which, by reason alone, without alleging the divine scriptures, he shewed that they did not think rightly of the Deity. And it was said, that upon occasion of this book, Julian wrote a letter to some Christian bishops to this purpose: I have read, understood, and condemned." To which he received this answer, You have read, but you did not understand; if you had understood, you would not have condemned.' Some ascribe this work to Basil of Cappadocia: but however that be, says Sozomen, the writer deserves to be admired both for his courage and learning.

Whether this be the same as the work against Porphyry, or different from it, is not clear. Fabricius thinks it to be a different work, and written before the other. He imagines, that Apollinarius, provoked at Julian's remark, was induced after this short performance to write the large work against Porphyry.

21. Beside all these, Apollinarius wrote divers books against those called heretics. Vincent of Lerins supposeth him to have written against many heresies; who at the same time mentions and commends his noble work against Porphyry. Epiphanius mentions Apollinarius together with others who had written against the Manichees. Philostorgius says he wrote against Eunomius. By Theophilus bishop of Alexandria, who flourished about the year 385, he is said to have written against the Arians, Eunomians, and other heretics.

III. There are some other works of Apollinarius spoken of by ancient writers, which I may take some notice of by and by. But I would first of all give an account of the wrong opinions which he is said to have advanced in the latter part of his life: this I could willingly have declined, if it had not been a necessary part of his history. Of these errors, accounts may be seen in many ancient, and modern writers, to whom I refer; some of which, especially the ancient, I shall quote.

1. Epiphanius, who speaks of Apollinarius with great respect, and says, that he had been long highly esteemed by Athanasius, and all the catholics in general, represents his opinion in this manner: that when the Son of God became incarnate, he took a human body, and animal or sensitive soul, but not mind, or an intelligent soul, and thereby denied him to have taken upon him perfect man. The doctrine concerning the thousand years to be spent on this earth by raised saints and martyrs, appeared to Epiphanius so absurd, that he could not believe it of him, though he had been assured of it by several.

2. Basil speaks as if Apollinarius had in some of his writings endeavoured to revive the Sabellian doctrine concerning the Deity. In another letter he mentions some obscure expres sions concerning the Trinity, which perhaps were not his; and are not, I think, delivered by

b

Basil, as certainly known to be his. His opinion concerning the person of Christ, or his incarnation, Basil says, had occasioned great disturbances. That letter is supposed to have been written in 377, or thereabout. The doctrine of Apollinarius concerning the Millennium, as represented by Basil in the same letter, is a very crude notion; and yet is agreeable to that which Epiphanius had been informed of; and is also much the same with what Jerom not seldom ascribes to our people, meaning catholics. I have put down below several of his passages, to be added to some others, transcribed formerly. Well might Basil and Jerom call it a Jewish doctrine, and they who held it Judaizers; if indeed they expected that good men should be raised up again to spend a thousand years in the land of Judea, and that the law of Moses should again be set up with circumcision, sacrifices at the temple in Jerusalem, and other usages of that

institution.

с

3. Gregory Nazianzen, in his letter to Nectarius of Constantinople, represents Apollinarius to teach in his writings, that Christ brought his body from heaven: this he argued from John iii. 13. 1 Cor. xv. 47. Next, that this man from heaven was not endowed with mind, but that the only begotten of the Father supplied the place of mind, being joined to an animal sensitive soul, and a body: and that he likewise taught, that God the Word, or the only begotten, suffered in his Deity. In another place' Gregory takes notice of Apollinarius's notion concerning the Millennium: but undoubtedly, the particulars just mentioned were the most offensive. However, Gregory does also charge him with teaching, that there are degrees in the Trinity.

h

4. Theodoret, in his Heretical Fables, says, that in some of his writings Apollinarius made no innovations in the doctrine of the Trinity, but appeared to agree with us, teaching one substance of the Deity, and three persons. But in some of his writings he speaks of degrees in the Trinity, saying, that the Spirit is great, the Son greater, the Father greatest of all. In other writings, he confounds the properties of the Divine Persons, and for that reason has been charged with Sabellianism. Moreover he says, that when God the Word took flesh, he took a body and soul, not a rational, but an irrational soul, which some call sensitive and animal: and the Divine nature supplied the place of a soul. In another place Theodoret expresseth himself after this manner: Arius and Eunomius said that Christ had a human body, and that the Divinity was in the place of a soul. Apollinarius said, that Christ had an animated [or living] body, but not a reasonable soul: for the mind was superfluous where God the Word was present. Again in his Ecclesiastical History also, Theodoret speaks distinctly of Apollinarius's several opinions, and there slightly mentions also his opinion concerning the divine promises, or the retributions to be hereafter given to good men.

i

k

5. Jerom sometimes speaks of Apollinarius's opinions concerning the incarnation, or his defective notion of the person of Christ, not allowing him to be perfect man; and the Millen

a

1 Είδα και τα περι σαρκώσεως τοσαυτην εποιησε τη αδελφοίητ την ταραχήν, ώσε ολίίοι λοιπον των εντετυχηκοίων τον αρχαίον της ευσέβειας διασώζεσι χαρακτηρα. κ. λ. ep. 263. al. 74. p. 407. A.

* Εσι δε αυτῳ και το περί αναςάσεως μυθικως συγκείμενα, μαλλον δε Ιεδαίκως. Εν οἷς φησι παλιν ήμας προς την νομικήν υπος ρέφειν λαρειαν· και παλιν ημας περιμηθησεσθαι, και σας βαδίζειν, και βρωμαίων απέχεσθαι, και θυσίας προσοίσειν Θεῷ. και προσκύνησιν εν Ιεροσολύμοις, επί τε ναs, και όλως από Χρισιανων Ιεδαίες γενήσεσθαι. ep. 263. p. 406. Ε.

Respondeant amatores tantum occidentis literæ, et in mille annos exquisitos cibos gulæ ac luxuriæ præparantes―qui post secundum in gloria Salvatoris adventum sperant nuptias, et parvulos centum annorum, et circumcisionis injuriam, et victimarum sanguinem, et perpetuum sabbatum. In Is. cap. lix. T. iii. P. i. p. 396.

Hæc illi et nostri Judaïzantes, qui mille annorum regnum in Judææ sibi finibus pollicentur, et auream Jerusalem, et victimarum sanguinem, et filios ac nepotes, et delicias incredibiles. In Joel. cap. iii. T. 3. P. ii. p. 1364. Vid. ibid. p. 1367.

Hæc omnia- -Judæi et Judaïzantes nostri, immo non nostri, qui Judaïzantes, sperant futura corporaliter utique et circumcisionem sibi, et conjugia in mille annorum imperio promittentes. In Zach. xiv. T. iii. p. 1803. d See Vol. i. p. 640.

* Ad Nectar. Or. 46. p. 722.

Ad Cledon. ep 2. al. Or. 52. p. 747. C.

8 Ad Cledon.

ep. 1. seu. Or. 51. p. 744. C. D.

* Αλλ' ὁμοιως ήμιν και την μιαν της θεοίητος εσίαν, και τας τρεις υποσάσεις εκήρυξεν εν ενίοις δε βαθμος αξιωμαίων ώρι σαῖο, ἑαυτον διανομέα της θείας χειροτονησας νομής. Αυτο γαρ εσιν εύρεμα, το μεία, μείζον, με ίσον-Εν ενιοίς τοινυν πάλιν έτος συγγραμμασι τας των υποςασεων συνεχεεν ιδιοτητας. Οθεν καὶ τὴν το Σαβελλιανισμό καληδοριαν εδεξαιο. Σαρκωθη και τε τον Θεόν εφησε λοίον, σώμα και ψυχήν ανειληφιίά, & την λοξικην, αλλά την αλοίον, ἣν φυσικήν ή δεν ζωτικήν τινες ονομα 8. H. F. I. iv. c. 8. p. 240.

1 Αρειος δε και Ευνομίος σωμα μεν αυτον ειληφέναι, την θεία Ίηία δε της ψυχης ενης ηκεναι την χρειαν· ὁ δε Απολλινάριος εμψυχον μεν έφησε είναι το σωτηρος σώμα, 8 μην την λοίικην εσχηκεναι ψυχήν περιτίος γαρ ην, φησι, ὁ νες, το Θεο λύνε wapovlos. Hær. Fab. I v. c. 11. p. 278. Conf. ad Flavian. 104. T. iii p. 975. D.

ep.

* Και έτερος δε μύθες και ληρες ταις θείαις επαγίελείαις συνε v. H. E. 1. v. c. 3. p. 200. D.

-dimidiatam Christi introduxit economiau. Ad Pamm. ep. 41. al. 65. T. iv. p. 342.

"Hic [Papias] dicitur, mille annorum Judaïcam edidisse deulspwov, quem secuti sunt Irenæus, et Apollinarius, etcæteri, qui post resurrectionem aiunt in carne cum sanctis Dominum regnaturum. De Papiâ cap. 18. V. I. Vid. et Proœm. in Is. Comm. 1. xviii. T. 3. p. 478. et in Ezech. c. 36. p. 952. m.

narian doctrine. He also speaks of an opinion of his concerning the soul: which, however, was not reckoned a part of his heresy.

b

с

6. I put below what Rufinus, and Vincent of Lerins say of Apollinarius's doctrine concerning the incarnation.

d

e

7. I transcribe below at length Augustine's article of the Apollinarists. He speaks of them in several other places; from one of which we perceive, that they argued in favour of their doctrine concerning the incarnation from John i. 14. I transcribe in the margin' a passage or two more, to be observed by my readers at leisure. And I refer also to other places of Augustine, where he treats somewhat largely of the opinions of these people.

g

S. Socrates entirely agrees with Rufinus, whom probably he copied, in the account of their doctrine concerning the incarnation: but he adds, the Apollinarians said, in this only did they differ from the catholics, for they believed a consubstantial Trinity. Vincent also, transcribed not long ago, has somewhat to the like purpose. And it must be owned to be in favour of Apollinarius in this respect, that Philostorgius, a learned Arian, reckons Apollinarius, together with Basil and Gregory Nazianzen, one of the best defenders of the homoüsian doctrine. And that he and his followers still professed to retain the Nicene faith, may be inferred from Athanasius's arguments with them. And Leontius of Byzantium, who was no friend to Apollinarius, allows him to be orthodox upon the Trinity; and imputes to him only an erroneous doctrine concerning the incarnation: for though Gregory and some others charge him with advancing degrees in the Trinity, he did not use the word created of the Son or the Spirit. Concerning this point, may be seen a note of the Benedictine editor's " of St. Ambrose's works.

n

9. S. Basnage allows the truth of what is generally said of Apollinarius, that he supposed the Word to supply in the man Jesus the place of a rational soul: and as what he says may illustrate

с

c Apollinaris vero in unitatem quidem Trinitatis quasi consentire se jactat, et hoc ipsum plenâ fidei sanctitate. Sed in Domini incarnatione apertâ professione blasphemat. Dicit enim, in ipsâ Salvatoris nostri carne aut animam humanam penitus non fuisse, aut certe talem fuisse, cui mens et ratio non esset. Sed et ipsam Domini carnem non de sanctæ virginis Mariæ carne susceptam, sed de cœlo in virginem descendisse dicebat: eamque nutabundus semper et dubius modo coæternam Deo Verbo, modo de Verbi Divinitate factam prædicabat. Vincent. Lirin. Comm. cap. 17.

d Apollinaristas Apollinaris instituit, qui de animâ Christi a Catholicis dissenserunt, dicentes, sicut Ariani, Deum Christum 'carnem sine animâ suscepisse. In quâ quæstione testimoniis evangelicis victi, mentem, quæ rationalis est anima hominis, defuisse animæ Christi, sed pro hac ipsum Verbum in eo fuisse dixerunt. De ipsâ vero ejus carne sic a rectâ fide dissensisse perhibenter, ut dicerent, carnem illam et Verbum unius ejusdemque substantiæ; contentiosissime asseverantes, Verbum carnem factum, hoc est, Verbi aliquid in carnem fuisse conversum atque mutatum, non autem carnem de Mariæ carne fuisse susceptam. De Hær. cap. 55. T. viii.

cquemadmodum argumentantur Apollinaristæ, vel quicumque sunt alii, adversus animam Domini: quam propterea negant, quia scriptum legunt, "Verbum caro factum est. Si enim et anima, inquiunt, ibi est, debuit dici: Verbum hono factum est. De Animâ et ejus Origine. 1. i. c. 18. p. 31. T. x.

Nec ita hominem, [dicimus Christum] ut aliquid minus habeat quod ad humanam certum est pertinere naturam, sive animam, sive in ipsâ animâ mentem rationalem, sive carnem, non de feminâ samtam, sed factam de Verbo in carnem con

verso atque mutato. Quæ omnia tria falsa et vana, hæreticorum Apollinaristarum tres partes varias diversasque fecerunt. De Dono Perseverantiæ. cap. 24. T. x. P. i.

Fuerunt enim quidam hæretici, et pulsi sunt ab ecclesià, qui putarent, non habere mentem rationalem corpus Christi, sed quasi animam belluinam. In Joan. Evang. Tr. 23. n. 6. T. iii. Ps. 2. Vid. ib. Tr. 47. n. 9.

h

* Vid. Enarr. in Ps. 29, n. 2. in Ps. 85. n. 4. T. iv. Περι τελε μονα δη λείεσι διαφέρεσθαι, οἱ νυν εξ εκείνων την προσωνύμιαν εχοντες την γαρ τριαδα ὁμουσιον είναι φασι. Socr. 1. ii. c. 46. p. 161. B.

i Vid. Suid. V. Απολλινάριος.

* Ep. ad Epictet. p. 903. E. p. 904. A. B. et alibi.

Γ Ὁ δὲ Απολλινάριος περί μεν την θεολόΓιαν ο φαινεται αμαρ λαγων, πλην διελεύχεσι και τελον οἱ ΓρηΓοριοι περί ταυτην αμαρ Πανονία Κλισμα μεν γαρ, φασιν, 8 λεΓει· ὑποβασιν δε μικραν λεξει το Υἱε και το Πνεύμαίος, προς τον Πατέρα. Περί δε την οικονομίαν φανερως διεξαλλείο. Ελεξε yag, το σώμα, ὁ ἐνεδύσατο ὁ Θεός Λοδος, ψυχην μεν έχειν, vev δε εδαμως· αλλ' ώσπης αλο Τον ψυχην, είως ελεξεν εχειν. De Sectis. Act. iv. Ap. B. PP. Morell. T. xi. p. 507. et Latine ap. B. PP. Ludg. T. ix. p. 666.

In Ad Ambr. de Incarnat. Domini Sacram. c. 2.T. ii. p. 705. n Id etiam luculentissime demonstrat ipse Apollinaris, epistolâ episcopis Diocæsarea scriptâ, quam ab oblivione Leonties vindicavit. Confitemur, non ad hominem sanctum venisse Verbum Dei, quod erat in Prophetis, sed ipsum Verbum carnem factum esse, non assumptâ mente humanâ, mente mutabili, quæ turpibus cogitationibus captiva ducitur, sed divinâ mente immutabili et cœlesti. Leont. adv. Fraudes Apollinarist. ap. Bib. PP. Lugdun. T. ix. p. 712. Mentem itaque, non animam, a Christo abjudicabat. -Ex fontibus porro Platonis videtur errorem deduxisse suum. Quod et asserit Nemesius de Nat. Hom. cap. i. Quidam, e quibus est Plotinus, aliud esse animam, et aliud mentem statuentes, ex tribus constare volunt hominem, e corpore, animâ, et mente. Hos secutus est Apollinaris Laodicea episcopus. His enima jactis fundamentis sententiæ suæ, reliqua dogmati suo conscntanea superstruxit. S. Basn. Ann. 364. n. xii. p. 6.

the point, I have transcribed him somewhat largely in the margin. But he thinks, that the opinions ascribed to Apollinarius by Gregory Nazianzen, in the letter to Nectarius before quoted, written about the year 385, not to have been held by him; as that our Saviour brought his body from heaven, and that his divinity suffered. Though Gregory quotes as a voucher, a work of Apollinarius himself; he says, it could not be his, but rather a work of one of his disciples. He moreover argues, that Theodoret in his Heretical Fables does not ascribe the opinion of the descent of Christ's body from heaven to Apollinarius, but to some of his followers.

b

10. To which I would answer, that there appears not any good reason to deny the genuineness of the book alleged by Gregory Nazianzen. To do so is an arbitrary proceeding: for what account can be given of Gregory's mistaking the author? Secondly, Theodoret in his work of Heretical Fables does, indeed, make two chapters, one of Apollinarius, another of the Polemians, and others his disciples. And in this last chapter he says, that some of these were of opinion, that the Lord's body came down from heaven. Nevertheless, in his Ecclesiastical History, Theodoret speaking of Apollinarius says: Sometimes he said, that our Lord took flesh, or his body, of the holy virgin: at other times, that his flesh came down from heaven, together with God the Word. Sometimes he said, that the Word was made flesh, without taking any thing from us. Which diversity of sentiments is hinted also in the just cited chapter of the Heretical Fables. Yea, he there expressly says, that those of his followers, who said, that the Lord's body came down from heaven, supported themselves by his writings. Thirdly, all the sentiments ascribed to Apollinarius by Gregory, in his letter to Nectarius, appear in other authors of the same time, who wrote against him. That the body of Christ came down from heaven; that his flesh and Divinity were homoüsian; that his Deity suffered; are all opinions of Apollinarius, or his disciples, taken notice of by Athanasius in his books against the Apollinarists in 372, or thereabout. The same things are observable in the letter of Athanasius to Epictetus bishop of Corinth, written about the year 371, particularly those offensive notions, that the body of Jesus was consubstantial and coëternal with his Deity. The like things are taken notice of by Epiphanius * in his article concerning them, written in 377. As Apollinarius was then living, it seems to me to make little difference, whether they were his notions, or his disciples. I might refer likewise to Gregory Nyssen's long work against them published by Zacagni, where all the same sentiments are disputed: as the mortality of the Deity in Christ, the pre-existence of his body, and its being brought down from heaven, as well as the Word's supplying the place of 'a rational soul in Christ. And Gregory And Gregory Nyssen supposeth all along that he argued with Apollinarius himself, as he had expressed his notions in his own work. Indeed some of these things are very strange; which may make us doubt, whether Apollinarius be not misrepresented, and whether some of the opinions ascribed to him are not consequences which he did not own: but I apprehend, that they are as much his, as his disciples.

m

11. The principal doctrine, by which Apollinarius and his followers were distinguished, was, that Christ had no rational soul, and that the Word supplied the office of it. With respect to that opinion, Epiphanius gave them the denomination of Dimcritæ, and so entitled his article

• Librum tamen Apollinarista potius, quam Apollinaris ipsius esse existimamus- Librum ea impia continentein subditum esse existimamus. Ib. p. 7. a.

• Και άλλοι δε τινες εκ της Απολλινάριο συναίωδης, εκ των ερανών εφασαν κατεληλυθέναι το κύριο σώμα. Διάφορα δε · εύκολες εν τοις εκεινε συγγραμμασι δοίματα, οι μεν τείοις, οἱ δε εκείνοις ηρεσθησαν. H. FI iv. cap. 9.

• Ποτε μεν γαρ συνωμολόγει και αυτος εκ της αγιας παρθενε προσειληφθήναι την σάρκας πολε δε ερανόθεν ταυτην τῷ Θεω Λόγω συγκατεληλυθέναι φησιν· αλλοτε δε αυτον γελενησθαι σαρκα, day & nur λypola. H. E. 1. v. c. 3. p. 200. D.

d See note.b

• Πως ύμεις παλιν λείετε εξ εραν το σώμα; Athanas. contr. Apollinarist. I. i. n. 7. T. i. p. 927. B.

* Και γαρ και όμοέσιον την σάρκα της Θεότητος λεξεις επιχει pele. Ib. p. 929. B. Vid. et E.

8 Μαλαίοι εν οἱ τη θεότητι αυτό πάθος προσαίονίες. 1. ii. p. 955. C.

Η Ποιος αδης ηρευταῖο, ὁμουσιον είπειν το εκ Μαρίας σώμα TYS TB 2018 Decllos; Ad Epict. p. 902. B.

Ποθεν ύμιν επήλθεν ειπείν, ω ετοι, όμουσιον είναι το σώμα της

τα λοίε Θεοίητος; Απο γαρ τείς καλον εςιν αρξασθαι. Ib.
P. 903. E.
ώςε ειπειν μη νεωτερον είναι το σωμα της το Θε8 Λοι
Θεότητος, αλλα συναΐδιον αυτῳ διαπαντος γενενησθαι, επειδε εκ
της εσίας της σοφίας συνεση. p. 902. D.
k Vid. H. 77. n. ii. p. 997, 998.

1 Απας γαρ αυτῳ της λογογραφίας ο σκοπος προς τεῖο βλέπει, το θήκην το μονοδενες Θε8 την θεοίητα. Gr. Nyss. adv. Apoll. ap. Zacagn. Monum. Vet. p. 132. in.

Ει γαρ αυτή τεθνηκεν το μονοδενος θεολης, συναπεθανε ταύτη πανίως και ἡ ζωη. κ. λ. Ibid. infr. Vid. et p. 133, 134. Ib. p. 150, 151, et alibi. n Ib..p. 205.

• Ib. p. 220. &c. et alibi.

P Dimoritarum porro nomine Apollinaristas insectatur Epiphanius, Hær. 77. Cujus appellationis causam aperit Gregorius Nazianz, cum ait Orat. 46. p. 722. corpus et animam esse in Christo το τριτημόριον, tertiam partem. Apollinaristæ quippe aiebant, in Christo partem unam hominis, scilicet, seu mentem, a, Verbo suppleri, solumque Verbum junctum corpori et animæ, (nempe sensitivæ, ut dictitabant illi] totum constituere Christum. Quamobrem, cum ex Catholicorum

concerning them: denoting persons who maimed the person of Christ, and made him consist of two parts only, animated flesh, and Divinity: whereas the catholics supposed him to have an human soul, or mind, and a human body, with the Word.

a

IV. I now proceed to observe some of his works, which have not yet been taken notice of. 1. Basil, in a letter written in 376, mentions a book concerning the Holy Spirit, which he had not seen. Whether this book regarded any of his peculiar notions, I cannot certainly say. Here Basil says, he had heard, that Apollinarius was become the most voluminous of writers: but he had seen few of his works. In another letter, written in 377, he says, that Apollinarius, being endowed with a great facility of writing, had filled the whole world with his books, neglecting the advice of Solomon in Ecc. xii. 12.

C

b

2. When Basil gives an account of Apollinarius's doctrine concerning the incarnation, he may be supposed to refer to some writing of his. When Gregory Nazianzen speaks of the same matter, he appears to have had a volume of Apollinarius before him, though he does not mention the title. Gregory Nyssen expressly names the book confuted by him.

3. When Basil gives an account of Apollinarius' notion concerning the Millennium, he seems also to refer to some book: whether he means the work against Dionysius bishop of Alexandria, mentioned by Jerom, I cannot say.

g

h

4. Apollinarius wrote verse easily, and agreeably: and accordingly composed short psalms and hymns, fitted for festivals, and for all seasons, and upon a great variety of subjects, all tending to the praise and glory of God. The men sung them at their work, and at their entertainments; the women sung them at their spindle: and some were sung by his followers in their religious assemblies, in the room of those which were generally used. So says Sozomen in his Ecclesiastical History. Gregory Nazianzen, referring to these poems, speaks, as if they had a new Psalter, but dissonant from that of David; and as if his writings were made by his followers a third Testament, or a part of sacred scripture: in which he may be supposed to aggravate more than a little.

k

i

5. There is a collection of small poems, fifty-three in number, called Homerici Centones de Christo. The subjects are taken out of the Old and New Testament, chiefly the latter: They are such as these, our Saviour's conception and birth, the presents brought by the Magi, the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem, John the Baptist, the wedding at Cana, the woman of Samaria, the raising of Lazarus from the dead, and several other of our Saviour's miracles, our Lord's crucifixion, burial, resurrection, and ascension. But these are not generally ascribed to Apollinarius.

6. I hope I have now given a sufficient account of the works and opinions of Apollinarius; not thinking it needful to enter farther into the history of his followers, or the sentences of condemnation pronounced by councils upon him, or them. They who desire a more particular account of those things may consult the writings of the learned moderns formerly referred to. V. It is almost needless to observe, that Apollinarius received all the scriptures of the Old and New Testament which we do, without adding to them any other, so far as we know. His firm belief of the Christian religion, appears in the books written in the defence of it, and in the

sententiâ tribus, constaret Christus, Verbo scilicet, mente humanâ, et corpore animato, qui unam ex illis demerent partem, mentem scilicet, a duabas aliis dipila audiebant. Nam duopov Græcis est duæ tertiæ partes, &c. Benedictin. in ep. ad Epictet. Admon. ap. Athan. p. 900.

* Ου μην περι το Πνεύμαίος τε άξια η αίτησας αυτον οιδα βιζ λιον, η αποσαλεν ὑποδεξάμενος. Αλλα πολυφωνο αίον μεν αυτον ακέω πανίων συγγραφεων γεΓενησθαι. κ. λ. Ep. 244. al. 82. T. iii. p. 378.

b Ep. 263, al. 74. p. 404.

8 Cui duobus voluminibus respondit Apollinarius, quem non solum suæ sectæ homines, sed et nostrorum in hac parte duntaxat plurima sequitur multitudo. Comm. in. Is. T. iii. p. 478. M.

h

παρα τας νενομισμένας ιερας ωδας, εμμεῖρα τινα μελύδρια ψαλλονίες, παρ' αυτε Απολλινάριο εύρημένα Άνδρες τε παρα τις ποιες και εν ερίοις, και γυναίκες παρα της ίσως τα αυτά μέλη εψαλλον. Σπεδης γαρ και ανέσεως, και ἑορ Ίων, και των άλλων, προς τον έκαςο καιρον ειδύλλια αυτῳ πεπο νητο, πανία εις ευλοΓίαν Θε8 τεινονία. Soz. 1. vi. c. 25. p. 671. B. C.

1 Ει δε οἱ μακροι λοῖοι, και νεα ψαλτηρια, και αντίφωνα τω Δαβίδ, και ἡ των μερων χαρις, ἡ τρίτη διαθήκη νομιζεται και ἡμεῖς ψαλμολοίησομεν, και πολλά γράψομεν, και μετρησομενο Greg. Νaz. ad Cledon. ep. 1. p. 745. Β. C.

* Ap. Bib. PP. Morell. T. xiv. p. 95–152.
1 See p. 458. note ".