PREFACE.
THE manuscript from which this work of Eusebius has been at
length recovered, after the lapse of several centuries, is that wonderful
volume of the Nitrian Collection (1) now in the British
Museum, whose most curious and remarkable history I have already made known
in the Preface to my edition of the Festal Letters of St. Athanasius.(2)
It is not necessary, therefore, for me in this place to give any further
account of it than to state that it was transcribed fourteen hundred and
fifty years ago,--as early as the year of our Lord four hundred and eleven.
The several works contained in it are now all printed, and thereby rescued
from the chance of being lost for all future time. The first--a Syriac
translation of the Recognitions of St. Clement, which I once intended to
publish, and had transcribed the greater part of it for that purpose--has
been edited by Dr. P. de Lagarde, (3) to whom I |ii gave
my copy. The transcript was completed by him, and compared with another
manuscript of the same work, and afterward printed with that great care and
accuracy which gives so much value to all the Syriac texts which he has
edited. The second treatise in this manuscript is the book of Titus, Bishop
of Bostra, or Bozra, in Arabia, against the Manicheans. We are also indebted
for the publication of this important work to Dr. de Lagarde.(4)
The third is the book of Eusebius on the Theophania, or Divine Manifestation
of our Lord. The text of this was edited by the late Dr. Lee,(5)
who also published an English translation of it,(6) with
valuable notes and a preliminary dissertation. The last is this history of
the Martyrs of Palestine, also written by the same Author.
In the eighth book of the Ecclesiastical History, upon the occasion of his
giving a short account of certain Bishops and others, who sealed their
testimony for their faith with their blood, Eusebius stated his intention of
writing, in a distinct treatise, a narrative of the confession |iii of those
Martyrs with whom he had himself been acquainted. (7) Up
to the time of the discovery of this Syriac copy, no such work was known to
exist in a separate form, either in Latin or Greek. There is indeed a brief
history of those contemporaries of Eusebius who suffered in the persecution
of the Christians in Palestine, found in several antient Greek manuscripts,
inserted as a part of it, and combined with the Ecclesiastical History : but
it does not occupy the same place in all the copies of that work. In one it
is placed after the middle of the thirteenth chapter of the eighth book;(8)
in two(9) at the end of the tenth book; and in several,(10)
at the end of the eighth; while from two |iv others,(11)
as well as from the Latin version made by Ruffinus, it is omitted
altogether. There is no distinct title prefixed to it in any copy but one,
the Codex Castellani,(12) where it bears the
inscription:--Eusebiou suggramma peri twn kat' auton marturhsantwn en twi
oktaetei Dioklhtianou kai efexhV Galeriou tou Maximinou diwgmou ; but two
copies, the Mazarine and Medicean, have at the end--Eusebiou tou Pamfilou
peri twn en Palaistinhi marturhsantwn teloV.(13)
That this was the history of the martyrs who were known to Eusebius which he
had promised, has never been doubted by any one; while, on the other hand,
almost every one who has undertaken to write on the subject has judged it to
be but an abridgment of the original work which formerly existed in a more
extended form.(14) The |v antient Latin copy of the Acts
of Procopius,(15) the Acts of Pamphilus and his
companions, as exhibited by Simeon Metaphrastes,(16) in
much fuller detail than they are now found in the Greek text of Eusebius,
and the additional facts respecting other martyrs who suffered in Palestine,
supplied by the Greek Menaea and Menologia, were adduced as evidence of the
existence at one time of a more copious work, and as a proof that the
narrative inserted in the Ecclesiastical History was only an abridgment.
The correctness of this critical induction has been completely established
by the discovery of this copy of the work of Eusebius of Caesarea on the
Martyrs of Palestine, in the vernacular language of the country where the
events took place, and actually transcribed within about seventy years after
the death of the author.(17)
S. E. Assemani goes so far as to express his conviction that this history of
the sufferings of the martyrs in Palestine was originally composed in Syriac,
a language with which Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, was necessarily well
acquainted, |vi as being the vernacular speech of his own country and
diocese.(18) It is not at all improbable that Eusebius
might made have use of the Syriac for ordinary purposes, or, indeed, as a
safer deposit for any memoranda which he might wish to commit to writing
than the Greek, during the time that the persecution continued. Could this
inference of S. E. Assemani be established, it would give still additional
interest and value to the work which I now publish. I must, however, own
that I cannot admit the supposition that this work was originally written in
the Syriac language. Indeed, it seems to me to be sufficiently disproved by
the fact, that the Syriac copy of such of the Acts of Martyrs in Palestine
as have been published by S. E. Assemani, while it agrees completely in
substance with this, is evidently a translation by another hand; and that
the variation and errors which occur in some of the proper names are of such
a kind as could only have arisen from confounding two similar Greek letters
of the writing at that period ;(19) and further, there
are some obscure passages in this Syriac, which obviously seem to be the
result of a translator not fully apprehending the meaning of the Greek
passage before him.(20)
How long the entire Greek text of the original work continued to be read, we
have now no means of learning with any degree of certainty. It must have
been in existence in the time of Simeon Metaphrastes, in the tenth century,
for he has supplied many facts20 from it |vii which the abridged form of the
Greek does not contain, and has also given entire the long passage relating
to Pamphilus and his companions.(21) Neither can there be
any doubt of its having been in use at the period when the Greek Menaea and
Menologia were compiled.(22) The fact that many of the
circumstances and events which it described had been inserted in the
abovementioned books, and that an abridgment, which, I cannot doubt, was
made by Eusebius himself, had also been incorporated into the
Ecclesiastical. History, seems to have led to the discontinuance of the
transcription of the larger work, and to have been mainly the cause of its
being no longer found in the Greek in a separate form. The preservation of
this work in its complete state up to the present time, in the Syriac, is
chiefly due to the circumstance of its having been transported, at a very
early period, to the Syrian Monastery in the solitude of the Nitrian Desert,
where the dryness of the climate kept the vellum from decay, and the
idleness and ignorance of the monks saved the volume from being worn out and
destroyed by frequent use.
Independently of the great interest of the subject of which it treats, this
work of Eusebius has especial claims to consideration, on the ground of the
author having been himself an eyewitness of most of the events which he
|viii describes. There are some, indeed, at which he could not have have
been present ; for instance, the Confession of Romanus, who suffered at
Antioch on the same day as Alphaeus and Zacchaeus did at Caesarea, where he
was then residing. He has, given a narrative of the sufferings of Romanus,
in his history of the Martyrs of Palestine, because he was a native of
Palestine, and had also been a deacon and exorcist in one of the villages of
Caesarea; and Eusebius was anxious to claim for his own country and diocese
the honour of this man's confession. This may perhaps be the reason why
there are found two distinct accounts of the Acts of Romanus in Syriac, as
well as in Greek and Latin.
It is not my intention to enter into any discussion respecting the time of
the composition of this treatise, or that of the great Church History by
Eusebius: nor will I consider at any length the question of the abridgment
of the account of the Martyrs of Palestine inserted in most of the copies of
the Ecclesiastical History, or that of the different recensions of this
latter work by the author himself. (23) These are
certainly very interesting subjects of literary and historical inquiry; and
doubtless this book will supply the critic with new data, to enable him to
elucidate and determine them in a more complete and satisfactory manner than
it has been hitherto possible for any one to do. These matters I would
rather leave to other scholars. All now have the same materials as I have,
and some may be possessed of other greater facilities and appliances, as
well as better capacities for the task. I |ix believe it to be my duty to
employ my own time and exertions in another way.
I will therefore content myself with briefly observing that this work of
Eusebius on the Martyrs of Palestine bears evidently upon it the stamp of
being a record of facts which were noted down at the time as they severally
occurred, and were afterwards revised and arranged in due order at a
subsequent period, when some events, which, in the earlier years of the
Persecution, the author thought it probable might happen, had actually taken
place ; and when other occurrences of earlier date were no longer so fresh
and vivid in the minds of men as they had been when all were still living
who had witnessed them.
I would observe, also, that it seems to be evident that this work, in which
Eusebius recounts the martyrdom of Pamphilus and his companions, was
composed before he wrote the fuller history of that noble Martyr, to which
he refers in the Abridgment; for no reference whatever is made to the
existence of any such history in this original and more copious narrative of
the Martyrs of Palestine. It must, therefore, have been composed before he
wrote the Ecclesiastical History, in which he several times adverts to the
life of Pamphilus as having been already completed.
The first edition of the Ecclesiastical History does not appear to have
contained the history of the Martyrs of Palestine. This seems to be the copy
used by Ruffinus, who neither gives any such history, nor has the passage in
the thirteenth chapter of the eighth book which refers to it.
Indeed, it is evident from his own words that the abridgment must have been
made by Eusebius himself.(24) When, |x therefore, he
condensed the narrative for the purpose of incorporating it into the
subsequent editions of the Ecclesiastical History, he also took that
opportunity of supplying several facts which, either from considerations of
prudence, or from not having had knowledge of them at the time when the work
was originally composed, he had previously omitted; and also ventured to
speak more plainly of persons, because the altered condition of
circumstances after the accession of Constantine enabled him to do this
without any apprehension of danger. This, I think, will be obvious to those
who will be at the pains to compare the general narrative of the events as
they are recorded year by year, with the notes which I have added, even
without having recourse to fuller and more minute researches.
The translation I have endeavoured to make as faithful as I could without
following the Syriac idiom so closely as to render the English obscure.
There are a very few passages in which I cannot feel quite sure that I have
obtained the precise meaning of the Syriac ; but the obscurity of these
passages is certainly due to the Translator, who does not seem to have fully
understood the Greek text which he had before him. My English translation of
the long account of Pamphilus and his companions was printed before I read
either the Greek text printed by Papebrochius, or the Latin translation made
by Lipomannus from the same Greek, as it was preserved by Simeon
Metaphrastes. The comparison of all of these together will be a good means
of testing both the integrity of the transmission of the original Greek to
the present day, and the fidelity of the Syriac translation.
In the notes, my chief object has been to collect such observations as may
tend especially to throw light upon |xi the time of the composition of this
work and of the Ecclesiastical History by Eusebius, and serve to elucidate
the text; but in order to keep them from extending to too great a length, I
have omitted all those matters which it appeared to me an ordinarily
well-informed scholar might be presumed to be acquainted with.
[[Footnotes given numbers and moved to end]]
1 (a) British Museum, Additional MS. No. 12,150.
2. (b) P. xv. The Festal Letters of Athanasius, discovered
in an antient Syriac version. 8vo. London, 1848.
3. (c) Clementis Romani Recognitiones Syriace. Paulus
Antonius de Lagarde edidit. 8vo, Lipsise, 1861.
4. (a) Titi Bostreni contra Manchaeos libri quatuor Syriace.
Paulus Antonius de Lagarde edidit. 8vo. Berolini, 1859.
5. (b) Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, on the Theophania, or
Divine Manifestation of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. A Syriac Version,
edited from an ancient Manuscript recently discovered. By Samuel Lee, D.D.
8vo. London, 1842.
6.(c) Eusebius, 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 By Samuel Lee, D.D. 8vo. Cambridge, 1843.
7. (a) OiV ge mhn autoV paregenomen,
toutouV kai toiV meq hmaV gnwrimouV di eteraV poihsomai grafhV."Moreover,
there were many other eminent martyrs who have an honourable mention among
the Churches, which are in those places and countries. But our design is not
to commit to writing the conflicts of all those who suffered for the worship
of God over the whole world, nor yet to give an accurate relation of every
accident that befel them ; but this rather belongs to those who, with their
own eyes, beheld what was done. Moreover, those ourselves were present
at, we will commit to the knowledge of posterity in another work." See
Ecc. Hist., B. viii. ch. 13, Eng. Trans. p. 148.
8. (b) Codex olim Regiae Societatis, nunc vero Musei
Britannici. This is G. of Dr. Burton's edition : Oxford, 1838. See the same,
pp. 572 and 591.
9. (c) Duo Codices Florentini Bibliothecae
Mediceo-Laurentianae. Plut. lxx. n. 7 et 20. I. and K. of Burton. See Ibid.
p. 591.
10. (d) 1. Codex Regius Bibliothecae Parisiensis n. 1436;
2. Codex Mediceus, ibid. n. 1434; 3. Codex Mazarinasus, ibid. n. 1430; 4.
Codex Fuketianus, ibid. n. 1435; 5. Codex Savilianus, in Bibliotheca
Bodleiana, n. 2278; being A. B. C. D. and F. respectively of Burton. Ibid.
11. (d) Codex Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis n. 1431, and
Codex Venetus n. 838 ; being E. and H. of Burton. Ibid.
12. (a) See N. of Burton. Ibid.
13. (b) See Valesius, note (a), p. 154, Eng. Trans.
14. (c) See Valesius and Ruinart, cited in the notes to
this, pp. 50, 51, 55, 59, 60, 64, 69, 84. Also S. E. Assemani remarks :-- "Graecam
S. Procopii, Martyrum Palaestinorum in Diocletiani persecutione antesignani,
historiam, quae in laudato de martyribus Palaestinae libro habetur; ab alia
fusiori, atque explicatiori fuisse contractam atque truncatam, certum et
exploratum est, nam quae ad patriam atque institum pertinent omittere
nunquam consuevit Eusebius."--Acta SS. Mart.
"Horum sanctorum martyrum historiam concisam pariter jejunamque exhibet
nobis Graecus Eusebii Caesariensis textus in libro de martyribus Palaestinae;
eandemque prorsus fortunam experta est, quam prior Procopii, ex latiori
scilicet narratione in brevem summam. Atque priorem illam Latina, quae
superfuit, versio supplerit, haec autem suppleri aliter non potuissent,
nisi, favente Deo, Chaldaicus Codex noster e tenebris Aegypti vindicatus
emersisset in lucem."-- Ibid. p. 173.
Baillet:--" Eusébe de Cesarée avait recueilli à part les Martyrs de
Palestine: et quoique les Actes qu'il en avoit ramassez avec beaucoup de
soin et de travail ne paroissent plus, il nous en reste un bon abbregé dans
le livre qui se trouve joint à son histoire genérale de l'Eglise.'' See
Les Vies des Saints, vol. i. p. 55.
15. (a) See these printed p. 50 below and Valesius' note
thereon.
16. (b) The Latin, by Surius, of this, will be found in
the Notes, at p. 69.
17. (c) Eusebius died A.D. 339 or 340 (Fabricius,
Bibliotheca Graec. lib. v. c. 4. p. 31), and this copy was transcribed
A.D. 411.
18. (a) See Note, p. 51, below.
19. (b) See Notes, pp. 57, 60 below.
20. (c) See p. 66, below.
21. (a) A Latin version of this, as it is found in Simeon
Metaphrastes, translated by Lipomannus, I have printed in the Notes, p. 69,
below, for the sake of comparison with this text. It also still exists in
Greek, and was first published by D. Papebrochius from a Medicean MS. in the
Acta Sanctorum, June, vol. i. p. 64; and afterwards reprinted by J. Alb.
Fabricius in S. Hippoliti Opera, 2 vols, fol. Hamb. 1716--19, vol. ii. p.
217.
22. (b) See notes pp. 53, 56, 59, 60, 64, 68.
23. (a) See Heinichen, Notitia Codicum, Editionum et
Translationum Historiae Ecclesiasticae Eusebianae, § vi.
24. (a) See Note below, p. 79.
|
|
