WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

tal manner, in lofty hyperbolical language, about A. D. 980. It was translated into Latin by Stephen of Antioch in 1127, in which language we have two editions, Venice

, or Ali Ebnol Abbas, as Abulpharagius calls him in his Hist. Dyn. or, as he is usually called, Magus, as being one of the Magi, the followers of Zaradusht or Zoroaster; and not for his learning, as the learned Dr. Freind supposes. He was a Persian physician, and studied under Abu Maher, another Persian doctor, who probably was of the Magian religion also; he wrote his book, or Royal Work, at the request of Bowaia the son of Adadb'ddaula the calif, to whom he dedicates it in the oriental manner, in lofty hyperbolical language, about A. D. 980. It was translated into Latin by Stephen of Antioch in 1127, in which language we have two editions, Venice 1492, and Leyden 1523, fol. There is an Arabic ms copy in 4 vols. folio in the Leyden library, which was brought by James Golius from the East.

, and ending with the reign of Zeno, and the deposition of Peter the Fuller, who had usurped the see of Antioch. He wrote likewise a treatise against the council of

, a Nestorian priest, lived, according to Vossius, under the emperor Zeno, about the year 483; but Cave is of opinion that he lived some years later, as he continued his history five books after the deposing of Peter the Fuller. This was an Ecclesiastical History, beginning with the reign of Theodosius the younger, when Nestorius published his opinions, and ending with the reign of Zeno, and the deposition of Peter the Fuller, who had usurped the see of Antioch. He wrote likewise a treatise against the council of Chalcedon. Photius praises his style, but censures his principles. There is only a fragment extant of his history in the Concilia, vol. VII. and in the collections of Theodoras Lector.

of Antioch, a celebrated rhetorician and sophist, who lived in

, of Antioch, a celebrated rhetorician and sophist, who lived in the third century, wrote in Greek a treatise on rhetoric which has descended to us, and some other works. His rhetoric has been translated into Latin. The best edition was printed by the Elzivirs at Amsterdam, 1645, 12mo, under the title “Aphthonii Progymnasmata, partim a Rodolpho Agricola, partim a Joanne-Maria Catanaeo latinitate donata, cum scholiis R. Lorichii.

, a Greek poet of Antioch ia Asia, is more known from the eloquent orations pronounced

, a Greek poet of Antioch ia Asia, is more known from the eloquent orations pronounced by Cicero in his favour, than by the few fragments of his that are come down to us. He was denied the title of Roman citizen, which Cicero caused to be confirmed to him, by maintaining that he had it; and that even if he had it not, his probity and his talents ought to have procured it for him. He lived about 60 years before the common sera. Archias composed several pieces; among others, a poem on the War of the Cimbri, and had begun another on the Consulate of Cicero, but none of his works have reached our times, except some epigrams in the Greek Anthology, and in Brunck’s “Analecta veterum poetarum Grsecorum,” vol. II. p. 92. They were also lately published, with notes and a Latin translation by Ilgen, 1800, who has subjoined a critical inquiry into the life and genius of Archias. It is not from these, however, that we can estimate the value of Cicero’s high praise of this author. Except two or three, these epigrams scarcely rise above mediocrity.

, a native of Antioch, and bishop of Amasea in Pontus, in the fourth century,

, a native of Antioch, and bishop of Amasea in Pontus, in the fourth century, was the author of many homilies, part of which were published by Rubenius, and part by the fathers Combesis and Richer. They were translated into French by Maucroix in 1695, and have been admired for their eloquence. The first fourteen are evidently by Asterius, Iput the others appear doubtful, among which are those on Daniel and Susannah, St. Peter and St. Paul. In the last the supremacy of the church of Rome is maintained against the pretensions of all the churches in the East and West.

, a Christian bishop and martyr, of the third century, became bishop of Antioch in the year 238, and governed that see thirteen years.

, a Christian bishop and martyr, of the third century, became bishop of Antioch in the year 238, and governed that see thirteen years. It is said he died for maintaining the Christian faith, but authors are not agreed about the time or manner of his martyrdom. Eusebius and St. Jerom say, that upon his professing himself a Christian, in the reign of Decius, he was put in prison and died there. St. Chrysostom, who wrote a panegyric upon Baby las, relates that he was brought out of prison and publicly executed. This is supposed to have taken place in the year 250. His relics were highly respected at Antioch, where two churches were built in honour of his memory, and it is said, that when his relics were brought thither, the oracle of Apollo was struck dumb.

er of the church of Constantinople, and provost of that of Blachern. He was also nominated patriarch of Antioch, but never was installed, and was flattered by the emperor

, an eminent scholar of the Greek church, who flourished about the end of the twelfth century, was chancellor and library keeper of the church of Constantinople, and provost of that of Blachern. He was also nominated patriarch of Antioch, but never was installed, and was flattered by the emperor Isaac Comnenus, with the hope of being advanced to the patriarchal see of Constantinople, which he never attained. He composed several valuable works, the chief of which are 1. “Cornmentarius in Canones Ss. Apostolorum, &c.” Paris, 1620, fol. but a far better edition, by Beveridge, Oxf. 1672, in his Pandects o*f Canons. 2. “Commentarius in Photii Nomocanonem,” Paris, 1615, 4to. 3. “Collectio ecclesiasticarum Constitutionum,” printed in Justelli Bibliotheca Juris Canon, vol. II. 4. “Responsa ad varias questiones Jus Canonicum spectantes,” in Leunclavius’ Jus Gr. Rom. lib. 2. 5. “Responsa ad interrogationes Murci patriarchs Alexandria!,” Gr. et Lat. ibid. 6. “Meditata, sive responsa ad varios casus,” ibid. &c. The time of Balsamon’s death is not ascertained, but he was certainly alive in 1203, when Constantinople was taken by the Latins. Baronius and other adherents to the church of Rome speak with disrespect of Balsamon, but Dupin, with his usual candour.

s, then much divided about some points of faith, and in regard to Meletius and Paulinus, two bishops of Antioch. The western churches acknowledged Paulinus for the

, surnamed The Great, on account of his learning and piety, was born at Caesarea in Cappadocia, in. the year 326. He received the first part of his education under his father. He went afterwards and studied under the famous Libanius at Antiochia and Constantinople, and from thence to Athens, where he met with Gregory Nazianzen, with whom he had a very cordial intimacy. After finishing his studies, he returned to his native country in the year 355, and taught rhetoric. Some time after he travelled into Syria, Egypt, and Libya, to visit the monasteries of these countries; and the monastic life so much suited his disposition, that upon his return home he resolved to follow it, and became the first institutor of it in Pontus and Cappadocia. Eusebius bishop of Csesarea conferred the order of priesthood upon Basil, who soon after retired into his solitude, having had some misunderstanding with his bishop; but he came to a reconciliation with him about three years after, and his reputation was at length so great, that, upon the death of Eusebius, in the year 370, he was chosen his successor. It was with some difficulty that he accepted of this dignity; and no sooner was he raised to it, than the emperor Valens began to persecute him because he refused to embrace the doctrine of the Arians. Valens came twice to Ca?sarea, and finding he was not able to influence Basil, resolved to banish him from that place. He ceased at length, however, to molest Basil, who now began to use his utmost endeavours to bring about a re-union betwixt the eastern and western churches, then much divided about some points of faith, and in regard to Meletius and Paulinus, two bishops of Antioch. The western churches acknowledged Paulinus for the lawful bishop, and would have no communion with Meletius, who was supported by the eastern churches. But all his efforts were ineffectual, this dispute not being terminated till nine months after his death. Basil was likewise engaged in some contests relating to the division the emperor had made of Cappadocia into two provinces. Anthimus, bishop of Tayane, the metropolis of the new province, was desirous to extend his limits, which Basil opposed. They contested chiefly about a little village named Zazime. Basil, in order to preserve it in his jurisdiction, erected a bishopric, and gave it to his friend Gregory of Nazianzen, but Anthimus took possession before him; and Gregory, who loved peace, retired from thence. Basil had also some disputes with Eustathius, and was engaged in most of the controversies of his age. Calumny, malice, and the domineering power of Arianism afflicted him with various trials, in which his patience was unwearied; and as his body became enfeebled by increasing distempers, his mind seems to have collected more vigour. Finding himself rapidly declining, after he had governed the church of Csesarea eight years and some months, he ordained some of his followers, and was then obliged to take to his bed. The people flocked about his house, sensible of the value of such a pastor. For a time he discoursed piously to those about him, and sealed his last breath with the ejaculation, “Into thy hands I commend my spirit.” He died in the year 379. By studying the works of Origen, he contracted a taste for exposition by no means very perspicuous. It is more to be regretted that a man of such extensive learning and piety should have been so attached to the monastic spirit, the excessive austerities of which impaired his constitution. His doctrines are consequently clouded with superstitious mixtures, although it is evident that he held the essential articles of Christianity in the utmost reverence.

Syria; and, after some months stay at Aleppo, where he had frequent conversation with the patriarch of Antioch, then resident there, he left a copy of our church-catechism,

, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born in 1607, in the island of Jersey, according to Wood, which an annotator on the Biog. Britannica contradicts without informing us of the place of his nativity. Grey, in his ms notes, says he was born at Rouen, in Normandy, but quotes no authority, nor do we know in what school or university he received his education. For some time, he was master of the college or free-school at Guernsey, and became chaplain to Thomas Morton bishop of Durham, who gave him the rectory of Stanhope, and the vicarage of EgglesclifF, b.oth in the county of Durham. In July 1640, he had the degree of doctor of divinity conferred upon him at Cambridge, by mandate; and was incorporated in the same at Oxford, the November following, about which time he was made chaplain in ordinary to king Charles I.; Dec. 12, 1643, he was installed into the seventh prebend of Durham, to which he was collated by his generous patron bishop Morton. The next year, August 24, he was also collated to the archdeaconry of Northumberland, with the rectory of Howiek annexed. But he did not long enjoy these great preferments, as in the beginning of the civil wars, being sequestered and plundered, he repaired to king Charles at Oxford, before whom, and his parliament, he frequently preached. In 1646, he had a licence granted him under the public seal of the university, to preach the word of God throughout England. Upon the surrender of the Oxford garrison to the parliament, he resolved with all the zeal of a missionary to propagate the doctrine of the EngJish church in the East, among the Greeks, Arabians, &c. Leaving therefore his family in England, he went first to Zante, an island near the Morea, where he made some stay; and had good success in spreading among the Greek inhabitants the doctrine of the English church, the substance of which he imparted to several of them, in a vulgar Greek translation of our church-catechism. The success of this attempt was so remarkable, that it drew persecution upon him from the Latins, as they are called, or those members of the Romish church, throughout the East, who perform their service in Latin. On this he went into the Morea, where the metropolitan of Achaia prevailed upon him to preach twice in Greek, at a meeting of some of his bishops and clergy, which was well received. At his departure, he left with him a copy of the catechism above mentioned. From thence, after he had passed through Apulia, Naples, and Sicily again (in which last, at Messina, he officiated for some weeks on board a ship) he embarked for Syria; and, after some months stay at Aleppo, where he had frequent conversation with the patriarch of Antioch, then resident there, he left a copy of our church-catechism, translated into Arabic, the native language of that place. From Aleppo he went in 1652 to Jerusalem, and so travelled over all Palestine. At Jerusalem he received much honour, both from the Greek Christians and Latins. The Greek patriarch (the better to express his desire of communion with the church of England, declared by the doctor to him) gave him his bull, or patriarchal seal, in a blank, which is their way of credence, and shewed him other instances of respect, while the Latins received him courteously into their convent, though he did openly profess himself a priest of the church of England. After some disputes about the validity of our English ordinations, they procured him entrance into the temple of the sepulchre, at the rate of a priest, that is half of the sum paid by a layman; and, at his departure from Jerusalem, the pope’s vicar gave him his diploma in parchment, under his own hand and public seal, styling him, a priest of the church of England, and doctor of divinity, which title occasioned some surprise, especially to the French ambassador at Constantinople. Returning to Aleppo, he passed over the Euphrates and went into Mesopotamia, where he intended to send the church-catechism in Turkish, to some of their bishops, who were mostly Armenians. This Turkish translation was procured by the care of sir Thomas Bendyshe, the English ambassador at Constantinople. After his return from Mesopotamia, he wintered at Aleppo, where he received several courtesies from the consul, Mr. Henry Riley. In the beginning of 1653, he departed from Aleppo, and came to Constantinople by land, being six hundred miles, without any person with him, that could speak any of the European languages. Yet, by the help of some Arabic he had picked up at Aleppo, he performed that journey in the company of twenty Turks, who used him courteously, because he acted as physician to them and their friends: a study (as he says) to which the iniquity of the times and the opportunity of Padua drove him. After his arrival at Constantinople, the French Protestants there desired him to be their minister, and though he declared to them his resolution to officiate according to the English liturgy (a translation whereof, for want of a printed copy, cost him no little labour) yet they orderly submitted to it, and promised to settle on him, in three responsible men’s hands, a competent stipend: and all this, as they told him, with the express consent of the French ambassador, but still under the roof and protection of the English ambassador. Before he quitted the Eastern parts, he intended to pass into Egypt, in order to take a survey of the churches of the Cophties, and confer with the patriarch of Alexandria, as he had done already with the other three patriarchs, partly to acquire the knowledge of those churches, and partly to publish and give them a true notion of the church of England; but whether he accomplished his design, is not certain. He went next into Transilvania, where he was entertained for seven years by George Ragotzi the Second, prince of that country; who honoured him with the divinity-chair in his new founded university of Alba Julia (or Weissenburg) and endowed him, though a mere stranger to him, with a very ample salary. During his travels he collated the several confessions of faith of the different sorts of Christians, Greeks, Armenians, Jacobites, Maronites, &c. which he kept by him in their own languages. His constant design and endeavour, whilst he remained in the East, was, to persuade the Christians of the several denominations there, to a canonical reformation of some errors; and to dispose and incline them to a communion or unity with the church of England, but his pious intentions were afterwards defeated by the artifices of court of France. Upon the restoration of king Charles II. Dr. Easier was recalled by his majesty to England, in a letter written to prince Ragotzi. But this unfortunate prince dying 'soon after, of the wounds he received in a battle with the Turks at Gyala, the care of his solemn obsequies was committed to the doctor by his relict, princess Sophia, and he was detained a year longer from England. At length returning in 1661 9 he was restored to his preferments and dignities; and made chaplain in ordinary to king Charles II. After quietly enjoying his large revenues for several years, he died on the 12th of Oct. 1676, in the 69th year of his age-, and was buried in the yard belonging to the cathedral of Durham, where a tomb was erected over his grave, with an inscription. His character appears to have been that of a learned, active, and industrious man; a zealous supporter of the church of England; and a loyal subject. His son, John Basire, esq. who had been receiver general for the four western counties, died ou the 2d of June 1722, in the 77th year of his age.

s, returned afterwards to the east, and applied himself to preaching the gospel there. The Maronites of Antioch sent him back to Rome, as a deputy from their church.

, a celebrated Maronite, was born at Gusta in Phenicia, 1663, of a noble family, and sent to the Maronite college at Rome when but nine years old, where he made a great progress in the oriental languages, returned afterwards to the east, and applied himself to preaching the gospel there. The Maronites of Antioch sent him back to Rome, as a deputy from their church. Cosmo III. grand duke of Tuscany, invited Benedict to his court; heaped many honours and favours upon him, and made him professor of Hebrew at Pisa, and Clement XI. appointed him one of the correctors of the Greek press. He entered among the Jesuits at the age of forty: his amiable temper, integrity, and profound skill in the oriental languages, procured him the esteem of all the learned. He died September 22, 1742, at Rome, aged 80. He published the first volumes of that excellent edition of St. Ephraim, which has been continued and finished by M. Assemani.

igion, was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and ordained by that bishop to be a reader in the church of Antioch, where he converted his two friends, Theodorus and Maximus.

, one of the most learned and eloquent of the fathers, was born at Antioch, of a noble family, about the year 354. His father, Secundus, dying when he was very young, the care of his education was left to his mother, Anthusa. He was designed at first for the bar, and was sent to learn rhetoric under Libanius; who had such an opinion of his eloquence, that when asked who would be capable of succeeding him in the school, he answered, “John, if the Christians had not stolen him from us.” He soon, however, quitted all thoughts of the bar, and being instructed in the principles of the Christian religion, was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and ordained by that bishop to be a reader in the church of Antioch, where he converted his two friends, Theodorus and Maximus. While he was yet young, he formed a resolution of entering ugon a monastic life, and in spite of all remonstrances from his mother, about the year 374, he betook himself to the neighbouring mountains, where he lived four years with an ancient hermit; then retired to a more secret part of the desert, and shut himself up in a cave, in which situation he spent two whole years more; till at length, worn out almost by continual watchings, fastings, and other severities, he was forced to return to Antioch, to his old way of living.

ay there he was of great service to the 'church, as appears from a letter of Alexander to the church of Antioch, which Clemens himself carried: in which Alexander says,

After holding the office of catechist, Clemens was raised to the priesthood, probably at the beginning of the emperor Severus’s reign; since Eusebius, in his history of the evert ts of the year 195, gives Clemens the title of priest. About this time he undertook a defence of Christianity against pagans and heretics, in a work entitled “Stromata,” on account of the variety of matter of which it treats— Stromata signifying discourses abounding with miscellaneous matter. In this work he has made so great a collection of heathen learning, for the sake of shewing the conformity there is between some opinions which the Christians and the philosophers held in common, as shews that his reading must have extended to almost everything that had been written. When Severus began a persecution against the Christians, for which he pleaded a rebellion of the Jews (for the pagans had not as yet learned to distinguish Jews and Christians), Clemens left Egypt to escape the violence of it; and upon this occasion drew up a discourse, to prove the lawfulness of flying in times of persecution: for this expedient, though explicitly allowed and even enjoined in the gospel, had been rejected by some early converts, especially Tertullian, as a base desertion of the cause. He then went to Jerusalem, and took up his abode for some time with Alexander, who was soon after bishop of that see. During his stay there he was of great service to the 'church, as appears from a letter of Alexander to the church of Antioch, which Clemens himself carried: in which Alexander says, that “Clemens was a man of great virtue, as the church of Antioch knew already, and would know better when he came among them; and that having been at Jerusalem, he had, by God’s blessing, greatly confirmed and strengthened that church.” From Antioch he returned to Alexandria; but we know not how long he lived. He appears to have survived Pantoenus at least some years, and was not old when he composed his “Stromata;” for he tells us, that he had made that collection with a view of its serving him in his old age, when his faculties should fail him. His memory appears to have been highly reverenced at Alexandria, as we learn from an extract of a letter from Alexander to Origen, preserved by Eusebius. Among several works which Clemens wrote, there are only three considerable ones remaining:

of Antioch, priest of that church, and afterwards bishop of Tarsus

, of Antioch, priest of that church, and afterwards bishop of Tarsus in the fourth century, was disciple of Sylvanus, and master of St. John Chrysostom, of St. Basil, and of St. Athanasius, who all bestow great praises on his virtues and his zeal for the faith: praises which were confirmed by the first council of Constantinople. St. Cyril, on the contrary, calls him the enemy of the glory of Jesus Christ, and regards him as the fore-runner of Nestorins. Diodorus was one of the first commentators who adhered to the literal sense of Scripture, without expatiating in the fields of allegory; but only some fragments of his writings are come down to us, in the “Catena patrum Grrccorum.” His contemporaries and immediate successors differ very essentially as to his real character, as may be seen in our authorities.

alled to a synod at Antioch, to defend the divinity of Jesus Christ against Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch: but he could not appear by reason of his great age

, bishop of Alexandria, a man of great renown in the church, was born a heathen, and of an ancient and illustrious family. He was a diligent inquirer after truth, which he looked for in vain among the sects of philosophers; but at last found it in Christianity, in which he was probably confirmed by his preceptor Origen. He was made a presbyter of the church of Alexandria in the year 232; and in the year 247 was raised to that see upon the death of Heracles. When the Decian persecution arose, he was seized by the soldiers and sent to Taposiris, a little town between Alexandria and Canopus; but he escaped without being hurt, of which there is an extraordinary account in the fragments of one of his letters, which Eusebius has preserved. He was less fortunate under the Valerian persecution, which began in the year 257, being then forcibly hurried off in the midst of a dangerous illness, and banished to Cephrus, a most desert and uncultivated region of Libya, in which terrible situation he remained for three years. Afterwards, when Gallienus published an edict of toleration to the Christians, he returned to Alexandria, and applied himself diligently to the offices of his function, as well by converting heathens, as by suppressing heretics. To the Novatian heresy he laboured to put a stop; he endeavoured to quiet the dispute, which was risen to some height, between Stephen and Cyprian, concerning the re-baptization of heretics: both which he attempted with Christian moderation and candour, and it must be acknowledged to his credit, that he seems to have possessed more of that spirit of gentleness and meekness than was usually to be found in those zealous times. He does not indeed appear to have been quite so moderate in the next congress which he had with Sabellius, who had asserted, that “the substance in the trinity was nothing more than one person distinguished by three names;” which Dionysius opposed with such zeal and ardour, as to fall into the Arian opinion, and maintain, that there was “not only a distinction of persons, but of essence or substance also, and even an inequality of power and glory in them.” Cave, however, excuses this error, or “blindness,” as he calls it, in him, because it flowed from his intemperate zeal and hatred of heretics, and because Dionysius was in all other respects a very sound and orthodox bishop. A little before his death he was called to a synod at Antioch, to defend the divinity of Jesus Christ against Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch: but he could not appear by reason of his great age and infirmities. He wrote a letter, however, to that church, in which he explained his own opinion of the matter, and refuted Paul, whom he thought so very blameable for advancing such an error, that he did not deign to salute him even by name. He died in the year 267; and though his writings were very numerous, yet scarce any of them are come down to us, except some fragments preserved by Eusebius.

she had two daughters, but, when she had accompanied him to Palestine, her intrigues with the prince of Antioch, and with a young handsome Turk named Saladin, led to

of Guienne, queen of France and England, was married in 1137, at the age of fifteen, to Louis VII. king of France, by whom she had two daughters, but, when she had accompanied him to Palestine, her intrigues with the prince of Antioch, and with a young handsome Turk named Saladin, led to a divorce in 1152. In the following year she married Henry duke of Normandy, who succeeded to the throne of England, in 1154, under the title of Henry II. and by his wile’s influence became a formidable rival to the French king. Eleanor at length became jealous of Henry with the fair Rosamond and this produced the rebellion of her sons against the king, whose unnatural conduct has been imputed wholly to her instigation. She was at length seized, and imprisoned, just as she was attempting to escape to France. In confinement she remained several years, but on the accession of Richard I. in 1189, she was set at liberty, and was when he went upon his crusade, made regent of the kingdom. The zeal which she manifested for this prince led her to considerable exertions on his behalf: she went to Navarre, to procure him, for a wife, Berengaria, daughter of the king of the country; and when Richard on his return from Palestine, was imprisoned in Germany, she proceeded thither with a ransom, accompanied by the chief justiciary, in 1194. After his death she supported the succession of John her son, in prejudice of her grandson Arthur. She died in 1202; though, according to some writers, she took the veil this year, at the abbey of Fontevrault, and there finished her busy and chequered life in 1204.

lor to Rome by the imperial letters, in order to determine the cause of Paulinus concerning the see of Antioch. In the year 3yi a contest arose between him and John,

, an ancient Christian writer, was born, about the year 320, at Besanduce, a village of Palestine, His parents are said by Cave to have been Jews; but others. are of opinion that there is no ground for this suspicion, since Sozomen affirms, that “from his earliest youth he was educated under the most excellent monks, upon which, account he continued a very considerable time in Ægypt.” It is certain, that, while he was a youth, he went into Ægypt, where he fell into the conversation of the Gnostics, who had almost engaged him in their party; but he soon withdrew himself from them, and, returning to his country, put himself for some time under the discipline of Hilarion, the father of the monks of Palestine. He afterwards founded a monastery near the village where he was born, and presided over it. About the year 367 he was elected bishop of Salamis, afterwards called Constantia, the metropolis of the isle of Cyprus, where he acquired great reputation by his writings and his piety. In the year 382, he was sent lor to Rome by the imperial letters, in order to determine the cause of Paulinus concerning the see of Antioch. In the year 3yi a contest arose between him and John, bishop of Jerusalem. Epipbanius accused John of holding the errors of Origen; and, going to Palestine, ordained Paulinian, brother of St. Jerom, deacon and priest, ill a monastery which did not belong to his jurisdiction. John immediately complained of this action of Epiphanius, as contrary to the canons and discipline of the church, and Epiphanius defended what he had done, in a letter to John. This dispute irritated their minds still more, which were already incensed upon the subject of Origen; and both of them endeavoured to engage Theophilus of Alexandria in their party. That prelate, who seemed at first to favour the bishop of Jerusalem, declared at last against Origen condemned his books in a council held in the year 399 and persecuted all the monks who were suspected of regarding his memory. These monks, retiring to Constantinople, were kindly received there by John Chrysostom; which highly exasperated Theophilus, who, from that time, conceived a violent hatred to Chrysostom. In the mean time Theophilus informed Epiphanius of what he had done against Origen, and exhorted him to do the same; upon which Epiphanius, in the year 401, called a council in the isle of Cyprus, procured the reading of Origen’s writings to be prohibited, and wrote to Chrysostom to do the same. Chrysostom, not approving this proposal, Epiphanius went to Constantinople, at the persuasion of Theophilus, in order to get the decree of the council of Cyprus executed. When he arrived there, he would not have any conversation with Cbrysostom, but used his utmost efforts to engage the bishops, who were then in that city, to approve of the judgment of the council of Cyprus against Origen. Not succeeding in this, he resolved to go the next day to the church of the apostles, and there condemn publicly all the books of Origen, and those who defended them; but as he was in the church, Cbrysostom informed him, by his deacon Serapion, that he was going to do a thing contrary to the laws of the church, and which might expose him to danger, as it would probably raise some sedition. This consideration stopped Epiphanius, who yet was so inflamed against Origen, that when the empress Eudoxia recommended to his prayers the young Theodosius, who was dangerously ill, he answered, that “the prince her son should not die, if she would but avoid the conversation of Dioscorides, and other defenders of Origen.” The empress, surprised at this presumptuous answer, sent him word, that “if God should think proper to take away her son, she would submit to his will that he might take him away as he had given him but that it was not in the power of Epiphanius to raise him from the dead, since he had lately suffered his own archdeacon to die.” Epiphanius’s heat was a little abated, when he had discoursed with Ammourns and his companions, whomTheophilus had banished for adhering to Origen’s opinions; for these monks gave him to understand that they did hot maintain an heretical doctrine, and that he had condemned them in too precipitate a manner. At last he resolved to return to Cyprus, and in his farewell to Chrysostom, he said, “I hope you will not die a bishop;” to which the latter replied, “I hope you will never return to your own country,” and both their hopes were realized, as Chrysostom was deposed from his bishopric, and Epiphanius died at sea about the year 403. His works were printed in Greek at Basil, 1544, in folio, and had afterwards a Latin translation made to them, which has frequently been reprinted. At last Petavius undertook an edition of them, together with a new Latin translation, which he published at Paris, 1622, with the Greek text revised and corrected by two manuscripts. This, which is the best edition, is in two volumes folio, at the end of which are the animadversions of Petavius, which however, are rather dissertations upon points of criticism and chronology, than notes to explain the text of his author. This edition was reprinted at Cologne, 1682, in 2 vols. folio.

a sect of heretics in the fourth century, was a native of Arabissus in Armenia Minor, and patriarch of Antioch, to which he was advanced in the year 356, and of C

, the founder of a sect of heretics in the fourth century, was a native of Arabissus in Armenia Minor, and patriarch of Antioch, to which he was advanced in the year 356, and of Constantinople, to which he was promoted in the year 359, and which he retained till his death in the year 370. He was a great defender of the Arian doctrine, though represented as somewhat fluctuating and unsteady in his principles, and was a bitter persecutor of the catholics. Of his works no remains are extant, except some fragments of a treatise “De Incarnatione Dei verbi;” to which Cave has referred. The Eudoxians adhered to the errors of the Arians and Eunomians, maintaining that the Son was created out of nothing that he had a will distinct and different from that of the Father, &c.

bscribed, as he did at length, to the Nicene creed. About the year 330 he was present at the council of Antioch, in which Eustathius. bishop of that city, was deposed,

When the persecution was over, and peace restored to the church, Eusebius was elected bishop of Caesarea, in Palestine, in the room of Agapius, who was dead; and this was about the year 3 13 or 315. He had afterwards a considerable share in the contest relating to Arius, priest of Alexandria; whose cause he, as well as other bishops of Palestine, defended at first, upon a persuasion that Arius had been unjustly persecuted by Alexander, bishop of Alexandria. He not only wrote to that bishop in favour of Arius, but likewise, not being able to procure his restoration, permitted him and his followers to preserve their rank, and to hold in their churches the ordinary assemblies of the faithful, on condition that they should submit to their bishop, and intreat him to restore them to communion. He assisted at the council of Nice, held in the year 325, and made a speech to the emperor Constantine, at whose right hand he was placed, when he came to the council. He at first refused to admit of the term Consubstantial; and the long and formal opposition which he made to it occasioned a suspicion for which there seems to be very good ground, that he was not altogether sincere, when he subscribed, as he did at length, to the Nicene creed. About the year 330 he was present at the council of Antioch, in which Eustathius. bishop of that city, was deposed, but though he consented to his deposition, and was elected to the see of Antioch in his room, he absolutely refused it; and when the bishops wrote to Constantine to desire him to oblige Eusebius to consent to the election, he wrote also to the emperor, to request him that he would not urge him to accept of it; which Constantine readily granted, and at the same time commended his moderation. Eusebius assisted at the council of Tyre held in the year 335 against Athanasius; and at the assembly of bishops at Jerusalem, when the church was dedicated there. He was sent by those bishops to Constantine, to defend what they had done against Athanasius; and it was then that he pronounced his panegyric upon that emperor, during the pubHe rejoicings in the 30th year of his reign, which was the last of his life. He was honoured with very particular marks of Constantine’s esteem: he frequently received letters from him, several of which are inserted in his books; and he was often invited to the emperor’s table, and admitted into private discourse with him. When Constantine wanted copies of the scriptures for the use of those churches which he had built at Constantinople, he conn mitted the care of transcribing them to Eusebius, whom he knew to be well skilled in those affairs; and when Eusebius dedicated to him his book “concerning Easter,” he ordered it immediately to be translated into Latin, and desired our author to communicate as soon as possible the other works of that nature which he had then in hand.

, bishop of Samosata, in the fourth century, at first joined the Arian party. The see of Antioch being vacant, they agreed with the orthodox to choose

, bishop of Samosata, in the fourth century, at first joined the Arian party. The see of Antioch being vacant, they agreed with the orthodox to choose Meletus bishop, and entrusted Eusebiiis with the decree of this election; but St. Meletus declaring immediately for the catholic faith, the Ariana, supported by the emperor Valens, resolved to depose him. Eusebius, informed of their mischievous design, retired to his dioeese, with the writings which had been entrusted to him. On this messengers were dispatched after him, and the emperor’s en-> voy threatened to cut off his right hand, if he did not deliver up the act of election; but Eusebius presenting his two handi, said he would suffer them both to be cut pff, rather than part with this act, unless in presence of all those who had entrusted him with it. In the year 353 hp subscribed to the Nicene faith in the council of AntiocU, and went to Caesarea in Cappadocia in the year 371, at the request of St. Gregory the elder, of Nazianzen, to elect St. Basil bishop of that city. His zeal for the faith caused him to be banished by Valeus in the year 373, during which exile he went disguised as a soldier, to comfort the orthodox under their persecutions. After the death of Valens, St. Eusebius assisted at the council of Antioch in, the year 378, and was employed by the members, of it, tq visit some eastern churches, which he did with good success in Mesopotamia, and part of Syria; but baying pr-t dained Maris, bishop of the little city of Doliche in Syria, on his entering the city to put him in possession of his church, a woman of the Arian party threw a tile upon his head, which wounded him mortally. In his last moments he sought and obtained a promise from those who attended him, that the woman should not be prosecuted; which, was done nevertheless, but the catholics procured her pardon. St. Gregory of Nazianzen, and St. Basil, wroe sen veral letters to St. Eusebius.

, a pious and learned bishop of Berea, was born at Sida in Pamphilia, and translated to the see of Antioch in the year 323. He assisted at the council of Nice

, a pious and learned bishop of Berea, was born at Sida in Pamphilia, and translated to the see of Antioch in the year 323. He assisted at the council of Nice in the year 325, and zealously defended the orthodox faith against the Arians, who accused him of infamous crimes, deposed him, and procured his banishment, by Constantine, to Trajanopolis in Thrace, where he died, about the year 337. He wrote several works, of which we have none remaining but his “Treatise on the Pythoness;” which Leo Allatius published in 1689, 4to, with another treatise on the “Exaemeron,” which is also attributed to St. Eustathius, but probably written by a more modern author. It is in the library of the fathers, and was published separately at Lyons, 1624, 4to.

of Theodosius, he was appointed prefect by Mauricius. In the year 589 he attended Gregory, patriarch of Antioch, to Constantinople, in quality of counsellor, when he

, an ancient ecclesiastical historian, was born at Epiphania, a city of Syria, about the year 536. He was sent to a grammar school at four years, of age; and two years after, was seized with the plague, as he himself informs us. He says, that this pestilence raged two and fifty years, and in a manner desolated the earth; and that he afterwards lost, during the several stages of it, many of his children, his wife, and several of his relations and servants. Quitting the. grammar-school, he applied himself to rhetoric; and making a great progress in that art, was registered among the advocates, whence he obtained the name of Scholas­Ticus, a term signifying a lawyer. He practised Jaw at Antioch, where he gained the friendship of George the patriarch of that city, and was made his counsellor and assessor. His authority appears to have been great in that city for, in the year v>92, when deprived of his wife and children, he married again, an holiday was kept, and a public marriage festival celebrated in pompous shows. In jthe reign of Tiberias Constantinus, he had the dignity of qusestor conferred upon him; and not long after, when he had made an oration in praise of Mauricius Augustus, upon, the birth of Theodosius, he was appointed prefect by Mauricius. In the year 589 he attended Gregory, patriarch of Antioch, to Constantinople, in quality of counsellor, when he appealed to the emperor and synod upon an accusation of incest, brought against him by a silversmith. After this he published “Six Books of Ecclesiastical History,” beginning with the year 431, where Theodoret, Socrates, and Sozomen, conclude, and ending with the year 594. It is not certain when he died. Phocius tells us, that his style is not unpleasant, though sometimes too redundant; but that, of all the Greek historians, he has most strictly adhered to the orthodox faith. Valesius observes, that he has been less diligent in collecting the monuments of ecclesiastical antiquity than those of profane history; and indeed almost his whole sixth book is spent in giving an account of the Persian war. Cave remarks of him, that he is too credulous in relating upon all occasions, fabulous stories of miracles said to be performed by the cross and relics of saints. His ecclesiastical history was published in Greek, by Robert Stephens, Paris, 1544; at Geneva, in Greek and Latin, in 1612 at Paris in 167.'}, with a new version and notes by Henry Valesius and afterwards re-published at Cambridge, 1720, by William Reading, with additional notes of various authors; all of them in folio. Besides this history, there were “Letters, relations, decrees, orations, and disputations,” written chiefly in the name of Gregory of Antioch; but these are now lost; as is likewise his “Panegyric to the emperor Mauricius, upon the birth of Theodosius.

was translated into Latin, and may be seen in his works. St. Firmilian presided at the first council of Antioch held in the year 264, against Paul of Samosata, who

, a celebrated bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, in the third century, was one of the friends of Origen, who took St. Cyprian’s part against pope Stephen; maintaining the necessity of re-baptizing those who had been baptized by heretics; and wrote a long letter on this subject in the year 256, to St. Cyprian, by whom it was translated into Latin, and may be seen in his works. St. Firmilian presided at the first council of Antioch held in the year 264, against Paul of Samosata, who promised a change of doctrine; but, continuing to propagate his errors, was condemned at the second council of Antioch, in the year 269. St. Firmilian died at Tarsus, as he was going to this council.

, patriarch of Antioch, in the fourth century, was a man of illustrious birth,

, patriarch of Antioch, in the fourth century, was a man of illustrious birth, and still superior virtues, and was placed on the patriarchal throne during the life of Paulinus. This election being confirmed by the council of Constantinople in the year 382, was the origin of a schism, which was terminated by the prudence of Flavian, and the death of his rival, Paulinus. After this, he evinced his zeal for orthodoxy by prosecuting the Arians, and he expelled the Messalian heretics from his diocese. When the inhabitants of Antioch, vexed at a new tax imposed to celebrate the tenth year of the emperor’s reign, had proceeded to various acts of outrage, particularly against the statues of the emperor and empress, Flavian interceded with Theodosius for them, and obtained their pardon by his eloquence. This happened in the year 387. He died in the year 404, after having been patriarch thirteen years. He wrote some epistles and homilies, of which fragments only remain.

from the trade of a fuller, which he exercised in his monastic state, intruded himself into the see of Antioch, in the fifth century, and after having been several

, so called from the trade of a fuller, which he exercised in his monastic state, intruded himself into the see of Antioch, in the fifth century, and after having been several times deposed and condemned on account of the bitterness of his opposition to the council of Chalcedon, was at last fixed in it, in the year 482, by the authority of the emperor Zeno, and the favour of Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, Among the innovations which he introduced to excite discord in the church, was an alteration in the famous hymn which the Greeks called Tris-agion. After the words “O God most holy, &c.” he ordered the following phrase to be added in the eastern churches, “who has suffered for us upon the cross.” His design in this was to raise a new sect, and also to fix more deeply in the minds of the people, the doctrine of one nature in Christ, to which he was zealously attached. His adversaries, and especially Fcelix, the Roman pontiff, interpreted this addition in a quite different manner, and charged him with maintaining, that all the three persons of the Godhead were crucified and hence his followers were called Theopaschites. To put an end to the controversy, the emperor Zeno published in the year 482 the “Henoticon,” or decree of onion, which was designed to reconcile the parties, and Fullo signed it; but the effects of the contest disturbed the church for a long time after his death, which happened in the year 486.

on him, as many thought, contrived to wear out his life with fatigue and vexation. He died at Daphne of Antioch, aged 34, in the 29th year of the Christian sera. His

, son of Drusus and of Antonia the virtuous niece of Augustus, inherited the excellent qualities of his mother. Tib.erius, who was his paternal uncle, adopted him, and he was gradually raised to the consulship, the twelfth year of the Christian tera. When Augustus died, he was in Germany, where the soldiers would have raised him to the empire, had he not declined it. He recalled the rebellious to their duty, defeated the Germans under Arminius, and retook a Roman eagle which the Marsi had kept from the defeat of Varus. Being recalled to Rome, he obtained the honours of a triumph, and was appointed commander in the East, whither he returned soon after, to quell the enemies of Rome in that quarter. He was there so successful, that he defeated the king of Armenia, and placed another on his throne. But the splendor of his victories is supposed to have cost him his life; for Tiberius became jealous of him, and if he did not actually poison him, as many thought, contrived to wear out his life with fatigue and vexation. He died at Daphne of Antioch, aged 34, in the 29th year of the Christian sera. His widow, Agrippina, by whom he had nine children, received his ashes with sincerity, as well as solemnity of grief, in which all Rome, except the tyrant, deeply partook. One of his sons was Caligula, who proved so dreadfully unworthy of his excellent father. Germanicus had all the qualities and talents which could conciliate universal affection aod esteem: courage, probity, military skill, pleasing mariners in society, fidelity in friendship, and even abilities for literature, eloquence, and composition. Some specimens of his Latin poetry are still extant; and he wrote comedies in Greek, and a version of Ararus. In the midst of arms he cultivated polite studies. It is seldom that so many admirable qualities unite in a person of such rank; and it must have been, therefore, with the most poignant regret, that, the Romans saw him so early cut off by the dark suspicions, or unfeeling treatment, of Tiberius.

ics grew more considerable, they chose him for their bishop, and the choice was confirmed by Meletus of Antioch, and Peter who succeeded Athanasius at Alexandria; but

By these breaches in the family, Nazianzen was sufficiently weaned from the place of his nativity; and, though he was not able to procure a successor to" his father, he resolved to throw up his charge, and accordingly retired to Seleucia, famous for the temple of St. Thercla, the virginmartyr; where, in a monastery of devout virgins dedicated to that saint, he continued a long time, and did not return till the death of St. Basil, whom he deeply regretted he could not attend at his last hours, being himself confined by sickness. About this time he was summoned to a council at Antioch, holden anno 378, to consider the emperor’s late edict for tolerating the catholics, in order to suppress Arianism; and, being ordered by the council to fix himself for that purpose at Constantinople, he presently repaired thither. Here he found the catholic interest at the lowest ebb; the Arians, favoured by Valens, had possessed themselves of all the churches, and proceeded to such extremities that scarcely any of the orthodox dared avow their faith. He first preached in his lodgings to those that repaired thither, and the congregation soon growing numerous, the house was immediately consecrated by Nazianzen, under the name of the church of Anastasia, or the resurrection; because the catholic faith, which in that city had been hitherto oppressed, here seemed to have its resurrection. The opposition to his measures but increased his fame, together with the number of his auditors, and even drew admirers and followers from foreign parts; among whom St. Jerom, lately ordained presbyter, came on purpose to put himself under his tutelage and discipline; an honour in which Jerom glories on every occasion. As the catholics grew more considerable, they chose him for their bishop, and the choice was confirmed by Meletus of Antioch, and Peter who succeeded Athanasius at Alexandria; but he was opposed by the Arians, who consecrating Maximus, a famous cynic philosopher and Christian, gave him a great deal of trouble. The Arian bishop, however, was at length forced to retire, and his successor Demophilus was deposed by the emperor Theodosius, who directed an edict to the people of Constantinople, February 27, 380, re-establishing the orthodox faith; and afterward coming thither in person, he treated Nazianzen with all possible kindness and respect, and appointed a day for his instalment in the see.

There had been a schism for some time in the church of Antioch, occasioned by the ordination of two bishops to that

There had been a schism for some time in the church of Antioch, occasioned by the ordination of two bishops to that see; and one of those, named Melitus, happening to die before the end of the council, Nazianzen proposed to continue the other, named Paulinus, then grown old, for his life. But a strong party being made for one Flavianus, presbyter of the church, these last carried it; and, not content with that, resolved to deprive their grand opposer of his seat at Constantinople. To prevent this he made a formal resignation to the emperor, and went to his paternal estate at Nazmnzum, resolving never to episcopize any more; insomuch, that though, at his return, he found the see of Nazianzum still vacant, and over-run with the heresy of Apollinarius, yet he pertinaciously resisted all intreaties that were made to take that charge upon him. And, when he was summoned to the re-assembling of the council the following year, he refused to give his attendance, and even did not stick to censure all such meetings as factious, and governed by pride and ambition. In the mean time, in defence of his conduct, he wrote letters to the Roman praetorian prefect, and the consul; assuring them, that, though he had withdrawn himself from public affairs, it was not, as some imagined, from any discontent for the loss of the great place he had quitted; and that he would not abandon the common interests of religion; that his retirement was a matter of choice more than necessity, in which he took as great pleasure as a man that has been tossed in a long storm at sea does in a safe and quiet harbour. And, indeed, being now freed from all external cares, he entirely gave himself up to solitude and contemplation, and the exercise of a strict and devout life. At vacant hours he refreshed the weariness of his old age with poetry, which he generally employed upon divine subjects, and serious reflections upon the former passages of his life; an account of which he drew up in iambics, whence no inconsiderable part of his memoir is derived. Thus he passed the remainder of his days till his death in the year 389. He made a will, by which, except a few legacies to some relations, he bequeathed his whole estate to the poor of the diocese of Nazianzum. In this spirit, during the three years that he enjoyed the rich bishopric of Constantinople, he never touched any part of the revenues, but gaVe it all to the poor, to whom he was extremely liberal.

ning the stratagems of the Arians, and strengthening those in the orthodox faith; and in the council of Antioch in the year 378, he was, among others, delegated to

, was the younger brother of St. Basil, and had an equal care taken of his education, being brought up in all the polite and fashionable modes of learning; but, applying himself particularly to rhetoric, he valued himself more upon being accounted an orator than a Christian. On the admonition of his friend Gregory Nazianzen he quitted those studies; and, betaking himself to solitude and a monastic discipline, he turned his attention wholly to the holy scriptures, and the controversies of the age; so that he became as eminent in the knowledge of these as he had before been in the course of more pleasant studies. Thus qualified for the highest dignity in the church, he was placed in the see of Nyssa, a city on the borders of Cappadocia. The exact time of his promotion is not known, though it is certain he was bishop in the year 371. He proved in this station a stout champion for the Nicene faith, and so vigorously opposed the Arian party, that he was soon after banished by the emperor Valens; and, in a synod held at Nyssa by the bishop of Pontus and Galatia, was deposed, and met with very hard usage. He was hurried from place to place, heavily fined, and exposed to the rage and petulance of the populace, which fell heavier upon him, as he was both unused to trouble, and unapt to bear it. In this condition he remained for seven or eight years, during which, however, he went about countermining the stratagems of the Arians, and strengthening those in the orthodox faith; and in the council of Antioch in the year 378, he was, among others, delegated to visit the eastern churches lately harassed by the Arian persecution.

dingly, he wrote to Damasus, then bishop of Rome, to know whom he must consider as the lawful bishop of Antioch; and upon Damasus’s naming Paulinus, Jerom acknowledged

He was in his 31st year, when he entered upon this monastic course of life; and he carried it, by his own practice, to that height of perfection, which he ever after enforced upon others so zealously by precept. He divided all his time between devotion and study: he exercised himself much in watchings and fastings; slept little, ate less, and hardly allowed himself any recreation. He applied himself very severely to the study of the Holy Scriptures, which he is said to have gotten by heart, as well as to the study of the Oriental languages, which he considered as the only keys that could let him into their true sense and meaning, and which he learned from a Jew Who visited him privately lest he should offend his brethren. After he had spent four years in this laborious way of life, his health grew so impaired, that he was obliged to return to Antioch: where the church at that time was divided by factions, Meletius, Paulinus, and Vitalis all claiming a right to the bishopric of that place. Jerom being a son of the church of Rome, where he was baptized, would not espouse any party, till he knew the sense of his own church upon this contested right. Accordingly, he wrote to Damasus, then bishop of Rome, to know whom he must consider as the lawful bishop of Antioch; and upon Damasus’s naming Paulinus, Jerom acknowledged him as such, and was ordained a presbyter by him in 378, but would never proceed any farther in ecclesiastical dignity. From this time his reputation for piety and learning began to spread abroad, and be known in the world. He went soon after to Constantinople, where he spent a considerable time with Gregory Nazianzen; whom he did not disdain to call his master, and owned, that of him "he learned the right method of expounding the Holy Scriptures. Afterwards, in the year 382, he went to Rome with Paulinus, bishop of Antioch, and Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis in the isle of Cyprus; where tie soon became known to Damasus, and was made his secretary. He acquitted himself in this post very well, and yet found time to compose several works. Upon the death of Damasus, which happened in the year 385, he began to entertain thoughts of travelling again to the East; to which he was moved chiefly by the disturbances and vexations he met with from the followers of Origen, at Rome. For these, when they had in vain endeavoured, says Cave, to draw him over to their party, raised infamous reports and calumnies against him. They charged him, among other things, with a criminal passion for one Paula, an eminent matron, in whose house he had lodged during his residence at Rome, and who was as illustrious for her piety as for the splendor of her birth, and the dignity of her rank. For these and other reasons he was determined to quit Rome, and accordingly embarked for the East in August in the year 385, attended by a great number of monks and ladies, whom he had persuaded to embrace the ascetic way of life. He sailed to Cyprus, where he paid a visit to Epiphanius; and arrived afterwards at Antioch, where he was kindly received by his friend Paulinus. From Antioch he went to Jerusalem; and the year following from Jerusalem into Egypt. Here he visited several monasteries: but rinding to his great grief the monks every where infatuated with the errors of Origen, he returned to Bethlehem, a town near Jerusalem, that he might be at liberty to cherish and propagate his own opinions, without any disturbance or interruption from abroad. This whole peregrination is particularly related by himself, in one of his pieces against RufRnus; and is very characteristic, and shews much of his spirit and manner of writing.

heroics. The first, in six books, is on the Trojan war the other is entitled “Antiochesis,” the war of Antioch, or the Crusade; of this last only a fragment remains,

, or Josephus Iscanus, a writer of considerable taste and elegance, in an age generally reputed barbarous, was a native of Devonshire, and flourished in the close of the twelfth, and the commencement of the thirteenth centuries. He was an ecclesiastic, and patronized by Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury. Some say that he was a priest of the cathedral of Exeter, from which he took his name. According to Camden, he accompanied Richard I. of England into the Holy Land, and was a great favourite with that prince. By archbishop Baldwin’s interest he was made archbishop of Bourdeaux, where he is supposed to have died in the reign of Henry III. and to have been buried in the cathedral of that city. He was author of two epic poems in Latin heroics. The first, in six books, is on the Trojan war the other is entitled “Antiochesis,” the war of Antioch, or the Crusade; of this last only a fragment remains, in which the heroes of Britain are celebrated. His style is not only for the most part pure, but rich and ornamented, and his versification approaches the best models of antiquity. His diction is compounded chiefly of Ovid, Statius, and Claudian, the favourite poets of the age, and wants only Virgilian chastity. “Italy,” says Warton in his History of English Poetry, “had at that time produced no poet comparable to him.” He was also author of love verses, epigrams, and miscellaneous poems. His “De Bello Trojano, lib. V.” was published at Basil, 1541, 8vo; Lond. 1675, 8vo Francfcnt, 1620, 4to, and ibid. 1623; Amst. 1702, 4to. All that remains of his “Antiochesis” is printed in Warton’s “Ftistory of English Poetry.” His love-verses, &c. are lost.

h great difficulty, taken and destroyed by Titus. He committed the conduct of this affair to Alypius of Antioch, who formerly had been lieutenant in Britain, When,

But as the indifference and corruptions of Paganism, joined to the inflexibility and perseverance of the Christians, prevented his project from advancing with the speed he desired, he grew chagrined, and even threatened, after his return from the Persian expedition, effectually to ruin the Christian religion. He had before, in pursuance of his general scheme of opposing revelation to itself, by setting one sect against another, written to the body or community of the Jews; assuring them of his protection, his concern for their former ill usage, and his fixed purpose to screen them from future oppression, that they might be at liberty, and in a disposition to redouble their vows for the prosperity of his reign; and concluded with a promise, that, if he came back victorious from the Persian war, he would rebuild Jerusalem, restore them to their possessions, live with them in the holy city, and join with them in their worship of the great God of the universe. The rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem was thought a sure means of destroying Christianity, since the final destruction of that temple had been foretold both by Christ and his apostles; if therefore the lye could be given to their predictions, their religion would be no more. This scheme, therefore, he set about immediately. The completing of such an edifice would be a work of time, and he pleased himself with the glory of atchieving so bold an enterprize. Accordingly, the attempt was made, and what was the consequence will be seen by the following account of it from Ammianus Marcellinus. “Julian, having been already thrice consul, taking Sallust prsefect of the several Gauls for his colleague, entered a fourth time on this high magistracy. It appeared strange to see a private man associated with Augustus; a thing of which, since the consulate of Dioclesian and Aristobulus, history afforded no example. And although his sensibility of the many and great events, which this year was likely to produce, made him very anxious for the future, yet he pushed on the various and complicated preparations for this expedition with the utmost application: and, having an eye in every quarter, and being desirous to eternize his reign by the greatness of his achievements, he projected to rebuild, at an immense expence, the proud and magnificent temple of Jerusalem, which, after many combats, attended with much bloodshed on both sides, during the siege by Vespasian, was, with great difficulty, taken and destroyed by Titus. He committed the conduct of this affair to Alypius of Antioch, who formerly had been lieutenant in Britain, When, therefore, this Alypius had set himself to the vigorous execution of his charge, in which he had all the assistance that the governor of the province could afford him, horrible bails of fire breaking out near the foundations, with frequent and reiterated attacks, rendered the place from time to time inaccessible to the scorched and blasted workmen; and the victorious element continuing in this manner, obstinately and resolutely bent, as it were, to drive them to a distance, Alypius thought best to give over the enterprize. In the mean time, though Julian was still at Antioch when this happened, yet he was so wholly taken up by the Persian expedition, that he had not leisure to attend to it. He set out soon after upon that expedition, in which he succeeded very well at first; and, taking several places from the Persians, he advanced as far as Ctesipho without meeting with an) body to oppose him. However, there passed several engagements in this place, in which it is said the Romans had almost always the advantage; but the distressed condition of their army, for want of necessaries, obliged them to come to a decisive battle. This was begun June 26, in the year 363, and victory appeared to declare itself on their side; when Julian, who was engaged personally irr the fight without |iis helmet, received a mortal wound upon his head, which put a period to his life the following night.” This fact of the interruption given to the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem has been denied by some modern infidels, but nothing of the kind seems better attested; and although it may be supposed that the eruption was not without natural causes,' and that the seeds of it lay in the bowels of the earth, yet, as Dr. Jortin observes, the fire’s breaking out at the very instant when the Jews and Pagans were attempting to rebuild the temple, its being renewed upon their renewed attempt to go on, and ceasing when they gave over, are circumstances which plainly shew a providential interposition.

was, for his eminent parts and piety, ordained by St. John; and confirmed about the year 67, bishop of Antioch by these two apostles, who first planted Christianity

, one of the apostolical fathers of the church, was born in Syria, educated under the apostle and evangelist St. John, intimately acquainted with some other of the apostles, especially St. Peter and St. Paul; and being fully instructed in the doctrines of Christianity, was, for his eminent parts and piety, ordained by St. John; and confirmed about the year 67, bishop of Antioch by these two apostles, who first planted Christianity in that city, where the disciples were first called Christians. In this important seat he continued to sit upwards of forty years, both an honour and safeguard to the Christian religion; in the midst of very stormy and tempestuous times, undaunted himself, and unmoved with the prospect of suffering a cruel death. So much seems to be certain in general, though we have no account of any particulars of his life till the year 107, when Trajan the emperor, elated with his victory over the Scythians and Daci, came to Antioch to prepare for a war against the Parthians and Armenians. He entered the city with the pomp and solemnities of a triumph; and, as he had already commenced a persecution against the Christians in other parts of the empire, he now resolved to carry it on here. However, as he was naturally mild and humane, though he ordered the laws to be put in force against them, if convicted, yet he forbad any extraordinary means to be used for discovering or informing against them.

is arrival, he was much refreshed with the news he received of the persecution ceasing in the church of Antioch. Hither atlso several churches sent their messengers

His guard, a little impatient at their stay, set sail with him for Troas, a noted city of the lesser Phrygia, not far from the ruins of old Troy; where, at his arrival, he was much refreshed with the news he received of the persecution ceasing in the church of Antioch. Hither atlso several churches sent their messengers to pay their respects to him, and hence too he dispatched two epistles, one to the church of Philadelphia, and the other to that of Smyrna; and together with this last, as Eusebitfs relates, he wrote privately to Polycarp, recommending to him the care and inspection of the church of Antioch. All this while his keepers used him very cruelly and barbarously. He complains of it himself: “From Syria even to Rome,” says he, “both by sea and land, I fight with beasts; night and day I am chained to 1 the leopards, which is my military guard, who, the kinder I am to them, are the more cruel and fierce to me.” And yet it is evident, that they suffered him to be visited by Christians, and to give them instructions; and write epistles in several cities through which he passed. But his own account of the matter explains this apparent difficulty; the words implying, that these ruffians made money of him this way, being handsomely rewarded for this permission by the Christians who resorted to him, although their savage tempers induced them to use him the worse for it. From Trcras they sailed to Neapolis, a maritime town in Macedonia, thence to Philippi, a Roman colony, where they were entertained with all imaginable kindness and courtesy, and conducted forwards on their journey, passing on foot through Macedonia and Epirus, till they came to Epidaurum, a city of Dalmatia, where again taking shipping, they sailed through the Adriatic, and arrived at Rhegium, a port town in Italy; directing their course thence through the Tyrrhenian sea to Pu'teoli, whence Ignatius desired to proceed by land, ambitious to trace the same way by which St. Paul went to Rome; buC this wish was not complied with. In about twenty-four hours, however, a brisk wind conveyed them to Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber, about sixteen miles from Rome.

of Antioch, a sophist, who was a teacher of rhetoric, and a member

, of Antioch, a sophist, who was a teacher of rhetoric, and a member of the church of Antioch, is supposed to have lived about the year 900, though some authors have been inclined to place him earlier. He is a writer of little value, and abounds in words of a barbarous Greek. He must not be confounded with John of Antioch, another historian of the same place, who was a monk. We have a chronicle written by Malelas, which extends from the creation to the reign of Justinian, but is imperfect. His history was published by Edward Chilmead at Oxford, in 1691, in 8vo, from a manuscript in the Bodleian library; and republished among the Byzantine historians, as a kind of appendix, at Venice, in 1733. The Oxford edition contains an interpretation and notes by Chilmead, with three indexes, one of events, a second of authors, a third of barbarous words. Prefixed is a discourse concerning the author, by Humphrey Hody; and an epistle is subjoined from Bentley to Mill, with an index of authors who are there amended.

e Lives of cardinal Pole and Campeggio.” 7. “The Homilies of St. Chrysostom, addressed to the people of Antioch.” Maucroix was intimately connected with Boileau, Racine,

, a French translator, and in some degree a poet, was born at Noyon, in 1619, and for a time followed the profession of an advocate but being disgusted with the lavi r went into the church, where he became an abbe, and canon of the cathedral of Rheims. In that city he died in 1708, at the age of ninety. His works consist chiefly of translations, which are written in a pure, but not an animated style. The principal of them are these: 1. “The Philippics of Demosthenes.” 2. “The Euthydemus, and the greater Hippias of Plato.” 3. Some Orations of Cicero. 4. “The Rationarium Temporum of father Petau,1683, 3 vols. 12mo. 5. “Sanderus’s History of the English Schism,1678, 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “The Lives of cardinal Pole and Campeggio.” 7. “The Homilies of St. Chrysostom, addressed to the people of Antioch.” Maucroix was intimately connected with Boileau, Racine, and particularly with La Fontaine; in conjunction with whom, he published in 1685, a collection of their miscellaneous works, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1726 were published, “Les nouvelles Oeuvres de Maucroix,” among which are some poems, more remarkable for a certain natural style, than for brilliancy of imagination.

This branch came from Denys du Moulin, lord of Fontenay in Brie, archbishop of Thoulouse, patriarch of Antioch, and bishop of Paris, where he died in 1447. The subject

, in Latin Molinæus, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Paris in 1500. His family was noble, and Papyrius mentions “that those of the family of Moulin were related to Elizabeth queen of England;” which she acknowledged herself in 1572, when conversing with Francis duke of Montmorency, marshal of France and ambassador to England. This relation probably came by Thomas Bullen, or Boleyn, viscount of Rochefort, the queen’s grandfather by the mother’s side; for Sanderus and others say, “that this Rochefort being ambassador to France, gave his daughter Anne of Bulloigne to a gentleman of Brie, a friend and relation of his, to take care of her education; and this gentleman is supposed to be the lord of Fontenay in Brie, of the family of du Moulin.” This branch came from Denys du Moulin, lord of Fontenay in Brie, archbishop of Thoulouse, patriarch of Antioch, and bishop of Paris, where he died in 1447. The subject of our memoir was at first educated at the university of Paris, and afterwards studied law at Poitiers and Orleans, at the latter of which cities he gave lectures on the subject in 1521. In the following year he was received as an advocate of parliament; but, owing to a defect in his speech, was obliged to give up pleading, and confine himself to chamber practice, and the composition of those works which gained him so much reputation. He was an indefatigable student, and set such a value on time, that, contrary to the custom of his age, he had his beard close shaven, that he might not lose any precious moments in dressing it; but in his latter days he permitted it again to grow. From the same love of study, he refused some valuable employments, and even took the resolution never to marry; and that he might be equally free from every other incumbrance, he gave the whole of his property to <rn elder brother, reserving only for his maintenance the profits of his studies. It was not long, however, before he had cause to repent of this uncommon liberality, as his brother behaved to him in a brutal and unnatural way. To revenge himself, he had recourse to an expedient suggested by his professional knowledge. He married, and having children, he resumed, according to the law, the possession of that property with which he had parted so freely when a bachelor. It was in 1538 that he married Louise de Beldon, daughter of the king’s secretary, a lady of a most amiable and affectionate temper, who, instead of being an incumbrance, as he once foolishly thought, proved the great comfort of his life, and in some respect, the promoter of his studies, by her prudent care of those domestic affairs of which literary men are generally very bad managers. She was also his consolation in the many difficulties in which he soon became embroiled. He was a man of an ardent mind and warm temper, totally incapable of concealing his sentiments, particularly in the cause of truth and justice, or regard to his country. Like many other eminent men of that age, he embraced the principles of the reformed religion, first according to the system of Calvin, but afterwards he adopted that of Luther, as contained in the Augsburgh confession. On this account it is said that the Calvinists endeavoured to make him feel their resentment, and even suspended their animosity against the Roman catholics, that they might join with the latter in attacking Du Moulin.

ome. After this irregular election, Novatian addressed letters to St. Cyprian of Carthage, to Fabiuu of Antioch, and to Dionysius of Alexandria; but St. Cyprian refused

, or Novatus, a priest of the church of Carthage, flourished in the third century, and was the author of a remarkable schism called after his name, or rather after the name of his associate Novatian, who, however, is also called Novatus by many ancient writers. He is represented by the orthodox as a person scandalous and infamous for perfidy, adulation, arrogance, and so sordidly covetous, that he even suffered his own father to perish with hunger, and spared not to pillage the goods of the church, the poor, and the orphans. It was in order to escape the punishment due to these crimes, and to support himself by raising disturbances, that he resolved to form a schism; and to that end entered into a cabal with Felicissimus, an African priest, who opposed St. Cyprian Novatus was summoned to appear before the prelate in the year 249; but the persecution, begun by Decius the following year, obliging that saint to retire for his own safety, Novatus was delivered from the danger of that process; and, not long after associating himself with Felicissimws, then a deacon, with him maintained the doctrine, that the lapsed ought to be received into the communion of the church without any form of penitence. In the year 2.51, he went to Rome, about the time of the election of pope Cornelius. There he met with Novatian, a priest, who had acquired a reputation for eloquence, and presently formed an alliance with him; and, although their sentiments with regard to the lapsed were diametrically opposite, they agreed to publish the most atrocious calumnies against the Roman clergy, which they coloured over so artfully, that many were deceived and joined their party. This done, they procured a congregation consisting of three obscure, simple, and ignorant bishops; and, plying them well with wine, prevailed upon them to elect Novatian bisuop of Rome. After this irregular election, Novatian addressed letters to St. Cyprian of Carthage, to Fabiuu of Antioch, and to Dionysius of Alexandria; but St. Cyprian refused to open his letter, and excommunicated his deputies: he had likewise sent to Rome before, ia order to procure the abolition of the schism. Fabius made himself pleasant at Novatian’s expence; and Dionysius declared to him, that the best way of convincing the world, that his election was made against his consent, would be to quit the see, for the sake of peace. On the contrary, Novatian now maintained his principal doctrine, that such as had fallen into any sin after baptism ought not to be re*­ceived into the church by penance; and he was joined in the same by Novatus, although he had originally maintained the contrary while in Africa. Novatian had been a Pagan philosopher before his conversion to Christianity, and it does not appear that he and his party separated from the church, on any grounds of doctrine, but of discipline, and it is certain, from some writings of Novatian still extant, that he was sound in the doctrine of the Trinity. He lived to the time of Valerian, when he suffered martyrdom. He composed treatises upon the “Paschal Festival, or Easter,” of -the “Sabbath,” of “Circumcision,” of the “Supreme Pontiff,” of “Prayer,” of the “Jewish Meats,” and of “the Trinity.” It is highly probable, that the treatise upon the “Trinity,” and the book upon the “Jewish Meats,” inserted into the works of Tertullian, were written by Novatian, and they are well written. There is an edition of his works by Whiston, 1709; one by Welchman; and a third, of 1728, with notes, by Jackson. With respect to the followers of Novatian, at the first separation, they only refused communion with those who had fallen into idolatry: afterwards they went farther, and excluded, for ever, from their communion, all such as had committed crimes for which penance was required; and at last they took away from the church the power of the keys, of binding and loosing offenders, and rebaptised those who had been baptised by the church. This sect subsisted a long time both in the east and west; but chiefly became considerable in the east, where they had bishops, both in the great sees and the small ones, parish-churches, and a great number of followers. There were also Novatians in Africa in the time of St. Leo, and in the east some remains continued till the eighth century.

the opinions since known by the name of Socinian, or Unitarian. In the year 260 he was chosen bishop of Antioch, and having begun to preach against the divinity of

, so named from the place of his birth, flourished in the third century, and was among the first who entertained the opinions since known by the name of Socinian, or Unitarian. In the year 260 he was chosen bishop of Antioch, and having begun to preach against the divinity of Jesus Christ, he was admonished, in a council assembled at Antioch, in the year 264: but, in another, held in phe year 269 or 270, sentence of deposition was passed. To this he refused to submit, and was supported in his disobedience by Zenobia the consort of Odenatus, At length, when this queen was driven from Antioch, the emperor Aurelian expelled Paul in the year 272 or 273. Jt is not known what became of him afterwards; nor are any of his writings extant. His morals appear to have been as obnoxious as his doctrines. Dr. Lardner has en4eavoured to defend both, yet it appears evident that he hail the whole Christian world against him, and queen Zenobia only for him. His wealth, says Gibbon, was a sufficient evidence of his guilt, since it was neither derived from the inheritance of his fathers, nor acquired by the arts of honest industry. His followers were for a considerable time called Paulianists, but have since been known by many other names, according to the shades of difference in their opinions.

Constantinople, likewise rejected their deputies. They were driven from Ephesus and Theodotus bishop of Antioch condemned them, and drove Pelagius thence, who was lately

Zosimus, either through a persuasion that these heretics had dealt insincerely with him, or finding it prudent to yield to the necessity of the occasion, upon the receipt of this letter, issued out a formal condemnation of the Pelagians, and applied also to Honorius, requesting him to cause all heretics to be driven out of Rome; in compliance with which, the emperor gave a rescript at Ravenna, April 418, directd to the pretorian prefect of Italy, who, in consequence, issued his ordinance jointly with the pretorian prefect of the east, and the prefect of Gaul, purporting, that all such as should be convicted of this error should suffer perpetual banishment, and that all their possessions should be confiscated. The pope also vigorously prosecuting hs design to extirpate the friends 01 Pelagius, caused all the bishops to be deposed who would not subscribe the condemnation of the new heresy, and drove them out of Italy by virtue of the laws of the empire. Atticus, bishop of Constantinople, likewise rejected their deputies. They were driven from Ephesus and Theodotus bishop of Antioch condemned them, and drove Pelagius thence, who was lately returned from Palestine, where he had taken refuge from the emperor’s rescript. We have no certain account of him after this; but there is reason to believe, that he returned to England, and spread his doctrine there; which induced the bishop of Gaul to send thither St. Germain of Auxerre, in order to refute it. However that be, it is certain that Pelagian heresy, as it is called, spread itself both in the east and west, and took so deep root, that it subsists to this day in different sects, who all go by the general name of Pelagians, except a more moderate part who are called Semi-Pelagians.

nacy against the divinity of Jesus Christ, for which in the year 345 he was condemned by the council of Antioch; in the year 374, by the council of Milan. However,

, a famous heretic of the fourth century, known in church history as the chief of a sect called Photinians, was a native of Ancyra, the capital of Galatia, and bishop of Sirmium, or Sirmich, the chief city of Illyricum. He had been the disciple of Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra. He spoke with ease, and his eloquence gained him great power over his people after he was consecrated bishop; but his life was corrupted, and his doctrine soon became so too. He espoused the same opinions with Paul of Samosata, and wrote with great obstinacy against the divinity of Jesus Christ, for which in the year 345 he was condemned by the council of Antioch; in the year 374, by the council of Milan. However, he still maintained his see till he was deposed by the council of Sirmich, A. D. 251, and by the emperor sent into banishment, where he spent the remainder of his life, during which time he composed a piece against all heresies in general, with an intent to establish his own. He wrote in Greek and Latin. The emperor Julian sent him a letter, commending him for denying the divinity of Jesus Christ. Photinus died A. D. 375 (377, Cave), in Galatia, whither he had been banished. This heresy was, amongst many others, anathematized in the council of Constantinople, A. D. 381. It afterwards was revived by Socinus.

ges, and of a distinguished character. He appeared before his holiness in the name of the patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem; he told his holiness, that

Pius behaved in his high office with considerable spirit and activity; but more as a temporal prince, than the head of the church. During his pontificate he received ambassadors from the patriarchs of the east: the chief of the embassy was one Moses, archdeacon of Austria, a man well versed in the Greek and Syriac languages, and of a distinguished character. He appeared before his holiness in the name of the patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem; he told his holiness, that the enemy who sows tares having prevented them till then from receiving the decree of the council of Florence, concerning the union of the Greek and Latin churches, God had at last inspired them with a resolution of submitting to it; that it had been solemnly agreed to, in an assembly called together for that purpose; and that for the future they would unanimously submit to the pope as vicegerent of Jesus Christ. Pius commended the patriarchs for their obedience, and ordered Moses’s speech to be translated into Latin, and laid up amongst the archives of the Roman church. A few days after the arrival of these ambassadors from the east, there came others also from Peloponnesus, who offered obedience to the pope, and he received them in the name of the church of Rome, and sent them a governor.

the Syriac version of the New Testament which had never yet been published. Ignatius, the patriarch of Antioch, had in the sixteenth century sent Moses Meridinseus,

As the statutes required that he should take orders within a certain time, he applied to the study of divinity and while employed in perusing the fathers, councils, and ecclesiastical writers, he found leisure to exhibit a specimen of his progress in the oriental languages by preparing for the press those parts of the Syriac version of the New Testament which had never yet been published. Ignatius, the patriarch of Antioch, had in the sixteenth century sent Moses Meridinseus, a priest of Mesopotamia, into the West, to get the Syriac version of the New Testament printed, for the use of his churches. It was accordingly printed by the care and diligence of Albertus Widmanstad, at Vienna in 1555. But the Syriac New Testament, which was followed in this edition, wanted the second Epistle of St. Peter, the second and third Epistles of St. John, the Epistle of St. Jude, and the whole book of the Revelations, because, as Lewis de Dieu conjectures, those parts of holy Scripture, though extant among them, were not yet received into the Canon by those Oriental Churches. This defect no one had thought of supplying until De Dieu, on the encouragement, and with the assistance of Daniel Heinsius, set about the Revelation, being furnished with a copy of it, which had been given, with many other manuscripts, to the university of Leyden by Joseph Scaliger. That version of the Apocalypse was printed at Leyden, in 1627, but still the four Epistles were wanting, and those Mr. Pocock undertook, being desirous that the whole New Testament might at length be published in that language, which was the vulgar tongue of our Saviour nimself and his apostles. A very fair manuscript for this purpose he had met with in the Bodleian Library, containing those Epistles, together with some other parts of the New Testament. Out of this manuscript, following the example of De Dieu, he transcribed those epistles in the Syriac character: the same he likewise set down in Hebrew letters, adding the points, not according to the ordinary, but the Syriac rules, as they had been delivered by those learned Maronites, Amira and Sionita. He also made a new translation of these epistles out of Syriac into Latin, comparing it with that of Etzelius, and shewing on various occasions the reason of his dissent from him. He also added the original Greek, concluding the whole with a number of learned and useful notes. When finished, although with the utmost care and exactness, yet so great was his modesty and distrust of himself, that he could not be persuaded to think it fit for publication, till after it had lain by him about a year, when he was induced to consent to its publication by Gerard John Vossius, who was then at Oxford, and to whom it had been shown by Rouse, the public librarian, as the production of a young man scarcely twenty-four years old. Vossius not only persuaded him to allow it to be printed, but promised to take it with him to Leyden for that purpose. It was accordingly published there in 1630, 4to, after some few corrections and alterations in the Latin version, in which Mr. Pocock readily acquiesced, from the pen of Lewis de Dieu, to whom Vossius committed the care of the work.

ars after the apostle’s death, he was also visited by St. Ignatius. Ignatius recommended his own see of Antioch to the care and si>perintendance of Polycarp, and afterwards

, an apostolic father of the Christian church, was born in the reign of Nero, probably at Smyrna, a city of Ionia in Asia Minor, where he was educated at the expence of Calisto, a noble matron of great piety and charity. In his younger years he is said to be instructed in the Christian faith by Bucolus, bishop of that place but others consider it as certain that he was a disciple of St. John the Evangelist, and familiarly conversed with others of the apostles. At a proper age, Bucolus ordained him a deacon and catechist of his church; and, upon the death of that prelate, he succeeded him in the bishopric. To this he was consecrated by St. John who also, according to archbishop Usher, directed his “Apocalyptical Epistle,” among six others, to him, under the title of the “Angel of the Church of Smyrna,” where, many years after the apostle’s death, he was also visited by St. Ignatius. Ignatius recommended his own see of Antioch to the care and si>perintendance of Polycarp, and afterwards sent an epistle to the church of Smyrna from Troas, A. C. 107 when Polycarp is supposed to have written his “Epistle to the Philippians,” a translation of which is preserved by Dr. Cave.

rted numbers of sinners, re-united to the church above 400 solitaries, who had engaged in the schism of Antioch, and persuaded several Macedonians and Arians to renounce

, orRUFINUS, a very celebrated priest of Aquileia, called by some Toranius, was born about the middle of the fourth century, at Concordia, a small city in Italy. He retired to a monastery in Aquileia, and devoted himself wholly to reading and meditating on the sacred scriptures and the writings of the holy fathers. St. Jerome passing that way became much attached to him, and vowed an indissoluble friendship. When St. Jerome retired into the east some years after, Ruffinus, inconsolable for their separation, resolved to quit Aquileia in search of his friend. He accordingly embarked for Egypt, visited the hermits who inhabited the deserts, and having been told much of the chamy of St. Melania the elder, had the satisfaction of seeing ner at Alexandria, where he went to hear the celebrated Didymus. The piety which Melania observed in Ruffinus induced her to make him her confident, which he continued to be while they remained iti the East, which was about thirty years. But the Arians, who ruled in the reign of Valens, raised a cruel persecution against Ruffinus, cast him into a dungeon, and loaded him with chains, where he suffered the torments of hunger and thirst, and they afterwards banished him to the most desolate part of Palestine. Melania ransomed him, with several other exiles, and returned to Palestine with him. It was at this period, that St. Jerome, supposing Ruffinus would go directly to Jerusalem, wrote to a friend in that city to congratulate him on the occasion, in the following terms: “You will see the marks of holiness shine in the person of Ruffinus, whereas I am but his dust. It is enough for my weak eyes to support the lustre of his virtues. He has lately been further purified in the crucible of persecution, and is now whiter than snow, while I am defiled with all manner of sins.” Ruffinus built a monastery on mount Olivet, converted numbers of sinners, re-united to the church above 400 solitaries, who had engaged in the schism of Antioch, and persuaded several Macedonians and Arians to renounce their errors. He, at the same time, translated such Greek books as appeared to him the most interesting; but his translations of Origen’s works, particularly “the Book of principles,” occasioned that rupture between him and St. Jerome, which made so much noise in the church, and so deeply afflicted St. Augustine, and all the great men of their time. Ruffinus was cited to Rome by pope Anastatius, who is said to have condemned his translation of “the Book of principles.” Being accused of heresy, he published some very orthodox apologies, which discover great ingenuity. His chief plea was, “That he meant to be merely a translator, without undertaking to support or defend any thing reprehensible in Origen’s works.” He went afterwards into 'Sicily, and died there about the year 410. He translated from Greek into Latin, “Josephus;” “The Ecclesiastical History,” by Eusebius, to which he added, two books; several of Origen’s writings, with his “Apology” by St. Pamphilius; ten of St. Gregory of Nazianzen’s Discourses, and eight of St. Basil’s, in all which he has been accused of taking great liberties, and in some of them acknowledges it. He has also left a Tract in defence of Origen; two “Apologies” against St. Jerome; “Commentaries” on Jacob’s Benedictions, on Hosea, Joel, and Amos; several “Lives of the Fathers of the desert,” and “An Exposition of the Creed,” which has always been valued. His works were printed at Paris, 1580, fol.; but the “Commentary on the Psalms,” which bears his name, was not written by him. The abbe“Gervase has published a” Life of Ruffinus," 2 vols. 12mo.

” 1716, 8vo. 4. “A Letter in Syriac of the bishop Mar Thomas, written from, Malabar to the patriarch of Antioch, and a Latin version by himself,” 1714, 4to. 5. “Sermo

, a learned German, was born at Nuys, in the electorate of Cologne, 1646; his father was a major in the army of the landgrave of Hesse Cassel. He was educated for the church at Dxiisbourg; and, having rnacle the Oriental tongues his particular study, became professor of them in that university in 1677. In 1679 he removed to Leyden, to fill the same post for a larger stipend.; aud there continued till 1729, when, he died of an apoplexy. He published some useful books in the Oriental way as, 1. “Opus Aramseum, complectens Grammaticam Chaldaicam & Syriacam,” 1686, 8vo. 2. “Nq-, vuin Testamenturn Syriacum, cum versione Latina,” 1708,' 4to. The Latin version is that of Tii./melHus retouched. Leusdeu laboured jointly with hini in this work till death, which happened when they were got to Luke xv. 20 and, Scbaaf wrote the remainder by himself. At the end of it is subjoined, “Lexicon Syriacum Concordantiale.” 3. “Epitome Grammaticae Hebraicae,1716, 8vo. 4. “A Letter in Syriac of the bishop Mar Thomas, written from, Malabar to the patriarch of Antioch, and a Latin version by himself,1714, 4to. 5. “Sermo Academicus de Linguarum Orientalium scientia,” an Inauguration-Speech, In 1711 he drew up, at the request of the curators of the academy at Leyden, a catalogue of all the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan books and manuscripts in the li^ brary there; which was joined to the catalogue of that library t published in 1714.

, and made under them a very uncommon progress. His learning and piety becoming known to the bishops of Antioch, they admitted him into holy orders; yet he did not

, an illustrious writer of the church, was born at Antioch about the year 386, of parents who were both pious and opulent. His birth has been represented as accompanied with miracles before and after, according to his own account, in his “Religious History;” in which he gravely informs us, that it was by the prayers of a religious man, called Macedonius, that God granted his motirer to conceive a son, and bring him into the world. When the holy anchorite promised her this blessing, she engaged herself on her part to devote him to God; and accordingly called him Theodoretus, which signifies either given by God, or devoted to God. To promote this latter design, he was sent at seven years of age to a monastery, where he learned the sciences, theology, and devotion. He had for his masters Theodore of Mopsuestia, and St. John Chrysostom, and made under them a very uncommon progress. His learning and piety becoming known to the bishops of Antioch, they admitted him into holy orders; yet he did not upon that account change either his habitation or manner of living, but endeavoured to reconcile the exercises of a religious life with tha function of a clergyman. ' After the death of his parents, he distributed his whole inheritance to the poor, and reserved nothing to himself. The bishopric of Cyrus becoming vacant about the year 420, the bishop of Antioch ordained Theodoret against his will, and sent him to govern that dumb. Cyrus was a city of Syria, in the province of Euphratesia, an unpleasant and barren country, but very populous. The inhabitants commonly spake the Syriac to;ig.e, Tew of them understanding Greek; they were almost all poor, rude, and barbarous; many of them were engaged in profane superbtitions, or in such gross errors as shewed them to be rather Heathens than Christians. The learning and worth of Theodoret, which were really very great, seemed to qualify him for a better see; yet he remained in this, and discharged all the offices of a good bishop and good man. He was afterwards engaged in the Nestorian dispute, very much against his will; but at length retired to his see, spent his life in composing books, and in acts of piety and charity, and died there in the year 457, aged seventy and upwards. He wrote “Commentaries upon the Holy Scriptures” an “Ecclesiastical History” a “Religious Histor\ T” containing the lives and praises of thirty monks, and several other things, which are still extant.

rminated happily the disputes which had arisen between Evagrius and Flavianus, both ordained bishops of Antioch. He zealously defended the faith of the Catholic church;

, a celebrated patriarch of Alexandria, who succeeded Timotheus about 385, has the credit of having completely destroyed the remains of idolatry in Egypt, by pulling down the temples and idols of the false deities; and he also terminated happily the disputes which had arisen between Evagrius and Flavianus, both ordained bishops of Antioch. He zealously defended the faith of the Catholic church; but quarrelling afterwards with Chrysostom, caused him to be deposed, and refused to place his name in the Dyptics. Of this violence and injustice Dupin thinks he never repented but some compunction he felt at last, on account of his other failings, for on his death-bed, reflecting on the long penitence of St. Arsenius, he exclaimed, “How happy art thou, Arsenius, to have had this hour always before thine eyes.” We have some of this patriarch’s works in the Library of the fathers, which seem of very little value. Dupin says, he knew better how to manage a court-intrigue than to solve a point in divinity.

of Antioch, a writer and bishop of the primitive church, was educated

, of Antioch, a writer and bishop of the primitive church, was educated a heathen, and afterwards converted to Christianity. Some have imagined that he is the person to whom St. Luke dedicates the “Acts of the Apostles;” but this is impossible, as he was not ordained bishop of Antioch till the year 170, and he governed this church twelve or thirteen years, at the end of which be died. He was a vigorous opposer of certain heretics of his time, and composed a great number of works, all of which are lost, except three books to Autolycus, a learned heathen of his acquaintance, who had undertaken to vindicate his own religion against that of the Christians. The first book is properly a discourse between him and Autoly* cus, in answer to what this heathen had said against Christianity. The second is to convince him of the falshood of his own, and the truth of the Christian religion. In the third, after having proved that the writings of the heathens are full of absurdities and contradictions, he vindicates the doctrine and the lives of the Christians from those false and scandalous imputations which were then brought against them. Lastly, at the end of his work, he adds an historical chronology from the beginning of the world to his own time, to prove, that the history of Moses is at once the most ancient and the truest; and it appears from this little epitome, that he was well acquainted with profane history. In these books are a great variety of curious disquisitions concerning the opinions of the poets and philosophers, but few things in them relating immediately to the doctrines of the Christian religion, the reason of which is, that having composed his woiks for the conviction of a Pagan, he insisted rather on the external evidences of Christianity, vis better adapted, in his opinion, to the purpose. His style is elegant, and he was doubtless a man of considerable parts and learning. These boots were published, with a Latin version, by Conradus Gesner, at Zurich, in 154-6. They were afterwards subjoined to Justin Martyr’s works, printed at Paris in 1615 and 1636; then published at Oxford, 1684, in 12mo, under the inspection of Dr. Fell; and, lastly, by Jo. Christ. Wolfius, at Hamburgh, 1723, in 8vo. It has been said, that this Theophilus of Antioch was the h'rst who applied the term Trinity to express the three persons in the Godhead.

She has also been censured for protecting Paulus Samosatenus, who had been condemned in the council of Antioch, and by that means preventing his being driven from

, queen of Palmyra, and one of the most illustrious women that have swayed the sceptre, declared herself to be descended from the Ptolemies and Cleopatras. She was instructed in the sciences by the celebrated Longinus, and made such progress, that she spoke the Egyptian tongue in perfection, as well as the Greek. She also understood the Latin, although she scrupled to speak it. She protected learned men; and was so well acquainted with the history of Egypt, and that of the East, that she wrote an epitome of it. This princess had also read the Greek and Roman history, and was justly admired for her beauty, chastity,-sobriety, and extraordinary courage. She married Odenatus, a Saracen prince, and contributed greatly to the most signal victories he gained over the Persians, which preserved the East to the Romans, when, after the taking of Valerian, it was highly probable that Sapr would dispossess them of all that country. Gallienus, in return for such important services, declared her Augusta, and, in the year 264, created Odenatus emperor. After her husband’s death, Zenobia reigwed with great bravery and glory; for, her sons Herennianus and Timor laus, on account of their tender age, had only the name and ornaments of emperor. She preserved the provinces that had been under the obedience of Odenatus, conquered Egypt, and was preparing to make other conquests, when the emperor Aurelian made war against her; and, having gained two battles, besieged her in Palmyra, where r!enobia defended herself with great bravery; but at length, finding that the city would be obliged to surrender, she quitted it privately; but the emperor, who had notice of her escape, caused her to be pursued with such diligence, that she was overtaken just as she got into a boat to cross the Euphrates. This happened in the year 272. Aurelian spared her life, although he made her serve to adorn his triumph, and gave her a country-house near Rome, where she spent the remainder of her life in tranquillity with her children. Her daughters formed noble alliances, and her race was not extinct in the fifth century. All histonsnl bestow the most magnificent praises on this princess; and yet they suspect her of having consented that Maeonius should assassinate Odenatus, her husband, for shewing [ess fondness for her sons than for Herod, his son by another wife. She has also been censured for protecting Paulus Samosatenus, who had been condemned in the council of Antioch, and by that means preventing his being driven from his church so long as she reigned. But P. Jouve, who published her Life, 1753, 12mo, endeavours, not unsuccessfully, to clear her from all these imputations. She must be distinguished from Zenobia, wife of Hhadamistus, king of Iberia, who fled from the Armenians, and took her with him. This princess being near the time of her delivery, begged Rhadamistus to kill her. He reluctantly yielded to Zenobia’s earnest entreaties, and wounded her with a sword; but she was found by some shepherds, who saved her life, in the year 51. Zenobia being afterwards conducted to Tiridates, he ordered her to be treated as a queen.