The Ancient Library

Scanned text contains errors.


many others (ypd<j>ovT€s els Kd\\os) to write out a fair transcript. But although the acquaintance of Hippolytus with Origen is confirmed by the asser­tion of Hippolytus himself, who stated (according to Jerome) that he had Origen among his hearers when preaching, the other particulars given by Photius are founded on a misunderstanding of a passage in Jerome, who asserts that Ambrosius of Alexandria, a Marcionite, whom Origen had con­verted, induced by the reputation which Hippoly­tus had acquired as a commentator, engaged Origen in the exposition of Scripture, and supplied him with the amanuenses already described.

The martyrdom of Hippolytus is not mentioned by Eusebius ; but Jerome calls him martyr (Praef. ad Matilweum) ; and Photius and subsequent writers commonly so designate him. His name is found in the Roman, Greek, Coptic, and Abys­sinian martyrologies ; but the variations in the calendars are such, that we must suppose them to record the martyrdom of several Hippolyti. Pru-dentius, a Christian poet of the earlier part of the fifth century, has a long poem (Liber irepl 2r€<pd-vuv, seuDe Coronis: Hymn, ix.) on the martyrdom of Hippolytus ; but this is a different person from the subject of the present article, unless we sup­pose, with some critics, that Prudentius has con­fused three Hippolyti, and made them one. The date of the martyrdom of our Hippolytus is doubt­ful. Alexander Severus, under whom it has been commonly placed, was not a persecutor; and if we suppose, with some of the best critics, that the Exhortatorius ad Severinam, enumerated among the writings of Hippolytus, is the work noticed by Theodoret as addressed irpos. jScunA&a rut/a, " to a certain queen" or " empress," and that Severina was the wife of the emperor Philip the Arabian, we must bring his death down to the persecution of Decius (about a. d. 250), if not later ; in which case Hippolytus, if a disciple of Irenaeus, who died in or near a. d. 190, must have been a very old man. The place of his martyrdom was probably near Rome, perhaps the mouth of the Tiber or the adjacent sea, and the mode drowning, with a stone round his neck. In this case he must have left the East and come to Rome ; and there may be some truth in the statement of Peter Damiani, cardinal bishop of Ostia, near Rome, a writer of the eleventh century (Opera, vol. iii. p. 217, Opuscul. xix. c. 7, ed. Paris, 1743), that after converting many of the Saracens (a circumstance which accords with the supposition that his diocese was in Arabia) he resigned his bishopric, came from the East to Rome, where !ne suffered martyrdom by drowning, and was buried by the pious care of his fellow-Christians. In 1551 the statue of a man seated in a monastic habit, and with a shaven crown, was dug up in the neighbourhood of Rome; some of our authorities say near a church of St. Laurence, others say of St. Hippolytus (perhaps the church was dedi­cated to both, as their names are united in the Martyrologies): on the sides of the seat were in­scribed the Canon of Hippolytus, and a list of his works. Three plates of the statue are given in the edition of the works of Hippolytus published by Fabricius.

In the Acta of a council held at Rome under pope Sylvester, a. d. 324 (Labbe, Concilia, vol. i. col. 1547, &c.), the deacon Hippolytus was con­demned for the Valentinian heresy. It is very doubtful if this is our Hippolytus, who was so far



from being a Valentinian, that Epiphanius mentions him (Panar. Haeres. xxxi. c. 33), with Irenaeus and Clement, as having written against them. The Acta are so corrupt, if indeed they are not spurious, that they cannot be relied on ; and if the memory of our Hippolytus (for he himself had been long dead) incurred any censure at the council, it was probably for differing from the Roman church in the calculation of Easter, to which subject he had given great attention.

Several of the works of Hippolytus are enume­rated by Eusebius, Jerome, and Photius, and are known by citations in ancient writers. Various portions of them are extant, most of which were collected and published by J. -A. Fabricius, under the title of S. Hippolyti Episcopi et Martyris Opera, 2 vols. fol. Hamb. 1716—18. Mills, the editor of the N. T., had contemplated an edition of Hippolytus, and after his death his papers were transmitted to Jo.. Wil. Janus, of Wittemburg, who was also prevented by death from bringing out the work. The collections of Mills and Janus con­tained some pieces or fragments not included by Fabricius; and further collections appear to have been made by Grabe and others. The genuineness of the extant writings of Hippolytus has been dis­puted. Semler doubts the genuineness of the whole; and Oudin and Mills (Proleg. ad N. T* p. Ixii.) of nearly the whole. The extant works and fragments were reprinted by Gallandius (Bibl. Pair. vol. ii. fol. Venet. 1766), who arranges them in the following order:—1. yATr68ei£i$ irepl tov XpiffTov Kal 'AvTixpiffTOv, Demonstratio de CJiristo et Antichristo. This was first published by Marquardus Gudius, 8vo. Paris, 1661, and was given by Combefis in his Anctar. Novissim. vol. i. fol. Paris, 1672, with a Latin version, which was reprinted in the BibliotJi. Pair. vol. xxvii. ed. Lyon. 1677. Mills makes this work the only exception to his judgment that the extant works of Hippo­lytus are spurious : he admits that it is " perhaps " genuine. The work published with a Latin version by Joannes Picus as a work of Hippolytus, Ilepl ttjs o~WTe\eias tov k^o^ou Kal irepl tov "Arrt-Xplo~Tov Kal els t^iv SevTepav irapovfflav tov Ku-plov r^w 'Iviffov Xpio~TOv9 De Consummatione Mundi et de Antichristo^ et secundo adventu Domini nostri Jesu CImsti, is pronounced by Combefis to be spurious, and as such is, in the edition of Fa^ bricius, given in an Appendix to the first vol. The work of Hippolytus, De Antichristo, is mentioned by Jerome and Photius. 2. Els t^v 'Swcrd.vvav, In Susannam. This was also published by Combefis,, as above, with a Latin version, which was reprinted in the BibliotJi. Patrum, with the foregoing. It is apparently part of the commentary on Daniel men* tioned by Jerome, of which some other parts re* main. Hippolytus interprets the history of Susanna allegorically: Susanna is a type of the church. 3« iroSetKTt/c^ irpds 'louSatovs, Demonstrate adyer* sus Judaeos. Fabricius gave in his 1st vol. a Latin version of this fragment, by Franciscus Turriamis,, which Possevinus had printed (Appar. Sac. vol. i, p. 763, &c.), and in his 2nd vol. the original Greek, which Montfaucon had communicated to him. As the piece appears to be a paraphrase of Psalm Ixix, Fabricius suspects it is part of Hippolytus's Com­mentary on the Psalms. 4. Upos vE\\i}vas \6yos. This is only a fragment. Its authorship is claimed for Hippolytus, on the authority of the inscription on his statue, where it is called Upos "EAA^aj

About | First



page #  
Search this site
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of