Historia Ecclesiastica

XIX. Νow the throne of James, who was the first to receive from the Saviour and the apostles the episcopate of the church at Jerusalem, who also, as the divine books show, was called a brother of Christ, has been preserved to this day; and by the honour that the brethren in suecession there pay to it, they show cleariy to all the reverenee in whieh the holy men were and still are held by the men οf old time and those of our day, because of the love shown them by God. so much for these matters.

XX. But to resume. Dionysius, in addition to the letters of his that were mentioned, composed at that time also the festal letters which are still extant, in which he gives utterance to words specially suited to

XXI. Ρeace had all but arrived, when he returned to Αlexandria. But when faction and war broke out there once more, since it was not possible for him to discharge his oversight over all the brethren in the city, separated as they were into one or other part οf the faction, he again at the festival of the Ρaseha communicated with them by letter, as if he were someone in a foreign country, from Alexandria itself. Αnd to Ηierax, after this, a bishop of those in Εgypt he writes another festal letter, mentioning in the following terms the faction prevailing among the Αlexandrians in his day:

“But as for me, what wonder is it if I find it difficult to communicate even by letter with those who at some distance, seeing that it has become impossible even for myself to coverse with myself, or to take counsel with my own soul? Certainly, I have need to write by letter to my very heart, that is, the brethren that are of the same household and mind with me, and citizens of the same church; and there seems no possible way of getting this correspondence through. For it were easier for a man to pass, I do not say to a foreign country, but even from East to

XXII. After this, when the war was followed by a pestilential disease, and the feast was at hand, he communicated once more by letter with the brethren, indicating the sufferings of the calamity, as follows:

‟To other men the present would not seem to be a time for festival, nor for them is this or any οther time of such a nature; I speak not of times of mourning, but even of any time that might be thought especially joyful. Νow indeed all is lamentation, and all men mourn, and wailings resound [*](2 We have no οther evidence, apart from this passagc, of this “dole” or public distribution of a food ration.) [*](3 i.e. the young, by sharing in the dole, were now classed along with the old. )

“For of a truth many and terrible were the things also that happened to us before this. Αt first they drove us out, and alone we kept our festival at that time also, persecuted and put to death by all, and every single sport where we were afflicted became for us a place of festive assembly, field, desert, ship, inn, prison; but the brightest of all festivals was kept by the perfect martyrs, when they feasted in heaven. Αnd, after that, war and famine came upon us, which we bore along with the heathen. Alone we endured all the injuries they inflicted upon us, while we had the benefit besides of what they wrought upon each other and what they suffered: and we found our joy once more in the peace of Christ, which Ηe has given to us alone. But when the briefest breathing-space had been granted us and them, there descended upon us this disease, a thing that is to them more fearful than any other object of fear, more cruel than any calamity whatsoever, and, as one of their own writers declared, ‘the only thing of all that proved worse than what was expected.’ Yet to us it was not so, but, less than the other misfortunes, a source of discipline and testing. For indeed it did not leave us untouched, although it attacked the heathen with great strength.”

Following these remarks he adds as follows: “The most, at all events, of our brethren in their exceeding love and affection for the brotherhood were unsparing

Αnd also after this letter, when peace reigned in the city, he once more sent a festal letter to the brethren in Egypt, and following this he again indited οthers. Αnd there is extant, also, a certain letter of his on the Sabbath, and another on Exercise.

Communicating by a letter again with Ηermammon and the brethren in Εgypt, he recounts in full many other things about the wickedness of Deeius and his successors, and mentions the peace under Gallienus.

XXIII. But there is nothing like hearing the nature of these happenings also.

“He1 then, after inciting one of his emperors and attacking the other, of a sudden disappeared altogether, root and branch with all his family, and Gallienus was proclaimed and acknowledged by all, being at once an old and a new emperor, for he was before and came after them; for in accordance with that which was spoken to the prophet Isaiah: ῾ Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things which shall now spring forth.’ 2 For as a cloud speeds underneath the rays of the sun, and for a short time screens and darkens it, and appears instead of it, but when the cloud passes by or is melted away, the sun that shone before again shines forth and once more appears; so Macrianus, after coming forward and getting for himself access to the imperial power that belonged to Gallienus, is no more, since indeed he never was, while Gallienus is like as he was before; and the monarchy has, as it attempted to dethrone Gallienus (10. 8). Ηe and his son were subsequently defeated in battle and [*](3 Α mixed quotation from Is. xlii. 9 and xliii. 19, )

Then, following on this, he indicates also the time at which he wrote this, in these words: “Αnd it occurs to me once more to observe the days of the imperial years. For I perceive that those wicked persons, though they were named with honour, after a short time have become nameless; while he, who is holier and filled with more love to God, has Ρassed the period of seven years, and is now completing a ninth year,1 in which let us keep the feast.”

XXIV. Besides all these, the two treatises On Promises were also composed by him. The occasion was supplied him by the teaching of Νepos, a bishop of those in Εgypt, that the promises whieh had been made to the saints in the divine scriptures should be interpreted after a more Jewish fashion, and his assdumption that there will be a kind of millennium on this earth devoted to bodily indulgenee. Thinking for example, to establish his own peculiar opinion from the Apocalypse of John, he composed a certain book on the subject and entitled it Refutation of the Allegorists.2 Dionysius attaeked him in the books On Promises, in the first of which he sets out the view that he himself held with regard to the doctrine, and in the seeond treats of the Apocalypse of John. There, at the beginning, he mentions Νepos, writing as follows about him: “But since they bring forward in his ninth year he was, to use Dionysius's metaphor, “under a cloud.” [*](2 The “Allegorists’’ were those who, like Dionysius, protested against a literal interpretation οf Revelation: see 25. 6. )

Αfter other remarks he adds as follows: ‘‘Νοw [*](1 Cf. Aristotle, Eth. Nic. i. 1096 a. )

XXV. Then, in due course, lower down he speaks thus, with reference to the Apocalypse of John: “Some indeed of those before our time rejected altogether impugned the book, examining it chapter by chapter and declaring it to be unintelligible and by chapter and declaring it to be unintelligible and illogical, and its title false. For they say that it is not John's, no, nor yet an apocalypse (unveiling), since it is veiled by its heavy, thick curtain of unintelligibility; and that the author of this book was not only not one of the apostles, nor even one of ints or those belonging to the chureh, but Cerinthus, e same who created the seet called “Cerinthian’’ after him, since he desired to affix to his own forgery a name worthy of credit. For that this was the doctrine which he taught, that the kingdom of christ would be οn earth; and he dreamed that it would consist in those things which formed the object of his own desires (for he was a lover of the body and altogether camal), in the full satisfaction of the belly and lower lusts, that is, in feasts and carousals and marriages, and (as a means, he thought, οf procuring d lowerd not lower lusts, that is, in feasts and under a better name) in festivals and sacrinces and slayings of victims.1 But for my part I should not dare to reject the book, since many my brethren hold it in estimatin ; but, reckoning that my perception οt dare to reject the book, since many brethren hold is inadequate to form an opinion concerning it, I hold what the interpretation of each several passage is in some way hidden and more wonderful.2 For even although I do not understand it, yet I suspect that some deeper meaning underlies the words. For I [*](2 i.e than appears on the surface. )

Moreover, after closely examining the whole book οf the Apocalypse and demonstrating that it cannot be understood in the literal sense, he adds as follows: “After completing the whole, one might say, of his prophecy, the prophet ealls those blessed who observe it, and indeed himself also; for he says: ῾ Blessed is he that keepeth the words οf the prophecy of this book, and I John, he that saw and heard these things.’ That then, he was certainly named John and that this book is by one John, I will not gainsay; for I fully allow that it is the work of some holy and inspired person. But I should not readily agree that he was the apostle, the son Zebedee, the brother of James, whose are the Gospel entitled According to John and the Catholic Epistle. For I fonn my judgement from the character of each and from the nature of the language and from What is known as the general construction of the book, that the John therein mentioned] is not the same. For the evangelist nowhere adds his name, nor yet proclaims himself, throughout either the Gospel or the Epistle.”

Then lower down he again speaks thus: “ . . . But John nowhere, either in the first or the third person. But he who wrote the Apocalypse at the very beginning puts himself forward: ῾ The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave him to show unto his servants quickly, and he sent and signified it by his angel

“That the writer of these words, therefore, was John, one must beieve, since he says it. But What John, is not clear. For he ffid not say that he was, as is frequently said in the Gospel, the disciple loved by the Lord, nor he whieh leaned back οn Ηis breast, nor the brother οf James, nor the eye-witness and

“Αnd from the conceptions too, and from the tenns and their arrangement, one might naturally assume that this writer was a different person from the other. For there is indeed a mutual agreement between the Gospel and the Εpistle, and they begin alike. The one says: ‘In the beginning was word’; the other: ‘That which was from the begining.'

“Αnd further, by means of the style one can estimate the difference between the Gospel and Εpistle and the Αpocalypse. For the former are not only written in faultless Greek, but also show the greatest literary skill in their ffiction, their reasonings, and the constructions in which they are expressed. There is a complete absence of any barbarous word, or soleeism, or any vulgarism whatever. For their author had, as it seemS, both kind of word, by the free gift of the Lord, the word of knowledge and the word of speech. But I will not deny that the other writer had seen revelations and received knowledge and prophecy; nevertheless I observe his style and that his use of the Oreek language is not accurate, but that he employs barbarous idioms, in some places [*](6 John i. 7, etc.; 1 John v. 4. 7 John iii. 36 and passim; 1 John iv. 14, etc. )

XXVI. In addition to these letters οf Dionysius there are extant aho many others, as for example those against Sabellius to Αmmon bishop of the church at Bernice, and that to Telesphorus, and that to Euphranor and Αmmon again and Εupοrus. Αnd he composed on the same subject aho four οther treatises, which he addressed to his namesake at Rome, Dionvsius. Αnd we have many letters of his hesides these, and moreover lengthy books written in epistolary form, such as those on Νature, addressed to Timothy his boy, and that on Temptations, which also he defficated to Euphranor. In adffition to these, in writing also to Basilides, bishop of the communities in the Pentapolis, he says that he himself had written an exposition of the beginning of Ecclesiastes; and he has left behind for our beneRt various other letters addressed to this person.

so much for Dionysius. But come now, after recording these things, let us hand down for the infonnation of posterity the character οf our own generation.

XXVII. when Xystus had presided οver the church of the Romans for eleven years,1 he was succeeded by Dionysius, namesake of him of Αlexandria. Αt this time also when Demetrian had departed this life at Αntioch, Ρaul of samosata received the Ρiscopate. Αs this person espoused low and mean riews as to Christ, contraq to the ’s teaching, namely, that Ηe was in His nature [*](1 Xystus II. was bishop from Αug. οr sept. 257 to Αug. 258. Eusebius should have said “eleven )

XXVIII. Αmong those who were the mort distinguished were Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea Cappadocia; the brothers Gregory and Athenodore, pastors of the communities in Pontus; and in addition to these, Helenus, [bishop] of community at Tarsus, and Nicomas, of the community at Iconium nor must we omit Hymenaeus, of the church at Jemsalem, and neotecnus, of this neighbouring church of Caesarea; and moreover there was aho, who was ruling with distinction the brethren at Bostra; and one would not be at a loss to reckon up countless others, together with presbyters and deacons, who were gathered together in the abovementioned city for the same cause. But these were the most famous among them. when all, then, were coming together frequently οn different oecasions, argmnents and questions were mooted at each meeting, the samosatene and his party attempting to keep still concealed and to cloak what was heterodox, while the οthers were eamestly engaged in laying bare and bringing into the open his heresy and blasphemy against Christ.

Αt that time Dionysius died in the tweKth year οf the reign οf Gallienus, 1 haring presided in the epis- [*](1 A.D. 264.265. )

Gallienus having held the prineipate for fifteen entire years, Claudius was established as his successor. 1

When he had completed his second year, he gac over the gOVernment to Aurelian.

XXIX. Ιn Aurelian's day a final synod of an ofexceedingly large number ofbishops Was assembled, and the leader ofthe heresy at Antioch, being unmasked and now cleariy condemned of heterodoxy by all, was excommunicated from the Catholich Church under heaven. The person foremost in calling him to account and in utterly refuting his attempts at concealment was Malchion, a learned man, who aho was head of a sehool of rhetoric, one of the Greek educational establihments at Antioch; and, moreoVer, for the surpassing sincerity of his faith in Christ he had been deemed worthy of the presbyterate of that community. Ιn faet, this man had stenographers to take notes as he held a disputatiOn with Ρaul, wllich we know to be eXtant even to tbis day; and he, alOne of them all, was able to unmask that erafty and deceitful person.

XXX. The pastors, then, WhO had been assembled together, indited unanimously a ringle letter personally to DiOnysius, bishop of ROme, and Maximus, of Alexandria, and sent it throughOut all the provinces. In it they make manifest to au their zeal, and also the perverse heterodoxy of Ρaul, as well as the arguments and questions that they addressed to him; and moreover they deseribe the man’s whole life and eonduct. From Which, by way οf memOrial, it may [*](1 Α.D. 270. )

“To Dionysius and Maximus and to all Our fellowministers throughout the worid, bishops, presbyters and deacons, and to the whole Catholic Chureh under heaven, Helenus and Ηymenaeus and Theophilus Theotecnus and Maximus, Ρroclus, Νicomas and Aelianus and Ρaul and Bolanus and Protogenes and Hierax and Eutychius and Theodore and Μalchion and Lueius and all the otherS who, with us, sojourn in the adjacent cities and provinces, bishops and preSbyters and deaeOns and the ehurcheS of God, aS to brethren beloved in the Lord send greeting.”

Α little further on they proeeed thus: “Αnd we wrote 1 inviting many even of the bishops at a distance to eome and heal this deadly doctrine, as for example, both DionySius at Alexandria and Firmihan of Cappadoeia, those blessed men. The former of these wrote to Antioch, [not to the bishop,] neither deeming the leader of the heresy worthy of being addressed nor writing to him personally, but to the whole community; of which letter also We subjoin a copy. Firmilian, on the other hand, even came twice, and eondemned Paul's new-fangled ideas, as we who were Ρresent know and bear Witness, and many others knoW aS well; but, on his promising to ehange, he adjourned the [proceedings], hoping and believing that the matter would be Bttingly eoncluded ithout any reproach to the Word; for he WaS deeeived by him who both denied his God and Lord, and also did not [*](1 The Greek (imperf.) implies a continued correspondence. )

Αgain, after other remarks they describe the manner of his life, in the fOllowing terms: “But he departed from the canOn [of truth], and has turned aside to spurious and bastard doetrines, we are under no obligation to judge the actions of him that without, not even because, though he vas fOrmerly poor and penniless, neither haVing reeeived a livelihoos from hiS fathers nor having got it from a trade or any oeeupation, he has has come to possess abundant wealth, as a result of lawless deeds and sacrilegious plunderings and extortions exacted from the brethren by threats; for he deprives the injured of their rights, and promises to help them for money, yet breaks his word with these also, and with a light heart makes his harvest out of the readiness of persons engaged in lawsuits to make an offer, for the sake of being rid of those that trouble them; seeing that he considers that godliness is a way of gain. Νeither [do we judge him] beeause he sets his mind on high things and is lifted up, clothing himself with wordly honours and wishing to be ealled ducenarius 1 rather than bishop, and struts in the market-places, 2 reading and dictating letters as he walks in public, and attended by a bodyguard, some preceding, some following, and that too in numbers: with the result [*](2 Cf. Demosthenes, κατὰ Μειδίου, 158: τρεῖς ἀκολούθους ἢ τέτταρας αὐτὸς ἄων διὰ τῆς ἀγορᾶς σοβεῖ. )

Then at the close οf the letter they add as follows:

“We were compelled therefore, aS he opposed himself to God and refused to yield, to excommunicate him, and appoint another bishop in his stead for the Catholic Chureh [choosing] by the providence of God, as we are persuaded, Domnus the son of the blessed Demetrian, who formerly presided with distinction over the same community; he is adorned with all the noble qualities suitable for a bishop, and we notify [this his appointment] unto you that ye may write to him, and from him receive letters of communion. But let this fellow write to Artemas, and let those who side with Αrtemas hold communion with him.”

When Ρaul, then, had fallen from the episcopate as well as from his orthodoxy in the faith, Domnus, as has been said, sueceeded to the ministry of the chureh at Αntioch. But as Ρaul refused on an any account to give up possession οf the church-building,

such indeed was the disposition οf Aurelian towards us at that time. But as his reign advanced, he changed his mind with regard to us, and was now being moved by certain counsels to stir up persecution against us; and there was great talk about this on all sides. But as he was just οn the point οf so doing and was putting, one might almost say, his signature to the decrees against us, the divine Justice visited him, and pinioned his arms, so to speak, to prevent his undertaking. Thus it was clearly shown for all to see that the rulers of this world would never find it easy to proeeed against the churches of Christ, unless the hand which champions us were to permit this to be done, as a divine and heavenly judgement to chasten and turn us, at whatsoever times it should approve. At all events, when Aurelian had reigned r six years, 2 he was suceeeded by Ρrobus. Ηe held e government for something like the same number οf years, 3 and Carus with his sons Carinus and Numerianus succeeded him; and when they in their turn had remained in office for not three entire years, the government devolved on Diocletian 4 and οn those who were brought in after him; and under them was [*](2 A.D. 270-275. 3 Α. D. 276-282, two emperors, Tacitus and Florianus, coming between Aurelian and Ρrοbus with short reigus. 4 A.D. 284 )

XXXI. Αt that time also the madman,1 named his devil-possessed heresy, was taking as his armour mental delusion; for the devil, that is Satan himself, the adversary of God, had put the man forward for the destruction of many. Ηis very speech and manners proclaimed him a barbarian in mode of life, and, being by nature devilish and insane, he suited his endeavours thereto and attempted to pose as Christ: at one time giving out that he was the Paraclete and the Ηoly spirit Himself, conceited fool that he was, as well as mad; at another time choosing, as Christ did, twelve disciples as associates in his new-fangled system. In short, he stitched together false and godless doctrines that he had collected from the countless, long-extinct, godless heresies, and infected οur empire with, as it were, a deadly poison that came from the land of the Ρersians; d from him the profane name of Manichaean is still commonly on men's lips to this day. Such, then, was the foundation on which rested this knowledge which is falsely so called, which sprang up at the e we have mentioned.

XXXII. At that time Felix, who had presided over the church οf the Romans for five years, was suceded by Eutychianus. This person did not r even ten entire months; he left the office to aius our contemporary. Αnd when he had presided [*](the words have no etymological relation to each other, cient to give Eusebius occasion for punning. )

In the time of these persons, in suecession to Domnus, Timaeus was in charge of the episeopate of Antioch, whom our contemporary Cyril succeeded. During Cyril's episcopate we came to know Dorotheus, a leamed man, who had been deemed worthy of the presbyterate at Αntioeh. In his zeal for all that is beautiful in divine things, he made so careful a study of the Ηebrew tongue that he read with understanding the original Ηebrew Scriptures. Αnd he was by nο means unacquainted with the most liberal studies and Greek primary education; but withal he was by bature a eunuch, having been so frοm his very birth, so that even the emperοr, accounting this as a sort miracle, tοok him into his friendship and honoured him with the charge of the purple dye-wοrks at Tyre. we heard him giving a measured exposition of the Scriptures in the church.

After Cyril, Tyrannus succeeded to the episcopate the community of the Antiochenes, in whose day the attack upon the churches was at its height.

Αfter socrates as head of the cοmmumunity at Laodicea came Εusebius, being a native of the city οf Alexandria. The reason of his migration was the air of Ρaul. For when he had cοme to Syria οn busniess connected with Ρaul, he was prevented frοm returning home by those whο had divine things at heart. Ηe was a goοdly example of piety amοng our cοntemporaries, as it will be easy to discover from the expressions of Dionysius quoted above.1 Αnatolius was appointed his successor, one good man, as they say, folloning another. Ηe alsο was by race an

From the Canons of Anatolius οn the Pascha.1

“It has therefore in the first year the new moon of first the first month, which is the beginning of the nineteen-year cycle, on the 26th of Phamnoth according to the Egyptians, but according to the months of the Macedonians the 22nd of Dystrus, or, as the Romans would say, the 11th before the Kalends of April. The Sun is found on the aforesaid 26th of Phamenoth not only to have arrived at the first sign of the zodiac, but already to be passing through the fourth day within it. This sign is commonly called the first of the twelve divisions and the equinoctial [sign] and the beginning of months and head of the cycle and the starting-point of the planetary course. But the preceding sign is the last of the months and the twelfth sign and the last of the twelve divisions and the end of the planetary circuit. Therefore we say that they who place the first month in it, and determine the fourteenth day of the Pascha accordingly,2 are guilty of no small or ordinary mistake.

Αnd this is not our οwn statement, but the fact was known to the Jews, those of οld time even before Christ, and it was carefully observed by them. One may learn it from what is said by Philo, Josephus and Musaeus, and not only by them but also by those of still more ancient date, the two Agathobuli, surnamed the Masters οf Aristobulus the Great. Ηe was reckoned among the Seventy who translated sacred and divine Hebrew Scriptures for Philadelphus and his father; and he dedicated books exegetical of the Law of Moses to the same kings. These writers, when they resolve the questions relative to the Exodus, say that all equally ought to sacrifice the passover after the vernal equinox, at the middle of the first month; and that this is found to occur when the sun is passing through the first sign of the solar, or, as some have named it, the zodiacal cycle. Αnd Aristobulus adds that at the feast of the passover it is necessary that not only the sun should be passing through an equinoctial sign, but the moon also For as the equinoctial signs are two, the οne vernal, the other autumnal, diametrically opposite each to other, and as the fourteenth of the month, at evening, is assigned as the day οf the passover, the moon will have its place in the station that is diametrically opposed to the sun, as may be seen in full moon ; and the one, the sun, will be in the sign οf the vernal equinox, while the other, the moon, will οf necessity be in that of the autumnal. I know many other statements of theirs, some of them probable, others advanced as absolute proofs,1 by which they attempt to establish that the Feast of [*](1 The translation is uncertain. )

And the same person has left behind an Introduction to Arithmetic also in ten complete treatises, and, as well, evidences of his Study and deep knowledge οf divine things. Theotecnus, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, first had ordained him to the episcopate, seeking to procure him as his successor in his own community after his death, and indeed for Some Short time both presided over the same church. But, the synod with reference to Ρaul summoning him to Antioch, as he was passing by the city οf the Laodiceans he was retained there by the brethren, Eusebius having fallen asleep.

Αnd when Anatolius also departed this life, Stephen was appointed over the community there, the last bishop before the persecution. Ηe won widespread admiration for his knowledge of philosophy and other secular learning, but he was not similarly disposed towards the divine faith, as the progress of the persecution cleariy proved, demonstrating that the man was more οf a dissembler, more of a craven and coward, than a true philosopher. But indeed the church and her affairs were not destined to perish [*](1 μαθήματα παθήματα, Herod. i. 207 ; cf. Ηeb. v. 8. 2 Enoch lxxii. 6, 9, 31, 32. )

But at Caesarea in Palestine Theotecnus, after exercising his episcopal office in the most zealous fashion, was sueeeeded by Agapius, whom also we know to have laboured much, displaying a most genuine regard for the gonernment of his people, and with a liberal hand caring especially for all the poor. In his day we came to known Pamphilus, a most eloquent man and a true philosopher in his mode of life, who had been deemed worthy of the presbyterate of that community. It would be no small undertaking to show the kind of man he was and whence he eame. But of each particular of his life and of the school that he established, as well as his contest in various confessions during the persecution, and the crown of martyrdom with which he was wreathed at the end of all, we have treated separately in a special work concerning him. Truly he was the most admirable of those of that city; but as men possessed of especially rare qualities in our day we know Pierius, one of the presbyters at Alexandria, and Μeletius, bishop of the churches in Pontus. The former of these had been noted for his life of extreme

In the church at Jerusalem, after the bishop Hymnaeus mentioned shortly before, Zabdas received the ministry. Αfter no great time he fell asleep, and Hermo, the last of the bishops up to the persecution in our day, succeeded to the apostolic throne that has still been preserved there to the present day.2

Αnd at Alexandria too, Maximus, who had held the episcopate for eighteen years after the death of Dionysius, was succeeded by Theonas. In his day at Alexandra Achillas, deemed worthy of the presbyterate along with Pierius, was well known; he had been entrusted with the school of the sacred faith, having displayed a wealth of philosophy most rare and inferior to none, and a manner of life that was [*](1 His sobriqut “the honey (μέλι) of Attica” is a pun οn his name. 2 See c. 19 of this book. )

In these books having concluded the subject of he successions, from the birth of οur Saviour to the destruction of the places of —a subject that extends οver three hundred and five —come, let us next leave in writing, for the information of those also that come after us, what the extent and nature have been of the conflicts in our own day οf those who manfully contended for piety.

cycle that upon which “the new moon οf the first month” (i.e. the Jewish Νisan οr Αbib, to our March-April) falls upon March 22: he is, however, in error about the vernal equinox, which he places on Μarch 19 (§ 15, where Μarch 22 is fourth day”) instead of March 21. Ηe insists (as did also Dionysius) that the paschal full moon must fall after the equinox, as opposed to those, whom he mentions at the close οf § 15, who regarded the full moon (“the fourteenth day”) if it fell the day before the equinox, as the paschal moon.