VOLUME II SLICE II Anjar to Apollo (continued 12)

This gospel must have been translated at an early date into Greek, as Clement and Origen cite it as generally accessible, and Eusebius recounts that many reckoned it among the received books The gospel is synoptic in character and is closely related to Matthew, though in the Resurrection accounts it has affinities with Luke. Like Mark it seems to have had no history of the birth of Christ, and to have begun with the baptism. (For the literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apok. Handbuch, 21-23.)

Gospel of Peter.—Before 1892 we had some knowlege of this gospel. Thus Serapion, bishop of Antioch (A.D. 190-203) found it in use in the church of Rhossus in Cilicia, and condemned it as Docetic (Eusebius, H.E. vi. 12). Again, Origen (In Matt. tom. xvii. 10) says that it represented the brethren of Christ as his half-brothers In 1885 a long fragment was discovered at Akhmim, and published by Bouriant in 1892, and subsequently by Lods, Robinson, Harnack, Zahn, Schubert, Swete.

Gospel of Thomas.—This gospel professes to give an account of our Lord’s boyhood. It appears in two recensions. The more complete recension bears the title Θωμᾶ Ίσραηλίτου Φιλοσόφου ῥητὰ εἰς τὰ παιδικὰ τοῦ Κυρίου, and treats of the period from the 7th to the 12th year (Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha2, 1876, 140-157). The more fragmentary recension gives the history of the childhood from the 5th to the 8th year, and is entitled Σύγγραμμα τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου Θωμᾶ περὶ τῆς παιδικῆς ἀναστροφῆς τοῦ Κυρίου (Tischendorf, op. cit. pp. 158-163). Two Latin translations have been published in this work by the same scholar—one on pp. 164-180, the other under the wrong title, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, on pp. 93-112. A Syriac version, with an English translation, was published by Wright in 1875. This gospel was originally still more Docetic than it now is, according to Lipsius. Its present form is due to an orthodox revision which discarded, so far as possible, all Gnostic traces. Lipsius (Smith’s Dict. of Christ. Biog. ii. 703) assigns it to the latter half of the 2nd century, but Zahn (Gesch. Kan. ii. 771), on good grounds, to the earlier half. The latter scholar shows that probably it was used by Justin (Dial. 88). At all events it circulated among the Marcosians (Irenaeus, Haer. i. 20) and the Naasenes (Hippolytus, Refut. v. 7), and subsequently among the Manichaeans, and is frequently quoted from Origen downwards (Hom. I. in Luc.). If the stichometry of Nicephorus is right, the existing form of the book is merely fragmentary compared with its original compass. For literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apokryphen Handbuch, 132 seq.

Gospel of the Twelve.—This gospel, which Origen knew (Hom. I. in Luc.), is not to be identified with the Gospel according to the Hebrews (see above), with Lipsius and others, who have sought to reconstruct the original gospel from the surviving fragments of these two distinct works. The only surviving fragments of the Gospel of the Twelve have been preserved by Epiphanius (Haer. xxx. 13-16, 22: see Preuschen, op. cit. 9-11). It began with an account of the baptism. It was used by the Ebionites, and was written, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 742), about A.D. 170.

Other Gospels Mainly Gnostic and almost all Lost.— Gospel of Andrew.—This is condemned in the Gelasian Decree, and is probably the gospel mentioned by Innocent (1 Ep. iii. 7) and Augustine (Contra advers. Leg. et Proph. i. 20).

Gospel of Apelles.—Mentioned by Jerome in his Prooem. ad Matt.

Gospel of Barnabas.—Condemned in the Gelasian Decree (see under Barnabas ad fin.).

Gospel of Bartholomew.—Mentioned by Jerome in his Prooem. ad Matt. and condemned in the Gelasian Decree.

Gospel of Basilides.—Mentioned by Origen (Tract. 26 in Matt. xxxiii. 34, and in his Prooem. in Luc.); by Jerome in his Prooem. in Matt. (See Harnack i. 161; ii. 536-537; Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, i. 763-774.)

Gospel of Cerinthus.—Mentioned by Epiphanius (Haer. li. 7).

Gospel of the Ebionites.—A fragmentary edition of the canonical Matthew according to Epiphanius (Haer. xxx. 13), used by the Ebionites and called by them the Hebrew Gospel.

Gospel of Eve.—A quotation from this gospel is given by Epiphanius (Haer. xxvi. 2, 3). It is possible that this is the Gospel of Perfection (Εὐαγγέλιον τελειώσεως) which he touches upon in xxvi. 2. The quotation shows that this gospel was the expression of complete pantheism.

Gospel of James the Less.—Condemned in the Gelasian Decree.

Wisdom of Jesus Christ.—This third work contained in the Coptic MS. referred to under Gospel of Mary gives cosmological disclosures and is presumably of Valentinian origin.

Apocryph of John.—This book, which is found in the Coptic MS. referred to under Gospel of Mary and contains cosmological disclosures of Christ, is said to have formed the source of Irenaeus’ account of the Gnostics of Barbelus (i. 29-31). Thus this work would have been written before 170.

Gospel of Judas Iscariot.—References to this gospel as in use among the Cainites are made by Irenaeus (i. 31. 1); Epiphanius (xxxviii. 1. 3).

Gospel, The Living (Evangelium Vivum).—This was a gospel of the Manichaeans. See Epiphanius, Haer. lxvi. 2; Photius, Contra Manich. i.

Gospel of Marcion.—On this important gospel see Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, i. 585-718.

Descent of Mary (Γέννα Μαρίας).—This book was an anti-Jewish legend representing Zacharias as having been put to death by the Jews because he had seen the God of the Jews in the form of an ass in the temple (Epiphanius, Haer. xxvi. 12).

Questions of Mary (Great and Little).—Epiphanius (Haer. xxvi. 8) gives some excerpts from this revolting work.

Gospel of Mary.—This gospel is found in a Coptic MS. of the 5th century. According to Schmidt’s short account, Sitzungsberichte d. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu. Berlin (1896), pp. 839 sqq., this gospel gives disclosures on the nature of matter (ὕλη) and the progress of the Gnostic soul through the seven planets.

Gospel of Matthias.—Though this gospel is attested by Origen (Horm. in Luc. i.), Eusebius, H.E. iii. 25. 6, and the List of Sixty Books, not a shred of it has been preserved, unless with Zahn ii. 751 sqq. we are to identify it with the Traditions of Matthias, from which Clement has drawn some quotations.

Gospel of Perfection (Evangelium perfectionis).—Used by the followers of Basilides and other Gnostics. See Epiphanius, Haer. xxvi. 2.

Gospel of Philip.—This gospel described the progress of a soul through the next world. It is of a strongly Encratite character and dates from the 2nd century. A fragment is preserved in Epiphanius, Haer. xxvi. 13. In Preuschen, Reste, p. 13, the quotation breaks off too soon. See Zahn ii. 761-768.

Gospel of Thaddaeus.—Condemned by the Gelasian Decree.

Gospel of Thomas.—Of this gospel only one fragment has been preserved in Hippolytus, Philos. v. 7, pp. 140 seq. See Zahn, op. cit. i. 746 seq.; ii. 768-773; Harnack ii. 593-595.

Gospel of Truth.—This gospel is mentioned by Irenaeus i. 11. 9, and was used by the Valentinians. See Zahn i. 748 sqq.

(b) Acts and Teachings of the Apostles.—Acts of Andrew.—These Acts, which are of a strongly Encratite character, have come down to us in a fragmentary condition. They belong to the earliest ages, for they are mentioned by Eusebius, H.E. iii. 25; Epiphanius, Haer. xlvii. 1; lxi. 1; lxiii. 2; Philaster, Haer. lxviii., as current among the Manichaeans and heretics. They are attributed to Leucius, a Docetic writer, by Augustine (c. Felic. Manich. ii. 6) and Euodius (De Fide c. Manich. 38). Euodius in the passage just referred to preserves two small fragments of the original Acts. On internal grounds the section recounting Andrew’s imprisonment (Bonnet, Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, ii. 38-45) is also probably a constituent of the original work. As regards the martyrdom, owing to the confusion introduced by the multitudinous Catholic revisions of this section of the Acts, it is practically impossible to restore its original form. For a complete discussion of the various documents see Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelgeschichte, i. 543-622; also James in Hastings’ Bible Dict. i. 92-93; Hennecke, NT. Apokryphen, in loc. The best texts are given in Bonnet’s Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, 1898, II. i. 1-127. These contain also the Acts of Andrew and Matthew (or Matthias) in which Matthew (or Matthias) is represented as a captive in the country of the anthropophagi. Christ takes Andrew and his disciples with Him, and effects the rescue of Matthew. The legend is found also in Ethiopic, Syriac and Anglo-Saxon. Also the Acts of Peter and Andrew, which among other incidents recount the miracle of a camel passing through the eye of a needle. This work is preserved partly in Greek, but in its entirety in Slavonic.

Acts of John.—Clement of Alexandria in his Hypotyposes on 1 John i. 1 seems to refer to chapters xciii. (or lxxxix.) of these Acts. Eusebius (H.E. iii. 25. 6), Epiphanius (Haer. xlvii. 1) and other ancient writers assign them to the authorship of Leucius Charinus. It is generally admitted that they were written in the 2nd century. The text has been edited most completely by Bonnet, Acta Apostol. Apocr., 1898, 151-216. The contents might be summarized with Hennecke as follows:—Arrival and first sojourn of the apostle in Ephesus (xviii.-lv.); return to Ephesus and second sojourn (history of Drusiana, lviii.-lxxxvi.); account of the crucifixion of Jesus and His apparent death (lxxxvii.-cv.); the death of John (cvi.-cxv.). There are manifest gaps in the narrative, a fact which we would infer from the extent assigned to it (i.e. 2500 stichoi) by Nicephorus. According to this authority one-third of the text is now lost. Many chapters are lost at the beginning; there is a gap in chapter xxxvii., also before lviii., not to mention others. The encratite tendency in these Acts is not so strongly developed as in those of Andrew and Thomas. James (Anecdota, ii. 1-25) has given strong grounds for regarding the Acts of John and Peter as derived from one and the same author, but there are like affinities existing between the Acts of Peter and those of Paul. For a discussion of this work see Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 856-865; Lipsius, Apok. Apostelgesch. i. 348-542; Hennecke, NT. Apokryphen, 423-432. For bibliography, Hennecke, NT. Apok. Handbuch, 492 sq.

Acts of Paul.—The discovery of the Coptic translation of these Acts in 1897, and its publication by C. Schmidt (Acta Pauli aus der Heidelberger koptischen Papyrushandschrift herausgegeben, Leipzig, 1894), have confirmed what had been previously only a hypothesis that the Acts of Thecla had formed a part of the larger Acts of Paul. The Acts therefore embrace now the following elements:—(a) Two quotations given by Origen in his Princip. i. 2. 3 and his comment on John xx. 12. From the latter it follows that in the Acts of Paul the death of Peter was recounted, (b) Apocryphal 3rd Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians and Epistle from the Corinthians to Paul. These two letters are connected by a short account which is intended to give the historical situation. Paul is in prison on account of Stratonice, the wife of Apollophanes. The Greek and Latin versions of these letters have for the most part disappeared, but they have been preserved in Syriac, and through Syriac they obtained for the time being a place in the Armenian Bible immediately after 2 Corinthians. Aphraates cites two passages from 3 Corinthians as words of the apostle, and Ephraem expounded them in his commentary on the Pauline Epistles. They must therefore have been regarded as canonical in the first half of the 4th century. From the Syriac Bible they made their way into the Armenian and maintained their place without opposition to the 7th century. On the Latin text see Carrière and Berger, Correspondance apocr. de S.P. et des Corinthiens, 1891. For a translation of Ephraem’s commentary see Zahn ii. 592-611 and Vetter, Der Apocr. 3. Korinthien, 70 sqq., 1894. The Coptic version (C. Schmidt, Acta Pauli, pp. 74-82), which is here imperfect, is clearly from a Greek original, while the Latin and Armenian are from the Syriac. (c) The Acts of Paul and Thecla. These were written, according to Tertullian (De Baptismo, 17) by a presbyter of Asia, who was deposed from his office on account of his forgery. This, the earliest of Christian romances (probably before A.D. 150), recounts the adventures and sufferings of a virgin, Thecla of Iconium. Lipsius discovers Gnostic traits in the story, but these are denied by Zahn (Gesch. Kanons, ii. 902). See Lipsius, op. cit. ii. 424-467; Zahn (op. cit. ii. 892-910). The best text is that of Lipsius, Acta Apostol. Apocr., 1891, i. 235-272. There are Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic and Slavonic versions. As we have seen above, these Acts are now recognized as belonging originally to the Acts of Paul. They were, however, published separately long before the Gelasian Decree (496). Jerome also was acquainted with them as an independent work. Thecla was most probably a real personage, around whom a legend had already gathered in the 2nd century. Of this legend the author of the Acts of Paul made use, and introduced into it certain historical and geographical facts, (d) The healing of Hermocrates of dropsy in Myra. Through a comparison of the Coptic version with the Pseudo-Cyprian writing “Caena,” Rolffs (Hennecke, NT. Apok. 361) concludes that this incident formed originally a constituent of our book, (e) The strife with beasts at Ephesus. This event is mentioned by Nicephorus Callistus (H.E. ii. 25) as recounted in the περίοδοι of Paul. The identity of this work with the Acts of Paul is confirmed by a remark of Hippolytus in his commentary on Daniel iii. 29. 4, ed. Bonwetsch 176 (so Rolffs). (f) Martyrdom of Paul. The death of Paul by the sentence of Nero at Rome forms the close of the Acts of Paul. The text is in the utmost confusion. It is best given by Lipsius, Acta Apostol. Apocr. i. 104-117.

Notwithstanding all the care that has been taken in collecting the fragments of these Acts, only about 900 stichoi out of the 3600 assigned to them in the Stichometry of Nicephorus have as yet been recovered.

The author was, according to Tertullian (De Baptism. 17), a presbyter in Asia, who out of honour to Paul wrote the Acts, forging at the same time 3 Corinthians. Thus the work was composed before 190, and, since it most probably uses the martyrdom of Polycarp, after 155. The object of the writer is to embody in St Paul the model ideal of the popular Christianity of the 2nd century. His main emphasis is laid on chastity and the resurrection of the flesh. The tone of the work is Catholic and anti-Gnostic. For the bibliography of the subject see Hennecke, NT. Apok. 358-360.

Acts of Peter.—These acts are first mentioned by Eusebius (H.E. iii. 3) by name, and first referred to by the African poet Commodian about A.D. 250. Harnack, who was the first to show that these Acts were Catholic in character and not Gnostic as had previously been alleged, assigns their composition to this period mainly on the ground that Hippolytus was not acquainted with them; but even were this assumption true, it would not prove the non-existence of the Acts in question. According to Photius, moreover, the Acts of Peter also were composed by this same Leucius Charinus, who, according to Zahn (Gesch. Kanons, ii. 864), wrote about 160 (op. cit. p. 848). Schmidt and Ficker, however, maintain that the Acts were written about 200 and in Asia Minor. These Acts, which Ficker holds were written as a continuation and completion of the canonical Acts of the Apostles, deal with Peter’s victorious conflict with Simon Magus, and his subsequent martyrdom at Rome under Nero. It is difficult to determine the relation of the so-called Latin Actus Vercellenses (which there are good grounds for assuming were originally called the Πράξεις Πέτρου) with the Acts of John and Paul. Schmidt thinks that the author of the former made use of the latter, James that the Acts of Peter and of John were by one and the same author, but Ficker is of opinion that their affinities can be explained by their derivation from the same ecclesiastical atmosphere and school of theological thought. No less close affinities exist between our Acts and the Acts of Thomas, Andrew and Philip. In the case of the Acts of Thomas the problem is complicated, sometimes the Acts of Peter seem dependent on the Acts of Thomas, and sometimes the converse.

For the relation of the Actus Vercellenses to the “Martyrdom of the holy apostles Peter and Paul” (Acta Apostol. Apocr. i. 118-177) and to the “Acts of the holy apostles Peter and Paul” (Acta Apostol. Apocr. i. 178-234) see Lipsius ii. 1. 84 sqq. The “Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena,” first edited by James (Texts and Studies, ii. 3. 1893), and assigned by him to the middle of the 3rd century, as well as the “Acts of the Disputation of Archelaus, bishop of Mesopotamia, and the Heresiarch Manes” (“Acta Disputationis Archelai Episcopi Mesopotamiae et Manetis Haeresiarchae,” in Routh’s Reliquiae Sacrae2, v. 36-206), have borrowed largely from our work.

The text of the Actus Vercellenses is edited by Lipsius, Acta Apostol. Apocr. i. 45-79. An independent Latin translation of the “Martyrdom of Peter” is published by Lipsius (op. cit. i. 1-22), Martyrium beati Petri Apostoli a Lino episcopo conscriptum. On the Coptic fragment, which Schmidt maintains is an original constituent of these Acts, see that writer’s work: Die alten Petrusakten im Zusammenhang der apokryphen Apostelliteratur nebst einem neuentdeckten Fragment, and Texte und Untersuch. N.F. ix. 1 (1903). For the literature see Hennecke, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen Handbuch, 395 sqq.

Preaching of Peter.—This book (Πέτρου κήρυγμα) gave the substance of a series of discourses spoken by one person in the name of the apostles. Clement of Alexandria quotes it several times as a genuine record of Peter’s teaching. Heracleon had previously used it (see Origen, In Evang. Johann. t. xiii. 17). It is spoken unfavourably of by Origen (De Prin. Praef. 8). It was probably in the hands of Justin and Aristides. Hence Zahn gives its date as 90-100 at latest; Dobschütz, as 100-110; and Harnack, as 110-130. The extant fragments contain sayings of Jesus, and warnings against Judaism and Polytheism.

They have been edited by Hilgenfeld: Nov. Test. extra Can., 1884, iv. 51-65, and by von Dobschütz, Das Kerygma Petri, 1893. Salmon (Dict. Christ. Biog. iv. 329-330) thinks that this work is part of a larger work, A Preaching of Peter and a Preaching of Paul, implied in a statement of Lactantius (Inst. Div. iv. 21); but this view is contested by Zahn, see Gesch. Kanons, ii. 820-834, particularly pp. 827-828; Chase, in Hastings’ Bible Dict. iv. 776.

Acts of Thomas.—This is one of the earliest and most famous of the Gnostic Acts. It has been but slightly tampered with by orthodox hands. These Acts were used by the Encratites (Epiphanius, Haer. xlvii. 1), the Manichaeans (Augustine, Contra Faust. xxii. 79), the Apostolici (Epiphanius lxi. 1) and Priscillianists. The work is divided into thirteen Acts, to which the Martyrdom of Thomas attaches as the fourteenth. It was originally written in Syriac, as Burkitt (Journ. of Theol. Studies, i. 278 sqq.) has finally proved, though Macke and Nöldeke had previously advanced grounds for this view. The Greek and Latin texts were edited by Bonnet in 1883 and again in 1903, ii. 2; the Greek also by James, Apoc. Anec. ii. 28-45, and the Syriac by Wright (Apocr. Acts of the Gospels, 1871, i. 172-333). Photius ascribes their composition to Leucius Charinus—therefore to the 2nd century, but Lipsius assigns it to the early decades of the 3rd. (See Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelgeschichten, i. 225-347; Hennecke, N.T. Apokryphen, 473-480.)

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē).—This important work was discovered by Philotheos Bryennios in Constantinople and published in 1883. Since that date it has been frequently edited. The bibliography can be found in Schaff’s and in Harnack’s editions. The book divides itself into three parts. The first (i.-vi.) contains a body of ethical instruction which is founded on a Jewish and probably pre-Christian document, which forms the basis also of the Epistle of Barnabas. The second part consists of vii.-xv., and treats of church ritual and discipline; and the third part is eschatological and deals with the second Advent. The book is variously dated by different scholars: Zahn assigns it to the years A.D. 80-120; Harnack to 120-165; Lightfoot and Funk to 80-100; Salmon to 120. (See Salmon in Dict. of Christ. Biog. iv. 806-815, also article Didachē.)

Apostolical Constitutions.—For the various collections of these ecclesiastical regulations—the Syriac Didascalia, Ecclesiastical Canons of the Holy Apostles, &c.—see separate article.

(c) Epistles.—The Abgar Epistles.—These epistles are found in Eusebius (H.E. i. 3), who translated them from the Syriac. They are two in number, and purport to be a petition of Abgar Uchomo, king of Edessa, to Christ to visit Edessa, and Christ’s answer, promising after his ascension to send one of his disciples, who should “cure thee of thy disease, and give eternal life and peace to thee and all thy people.” Lipsius thinks that these letters were manufactured about the year 200. (See Dict. Christ. Biog. iv. 878-881, with the literature there mentioned.) The above correspondence, which appears also in Syriac, is inwoven with the legend of Addai or Thaddaeus. The best critical edition of the Greek text will be found in Lipsius, Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, 1891, pp. 279-283. (See also Abgar.)

Epistle of Barnabas.—The special object of this epistle was to guard its readers against the danger of relapsing into Judaism. The date is placed by some scholars as early as 70-79, by others as late as the early years of the emperor Hadrian, 117. The text has been edited by Hilgenfeld in 1877, Gebhardt and Harnack in 1878, and Funk in 1887 and 1901. In these works will be found full bibliographies. (See further Barnabas.)

Epistle of Clement.—The object of this epistle is the restoration of harmony to the church of Corinth, which had been vexed by internal discussions. The epistle may be safely ascribed to the years 95-96. The writer was in all probability the bishop of Rome of that name. He is named an apostle and his work was reckoned as canonical by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iv. 17. 105), and as late as the time of Eusebius (H.E. iii. 16) it was still read in some of the churches. Critical editions have been published by Gebhardt and Harnack, Patr. Apost. Op., 1876, and in the smaller form in 1900, Lightfoot2, 1890, Funk2, 1901. The Syriac version has been edited by Kennet, Epp. of St Clement to the Corinthians in Syriac, 1899, and the Old Latin version by Morin, S. Clementis Romani ad Corinthios epistulae versio Latina antiquissima, 1894.

“Clement’s” 2nd Ep. to the Corinthians.—This so-called letter of Clement is not mentioned by any writer before Eusebius (H. E. iii. 38. 4). It is not a letter but really a homily written in Rome about the middle of the 2nd century. The writer is a Gentile. Some of his citations are derived from the Gospel to the Egyptians.

Clement’s Epistles on Virginity.—These two letters are preserved only in Syriac which is a translation from the Greek. They are first referred to by Epiphanius and next by Jerome. Critics have assigned them to the middle of the 2nd century. They have been edited by Beelen, Louvain, 1856.

Clement’s Epistles to James.—On these two letters which are found in the Clementine Homilies, see Smith’s Dict. of Christian Biography, i. 559, 570, and Lehmann’s monograph, Die Clementischen Schriften, Gotha, 1867, in which references will be found to other sources of information.

Epistles of Ignatius.—There are two collections of letters bearing the name of Ignatius, who was martyred between 105 and 117. The first consists of seven letters addressed by Ignatius to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans and to Polycarp. The second collection consists of the preceding extensively interpolated, and six others of Mary to Ignatius, of Ignatius to Mary, to the Tarsians, Antiochians, Philippians and Hero, a deacon of Antioch. The latter collection is a pseudepigraph written in the 4th century or the beginning of the 5th. The authenticity of the first collection also has been denied, but the evidence appears to be against this contention. The literature is overwhelming in its extent. See Zahn, Patr. Apost. Op., 1876; Funk2, Die apostol. Väter, 1901; Lightfoot2, Apostolic Fathers, 1889.

Epistle of Polycarp.—The genuineness of this epistle stands or falls with that of the Ignatian epistles. See article in Smith’s Dictionary of Christian Biography, iv. 423-431; Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, i. 629-702; also Polycarp.

Pauline Epistles to the Laodiceans and the Alexandrians.— The first of these is found only in Latin. This, according to Lightfoot (see Colossians3, 272-298) and Zahn, is a translation from the Greek. Such an epistle is mentioned in the Muratorian canon. See Zahn, op. cit. ii. 566-585. The Epistle to the Alexandrians is mentioned only in the Muratorian canon (see Zahn ii. 586-592).

For the Third Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, and Epistle from the Corinthians to Paul, see under “Acts of Paul” above.

(R. H. C.)

1 Judaism was long accustomed to lay claim to an esoteric tradition. Thus though it insisted on the exclusive canonicity of the 24 books, it claimed the possession of an oral law handed down from Moses, and just as the apocryphal books overshadowed in certain instances the canonical scriptures, so often the oral law displaced the written in the regard of Judaism.

2 See Porter in Hastings’ Bible Dict. i. 113

3 The New Testament shows undoubtedly an acquaintance with several of the apocryphal books. Thus James i. 19 shows dependence on Sirach v. 11, Hebrews i. 3 on Wisdom vii. 26, Romans ix. 21 on Wisdom xv. 7, 2 Cor. v. 1, 4 on Wisdom ix. 15, &c.

4 Thus some of the additions to Daniel and the Prayer of Manasses are most probably derived from a Semitic original written in Palestine, yet in compliance with the prevailing opinion they are classed under Hellenistic Jewish literature. Again, the Slavonic Enoch goes back undoubtedly in parts to a Semitic original, though most of it was written by a Greek Jew in Egypt.

5 These editors have discovered (1907) a gospel fragment of the 2nd century which represents a dialogue between our Lord and a chief priest—a Pharisee.

APODICTIC (Gr. ἀποδεικτικός, capable of demonstration), a logical term, applied to judgments which are necessarily true, as of mathematical conclusions. The term in Aristotelian logic is opposed to dialectic, as scientific proof to probable reasoning. Kant contrasts apodictical with problematic and assertorical judgments.

APOLDA, a town of Germany, in the grand-duchy of Saxe-Weimar, near the river Ilm, 9 m. E. by N. from Weimar, on the main line of railway from Berlin via Halle, to Frankfort-On-Main. Pop. (1900) 20,352. It has few notable public buildings, but possesses three churches and monuments to the emperor Frederick III. and to Christian Zimmermann (1759-1842), who, by introducing the hosiery and cloth manufacture, made Apolda one of the most important places in Germany in these branches of industry. It has also extensive dyeworks, bell foundries, and manufactures of steam engines, boilers and bicycles.

APOLLINARIS, “the Younger” (d. A.D. 390), bishop of Laodicea in Syria. He collaborated with his father Apollinaris the Elder in reproducing the Old Testament in the form of Homeric and Pindaric poetry, and the New after the fashion of Platonic dialogues, when the emperor Julian had forbidden Christians to teach the classics. He is best known, however, as a warm opponent of Arianism, whose eagerness to emphasize the deity of Christ and the unity of His person led him so far as a denial of the existence of a rational human soul (νοῦς) in Christ’s human nature, this being replaced in Him by a prevailing principle of holiness, to wit the Logos, so that His body was a glorified and spiritualized form of humanity. Over against this the orthodox or Catholic position maintained that Christ assumed human nature in its entirety including the νοῦς, for only so could He be example and redeemer. It was held that the system of Apollinaris was really Docetism (see Docetae), that if the Godhood without constraint swayed the manhood there was no possibility of real human probation or of real advance in Christ’s manhood. The position was accordingly condemned by several synods and in particular by that of Constantinople (A.D. 381). This did not prevent its having a considerable following, which after Apollinaris’s death divided into two sects, the more conservative taking its name (Vitalians) from Vitalis, bishop of Antioch, the other (Polemeans) adding the further assertion that the two natures were so blended that even the body of Christ was a fit object of adoration. The whole Apollinarian type of thought persisted in what was later the Monophysite (q.v.) school.

Although Apollinaris was a prolific writer, scarcely anything has survived under his own name. But a number of his writings are concealed under the names of orthodox Fathers, e.g. ἡ κατὰ μέρος πίστις, long ascribed to Gregory Thaumaturgus. These have been collected and edited by Hans Lietzmann.

He must be distinguished from the bishop of Hierapolis who bore the same name, and who wrote one of the early Christian “Apologies” (c. 170). See A. Harnack, History of Dogma, vols. iii. and iv. passim; R.L. Ottley, The Doctrine of the Incarnation; G. Voisin, L’Apollinarisme (Louvain, 1901); H. Lietzmann, Apollinaris von Laodicea und seine Schule (Tubingen, 1905).

APOLLINARIS, SULPICIUS, a learned grammarian of Carthage, who flourished in the 2nd century A.D. He taught Pertinax—himself a teacher of grammar before he was emperor,—and Aulus Gellius, who speaks of him in the highest terms (iv. 17). He is the reputed author of the metrical arguments to the Aeneid and to the plays of Terence and (probably) Plautus (J.W. Beck, De Sulpicio Apollinari, 1884).

APOLLINARIS SIDONIUS, CAIUS SOLLIUS (c. 430-487 or 488), Christian writer and bishop, was born in Lyons about A.D. 430. Belonging to a noble family, he was educated under the best masters, and particularly excelled in poetry and polite literature. He married (about 452) Papianilla, the daughter of Avitus, who was consul and afterwards emperor. But Majorianus, in the year 457, having deprived Avitus of the empire and taken the city of Lyons, Apollinaris fell into the hands of the enemy. The reputation of his learning led Majorianus to treat him with the greatest respect. In return Apollinaris composed a panegyric in his honour (as he had previously done for Avitus), which won for him a statue at Rome and the title of count. In 467 the emperor Anthemius rewarded him for the panegyric which he had written in honour of him by raising him to the post of prefect of Rome, and afterwards to the dignity of a patrician and senator. In 472, more for his political than for his theological abilities, he was chosen to succeed Eparchius in the bishopric of Arverna (Clermont). On the capture of that city by the Goths in 474 he was imprisoned, as he had taken an active part in its defence; but he was afterwards restored by Euric, king of the Goths, and continued to govern his bishopric as before. He died in A.D. 487 or 488. His extant works are his Panegyrics on different emperors (in which he draws largely upon Statius, Ausonius and Claudian); and nine books of Letters and Poems, whose chief value consists in the light they shed on the political and literary history of the 5th century. The Letters, which are very stilted, also reveal Apollinaris as a man of genial temper, fond of good living and of pleasure. The best edition is that in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica (Berlin, 1887), which gives a survey of the manuscripts.

Apollinaris Sidonius (the names are commonly inverted by the French) is the subject of numerous monographs, historical and literary. See, for bibliography, A. Molinier, Sources de l’histoire de France, no. 136 (vol. i.). S. Dill, Roman Society in the Fifth Century, and T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders (vol. vii.), contain interesting sections on Apollinaris. See also Teuffel and Ebert’s histories of Latin literature.

APOLLO (Gr. Άπόλλων, Άπέλλων), in Greek mythology, one of the most important and many-sided of the Olympian divinities. No satisfactory etymology of the name has been given, the least improbable perhaps being that which connects it with the Doric ἀπέλλα (“assembly”)1 so that Apollo would be the god of political life (for other suggested derivations, ancient and modern, see C. Wernicke in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie). The derivation of all the functions assigned to him from the idea of a single original light- or sun-god, worked out in his Lexikon der Mythologie by Roscher, who regards it as “one of the most certain facts in mythology,” has not found general acceptance, although no doubt some features of his character can be readily explained on this assumption.

In the legend, as set forth in the Homeric hymn to Apollo and the ode of Callimachus to Delos, Apollo is the son of Zeus and Leto. The latter, pursued by the jealous Hera, after long wandering found shelter in Delos (originally Asteria), where she bore a son, Apollo, under a palm-tree at the foot of Mount Cynthus. Before this, Delos—like Rhodes, the centre of the worship of the sun-god Helios, with whom Apollo was wrongly identified in later times—had been a barren, floating rock, but now became stationary, being fastened down by chains to the bottom of the sea. Apollo was born on the 7th day (ἑβδομαγενής) of the month Thargelion according to Delian, of the month Bysios according to Delphian, tradition. The 7th and 20th, the days of the new and full moon, were ever afterwards held sacred to him. In Homer Apollo appears only as the god of prophecy, the sender of plagues, and sometimes as a warrior, but elsewhere as exercising the most varied functions. He is the god of agriculture, specially connected with Aristaeus (q.v.), which, originally a mere epithet, became an independent personality (see, however, Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, iv. 123). This side of his character is clearly expressed in the titles Sitalcas (“protector of corn”); Erythibius (“preventer of blight”); Parnopius (“destroyer of locusts”); Smintheus (“destroyer of mice”), in which, however, some modern inquirers see a totemistic significance (e.g. A. Lang, “Apollo and the Mouse,” in Custom and Myth, p. 101; against this, W.W. Fowler, in Classical Review, November 1892); Erithius (“god of reapers”); and Pasparius (“god of meal”). He is further the god of vegetation generally—Nomios, “god of pastures” (explained, however, by Cicero, as “god of law”), Hersos, “sender of the fertilizing dew.” Valleys and groves are under his protection, unless the epithets Napaeus and Hylates belong to a more primitive aspect of the god as supporting himself by the chase, and roaming the glades and forests in pursuit of prey. Certain trees and plants, especially the laurel, were sacred to him. As the god of agriculture and vegetation he is naturally connected with the course of the year and the arrangement of the seasons, so important in farming operations, and becomes the orderer of time (Horomedon, “ruler of the seasons”), and frequently appears on monuments in company with the Horae.

Apollo is also the protector of cattle and herds, hence Poimnius (“god of flocks”), Tragius (“of goats”), Kereatas (“of horned animals”). Carneius (probably “horned”) is considered by some to be a pre-Dorian god of cattle, also connected with harvest operations, whose cult was grafted on to that of Apollo; by others, to have been originally an epithet of Apollo, afterwards detached as a separate personality (Farnell, Cults, iv. p. 131). The epithet Maleatas, which, as the quantity of the first vowel (ă) shows,2 cannot mean god of “sheep” or “the apple-tree,” is probably a local adjective derived from Malea (perhaps Cape Malea), and may refer to an originally distinct personality, subsequently merged in that of Apollo (see below). Apollo himself is spoken of as a keeper of flocks, and the legends of his service as a herdsman with Laomedon and Admetus point in the same direction. Here probably also is to be referred the epithet Lyceius, which, formerly connected with λυκ- (“shine”) and used to support the conception of Apollo as a light-god, is now generally referred to λύκος (“wolf”) and explained as he who keeps away the wolves from the flock (cf. λυκόεργος, λυκοκτόνος). In accordance with this, the epithet λυκηγενής will not mean “born of” or “begetting light,” but rather “born from the she-wolf,” in which form Leto herself was said to have been conducted by wolves to Delos. The consecration of the wolf to Apollo is probably the relic of an ancient totemistic religion (Farnell, Cults, i. 41; W. Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, new ed., 1894, p. 226).

With the care of the fruits of the earth and the lower animals is associated that of the highest animal, man, especially the youth on his passage to manhood. As such Apollo is κουροτρόφος (“rearer of boys”) and patron of the palaestra. In many places gymnastic contests form a feature of his festivals, and he himself is proficient in athletic exercises (ἐναγώνιος). Thus he was supposed to be the first victor at the Olympic games; he overcomes Hermes in the foot-race, and Ares in boxing.

The transition is easy to Apollo as a warlike god; in fact, the earlier legends represent him as engaged in strife with Python, Tityus, the Cyclopes and the Aloidae. He is Boëdromios (“the helper”), Eleleus (“god of the war-cry”), and the Paean was said to have been originally a song of triumph composed by him after his victory over Python. In Homer he frequently appears on the field, like Ares and Athene, bearing the aegis to frighten the foe. This aspect is confirmed by the epithets Argyrotoxos (“god of the silver bow”), Hecatebolos (“the shooter from afar”), Chrysaoros (“wearer of the golden sword”), and his statues are often equipped with the accoutrements of war.3

The fame of the Pythian oracle at Delphi, connected with the slaying of Python by the god immediately after his birth, gave especial prominence to the idea of Apollo as a god of prophecy. Python, always represented in the form of a snake, sometimes nameless, is the symbol of the old chthonian divinity whose home was the place of “enquiry” (πυθέσθαι). When Apollo Delphinius with his worshippers from Crete took possession of the earth-oracle Python, he received in consequence the name Pythius. That Python was no fearful monster, symbolizing the darkness of winter which is scattered by the advent of spring, is shown by the fact that Apollo was considered to have been guilty of murder in slaying it, and compelled to wander for a term of years and expiate his crime by servitude and purification. Possibly at Delphi and other places there was an old serpent-worship ousted by that of Apollo, which may account for expiation for the slaying of Python being considered necessary. In the solar explanation, the serpent is the darkness driven away by the rays of the sun. (On the Delphian cult of Apollo and its political significance, see Amphictyony, Delphi, Oracle; and Farnell, Cults, iv. pp. 179-218.) Oracular responses were also given at Claros near Colophon in Ionia by means of the water of a spring which inspired those who drank of it; at Patara in Lycia; and at Didyma near Miletus through the priestly family of the Branchidae. Apollo’s oracles, which he did not deliver on his own initiative but as the mouthpiece of Zeus, were infallible, but the human mind was not always able to grasp their meaning; hence he is called Loxias (“crooked,” “ambiguous”). To certain favoured mortals he communicated the gift of prophecy (Cassandra, the Cumaean sibyl, Helenus, Melampus and Epimenides). Although his favourite method was by word of mouth, yet signs were sometimes used; thus Calchas interpreted the flight of birds; burning offerings, sacrificial barley, the arrow of the god, dreams and the lot, all played their part in communicating the will of the gods.

Closely connected with the god of oracles was the god of the healing art, the oracle being frequently consulted in cases of sickness. These two functions are indicated by the titles Iatromantis (“physician and seer”) and Oulios, probably meaning “health-giving” (so Suidas) rather than “destructive.” This side of Apollo’s character does not appear in Homer, where Paieon is mentioned as the physician of the gods. Here again, as in the case of Aristaeus and Carneius, the question arises whether Paean (or Paeon) was originally an epithet of Apollo, subsequently developed into an independent personality, or an independent deity merged in the later arrival (Farnell, Cults, iv. p. 234). According to Wilamowitz-Möllendorff in his edition of Isyllus, the epithet Maleatas alluded to above is also connected with the functions of the healing god, imported into Athens in the 4th century B.C. with other well-known health divinities. In this connexion, it is said to mean the “gentle one,” who gave his name to the rock Malion or Maleas (O. Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie, ii. 1442) on the Gortynian coast. Apollo is further supposed to be the father of Asclepius (Aesculapius), whose ritual is closely modelled upon his. The healing god could also prevent disease and misfortune of all kinds: hence he is ἀλεξίκακος (“averter of evil”) and ἀποτρόπαιος. Further, he is able to purify the guilty and to cleanse from sin (here some refer the epithet ἰατρόμαντις, in the sense of “physician of the soul”). Such a task can be fitly undertaken by Apollo, since he himself underwent purification after slaying Python. According to the Delphic legend, this took place in the laurel grove of Tempe, and after nine years of penance the god returned, as was represented in the festival called Stepterion or Septerion (see A. Mommsen, Delphika, 1878). Thus the old law of blood for blood, which only perpetuated the crime from generation to generation, gave way to the milder idea of the expiatory power of atonement for murder (cf. the court called τὸ ἐπὶ Δελφινίῳ at Athens, which retained jurisdiction in cases where justifiable homicide was pleaded).

The same element of enthusiasm that affects the priestess of the oracle at Delphi produces song and music. The close connexion between prophecy and song is indicated in Homer (Odyssey, viii. 488), where Odysseus suggests that the lay of the fall of Troy by Demodocus was inspired by Apollo or the Muse. The metrical form of the oracular responses at Delphi, the important part played by the paean and the Pythian nomos in his ritual, contributed to make Apollo a god of song and music, friend and leader of the Muses (μουσαγέτης). He plays the lyre at the banquets of the gods, and causes Marsyas to be flayed alive because he had boasted of his superior skill in playing the flute, and the ears of Midas to grow long because he had declared in favour of Pan, who contended that the flute was a better instrument than Apollo’s favourite, the lyre.

A less important aspect of Apollo is that of a marine deity, due to the spread of his cult to the Greek colonies and islands. As such, his commonest name is Delphinius, the “dolphin god,” in whose honour the festival Delphinia was celebrated in Attica. This cult probably originated in Crete, whence the god in the form of a dolphin led his Cretan worshippers to the Delphian shore, where he bade them erect an altar in his honour. He is Epibaterius and Apobaterius (“embarker” and “disembarker”), Nasiotas (“the islander”), Euryalus (“god of the broad sea”). Like Poseidon, he looks forth over his watery kingdom from lofty cliffs and promontories (ἀκταῖος, and perhaps ἀκρίτας).

These maritime cults of Apollo are probably due to his importance as the god of colonization, who accompanied emigrants on their voyage. As such he is ἀγήτωρ (“leader”), οἰκίστης (“founder”), δωματίτης (“god of the home”). As Agyieus (“god of streets and ways”), in the form of a stone pillar with painted head, placed before the doors of houses, he let in the good and kept out the evil (see Farnell, Cults, iv. p. 150, who takes Agyieus to mean “leader”); on the epithet Prostaterius, he who “stands before the house,” hence “protector,” see G.M. Hirst in Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxii. (1902). Lastly, as the originator and protector of civil order, Apollo was regarded as the founder of cities and legislation. Thus, at Athens, Apollo Patroös was known as the protector of the lonians, and the Spartans referred the institutions of Lycurgus to the Delphic oracle.

It has been mentioned above that W.H. Roscher, in the article “Apollo” in his Lexikon der Mythologie, derives all the aspects and functions of Apollo from the conception of an original light- and sun-god. The chief objections to this are the following. It cannot be shown that on Greek soil Apollo originally had the meaning of a sun-god; in Homer, Aeschylus and Plato, the sun-god Helios is distinctly separated from Phoebus Apollo; the constant epithet Φοῖβος, usually explained as the brightness of the sun, may equally well refer to his physical beauty or moral purity; λυκηγενής has already been noticed. It is not until the beginning of the 5th century B.C. that the identification makes its appearance. The first literary evidence is a fragment of Euripides (Phaëthon), in which it is especially characterized as an innovation. The idea was taken up by the Stoics, and in the Roman period generally accepted. But the fact of the gradual development of Apollo as a god of light and heaven, and his identification with foreign sun-gods, is no proof of an original Greek solar conception of him. Apollo-Helios must be regarded as “a late by-product of Greek religion” (Farnell, Cults, iv. p. 136; Wernicke in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencydopädie). For the manner in which the solar theory is developed, reference must be made to Roscher’s article, but one legend may here be mentioned, since it helps to trace the spread of the cult of the god. It was said that Apollo soon after his birth spent a year amongst the Hyperboreans, who dwelt in a land of perpetual sunshine, before his return to Delphi. This return is explained as the second birth of the god and his victory over the powers of winter; the name Hyperboreans is explained as the “dwellers beyond the north wind.” This interpretation is now, however, generally rejected in favour of that of H.L. Ahrens,—that Hyperborei is identical with the Perphereës (“the carriers”), who are described as the servants of Apollo, carriers of cereal offerings from one community to another (Herodotus iv. 33). This would point to the fact that certain settlements of Apolline worship along the northernmost border of Greece (Illyria, Thrace, Macedonia) were in the habit of sending offerings to the god to a centre of his worship farther south (probably Delphi), advancing by the route from Tempe through Thessaly, Pherae and Doris to Delphi; while others adopted the route through Illyria, Epirus, Dodona, the Malian gulf, Carystus in Euboea, and Tenos to Delos (Farnell, Cults, iv. p. 100).

The most usual attributes of Apollo were the lyre and the bow; the tripod especially was dedicated to him as the god of prophecy. Among plants, the bay, used in expiatory sacrifices and also for making the crown of victory at the Pythian games, and the palm-tree, under which he was born in Delos, were sacred to him; among animals and birds, the wolf, the roe, the swan, the hawk, the raven, the crow, the snake, the mouse, the grasshopper and the griffin, a mixture of the eagle and the lion evidently of Eastern origin. The swan and grasshopper symbolize music and song; the hawk, raven, crow and snake have reference to his functions as the god of prophecy.

The chief festivals held in honour of Apollo were the Carneia, Daphnephoria, Delia, Hyacinthia, Pyanepsia, Pythia and Thargelia (see separate articles).

Among the Romans the worship of Apollo was adopted from the Greeks. There is a tradition that the Delphian oracle was consulted as early as the period of the kings during the reign of Tarquinius Superbus, and in 430 a temple was dedicated to Apollo on the occasion of a pestilence, and during the Second Punic War (in 212) the Ludi Apollinares were instituted in his honour. But it was in the time of Augustus, who considered himself under the special protection of Apollo and was even said to be his son, that his worship developed and he became one of the chief gods of Rome. After the battle of Actium, Augustus enlarged his old temple, dedicated a portion of the spoil to him, and instituted quinquennial games in his honour. He also erected a new temple on the Palatine hill and transferred the secular games, for which Horace composed his Carmen Saeculare, to Apollo and Diana.

Apollo was represented more frequently than any other deity in ancient art. As Apollo Agyieus he was shown by a simple conic pillar; the Apollo of Amyclae was a pillar of bronze surmounted by a helmeted head, with extended arms carrying lance and bow. There were also rude idols of him in wood (xoana), in which the human form was scarcely recognizable. In the 6th century, his statues of stone were naked, stiff and rigid in attitude, shoulders square, limbs strong and broad, hair falling down the back. In the riper period of art the type is softer, and Apollo appears in a form which seeks to combine manhood and eternal youth. His long hair is usually tied in a large knot above his forehead. The most famous statue of him is the Apollo Belvidere in the Vatican (found at Frascati, 1455), an imitation belonging to the early imperial period of a bronze statue representing him, with aegis in his left hand, driving back the Gauls from his temple at Delphi (279 B.C.), or, according to another view, fighting with the Pythian dragon. In the Apollo Citharoedus or Musagetes in the Vatican, he is crowned with laurel and wears the long, flowing robe of the Ionic bard, and his form is almost feminine in its fulness; in a statue at Rome of the older and more vigorous type he is naked and holds a lyre in his left hand; his right arm rests upon his head, and a griffin is seated at his side. The Apollo Sauroctonus (after Praxiteles), copied in bronze at the Villa Albani in Rome and in marble at Paris, is a naked, youthful, almost boyish figure, leaning against a tree, waiting to strike a lizard climbing up the trunk. The gigantic statue of Helios (the sun-god), “the colossus of Rhodes,” by Chares of Lindus, celebrated as one of the seven wonders of the world, is unknown to us. Bas-reliefs and painted vases reproduce the contests of Apollo with Tityus, Marsyas, and Heracles, the slaughter of the daughters of Niobe, and other incidents in his life.

Authorities.—F.L.W. Schwartz, De antiquissima Apollinis Natura (Berlin, 1843); J.A. Schönborn, Über das Wesen Apollons (Berlin, 1854); A. Milchhöfer, Über den attischen Apollon (Munich, 1873); T. Schreiber, Apollon Pythoktonos (Leipzig, 1879); W.H. Roscher, Studien zur vergleichenden Mythologie der Griechen und Romer, i. (Leipzig, 1873); R. Hecker, De Apollinis apud Romanos Cultu (Leipzig, 1879); G. Colin, Le Culte d’Apollon pythien à Athènes (1905); L. Dyer, The Gods in Greece (1891); articles in Pauly-Wissowa’s Realencyclopädie, W.H. Roscher’s Lexikon der Mythologie, and Daremberg and Saglio’s Dictionnaire des antiquités; L. Preller, Griechische und römische Mythologie (4th ed. by C. Robert); J. Marquardt, Römische Staalsverwaltung, iii.; G. Wissowa Religion und Kultus der Romer (1902); D. Bassi, Saggio di Bibliografia mitologica, i. Apollo (1896); L. Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, iv. (1907); O. Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte, ii. (1906). In the article Greek Art, fig. 9 represents a bearded Apollo, playing on the lyre, in a chariot drawn by winged horses; fig. 55 (pl. ii.) Apollo of the Belvidere; fig. 76 (pl. v.) a nude and roughly executed colossal figure of the god.

(J. H. F.)

1 Hesychius; who also gives the explanation σηκός (“fold”), in which case Apollo would be the god of flocks and herds.

2 The authority for the quantity is Isyllus.

3 Hence some have derived “Apollo” from ἀπολλὕναι, “to destroy.”