporeal soul. He also holds, as it were in His hands, the breadth and length of all in (its) extent. This whole has He brought, and bound up together; and has (thus) set up for himself this (immense) vessel filled with every sort of compound. He too, by every species of wisdom, and by means of the power which is rational, has made well to combine and to harmonize, according to their several measures, this essence of bodies destitute of reason, form, and visibility; governing by words unutterable, and directing for the advantage of all13, the Sun, the Moon, and those (other) luminaries that are in the heavens.

16. This selfsame WORD OF GOD too brought himself down also upon the earth, and (there) set up all the various kinds of animals, and every beautiful form of plant.

17. This selfsame WORD OF GOD also immerged even into the depths of the sea14, and determined those swimming natures: and here again he made the myriads of forms which are innumerable, with every various kind of living creature.

18. The selfsame also completes, by the effectuating art of nature, those (beings) which are inwardly |10 conceived in the womb, and forms (them) into animals. The same too makes to ascend to the heights as light, this humid, heavy, and naturally descending, matter (of sea-water15), and thus, completing the course of his government, changes it to sweetness, and brings it (again) in due measure, and at determined seasons, upon the earth: and, like the excellent husbandman who waters his land well, and attempers the wet with the dry, he changes (things) into every sort of form: at one time, into beautiful flowers; at another, into the forms peculiar to each species; at another, into delightful scents; at another, into different and diversified sorts of fruits; at another, into every kind of taste which gives pleasure.

19. But why need I take upon myself to discuss the powers of THE WORD OF GOD? or, venture upon a thing, the doing of which is impossible, and, it is clear, greatly surpasses all mortal mind?

20. Others indeed name this same (Being) Universal nature; others, the Universal soul; others, Fate; and others say, that He is the God who is beyond all. But, I know not how they confound together the things, which are so greatly and widely different; and (thus) cast down to the earth, and mix up, that Governour of all, that Power of (eternal) existence which is above all, with bodies, (and) |11with perishable matter; affirm, that He is the medium both of irrational and rational animals, and is comprehended both in those that are mortal, and immortal. But these things they (do).

21. The Divine doctrine, however, declares that He who is above all that is good, the same is the (efficient) Cause of all, and is beyond all comprehension; and that on this account He cannot be described, enounced, or named: and, not only that He is elevated above all verbal description, but also above all mental apprehension; that He is neither contained in place, nor existing in body, neither in the heavens, nor in the aether, nor in any one portion of this whole. But that He is at once within, and independent of all, reserved in the unseen depth of (His own) knowledge. The Divine declarations teach us to recognize Him alone as the God of truth, who is far removed from all essence of body, and a stranger to all service of government. It has, therefore, been delivered to us, that all is of Him, but not that it is by (or through) Him16.

22. But He, as a king within the concealment and privacy in which He is incomprehensible, sits in the elevation of His own splendour, governing and ordering (all) solely by the power of His own will. For, by His will exists whatsoever does exist; and, had He not (so) willed, neither had it (so) existed. He wills, however, every good thing, because He is also good in His own essential being. |12

23. He therefore, by whom are all things, THE WORD OF GOD, proceeded forth from above, from His good Father, as a river ever flowing from an unlimited fountain, and distilling as rain, in words unutterable, to those who were perishing, completely furnished for the common salvation of all. And, as in the case with ourselves, that secret and invisible mind which is within us, no man ever knew, either how, or why, it exists in its own essential character, but (which) sits as a king within the secrecy of its chambers, and considers of the things to be done; so the only word then proceeding from it, begotten as it were of a Father in the privacy of retirement, and being the primary angel (messenger) to all, of the mind of its Father, openly publishes those things which its father considered in secret; and, passing on into the hearing of all, brings to full effect the will (so made known). These (hearers) then receive the benefit of the word, while the secret and invisible mind, this father of (such) word, no one had ever seen with the eyes. So also,----that is, (in a manner) surpassing all examples and comparisons, that completing WORD OF GOD, the King of all,----was, as being the only (begotten) Son of His Father, established, not by any mere emanating virtue; nor constituted in his nature by the enunciation of names and words; nor designated by any sound produced by the percussion of the air: but THE WORD is living, and is the minister of God who is |13 over all, and in His essence, He is "the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God." He proceeds moreover from the Godhead and rule of His Father; and is the17 good offspring of the good Father, and the common Saviour of all. He also waters all, pouring out from his own fulness upon all, life, and reason, and wisdom, and light, and every good thing. He waters too, not only the things that are before Him and near Him, but those also that are removed far away on the earth, and in the sea; and if there be any other creature, in any thing that exists. He too keeps in order, by His justice and the power of His rule, every border, place, law, and possession: to each and every thing does He distribute and give that which is suitable: apportioning (this) to some who are in the sphere above the world; to others, who reside in the heavens; to others, whose habitation is the aether; to others, that are in the air; and to others, on the earth. Then passing on from these, He again well distinguishes, in other quarters, the lives of all; carrying forward with due discrimination, their customs and various observances. He also provides the food for the animals, not only for those that are rational, but also for those that are not so: (and this) for the advantage of those that are.

24. To some he gives the comforts of a mortal and temporary life; to others, that they may partake of immortality: and of every thing, as THE WORD OF GOD, is He the Doer. And, being near to every thing, and |14pervading all with a power which is rational, and, looking up to His Father, He governs the things that are below according to His intimations, and after Him accordingly as the Saviour of all. And thus, mediating and bringing near to the (eternal) Being this essence of things, He constitutes the bond which cannot be severed. THE WORD OF GOD (I say), which is in the midst, which binds together those which are diverse, and suffers them not to fall off (and) away, He is the Providential care which is watchful over all, He is the Director of all: He is "the Power of God, and the wisdom of God": He is the only (begotten) Son of God; the God which is begotten of God, THE WORD. For, "In the beginning was THE WORD, and THE WORD was with God, and THE WORD was God. Every thing was by Him, and without Him was not any thing:"---- the glorious words of the divine men (so) teaching.

25. This is the common Saviour of all, on whose account this universal essence is productive, and rejoices that it ever drinks from his dewdrops; is always youthful in its stature, and ever presents the appearance of beauty. He therefore holds its reins, and, at the intimations of His Father, rightly guides the mighty ship of this universe, |15(and) with His own helm He governs it. This (Being) excellent of art, did He who is God above all, as a good Father beget as good Fruit, the ONLY (begotten) SON, and give (him) to this world (as) a most excellent gift; did cast as a Soul into a body destitute of soul, and into the nature of irrational bodies, His own rational WORD: and (so), by virtue of the DIVINE WORD, did He both enlighten and enliven this (otherwise) shapeless, unsightly and colourless, being ----by Him, (I say) whom we ought, both to know and to worship, as being ever near to the matter and elements, of (all) bodies. Thus, that which was immaterial, bodiless, and unconscious (lit. unwise), became, as from others, endued with consciousness (lit. became wise). But He is THE LIFE, and He is THE LIGHT; the intelligent offspring of THE LIGHT which cannot be described. He too, is ONE in His Essence, even as He is |16from ONE Father. He possesses however many powers (virtues) within His own person. For, we should not suppose that, because the (constituent) parts of the world are many, they therefore constitute many powers1 (Demons): nor, because the operations are many, we ought therefore, to set up for ourselves many Gods.

26. Those therefore who follow many Gods, commit, as children in soul, a grievous mistake when they make into Gods the (constituent) parts of the Universe, and (virtually) divide the one world into many18. As if one should take from the person of a man the eyes only, and then affirm that these were the man; and again, that the ears were another; and so again, the head (another); or, should gradually sever the neck, the breast, the shoulders, the feet, the hands, or the rest of the members; or, that he should (so) divide the faculty of sense by |17 process of reasoning, and then affirm on this one man, that these (portions) really were many men: he would deserve nothing better of the wise, than the ridicule due to folly. Such as this man would be, would he likewise be who fabricated for himself many Gods out of the (constituent) parts of the one Universe, and would sever into many sections those Bodies of all, whose nature is fleeting and dispersive, and which are fabricated out of one primary material; and then again, would by an effort of reason make these his Gods?.

27. Much worse than this would he be, who would also imagine that this entirely made world,----constituted as it is wholly and altogether of many parts,----is God: not considering that the Divine nature could never subsist of parts or be complex, or could stand in need of some other to compound it: nor again, that if it consisted of parts, could it be Divine. For, How can it consist of things different and dissimilar, faulty and excellent? Because that which is compounded, must also be dissoluble; and that which consists of many parts, is of necessity dissimilar19: while that which is equal in all and unchanging in all, is simple and incomplex. That too which is complex, is compounded of things dissimilar. And that which is dissimilar has in itself something faulty, opposed to that which is excellent. For if the whole were excellent, it would (then) be equal and similar. And, if it were so in the whole, it would in the whole be consistent with itself: and thus would it be in essence simple, |18and without parts. But this nature (of things) does not shew itself to be such, since this world is viewed as wholly subject to sense: for it is constituted of many parts, and is (therefore) compounded; it is too, in many of its parts, changing. And where it is thus, there is also the capability of a nature of an opposite description. And hence this world associates beings, at once both mortal and immortal, rational and irrational; in matter too, both cold and hot; wet and dry. From all which, God is (necessarily) free. For, if the nature of God be simple, it is also without parts, and is uncompounded; (placed) beyond, and far removed from, every ordinance of this visible world. On this account the Preacher of Truth thus openly says: "The Word of God proclaimed, He who is before all, is alone the Saviour of all rational beings.'' But God who is beyond all, is the head (source) of the generation of THE WORD. He alone is the Cause of all; and, of His ONLY (begotten) WORD, He is truly styled THE FATHER. Above Him therefore, no other Cause can be assigned. He therefore is God alone20; and from Him proceeded forth, by (virtue of) His own secret will which is unutterable, the ONLY (begotten), the Saviour of all, the one WORD of God, who (is) through all. 

28. This sensible world is therefore, not unlike the lyre of many strings, consisting of many dissimilar portions:|19----of acute and grave, lax and intense; and of others between these, all well combined together by the art of the Musician. Such then is also this (universe), collected (as it is) into one compound, consisting of many parts, and many compositions; of cold at once, and warm its opposite; and of matter, wet and dry. It is moreover a mighty vessel, and is the work of the God of all.

29. But the DIVINE WORD has not been constituted of parts, nor has it been compounded of any opposing (nature), nor does it consist of (either) part or compound; but both wisely and well does He in every thing resemble His Father; and to the King of all does He give back the praise, which to Him is both suitable and due. (And) as in one body there are many parts, members, viscera, and bowels, collected together, and one invisible soul (only) is diffused through all; and one is the mind which (consists) of neither body nor parts; so also (we say) of this one world, which is constituted of many parts. So also the WORD OF GOD, manifold in power and Almighty, is one extended into all things, and is invisibly diffused throughout them: and of all, in which He (thus) subsists, He is the (efficient) Cause.

30. Do you not see with your eyes, that one heaven surrounds the whole world? and that many orders of stars revolve in this? And again, (that) there is one sun, not many? and that this eclipses the splendour of them all by its superior light? So likewise is there one Father, the WORD of whom also is one, who must be the good |20offspring of the good Father. If therefore any one complain, that there are not many Sons; so should he also complain, that many suns, moons, and worlds, are not established, and at many other things, after the manner of madmen, who endeavour to subvert those of nature which are right and good. But, as in things visible, one sun gives light to the whole sensible world; so also in things intellectual, the one WORD OF GOD, filled with all power, secretly and (in a manner) imperceptible to us, gives light to all. For Why should many suns be required, when one is sufficient to effect every thing? And again, What need can there be of many Sons of God, when the ONE, the only (begotten), is sufficient to effect the will of His Father? For, if there were many, then would they be either similar, or dissimilar21. And if they were similar, then would their multiplicity be in vain; because one Effectuator, and this Almighty, would be sufficient for the performance and due ordering of all. But the WORD OF GOD, and the WISDOM OF GOD, which is ONE in its essence, brings along with it the light, and the life, and (indeed) all the fulness of goodness. The multitude (then) of those who were (thus) vainly, and not well joined together in a power that were similar, could have no advantage. But, if it were necessary they should be dissimilar, How then could that which were dissimilar, or incomplete and defective in its nature, be on the |21other hand an Effectuator, and that sufficient for all? But nothing which is horn of God is incomplete. The only (begotten) of God is therefore complete (the Efficient). Nor are there many WORDS OF GOD. On the contrary, THE GOD who is OF GOD is sufficient for all, and is Almighty; is the one Image of the light of His Essence, as the divine words declare; who, for the convenience of governing and healing all existing beings, was necessarily appointed; who is also in His essence one, but in His powers manifold. And Him alone do we declare to he sufficient for the adorning of all things.

31. Because too, there is in man (but) one Soul and one reasoning faculty, and this at the same time capable of comprehending many things; whether (for example), it cultivate the earth, or fit up a ship, or guide it, or build (a house), still it is one and the same: or, whether it learn and do many things, still there is but one mind and cogitative faculty in man. It is moreover capable at once of many sorts of knowledge: the same man will be the geometrician, or will be skilled in the courses of the stars, or be perfect in the precepts of the grammarians and rhetoricians; or, he will become a leader in the science of healing, or in its manual operations. Nor has any one ever yet imagined, that there are many souls in (any) one body: neither has it been made matter of wonder, that there exists many essences in man, because of his |22 capability of many sorts of knowledge. For, should a man find a shapeless piece of clay, and afterwards so model it with his hands, as to impress upon it the forms of certain animals; on one figure, the head; on another, the hands, the feet, or the eyes (of a man); and again, that he otherwise imitate by the art of the modeller, the cheeks, ears, mouth, nostrils, breast, and shoulders, Would it be right also to suppose that, because many forms and members had been (so) wrought in this one body, many were therefore their makers? We ought rather to bestow the full meed of praise on the one artificer of the whole, who had by one train of thought, and the exertion of one executive power, (so) disposed the whole:----

32. So also, of this universal world which is one, consisting nevertheless of many parts, it cannot be right to erect the many powers (visible within it) into makers; nor again to call these many Gods: but rather, to bless the ONE who abounds in every species of wisdom, and every sort of compounding (power): Him (I say) who is in truth "THE POWER or GOD, and THE WISDOM OF GOD;" who, by means of one (almighty) power and virtue, pervades, and remains in, the universal whole; who also gives establishment and life to all: and who, for the whole and singular of |23these bodies and elements, in their several situations, produced at once from himself, the several and various means of subsistence.

33. So also the light of the Sun is one; yet, by its one incidence, it at once illuminates the air, affords light to the eyes, warmth to the touch, ripens the (produce of) the earth, gives growth to the plant, and fixes the several periods of time. It also precedes the stars (in its course), makes the circuit of the heavens, rises upon the world, and clearly establishes the power of God with respect to all things22. All these things it completes in a momentary period of nature. Thus too, the nature of fire (is such) as to purify gold, to melt lead, to dissolve wax, to dry (wet) clay, and to consume dense (bodies): by means of one burning power, it effects all these things.

34. So likewise THE WORD OF GOD, the King of all, He who is extended throughout all, is in and pervades all, that is both in the heavens and the earth; He is the governour of the things which are invisible and visible, and He directs by powers unspeakable", the Sun, the Heavens, |24 and the whole Universe. He is present to all things in His effectuating power; and He remains throughout all. He also makes to distil as rain, from His own resources, the never-failing light to the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars. He has established, and perpetually holds fast, the heavens (as) an image of his own greatness. He also fills from the treasury that is with Him, those hosts of Angels and Powers of intelligent and rational spirits, at once with life, light, wisdom, and all th