Hippolytus

Footnotes

^[1061] That is, Kohath (see Gen. xlvi. 11).

^[1062] That is, Tera (see Gen. xi. 26).

^[1064] [Possibly a physical catastrophe. Gen. x. 25, and 1 Chron. i. 19.]

^[1065] The system of seventy-two nations here adopted by Hippolytus is that advanced by Jewish writers generally, and has been probably deduced from the tenth chapter of Genesis. Another historian of the heresies of the Church adopts it—Epiphanius. A chronographer, however, contemporary with Hippolytus—Julius Africanus—discarded this number, as is proved by the fragments of his work preserved by Eusebius and Syncellus.

^[1066] The allusion here made constitutes a strong reason for ascribing The Refutation to Hippolytus, the author of which here states that he had written a Chronicle. But the fragment in our text corresponds with a Latin translation of a Chronicon given by Fabricius, and bearing the name of Hippolytus. The terms in which Hippolytus delivers himself above imply that he was the inventor of a chronological system, thus harmonizing with the fact that the Paschal Cycle, though ever so faulty, was selected out of all his writings for being inscribed on Hippolytus’ statue, dug up on the road to Tivoli a.d. 1551, in the vicinity of Rome, near the Church of St. Lorenzo. [This modest note is of no slight importance to the case, as elucidated by Bunsen and Wordsworth.]

^[1067] [Hippolytus does not call in the Greek fables to support the biblical story; he dismisses them with indifference. Yet the universality of such traditions is unaccountable save as derived from the history of Noah.

^[1068] Cruice has 435 years.

^[1069] [That such relics were exhibited need not be doubted if the account of Berosus is credited. We may doubt as to their genuineness, of course.]

Chapter XXVII.—Jewish Chronology Continued.

^[1070] [See note 4, p. 148, supra.]

^[1071] [The only son of Ham who did not go to Africa, vol. iii. p. 3.]

^[1072] [The fable of Iapetus cannot be explained away as a corroboration of the biblical narrative. Hor., Od., i. 3, 27.]

^[1073] [Here the Edinburgh has “nature.” The context seems to require the more comprehensive word “Truth.”]

Chapter XXVIII.—The Doctrine of the Truth.

^[1074] The margin of the ms. has the words “Origen and Origen’s opinion.” This seemed to confirm the criticism which ascribes The Refutation to Origin. But even supposing Origen not the author, the copyer of the ms. might have written Origen’s name on the margin, as indicating the transcriber’s opinion concerning the coincidence of creed between Origen and the author of The Refutation. The fact, however, is that the doctrine of eternal punishment, asserted in the concluding chapter of The Refutation, was actually controverted by Origen. See translator’s Introductory Notice. [See also Wordsworth (a lucid exposition), p. 20, etc., and infra, cap. xxix. note 5.]

^[1075] ὀροφήν (Scott). The ms. has μορφήν.

^[1076] Here we have another reference intimately bearing on the authorship of The Refutation. What follows corresponds with a fragment having a similar title to that stated above, first published by Le Moyne, and inserted in Fabricius (i. pp. 220–222) as the work of Hippolytus. Photius mentions this work, and gives an extract from it corresponding with what is furnished by Hippolytus. Photius, however, mentions that the book On the Substance of the Universe was said to be written by Josephus, but discovers in marginal notes the ascription of it to Caius. But Caius cannot be the writer, since Photius states that the author of The Labyrinth affirmed that he had written On the Substance of the Universe. Now Hippolytus informs us that he is author of The Labyrinth. Hippolytus thus refers to three of his works in The Refutation: (1) ἕτεραι βίβλοι, i.e., on Chronology; (2) Concerning the Substance of the Universe; (3) Little Labyrinth. Except Hippolytus and Photius refer to different works in speaking of The Labyrinth, the foregoing settles the question of the authorship of The Refutation. [See the case of Caius stated, Wordsworth, cap. iv. p. 27, etc.]

Chapter XXIX.—The Doctrine of the Truth Continued.

^[1077] [Elucidation XVI.]

^[1078] This passage is differently rendered, according as we read φωνὴ with Bunsen, or φωνὴν with Dr. Wordsworth. The latter also alters the reading of the ms. (at the end of the next sentence), ἀπετελεῖτο ἀρέκων Θεῷ, into ἀπετελεῖ τὸ ἄρεσκον, “he carried into effect what was pleasing to the Deity.”

^[1079] Dr. Wordsworth suggests for γενέσει, ἐπιγενέσει, i.e., a continuous series of procreation.

^[1080] See Origen, in Joann., tom. ii. sec. 8.

^[1081] [Rather, His will.]

10 per page

Search Comments

This page has been visited 0196 times.

Contents