Listed 33 sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography for wider area of: "BLACK SEA COAST Region TURKEY" .
SINOPI (Ancient city) TURKEY
Marcion (Markion,) one of the most celebrated of the so-called heretics of the
second century. He was a native of Pontus. The account, prevalent in the days
of Epiphanius, of which there is no reason to doubt the correctness, made him
a native of Sinope in Hellenopontus. Tertullian repeatedly calls him a ship-master,
nauclerus (Adv. Marc. i. 18, iii. 6, iv. 9, &c.), and, according to one MS. and
the version of Rufinus, Rhodon, a writer of the latter part of the second century
(apud Euseb. H. E. v. 13), calls him the seaman Marcion. Some moderns have doubted
whether so learned a man could have been in such an occupation, but we see no
reason to question the statement, nor does his learning appear to have been great.
His father was bishop of a Christian church (probably at Sinope), but there is
reason to think that Marcion had grown up before his father's conversion, for
Tertullian intimates (De Praescrip. Hereticor. c. 30) that he had been a stoic,
and speaks of his " finding out God" (Adv. Marcion, i. l), expressions which indicate
that he had not been brought up as a Christian, but had become a convert in an
adult age, after inquiry, and on his own conviction. Be this as it may, he appears
to have been a sincere and earnest believer, characterised by the severity of
his ascetic practices; nor does he at first seem to have entertained, at least
he did not avow, any opinions at variance with the usual belief of the church
with which he was in full communion.
The course of his life was, however, altogether altered by his excommunication.
The occasion of this is, in the spurious addition to one of the works of Tertullian
(De Praescrip. Haeret. c. 51 ), and by Epiphanius, stated to have been his seduction
of a girl; but the silence of Tertullian in his genuine works, and of the other
early opponents of Marcion, ready as they would have been to lay hold on anything
unfavourable to him, throws,as Beausobre and Lardner have shown, considerable
doubt on the accusation. Beausobre and Neander suppose that he was cut off from
the church on account of his having already begun to propagate his obnoxious sentiments
as to the Mosaic dispensation and the Old Testament generally. Even if the charge
brought against him by Epiphanius be credited, there is no reason to regard his
delinquency as an evidence of habitual licentiousness: it stands in marked contrast
with the rigour of his system and with the ordinary tenor of his life, and at
a later period he himself excommunicated Apelles, one of his disciples, for a
similar, perhaps even a less heinous, offence. (Tertull. ibid. c. 30.) Epipbanius
further adds, that his first desire after his fall was to be restored to the communion
of the church, and that, in order to this, he professed penitence; but that his
father, by whom he ad been excommunicated, refused to restore him, being angry
at the shame which had fallen upon himself by his son's fall; or possibly (if
there be any truth in the story at all), from an apprehension that his near connection
with the offender might incline hinm, or make him suspected of inclining, to undue
lenity. Failing to obtain his readmission, and unable to bear the opprobrium which
his conduct had incurred, Marcion went to Rome. Epiphanius says that he arrived
there after the decease of Pope Hyginus, a statement which is subject to considerable
doubt, and of which, in any case, the uncertainty of the early Papal chronology
prevents our fixing the date. Tillemont places the pope's death and Marcion's
arrival in A. D. 142; but if Justin Martyr wrote his First Apology in which Marcion's
residence at Rome, and his teaching his heretical views are mentioned (Justin.
Apol. Prima, c26), in A. D. 139. Marcion must have settled at Rome some years
earlier.
According to Epiphanius, Marcion's first care, on his arrival at Rome,
was to apply to be admitted into communion with the church, but he was refused.
Epiphanius adds, that he had aspired to succeed to the vacant bishopric,--a statement
too absurd to merit refutation, especially taken in conneetion with the story
of his previous incontinence ; and that disappointed ambition stimulated him to
unite himself with the Syrian Gnostic Cerdon, then at Rome, to adopt and propagate
his opinions, and to carry out the threat with which he parted from the elders
of the Roman church on their refusal to receive him, that "he would cause a perpetual
schism among them." Imputation of motives is so easy and so common, that it has
little weight, especially when the writer is so credulous and uncharitable as
Epiphanius; nor is his statement of facts in accordance with Tertullian, who tells
us (De Praescrip. Haeret. c. 30) that Marcion was in communion with the Roman
church, and professed to hold the general belief; under tile episcopate of Eleutherius,
but that on account of the ever-restless curiosity with which lie pursued his
inquiries, he was repeatedly (semel atque iterum) excommunicated, the last time
finally (in perpetuum discidium relegatus). It is possible that lie may, on his
final ejection, have uttered some such threat as that attributed to him by Epiphanius,
yet in that case Tertullian would have hardly forborne to mention it; and it may
be observed that Marcion's repeated reconciliation with the church, and retractation
or concealment of his opinions, indicate a greater pliancy of temper and a more
anxious desire to avoid a schism than it has been usual to impute to him. Tertullian
is, indeed, by some critics, yet we think on insufficient ground, supposed to
have confounded Marcion with Cerdon, of whom Irenaeus (Adv. Haeres. iii. 4) gives
a somewhat similar account.
We have seen that Marcion was at Rome, and engaged in the propagation
of his views which implies his separation from the church, in A. D. 139, when
Justin wrote his First Apology. Whether he travelled intodistant provinces to
diffuse his opinions is very doubtful. Most modern critics, including Tillemont,
Beausobre, and Lardner, think that he did; but the passages cited from the ancients
in support of the supposition are quite insufficient. That views similar to his
were widely diffused in various parts, especially of the East, is indisputable,
but that the diffusion was owing to his personal exertions and influence is by
no means clear; and we do not know of any distinct evidence that he ever left
Rome after his first arrival there. The passages from Tertullian and Ephrem Syrus
are mere declamatory expressions, and the passage usually cited from Jerome (Epist.
cxxxiii. ad Ctesiphont. c. 4, Opera, vol. i. col. 1025, ed. Vallarsii), if it
has any foundation in truth, is most naturally referred to Marcion's first journey
from Sinope to Rome; and it was probably on that same journey that he became acquainted
with the venerable Polycarp, whom he afterwards met, apparently at Rome, and who,
when Marcion asked if he knew him, replied, "I know thee as the first-born of
Satan." (Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres. iii. 3.) This anecdote of Marcion's anxiety to
claim acquaintance with that venerable man is in accordance with his desire to
be reconciled to the Catholic Church, a desire which continued to the close of
his life, for after all his misbelief, the ministers, apparently of the Roman
church, agreed to restore him on condition of his bringing back with hin those
whim he had led into error. This colldition seems to show that his own immediate
disciples were not numerous, and that the widely diffused body that held similar
views, and was called by his name, had rather followed an independent course of
thougllt than been influenced by him. His compliance with the condition of his
restoration was prevented by his death, the time of which is quite unknown. (Tertullian,
de I'raescript. Haeret. c. 30.)
The doctrinal system of Marcion was of remarkable character. Its great
feature was the irreconcileable opposition which it supposed to exist between
the Creator and the Christian God, and between the religious systems, the Law
and the Gospel, which it was believed they had respectively founded. Whether he
held two or three original principles is not clear. Rhodon (apud Euseb. H. E.
v. 13) and Augusitin (de Haeres. c. 22) say he held two, Epiphanius charges him
with holding three, --one, nameless and invisible, the Supreme, whom Marcion termed
"the Good"; another "the visible God, the Creator"; the third, "the Devil," or
perhaps matter, the source of evil. Theodoret says he held four "unbegotten existences",
--the good God. the Creator, matter, and the evil ruler of matter, meaning, apparently,
the Devil. That he held matter to be eternal is admitted; the doubtful point is
whether he really held the Creator to have been a principle, or to have been in
some way derived from the good God. That he regarded them as independent first
principles is tile most natural inference from the strong opposition which he
conceived to exist between them, and which formed the prominent feature in his
doctrinal system. He was probably led to the belief of this opposition by the
difficulty he found in reconciling the existence of evil, so prevalent in the
world, with the attribute of goodness in the Deity, which was so distinctly manifested
in the gospel. This is Tertullian's account of the origin of his heresy (Adr.
Marcion. i. 2), and it is apparently tile true one; nor will it materially differ
from the account of Neander, that Marcion could not perceive in nature or in the
Old Testament the same love which was manifested in the Gospel of Christ. He accordingly
made the Creator, the God of the Old Testament, the author of evils, "malorum
factored," according to the statement of Irenaeus (Adv. Haeres. i. 29), by which
he meant that he was the author, not of moral evil, but of suffering. The old
dispensation was, according to him, given by the Creator, who chose out the Jews
as his own people, and promised to them a Messiah. Jesus was not this Messiah,
but the son of the " unseen and unnamed" God, and had appeared on earth in the
outward form of man, possibly a mere phantasm, to deliver souls, and to upset
the dominion of the Creator; and Marcion further supposed that, when he descended
into Hades, he had delivered, not those who in the Old Testament were regarded
as saints, such as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, &c., who were apprehensive
of some delusion and would not believe, but rather those who had rejected or disobeyed
the Creator, such as Cain, Esau, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.
The other doctrines of Marcion were such as naturally flowed from
this prominent feature of his system. He condemned marriage, and admitted none
who were living in the married state to baptism; for he did not think it right
to enlarge, by propagation, a race born in subjection to the harsh rule of the
Creator. (Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 3.) His followers did not hesitate to brave
martyrdom, and boasted of the number of their martyrs. He denied the resurrection
of the body; and, according to the very questionable authority of Epiphanius,
believed in transmigration. He admitted persons to baptism, Epiphanius says, three
times, apparently requiring a repetition of it after any great sin; but as Tertullian
does not notice this threefold baptism, it was probably introduced after Marcion's
time. His followers permitted women to baptize probably those of their own sex,
and allowed catechumens to be present at the celebration of the mysteries. According
to Chrysostom, when a catechumen died they baptized another person for him; but
even Tillemont supposes that this was not their original practice. They fasted
on the Sabbath, out of opposition to the Creator, who had rested on that day.
It was a necessary consequence of these views that Marcion should
reject a considerable part of the New Testament. The Old Testament he regarded
as a communication from the Creator to his people the Jews, not only separate
from Christianity, but opposed to it. He acknowledged but one Gospel, formed by
the mutilation of the Gospel of St. Luke. which, it may be reasonably supposed,
he believed he was restoring, by such mutilation, to its original purity. He rejected
the greater part of the four first chapters, commencing his gospel with the words,
"In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar God came down to Capernaum,
a city of Galilee, and he taught on the Sabbath", &c. (as in Luke, iv. 31, &c.).
He omitted all those passages in our Lord's discourses in which he recognised
the Creator as his father. He received the following Epistles of Paul:--to the
Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1
and 2 Thessalonians, and Philemon, and acknowledged certain portions of a supposed
Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans; but the Epistles which he received were, according
to Epiphanius, whose testimony in this respect there is no reason to doubt, mutilated
and corrupted. Marcion, besides his edition, if we may so term it, of the New
Testament, compiled a work entitled Antithesis, consisting of passages from the
Old and from the New Testament which he judged to be mutually contradictory. This
work was examined and answered by Tertullian, in his fourth book against Marcion.
Tertullian also cites (De Carne Christi, c. 2) an epistle of Marcion, but without
further describing it. (Justin Martyr and Irenaeus,ll. cc.; Tertullian, Adv. Marcion.
Libri V. de Praescripf. Haeret. passim; Epiphan. Panarium. Haeres. xlii; the numerous
other passages in ancient writers have been collected by Ittigius, de Haeresiarchis,
sect. ii. c. 7; Tillemont, Memoires, vol. ii. p. 266, &c.; Beausobre, Hist. de
Manicheisme, liv. iv. ch. v.--viii.; and Lardner, Hist. of Heretics, b. ii. ch.
x. See also Neander, Church History (by Rose), vol. ii. p. 119, &c.; Cave, Hist.
Litt. ad ann. 128, vol. i. p. 54, ed. Oxford, 1740-42.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
AMASSIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Eutychius Eutuchios), was originally a nonk of the town of Amaseia, whence he was sent by his fellow-citizens to Constantinople, as proxy for their bishop. The great talent he displayed in some theological controversy gained him general admiration, and the emperor in A. D. 553 raised him to the highest dignity in the church at Constantinople. In the same year he accordingly presided at an ecumenical synod, which was held in that city. In A. D. 564, he incurred the anger of the emperor Justinian, by refusing to give his assent to a decree respecting the incorruptibility of the body of Christ previous to his resurrection, and was expelled from his see in consequence. He was at first confined in a monastery, then transported to an island, Princepo, and at last to his original convent at Amaseia. In 578, the emperor Tiberius restored him to his see, which he henceforth retained until his death in 585, at the age of 73. There is extant by him a letter addressed to pope Vigilius, on the occasion of his elevation in A. D. 553. It is printed in Greek and Latin among the Acta Synodi quintae, Concil. vol. v. p. 425, &c. He also wrote some other treatises, which, however, are lost. (Evagr. iv. 38; Gregor. Moral. xiv. 29)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Dec 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
TRAPEZOUS (Ancient city) TURKEY
Anthimus (Anthimos), bishop of Trapezus in Pontus, was made patriarch of Constantinople by the influence of the empress Theodora (A. D. 535), and about the same time was drawn over to the Eutychian heresy by Severus. Soon after his election to the patriarchate, Agapetus, the bishop of Rome, came to Constantinople, and obtained from the emperor Justinian a sentence of deposition against Anthimus, which was confirmed by a synod held at Constantinople under Mennas, the successor of Anthimus (A. D. 536; Novell. 42; Mansi, Nova Collect. Concil. viii.; Labbe, v). Some fragments of the debate between Anthimus and Agapetus in the presence of Justinian are preserved in the Acts of the Councils.
d. 319, feastday: April 26
GANGRA (Ancient city) PAFLAGONIA
d.c. 325, feastday: November 14
NEOKESARIA (Ancient city) TURKEY
d.c. 269, feastday: October 18
Styled Thaumaturgus, from his miracles, was born at Neocaesarea in Cappadocia, of heathen parents. He was converted to Christianity by Origen about A.D. 234, and subsequently became the bishop of his native town. He died about the year 265. His celebrated Ekthesis, or confession of faith, is a summary of the theology of Origen. It is said to have been divined by him through a revelation from the Virgin Mary and the Apostle John. Other treatises of doubtful authenticity are attributed to him. His works are printed in vol. x. of the Patristic collection of the Abbe Migne.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Gregorius Thaumaturgus or Theodorus, St., received the surname of Thaumaturgus
from his miracles. He was a native of Neocaesareia in Cappadocia, and the son
of heathen parents. He pursued his studies, chiefly in Roman law, at Alexandria,
Athens, Berytus, and unally at Caesareia in Palestine, where lie became the pupil
and the convert of Origen, about A. D. 234. At the end of five years, during which
Origen instructed him in logic, physics, mathematics, ethics, and the whole circle
of philosophy, as well as in the Christian faith and biblical science, Gregory
returned to his native place, where he soon received a letter from Origen, persuading
him to become a minister of the church. Gregory, however, withdrew into the wilderness,
whither he was followed by Phaedinms, bishop of Amaseia, who wished to ordain
him to the bishopric of Neocaesareia. Gregory for a long time succeeded in evading
the search of Phaedimus, who at last, in Gregory's absence, performed the ceremony
of his ordination, just as if he had been present. Upon this Gregory came from
his hiding-place, and undertook the office, in the discharge of which he was so
successful, that whereas, when he became bishop, there were only seventeen Christians
in the city, at his death there were only seventeen persons who were not Christians,
notwithstanding the two calamities of the Decian persecution, about A. D. 250,
and the invasion of the northern barbarians, about A. D. 260, from which the church
of Neocaesareia suffered severely during his bishopric. In the Decian persecution
he lied into the wilderness, not, as it really appears, from fear, but to preserve
his life for the sake of his flock. He was a warm champion of orthodoxy, and sat
in the council which was held at Antioch in A. D. 265, to inquire into the heresies
of Paul of Samosata. He died not long afterwards. The very probable emendation
of Kuster to Suidas, substituting the name of Aurelian for that of Julian, would
bring down his life to A. D. 270.
This is not the place to inquire into the miracles which are said
to have been performed by Gregory at every step of his life. One example of them
is sufficient. On his journey from the wilderness to his see he spent a night
in a heathen temple. The mere presence of the holy man exorcised the demons, so
that, when the Pagan priest came in the morning to perform the usual service,
he could obtain no sign of the presence of his divinities. Enraged at Gregory,
he threatened to take him before the magistrates; but soon, seeing the calmness
of the saint, his anger was turned to admiration and faith, and he besought Gregory,
as a further proof of his power, to cause the demons to return. The wonder-worker
consented, and laid upon the altar a piece of paper, on which he had written,
"Gregory to Satan:--Enter." The accustomed rites were performed, and
the presence of the demons was manifested. The result was the conversion of the
Pagan priest, who became a deacon of Neocaesareia, and the most faithful follower
of the bishop. The following are the genuine works of Gregory Thaumaturgus :--1.
Panegyricus ad Origeneml, a discourse delivered when he was about to quit the
school of Origen. 2. Metaphrasis in Ecclesiasten. 3. Expositio Fidei, a creed
of the doctrine of the Trinity. 4. Epistola canonica, de iis, qui in Barbarorum
Incursione idolothyta comederant, an epistle in which he describes the penances
to be required of those converts who had relapsed into heathenism through the
fear of death, and who desired to be restored to the church. 4. Other Letters.
The other works ascribed to him are either spurious or doubtful.
The following are the editions of Gregory's works:--1. That of Gerardus
Vossius, Greek and Latin, Lips. 1604, 4to. 2. The Paris edition, in Greek and
Latin, which also contains the works of Macarius and Basil of Seleuceia, 1622,
fol. 3. In Gallandii Biblioth. Patrum, Paris, 1788, folio. There are several editions
of his separate works. (Gregorius Nyssen. Vit. S. Greg. Thaum.; Suid. s. v.; the
ancient ecclesiastical historians; Lardner's Credibility; Cave, Hist. Lit. sub.
ann. 254; Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. vii. p. 249; Schrockh, Christliche Kirchengeschichte,
vol. iv.; Hoffmann, Lex. Bibl. Script. Graec.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Nov 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
d.c. 340, feastday: January 14
PAFLAGONIA (Ancient country) TURKEY
d.c. 838, feastday: October 6
d.c. 998, feastday: November 26
d.c. 295, feastday: December 4 (Catholic). Bishop of Pontus, modern Turkey, and a friend of Eusebius. His name supposedly derives from MelAtticum, "Attic Honey," denoting eloquence in preaching. Meletius endured many trials during the persecutions of his era.
GAZIURA (Ancient city) TURKEY
Evagrius of Pontus, an eminent ascetic and ecclesiastical writer. The place of his birth was probably
Ibora, a small town in Pontus, on the shore of the Euxine near the mouth of the
Halys; but the expressions of Nicephorus Callisti would rather imply that he was
of the race of the Iberians, who inhabited the modern Georgia, on the southern
side of the Caucasus. Palladius, his disciple, says he was of Pontus, of the city
(or rather a city) of the Iberians (poleois Iberon, or as one MS., according to
Tillemont, has it, Iboron), which is ambiguous. Jerome calls him "Hyperborita,"
an expression which Martianay, the Benedictine editor of Jerome's works, alters
to "Iberita," and which has given occasion to other conjectural emendations. (Cotelerius,
Eccles. Graec. Monumenta, vol. iii. p. 543.) His father was a presbyter, or perhaps
a chorepiscopus (Heraclides, apud Tillemont). He was placed in early life under
the instruction of Gregory Nazianzen. There is extant a letter of Gregory to an
Evagrius, to whom he expresses his pleasure at the growing reputation of one whom
he terms "our son", and of whom he had been the instructor both in literature
and religion. If, as is conjectured, this letter refers to our Evagrius, his father
and he were of the same name. Gregory also in his will leaves a legacy, with strong
expressions of regard, to Evagrius the deacon; but it is not certain that this
is our Evagrius. Evagrius was appointed reader by the great Basil, and was ordained
deacon either by Gregory Nyssen or Gregory Nazianzen. According to Socrates, he
was ordained at Constantinople by Gregory Nazianzen; and Sozomen says, that when
Gregory occupied the see of Constantinople, he made Evagrius his archdeacon. If
these statements are received, the removal of Evagrius to Constantinople must
be placed during or before the short time (A. D. 379 to 381) of Gregory's episcopate
at Constantinople. But according to Palladius (whose personal connexion with Evagrius
would make his testimony preferable, if the text of his Lausiac History was in
a more satisfactory state), Evagrius was ordained deacon by Gregory Nyssen, and
taken by him to the first council of Constantinople (the second general council),
and left by him in that city, under the patronage of Nectarius, who succeeded
Gregory Nazianzen. The age and intellectual character of Evagrius disposed him
to polemical discussion; and "he obtained high reputation in controversy", says
Palladius, "in the great city, exulting with the ardour of youth in opposing every
form of heresy". His popularity was probably increased by the beauty of his person,
which he set off by great attention to his dress. The handsome deacon won and
returned the affection of a married lady of rank; but Evagrius, though vain, was
not profligate, and struggled hard against the sinful passion. It is doubtful,
however, if he would have broken away from the snare, but for an extraordinary
dream; in which he dreamed that he took a solemn oath to leave Constantinople.
Deeming himself bound by his oath, he at once left the city; and by this step,
according to Sozomen, preserved not only his virtue, but his life, which was in
imminent danger from the jealousy of the lady's husband. His first sojourn after
leaving Constantinople, was at Jerusalem. Here, recovering from the alarm into
which his dream had thrown him, lie gave way again to vanity and the love of dress;
but a long and severe illness, and the exhortation of Melania Romana, a lady who
had devoted herself to a religious life, and had become very eminent, induced
him to renounce the world, and give himself up to an ascetic life. He received
the monastic garb from the hands of Melania, and departed for Egypt, the cradle
of monasticism, where he spent the remainder of his life. Some copies of Palladius
are thought to speak of a visit made by him to Constantinople, in A. D. 394; but
the passage is obscure, and Tillemont and the Greek text of Palladius, in the
Bibliotheca Patrum, refer the incident to Ammonius. Socrates states that he accompanied
Gregory Nazianzen into Egypt; but there is no reason to think that Gregory visited
Egypt at that time. Evagrius's removal into Egypt was probably late in A. D. 382,
or in 383. The remainder of his life was spent on the hills of Nitria, in one
of the hermitages or monasteries of Scetis or Scitis, or in the desert "of the
Cells", to which, after a time, he withdrew. He was acquainted with several of
the more eminent solitaries of the country, the two Macarii, Ammonius, and others,
whose reputation for austerity of life, sanctity and miracles (especially healing
the sick and casting out daemons) he emulated. He learned here, says Socrates,
to be a philosopher in action, as he had before learned to be one in words. He
had many disciples in the monastic life, of whom Palladius was one. His approval
of the answer which one of the solitaries gave to the person who informed him
of the death of his father: "Cease to blaspheme; for my Father (meaning God) is
immortal", shews that Jerome's sarcastic remark, that he recommended an apathy
which would shew that a man was "either a stone or God", was not undeserved. Theophilus,
patriarch of Alexandria, would have ordained him a bishop; but he fled front him
to avoid an elevation which he did not covet. Palladius has recorded many singular
instances of his temptations and austerities; and, besides a separate memoir of
him, has mentioned him in his notices of several other leading monks. Evagrius
died apparently about A. D. 399, at the age of fifty-four.
There is considerable difficulty in ascertaining what were the writings
of Evagrius. Some are known to us only from the notice of them in ancient writers,
others are extant only in a Latin version, and of others we have only disjointed
fragments. As nearly as we can ascertain, he is the author of the following works:
1. Monachos (perhaps we should read Monachikos) e peri Praktikes. Fragments of
this work, but apparently much interpolated, are given in the Monumenta Eccles.
Graec. of Cotelerius, and in the edition of the Dialogus Vita St. Joannis Chrysostomi,
erroneously ascribed to Palladius, published by Emmer. Bigotius, Paris, 1680.
Possibly the whole work is extant in these fragments (which are all given in the
Bibliotheca Patrum of Gallandius); although a quotation given by Socrates (Hist.
Eccles. iii. 7) as from this work (but which Cotelerius considers was probably
taken from the nextmentioned work) is not included in it. An introductory address
to Anatolius, given by Cotelerius, was evidently designed as a preface both to
this work and the next. A Latin translation of the Monachus was revised by Gennadius,
who lived toward the close of the fifth century.
2. Gnostikos e poos ton kataxiothenta (or peri tou kataxiothentos) gnaseos, in
fifty chapters, and Hexakosia Prognostika Problemata. These two pieces, which
are by ancient and modern writers noticed as distinct works, are by the writer
himself, in the address to Anatolius just mentioned, regarded as one work, in
six hundred and fifty chapters. Perhaps the complete work constituted the Hiera,
one of the three works of Evagrius mentioned by Palladius. The fifty chapters
of the Gnostikos were first translated into Latin by Gennadius. It is possible
that the "paucas sententiolas valde obscuras", also translated by Gennadius, were
a fragment of the Problemata: Fabricius thinks that the treatise entitled Capita
Gnostica published in Greek and Latin by Suaresius, in his edition of the works
of St. Nilus, is the Gnostikos of Evagrius.
3. Antirretikos (or Antirretika) apo ton theion lraphon, pros tous peirazontas
daimonas. This work was translated by Gennadius. It was divided into eight sections
corresponding to the eight evil thoughts. Fabricius and Gallandius consider that
the fragment given by Bigotius (as already noticed) is a portion or compendium
of this work, the scriptural passages being omitted. But although that fragment,
a Latin version of which, with some additional sentences not found in the Greek,
appears in the Biblioth. Patrum treats of the eight evil thoughts, it belongs,
we think, to the Monachos rather than the Antirretikos.
4. Stichera duo, two collections of sentences, possibly in verse, one addressed
to Coenobites or monks, the other to a virgin, or to women devoted to a life of
virginity. A Latin version of these appears in the Appendix to the Codex Regularum
of Holstenius, Rome, 1661, and reprinted in vol. i. of the Augsburg edition of
1759, and in the Biblioth. Patrium, Lyon, 1677. Jerome, who mentions the two parts
of these Stichera, appears to refer to a third part addressed "to her whose name
of blackness attests the darkness of her perfidy", i. e. to Melania Romana; but
this work, if Jerome is correct in his mention of it, is now lost. Gennadius mentions
the two parts, not the third: and it is possible that, as Cave supposes, these,
not the Gnostikos, may constitute the Hiera of Palladius.
5. Ton kata Monachon pragmaton ta aitia, extant in Cotelerius, Eccles. Graec.
Mon. vol. iii., and Gallandius, Bibl. Patrum, vol. vii., are noticed in the Vitae
Patrum of Rosweid, and are perhaps referred to by Jerome, who says that Evagrius
wrote a book and sentences Peri Apatheias; in which words he may describe the
Monachos and this work Ton kata Monachon, both which are contained in one MS.
used by Cotelerius.
6. A fragment Eis to PIPI, or the tetragrammaton and other names of God used in
the Hebrew Scriptures, published by Cotelerius and Gallandius (ll. cc.)
7. Kephalaia lg kat akolouthian.
8. Pneumatikai gnomai kata alphabeton.
9. Heterai guomai. These three pieces are published by Gallandisus as the works
of Evagrius, whose claim to the authorship of them he vindicates. They have been
commonly confounded with the works of St. Nilus.
10. 11. The life of the monk Pachrom ar Pahromius; and A Sermon on the Trinity,
both published by Suaresius among the works of St. Nilus, but assigned by him,
on the authority of his MS., to Evagrius. Gallandius positively ascribes the sermon
to Basil of Caesareia.
12. Hupomnemata eis Paroimias tou Solomontos, mentioned by Suidas (s. v. Euagrios).
Some understand Suidas to mean not "Notes on the Proverbs", but a "work on the
model of the Proverbs of Solomon", and suppose that the Stichera are referred
to. Fabricius, however, is inclined to regard it as a commentary.
13. Peri Logismon, and
14. Apophthegmata peri ton megalon geronton both mentioned by Cotelerius (Eccles.
Graec. Mon. vol. iii. pp. 547, 552) as extant in MS.
15. Trithemius ascribes to Evagrius "a work on the life of the Holy Fathers" but
he either refers to one of his works on "the monastic life"΄, or has been misled
by passages in Gennadius and Jerome. It is doubtful, however, whether these and
several others of his writings extant in MS. and variously entitled, are distinct
works, or simply compilations or extracts from some of the above. The genuineness
of several of the above works must be regarded as doubtful. There are many citations
from Evagrius in different writers, in the Scholia to the works of others, and
in the Catenae on different books of Scripture. Jerome attests that his works
were generally read in the East in their original Greek, and in the West in a
Latin version made "by his disciple Rufinus".
Jerome appears to have been the first to raise the cry of heresy against Evagrius.
The editors of the Bibliotheca Patrum (except Gallandius) prefix to the portions
of his works which they publish a prefatory caveat. He is charged with perpetuating
the errors of Origen, and anticipating those of Pelagius. Tillemont vindicates
him from these charges. Some of his opinions, as coincident with those of Origen,
were condemned, according to Nicephorus Callisti, at the fifth general (second
Constantinopolitan) council, A. D. 553.
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Dec 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
