Porphyry, Julian, or Hierokles? the anonymous Hellene in Makarios Magnes' apokritikos

Journal of Theological Studies

Volumn 53, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 466-502

  Digeser, Elizabeth Depalma ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 66449114652     PISSN: 00225185     EISSN: 14774607     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jts/53.2.466     Document Type: Article

References (118)

1. G. Schalkhausser, 'Zu den Schriften des Makarios Magnes', Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 31.4 (1907), pp. 1-218 at 5-81;
2. T. W. Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes, A Neglected Apologist', JTS, NS, 8 (1007), pp. 401-23 and pp. 546-71 at 401;
3. and P. Frassinetti, 'Sull' autore delle questioni pagane conservate nell' Apokritico di Macario di Magnesia', Nuovo Didaskaleion 3 (1949), pp. 41-56 at 41.
4. A. von Harnack, 'Kritik des Neuen Testaments von einem griechischen Philosophen des 3. Jahrhunderts', Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 37.3-4 (1911), pp. 1-144 at 96-107.
5. Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes';
6. L. Duchesne, De Macario Magnete et scriptis eius (Paris, 1877).
7. A. von Harnack, 'Porphyrias, 'Gegen die Christen.' 15 Bücher: Zeugnisse, Fragmente und Referate', Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (1916), Nr.1. The Apokritikos contributed 51 out of 97 fragments to Harnack's edition.
8. Those following Harnack include P. de Labriolle, 'Porphyre et le christianisme', Revue d'histoire et de philosophie 3 (1929), pp. 385-440;
9. P. Benoit, 'Un adversaire du christianisme au IIIième siècle: Porphyre', Revue Biblique 54 (1947), pp. 543-72;
10. R. Beutler, 'Porphyrios', in Paulys Real-Enzyclopädie 22 (1953), pp. 275-313;
11. J. M. Demarolle, 'Un aspect de la polémique païenne à la fin du IIIième siècle, le vocahulaire chrétien de Porphyre', Vigiliae Christianae 26 (1972), pp. 117-29;
12. R. M. Grant, 'The Stromateis of Origen', in J. Fontaine and C. Kannengiesser (eds.), Epektasis: Mélanges pairistiques offerts à Jean Daniélou (Paris, 1972), pp. 285-92;
13. W. den Boer, 'A Pagan Historian and his Enemies: Porphyry Against the Christians', Classical Philology 69 (1974), pp. 198-208;
14. J. Sirinelli, Eusèhe de Césarée. La préparation évangélique, SC 206 (Paris, 1974), p. 33;
15. H. O. Schröder, 'Celsus und Porphyrius als Christengegner', Die Welt als Geschichte 17 (1957), pp. 190-202;
16. G. Mercati, 'Per l'Apokritico di Macario Magnete', Studio e Testi 95 (1941), pp. 49-74;
17. F. Scheidweiler, 'Zu Porphyrios', Philologus 99 (1955), pp. 304-12;
18. M. V. Anastos, 'Porphyry's Attack on the Bible', in L. Wallach (ed.), The Classical Tradition (Ithaca, 1966), pp. 421-50;
19. and Robert Waelkens, L'Economie, thème, apologetique, et principe hermeneutique dans l'Apocritique de Macarios Magnes (Louvain, 1974), pp. 8-9, 30.
20. 'Porphyry Against the Christians: Date and Attribution of Fragments', JTS, NS, 24 (1973), pp. 424-42.
21. Cf. A. Meredith, 'Porphyry and Julian against the Christians', Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt 2.23.2 (1980), pp. 1119-49.
22. But see R. Goulet, 'Porphyre et Macarie de Magnésie', Studia Patristica 15 (1984), pp. 448-52;
23. C. Evangeliou, 'Porphyry's Criticism of Christianity and the Problem of Augustine's Platonism', Dionysius 13 (1989), pp. 51-70;
24. and R. J. Hoffmann, Against the Christians. The Extracts of Macarius Magnes (Amherst, NY, 1994), pp. 21-4, which follow Harnack.
25. Frassinetti, 'Sull' autore', pp. 41-56.
26. The Athens MS began in the middle of book 2, broke off at the end of book 4, and the extant books lacked their conclusions; Blondel, Macarii Magnetis, pp. vi, 3-4, 227;
27. Iconoclasts had circulated selections from it to support their position; the bishop, unfamiliar with it, procured an old illuminated copy to evaluate their claims. In he finds that the iconoclasts quoted Makarios out of context and cites 1.6, 4.20-21, 26-7.
28. Cf. Nikephoros' Antirrhetici libri in J. B. Pitra, Analecta sacra Spicilegio Solesmensi parata (Paris, 1876-83), 1:303;
29. Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes', p. 402, incl. n. 1;
30. and Paul Alexander, The Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople: Ecclesiastical Policy and Image Worship in the Byzantine Empire (New York, 1980), pp. 165-6.
31. K. K. Müller, 'Neue Mittheilungen über Janos Laskaris und die Mediceische Bibliothek', Centralhlatt für Bibliothekswesen 1 (1884), pp. 403-4 in Mercati, 'Per l' Apokritico', p. 49, n. 2.
32. T. W. Crafer, The Apocriticus of Macarius Magnes, idem, trans. (New York, 1919), p. 164f.;
33. Schalkhausser, 'Zu den Schriften', pp. 18-81, 109-13.
34. Schalkhausser, 'Zu den Schriften', p. 15.
35. Mercati, 'Per l'Apokritico', p. 52.
36. Mercati 'Per l' Apokritico', p. 62.
37. Although F. Corsaro, 'Una nuova interpretazione del titolo dell' apologia di Macario di Magnesia', Acta Philologica (1964), pp. 115-18 argues that the title should be 'The Only Diseourse against the Hellenes', he ignores the Vatican MS's title and Makarios' own penchant for as 'Only-begotten' (e.g., pp. 2.8; 3.14, 40).
38. - 3.pr.; 4-pr.; Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes', p. 411;
39. de la Torre, Adversus Magdehurgenses, pp. 144f. (in Harnack, 'Porphyrius', p. 52) confused Theosthenes with Makarios' opponent.
40. Cf. R. Lim, Public Disputation, Power and Social Order in Late Antiquity (Berkeley, 1994), pp. 84, incl. n. 59, 94,
41. Harnack, 'Kritik', p. 11;
42. Waelkens, L'Economie, pp. 14-16;
43. and F. Corsaro, 'L'Apokritico di Macario di Magnesia e le Sacre Scritture', Nuovo Didaskaleion 7 (1957), pp. 1-24 at 1-12.
44. Makarios also sometimes alters the Hellene's citations in answering him; Corsaro, 'Apokritico', pp. 12, 17-18.
45. Crafer, Apocriticus, p. 129.
46. See also Anastos, 'Porphyry's Attack', p. 444;
47. Schröder, 'Celsus und Porphyrius', p. 198;
48. and J. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig, 1907), p. 303.
49. T. W. Crafer, 'The Work of Porphyry against the Christians, and its Reconstruction', JTS, NS, 15 (1914), pp. 360-95 and 481-512 at 363;
50. idem, 'Macarius Magnes', pp. 419-20.
51. Although A. H. M. Jones dated the army purge to 297 (PLRE 1.955) (see also D. Woods, 'Two Notes on the Great Persecution', JTS, NS, 43 [1992], pp. 128-34 at 128-129), 299 is the more reasonable date.
52. Cf. J. Moreau, Lactance, De la mart des persécuteurs, SC 39 (Paris, 1954), p. 266;
53. T. D. Barnes, Constantine and Eusehius (Cambridge, MA, 1981), pp. 18-19;
54. P. Davies, 'The Origin and Purpose of the Persecution of A.D. 303', JTS, NS, 40 (1989), pp. 66-94 at 91-3;
55. and R. W. Burgess, 'The Date of the Persecution of Christians in the Army', JTS, NS, 47 (1996), pp. 157-8.
56. But note the text's continued use well after Eusehius' 306 publication of the HE (revised in the 320s); New Testament Apocrypha, W. Schneemeleher (ed.) and R. McL. Wilson (trans.) (Philadelphia, 1965), p. 664;
57. Hoffmann, Against the Christians, p. 74, n. 55.
58. For the date of the HE, see R. W. Burgess, 'The Dates and Editions of Eusehius' Chronici canones and Historia ecclesiastica', JTS, NS, 48 (1997), pp. 471-504.
59. Crater, Apocriticus, pp. xvii, 44, n. 1.
60. F. Corsaro, 'La reazione pagana nel iv secolo e l' "Apocritico" di Macario di Magnesia', Quaderni catanesi di studi classici e medievali 6 (1984), pp. 173-95 at 181-91 preferred 367 to 351 (300 years after 1 Thessalonians) because he thought that the Hellene's phrase 'many ruled the world' (see n. 47) required several emperors to be on the throne.
61. idem, 'Porfirio esegeta del profeta Daniele', Rendiconti dell' Istituto Lombardo 86 (1953), pp. 194-210 at 194.
62. For Eusebius, see Burgess, 'Dates and Editions', pp. 479-80;
63. for Porphyry, see B. Croke, 'Porphyry's anti-Christian Chronology', JTS, NS, 34 (1983), pp. 168-85; for Porphyry as one of the Hellene's sources see below.
64. Chr. fr.40=Eus. Chron. praef. ap. Hier.: Ex ethnicis vero impius ille Porphyrius in IV. operis sui libro, quod adversum nos casso Labore contexuit, post Moysen Semiramim fuisse adfirmat, quae aput Assyrios CL ante Inachum regnavit annis. itaque iuxta eum DCCC paene et L annis Troiano hello Moyses senior invenitur; Apok. 3.3. R. Goulet, 'Porphyre et la datation de Moïse', Revue de l'histoire des Religions 192 (1977), pp. 137-164 shows how the Hellene's claim accords with Porphyry's.
65. Crafer, 'Work of Porphyry', pp. 363-369.
66. Harnack, 'Porphyrius', p. 48.
67. Goulet, 'Porphyre et Macarie', pp. 450-52.
68. Geffcken, Zwei Apologeten, p. 302, n. 1.
69. Frassinctti, 'Sull' autore', p. 47.
70. A. Smith, 'Porphyrian Studies since 1913', Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt 2.36.2 (1987), pp. 717-73 at 721 incl. n. 18.
71. B. Croke, 'The Era of Porphyry's Anti-Christian Polemic', Journal of Religious History 13 (1984), pp. 1-14;
72. T. D. Barnes, 'Scholarship or Propaganda? Porphyry Against the Christians and Its Historical Setting', Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies (1994), pp. 53-65.
73. The Sea of Galilee is between Tyre (Porphyry's birthplace, cf. Porph. Plot. 7.51) and Caesarea, about 30 miles to the east. P. Benoit ('Un adversaire', p. 545 incl, n. 1) calculates that Batanaia was either in the mountains fifteen miles east of Caesarea (toward the Sea) or close to the Sea itself.
74. Harnack, 'Kritik', pp. 9, 141-4.
75. Smith, Porphyrii fragmenta.
76. Barnes, 'Date and Attribution', pp. 428-9.
77. Cf. also idem, 'La dottrina eucharistica di Macario di Magnesia', Convivium Domenicum (1959), pp. 69-86 at 69, 11, 1.
78. Frassinetti, 'Sull. autore', pp. 48-56.
79. Wilrner Cave Wright, The Works of the Emperor Julian (Cambridge, MA, 1990), p. 314.
80. Wright, Emperor Julian, p. 313.
81. C. J. Neumann, Iuliani imperatoris librorum contra Christianas quae supersunt (Leipzig, 1880), pp. 18-21. He agreed that the Hellene resembled Julian, but on closer inspection rejected their identity.
82. See Geffcken, Zwei Apologeten, p. 304
83. and Meredith, 'Porphyry and Julian', pp. 1136, 1139-40 for Julian's dependence on Porphyry, pp. 1141-2 for his dependence on Celsus, and pp. 1130, 1143, 1147 for his dependence on both.
84. T. D. Barnes, 'Sossianus Hierocles and the Antecedents of the Great Persecution', Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 80 (1976), pp. 239-52 at 243-245
85. and idem, 'Scholarship or Propaganda', p. 60, n. 5 posits that Hierokles was either vicarius of Oriens or Pontica. But if Lactantius is correct about Hierokles' urging the onset of the persecution, which the professor himself seems to have linked with the purges from the army, then Hierokles' post is likely to have been in Oriens, whence Diocletian issued this order. See n. 45.
86. See T. Hägg, 'Hierocles the Lover of Truth and Eusebius the Sophist', Symbolae Osloenses 67 (1992), pp. 138-50;
87. Barnes, 'Scholarship or Propaganda', p. 60.
88. Hierocl. 4; cf. also 19.1-2;
89. Barnes, 'Sossianus Hieroeles', pp. 243-4.
90. F. C. Conybeare (Cambridge, MA, 1989). This passage led E. Schwartz, RE 6 (1909), 1394 (in Barnes, 'Sossianus Hierocles', pp. 240-1) and Brian Croke ('Polemic', pp. 4-5) to date the work to 311-313 because it seemed to describe the illness that drove the emperor Galerius to end the Great Persecution (Lact. Mart. 33). But Eusebius 'consistently fails to mention contemporary persecution or martyrdom in contexts where it would aid his argument'; thus Barnes thinks that it refers to Deeius' death in battle and Valerian's capture by the Persians (Barnes, 'Sossianus Hierocles', p. 241).
91. Eberhard Heck, Die dualistischen Zusätze und die Kaiseranreden bei Laciantius (Heidelberg, 1972), pp. 37-46.
92. Hägg, 'Hierocles', p. 145.
93. De Labriolle, 'Porphyre', p. 413, n. 2, thinking that the Apokritikos' Hellene was Porphyry, assumed that Eusebius had used Porphyry against Hierokles. This parallel challenges Goulet's claim that Makarios had written this passage (see n. 71).
94. Despite Schröder's observation ('Celsus und Porphyrius', pp. 200-2) that Cclsus emphasized morality while Porphyry concentrated on philology, both criticize allegorizing (e.g., Cels. 1.17; Chr. fr.39=Eus. HE 6.19.2),
95. J. Bidez, Vie de Porphyre (Ghent, 1913), 74;
96. A. B. Hulen, Porphyry's Work Against the Christians (New Haven, 1933), pp. 38-55;
97. and A. Meredith, 'Porphyry and Julian', p. 1130.
98. Evangeliou, 'Porphyry's Criticism', p. 67 n. 59 claimed that Hierokles' verbosity meant that he could not be Makarios' Hellene. But he must be thinking of Hierokles the philosopher, since there are no other extant works by Sossianus Hierokles.
99. Mercati, 'Per l'Apokritico', p. 62. For 1.10, see n. 32.
100. De Labriolle, 'Porphyre', p. 436;
101. see also M. Frede, 'Eusebius' Apologetic Writings', in M. Edwards, M. Goodman and S. Price (eds.), Apologetics in the Roman Empire: Pagans, Jews, and Christians (Oxford, 1999), p. 234.
102. S. Pezzella, 'Il problema del di Portirio', Eos 52 (1962), pp. 87-107 at 88, 98, 99 went on to argue that the Hellene was a montage of several anti-Christian authors, but he identified only two of them - Hierokles and Porphyry. His approach was driven by his (incorrect) assumption that books 2 and 5 were written against Theosthenes and that the other three books were written against other people;
103. cf. also Waelkens, L'Econowie, pp. 8-9.
104. Pezzella, 'Il problema', p. 87;
105. cf. Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes', pp. 547-9;
106. idem, 'Apocriticus', p. 115, nn. 4-6.
107. Crater, 'Macarius Magnes', p. 550;
108. idem, 'Apocriticus', p. xix.
109. Although Jonas Palm, Textkritisches zum Apokritikos des Makarios Magnes (Lund, 1961) did not give it special attention, this portion of Makarios' text differs significantly in phrasing, vocabulary, and content from the rest of his work. For example, the average sentence length in the 'post-Cappadocian' section (4.25.111-126) is twenty-three words, whereas in the paragraph above it is twenty-nine and below it is thirty-one - just what would be expected if this section incorporated a gloss, a likely possibility in such a recent manuscript. Moreover, Makarios did not use such language in his discussion of the Eucharist, where it would have supported his argument (Corsaro, 'Dottrina eucharistica', p. 73), and it is odd that he would broach the subject of the Trinity just before he went on to explain the absolute monarchy of God (Apok. 4.26).
110. Crafer, 'Macarius Magnes', p. 405 inch n. 5;
111. 'Porphyry's Criticism', Apocriticus, pp. xx incl. n. 1; 132, incl. n. 5.
112. for Corsaro, 'Dottrina eueharistica', p. 77, n. 10, he would not have been the first such hypocrite.
113. Believing that Makarios is the bishop at the 403 Synod, Corsaro, 'La reazione pagana', p. 193 finds this reference strange and claims that the author must be 'poco informato'.
114. Lim, Public Disputation, 3;
115. H. Gregory Snyder, Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World. Philosophers, Jews, and Christians (Routledge, 2000), p. 1.
116. See Lim, Public Disputation, p. 84 incl. n. 50, 94.
117. Harnack, 'Kritik', p. 10, n. 1 claims that this was a 'courtesy'.
118. Lim, Public Disputation, p. 7 incl. n. 22.