DIONYSIAS

script attributed it with other writings to Justin Martyr; but that earnest philosopher and hasty writer was quite incapable of the restrained eloquence, the smooth flow of thought, the limpid clearness of expression, which mark this epistle as one of the most perfect compositions of antiquity. The last two chapters (xi, xii) are florid and obscure, and bear no relation to the rest of the letter. They seem to be a fragment of a homily of later date. The writer of this addition describes himself as a "disciple of the Apostles"; and through a misunderstanding of these words the epistle has, since the eighteenth century, been classed with the writings of the Apostolic Fathers. The letter breaks off at the end of chapter x; it may have originally been much longer.

The writer addresses the "most excellent Diognetus", a well-disposed pagan, who desires to know what is the religion of Christians. Idol-worship is ridiculed, and it is shown that Jewish sacrifices and ceremonies cannot cause any pleasure to the only God and Creator of all. Christians are not a nation nor a sect, but are diffused throughout the world, though they are not of the world, but citizens of heaven; yet they are the soul of the world. God, the invisible Creator, has sent His Child, by whom He made all things, to save man, after He has allowed man to find out his own weakness and proneness to sin and his incapacity to save himself. The last chapter is an exposition, "first" of the love of the Father, evidently to be followed "secondly" by another on the Son; but this is lost. The style is harmonious and simple. The writer is a practised master of classical eloquence, and a fervent Christian. There is no resemblance to the public apologies of the second century. A closer affinity is with the "Ad Donatum' of St. Cyprian, which is similarly addressed to an inquiring pagan. The writer does not refer to Holy Scripture, but he uses the Gospels, I Peter, and I John, and is saturated with the Epistles of St. Paul. Harnack seems to be right in refusing to place the author earlier than Irenæus. One might well look for him much later, in the persecutions of Valerian or of Diocletian. He cannot be an obscure person, but must be a writer otherwise illustrious; and yet he is certainly not one of those writers whose works have come down to us from the second or third centuries. The name of Lucian the Martyr would perhaps satisfy the conditions of the problem; and the loss of that part of the letter where it spoke more in detail of the Son of God would be explained, as it would have been suspected or convicted of the Arianism of which Lucian is the reputed father. The so-called letter may be in reality the apology presented to a judge. The editio princeps is that of Stephanus (Paris, 1592), and the epistle was included among the works of St. Justin by Sylburg (Heidelberg, 1593) and subsequent editors; the best of such editions is in Otto, 'Corpus Apologetarum Christ." (3d ed., Jena, 1879), III. Tillemont followed a friend's suggestion in attributing it to an earlier date, and Gallandi included it in his "Bibl. Vett. PP.", I, as the work of an anonymous Apostolic Father. It has been given since then in the editions of the Apostolic Fathers, especially those of Hefele, Funk (2d ed., 1901), Gebhardt, Harnack, and Zahn (1878), Lightfoot and Harmer (London, 1891, with English tr.). Many separate editions have appeared in Germany. There is an English translation in the Ante-Nicene Library (London, 1892), I. The dissertations on this treatise are too numerous to catalogue; they are not as a rule of much value. Baratier and Gallandi attributed the letter to Clement of Rome, Böhl to an Apostolic Father, and he was followed by the Catholic editors or critics, Möhler, Hefele, Permaneder, Alzog; whereas Grossheim, Tzschirner, Semisch, placed it in the time of Justin; Dorner referred it to Marcion; Zeller to the end of the second century, while Ceillier, Hoffmann, Otto,

defended the MS. attribution to Justin; Fessler held
for the first or second century. These definite views
are now abandoned, likewise the suggestions of Krüger
that Aristides was the author, of Dräseke that it is by
Apelles, of Overbeck that it is post-Constantinian,
and of Donaldson that it is a fifteenth-century rhetor-
ical exercise (the MS. was thirteenth- or fourteenth-
century). Zahn has sensibly suggested 250-310.
Harnack gives 170-300.

References to all these writers will be found in Patres Apos-
tolici, ed. FUNK. See also BARDENHEWER, Gesch, der altkirchl.
Lit., I, and bibliography in RICHARDSON, Bibliogr. Synopsis,
and CHEVALIER, Bio.-bibl. On the MS. see Texte und Unter-
HARNACK, Gesch. der all-chr. Lit., I, 757. The concluding
suchungen, I (1882, HARNACK), and II (1883, GEBHARDT), and
chapters are attributed to Hippolytus by DI PAULI in Theol.
Quartalschrift, LXXXVIII (1906), i, 28.
JOHN CHAPMAN.

Dionysias, a titular see in Arabia. This city, which figures in the "Synecdemos" of Hierocles (723, 3) and Georgius Cyprius (1072), is mentioned only in Parthey's "Prima Notitia", about 840, as a suffragan of Bostra. Lequien (Or. christ., II, 865) gives the names of three Greek bishops, Severus, present at Nicæa in 325, Elpidius at Constantinople in 381, and Maras at Chalcedon in 451. Another, Peter, is known by an inscription (Waddington, Inscriptions .. de Syrie, no. 2327). Fifteen or sixteen titular Latin bishops are known throughout the fifteenth century (Lequien, op. cit., III, 1309; Eubel, I, 232, II, 160). Waddington (op. cit., 529 sqq.) identifies Dionysias with Soada, now es Sûwêda, the chief town of a caza in the vilayet of Damascus, where many inscriptions have been found. Soada, though an important city, is not alluded to in ancient authors under this name; Nöldeke inscriptions prove that it was built by a "lord builder Dionysos" and that it was an episcopal see. admits this view. Gesenius identifies Dionysias with Shohbâ (Philippopolis), but this is too far from DaGELZER, ed., Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis Romani, 206. S. PÉTRIDÈS.

mascus.

Dionysius, SAINT, POPE, date of birth unknown; d. 26 or 27 December, 268. During the pontificate of Pope Stephen (254-57) Dionysius appears as a presbyter of the Roman Church and as such took part in the controversy concerning the validity of heretical baptism (see BAPTISM under sub-title Rebaptism). This caused Bishop Dionysius of Alexandria to write him a letter on baptism in which he is described as an excellent and learned man (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., VII, vii). Later, in the time of Pope Sixtus II (257-58), the same Bishop of Alexandria addressed Dionysius a letter concerning Lucianus (ibid., VII, ix); who this Lucianus was is not known. After the martyrdom of Sixtus II (6 August, 258) the Roman See remained vacant for nearly a year, as the violence of the persecution made it impossible to elect a new head. It was not until the persecution had begun to subside that Dionysius was raised (22 July, 259) to the office of Bishop of Rome. Some months later the Emperor Gallienus issued his edict of toleration, which brought the persecution to an end and gave a legal existence to the Church (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., VII, xiii). Thus the Roman Church came again into possession of its buildings for worship, its cemeteries, and other properties, and Dionysius was able to bring its administration once more into order. About 260 Bishop Dionysius of Alexandria wrote his letter to Ammonius and Euphranor against Sabellianism in which he expressed himself with inexactness as to the Logos and its relation to God the Father (see DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDRIA). Upon this an accusation against him was laid before Pope Dionysius who called a synod at Rome about 260 for the settlement of the matter. The pope issued, in his own name and that of the council, an important doctrinal letter in which, first, the erroneous

DIONYSIUS

African Council of Carthage (419).-(c) Of another bilingual version of Greek canons, undertaken at the instance of Pope Hormisdas, only the preface has been preserved. (2) A collection of papal Constitutions (Collectio decretorum Pontificum Romanorum) from Siricius to Anastasius II (384-498).

In chronology Dionysius has left his mark conspicuously, for it was he who introduced the use of the Christian Era (see CHRONOLOGY) according to which dates are reckoned from the Incarnation, which he assigned to 25 March, in the year 754 from the foundation of Rome (A. U. c.). By this method of computation he intended to supersede the "Era of Diocletion" previously employed, being unwilling, as he tells us, that the name of an impious persecutor should be thus kept in memory. The Era of the Incarnation, often called the Dionysian Era, was soon much used in Italy and, to some extent, a little later in Spain; during the eighth and ninth centuries it was adopted in England. Charlemagne is said to have been the first Christian ruler to employ it officially. It was not until the tenth century that it was employed in the papal chancery (Lersch, Chronologie, Freiburg, 1899, p. 233). Dionysius also gave attention to the calculation of Easter, which so greatly occupied the early Church. To this end he advocated the adoption of the Alexandrian Cycle of nineteen years, extending that of St. Cyril for a period of ninety-five years in advance. It was in this work that he adopted the Era of the Incarnation. DIONYSIUS, Works in P. L., LXVII, and the testimony of CASSIODORUS, ibid., LXX. See also MAASEN, Quellen der Lit. des. can. Rechts im Abendlande (Graz, 1870); BARDenhewer, JOHN GERARD. Gesch. der altkirch. Lit. (Freiburg im Br., 1902).

Dionysius of Alexandria (bishop from 247-8 to 264-5), called "the Great" by Eusebius, St. Basil, and others, was undoubtedly, after St. Cyprian, the most eminent bishop of the third century. Like St. Cyprian he was less a great theologian than a great administrator. Like St. Cyprian his writings usually took the form of letters. Both saints were converts from paganism; both were engaged in the controversies as to the restoration of those who had lapsed in the Decian persecution, about Novatian, and with regard to the iteration of heretical baptism; both corresponded with the popes of their day. Yet it is curious that neither mentions the name of the other. single letter of Dionysius has been preserved in Greek canon law. For the rest we are dependent on the many citations by Eusebius, and, for one phase, to the works of his great successor St. Athanasius.

A

Dionysius was an old man when he died, so that his birth will fall about 190, or earlier. He is said to have been of distinguished parentage. He became a Christian when still young. At a later period, when he was warned by a priest of the danger he ran in studying the books of heretics, a vision-so he informs us-assured him that he was capable of proving all things, and that this faculty had in fact been the cause of his conversion.

He studied under Origen. The latter was banished by Demetrius about 231, and Heraclas took his place at the head of the catechetical school. On the death of Demetrius very soon afterwards, Heraclas became bishop, and Dionysius took the headship of the famous school. It is thought that he retained this office even when he himself had succeeded Heraclas as bishop. In the last year of Philip, 249, although the emperor himself was reported to be a Christian, a riot at Alexandria, roused by a popular prophet and poet, had all the effect of a severe persecution. It is described by Dionysius in a letter to Fabius of AntiThe mob first seized an old man named Metras, och. beat him with clubs when he would not deny his faith, pierced his eyes and face with reeds, dragged him out of the city, and stoned him. Then a woman named Quinta, who would not sacrifice, was drawn along the rough pavement by the feet, dashed against mill

11

urb. The houses of the faithful were plundered.
stones, scourged, and finally stoned in the same sub-
Not one, so far as the bishop knew, apostatized. The
aged virgin, Apollonia, after her teeth had been
prepared for her rather than utter blasphemies. Sera-
knocked out, sprang of her own accord into the fire
pion had all his limbs broken, and was dashed down
sible for any Christian to go into the streets, even at
from the upper story of his own house. It was impos-
not blaspheme should be burnt. The riot was stopped
night, for the mob was shouting that all who would
by the civil war, but the new Emperor Decius insti-
tuted a legal persecution in January, 250. St. Cyprian
describes how at Carthage the Christians rushed to
sacrifice, or at least to obtain false certificates of hav-
ing done so. Similarly Dionysius tells us that at
account of official position, or persuaded by friends;
Alexandria many conformed through fear, others on
some pale and trembling at their act, others boldly as-
endured imprisonment for a time; others abjured only
serting that they had never been Christians. Some
at the sight of tortures; others held out until the tortures
stances of constancy. Julian and Kronion were
conquered their resolution. But there were noble in-
to death. A soldier, Besas, who protected them from
scourged through the city on camels, and then burnt
the insults of the people, was beheaded. Macar, a
The virgin Ammonarion
Libyan, was burnt alive. Epimachus and Alexander,
burnt, with four women.
after long imprisonment and many tortures, were also
also was long tortured. The aged Mercuria and Dio-
nysia, a mother of many children, suffered by the
sword. Heron, Ater, and Isidore, Egyptians, after
many tortures were given to the flames. A boy of
fifteen, Dioscorus, who stood firm under torture, was
dismissed by the judge for very shame. Nemesion
was tortured and scourged, and then burnt between
two robbers.

A number of soldiers, and with them an old man named Ingenuus, made indignant signs to one called to order they cried out that they were Christians who was on his trial and about to apostatize. When were taken aback; they suffered a glorious martyrwith such boldness that the governor and his assessors dom. Numbers were martyred in the cities and villages. A steward named Ischyrion was pierced because he refused to sacrifice. Many fled, wandered through the stomach by his master with a large stake in the deserts and the mountains, and were cut off by A bishop named Chæremon escaped with his σúμßios hunger, thirst, cold, sickness, robbers, or wild beasts. (wife?) to the Arabian mountain, and was no more cens and some of these were later ransomed for large heard of. Many were carried off as slaves by the Sara

sums.

Some of the lapsed had been readmitted to Christian Fabius, Bishop of Antioch, who was inclined to join fellowship by the martyrs. Dionysius urged upon delivered by blessed martyrs "now seated with Christ, Novatian, that it was right to respect this judgment and sharers in His Kingdom and assessors in His On his judgment". He adds the story o. an old man, Serapion, who after a long and blameless life had sacrificed, and could obtain absolution from no one. death-bed he sent his grandson to fetch a priest. The the child, telling him to moisten it and place it in the priest was ill, but he gave a particle of the Eucharist to immediately expired. Sabinus, the prefect, sent a old man's mouth. Serapion received it with joy, and frumentarius (detective) to search for Dionysius directly the decree was published; he looked everywhere but in Dionysius's own house, where the saint had quietly remained. On the fourth day he was inspired certain brethren. But it seems that he was soon made to depart, and he left at night, with his domestics and prisoner, for soldiers escorted the whole party to Taposiris in the Mareotis. A certain Timotheus, who had not been taken with the others, informed a passing

countryman, who carried the news to a wedding-feast he was attending. All instantly rose up and rushed to release the bishop. The soldiers took to flight, leaving their prisoners on their uncushioned litters. Dionysius, believing his rescuers to be robbers, held out his clothes to them, retaining only his tunic. They urged him to rise and fly. He begged them to leave him, declaring that they might as well cut off his head at once, as the soldiers would shortly do so. down on the ground on his back; but they seized him He let himself by the hands and feet and dragged him away, carrying him out of the little town, and setting him on an ass without a saddle. With two companions, Gaius and Peter, he remained in a desert place in Libya until the persecution ceased in 251. The whole Christian world was then thrown into confusion by the news that Novatian claimed the Bishopric of Rome in opposition to Pope Cornelius. Dionysius at once took the side of the latter, and it was largely by his influence that the whole East, after much disturbance, was brought in a few months into unity and harmony. Novatian wrote to him for support. His curt reply has been preserved entire: Novatian can easily prove the truth of his protestation that he was consecrated against his will by voluntarily retiring; he ought to have suffered martyrdom rather than divide the Church of God; indeed it would have been a particularly glorious martyrdom on behalf of the whole Church (such is the importance attached by Dionysius to a schism at Rome); if he can even now persuade his party to make peace, the past will be forgotten; if not, let him save his own soul. St. Dionysius also wrote many letters on this question to Rome and to the East; some of these were treatises on penance. He took a somewhat milder view than Cyprian, for he gave greater weight to the "indulgences" granted by the martyrs, and refused forgiveness in the hour of death to none.

After the persecution the pestilence. Dionysius describes it more graphically than does St. Cyprian, and he reminds us of Thucydides and Defoe. The heathen thrust away their sick, fled from their own relatives, threw bodies half dead into the streets; yet they suffered more than the Christians, whose heroic acts of mercy are recounted by their bishop. Many priests, deacons, and persons of merit died from succouring others, and this death, writes Dionysius, was in no way inferior to martyrdom. The baptismal controversy spread from Africa throughout the East. Dionysius was far from teaching, like Cyprian, that baptism by a heretic rather befouls than cleanses; but he was impressed by the opinion of many bishops and some councils that repetition of such a baptism was necessary, and it appears that he besought Pope Stephen not to break off communion with the Churches of Asia on this account. He also wrote on the subject to Dionysius of Rome, who was not yet pope, and to a Roman named Philemon, both of whom had written to him. We know seven letters from him on the subject, two being addressed to Pope Sixtus II. In one of these he asks advice in the case of a man who had received baptism a long time before from heretics, and now declared that it had been improperly performed. Dionysius had refused to renew the sacrament after the man had so many years received the Holy Eucharist; he asks the pope's opinion. In this case it is clear that the difficulty was in the nature of the ceremonies used, not in the mere fact of their having been performed by heretics. We gather that Dionysius himself followed the Roman custom, either by the tradition of his Church, or else out of obedience to the decree of Stephen. In 253 Origen died; he had not been at Alexandria for many years. not forgotten his old master, and wrote a letter in his But Dionysius had praise to Theotecnus of Cæsarea.

An Egyptian bishop, Nepos, taught the Chiliastic error that there would be a reign of Christ upon earth for a thousand years, a period of corporal delights; he

founded this doctrine upon the Apocalypse in a book
only after the death of Nepos that Dionysius found
entitled "Refutation of the Allegorizers". It was
himself obliged to write two books "On the Promises"
respect, but rejects his doctrine, as indeed the Church
to counteract this error. He treats Nepos with great
has since done, though it was taught by Papias, Justin,
Irenæus, Victorinus of Pettau, and others. The dio-
cese proper to Alexandria was still very large (though
Heraclas is said to have instituted new bishoprics),
and the Arsinoite nome formed a part of it. Here the
error was very prevalent, and St. Dionysius went in
teachers, and for three days instructed them, refuting
person to the villages, called together the priests and
the arguments they drew from the book of Nepos. He
was much edified by the docile spirit and love of truth
duced the book and the doctrine, declared himself con-
which he found. At length Korakion, who had intro-
vinced. The chief interest of the incident is not in the
picture it gives of ancient Church life and of the wis-
able disquisition, which Dionysius appends, on the
dom and gentleness of the bishop, but in the remark-
authenticity of the Apocalypse. It is a very striking
piece of "higher criticism", and for clearness and mod-
Some of the brethren, he tells us, in their zeal against
eration, keenness and insight, is hardly to be surpassed.
gether, and took it chapter by chapter to ridicule it,
Chiliastic error, repudiated the Apocalypse alto-
attributing the authorship of it to Cerinthus (as we
know the Roman Gaius did some years earlier). Dio-
nysius treats it with reverence, and declares it to be
full of hidden mysteries, and doubtless really by a man
called John. (In a passage now lost, he showed that
the book must be understood allegorically.) But he
found it hard to believe that the writer could be the
son of Zebedee, the author of the Gospel and of the
character, style, and "what is called working out".
Catholic Epistle, on account of the great contrast of
He shows that the one writer calls himself John,
phrasis. He adds the famous remark, that "it is said
whereas the other only refers to himself by some peri-
that there are two tombs in Ephesus, both of which
likeness between the Gospel and the Epistle, and
are called that of John". He demonstrates the close
points out the wholly different vocabulary of the Apoc-
alypse; the latter is full of solecisms and barbarisms,
while the former are in good Greek. This acute criti-
cism was unfortunate, in that it was largely the cause
of the frequent rejection of the Apocalypse in the
Greek-speaking Churches, even as late as the Middle
Ages. Dionysius's arguments appeared unanswer-
Lately the swing of the pendulum has brought many,
able to the liberal critics of the nineteenth century.
guided by Bousset, Harnack, and others, to be im-
pressed rather by the undeniable points of contact be-
tween the Gospel and the Apocalypse, than by the
differences of style (which can be explained by a differ-
books was certainly a Jew), so that even Loisy ad-
ent scribe and interpreter, since the author of both
mits that the opinion of the numerous and learned
But it should be noted that the modern critics have
conservative scholars "no longer appears impossible".
added nothing to the judicious remarks of the third-
century patriarch.

The Emperor Valerian, whose accession was in 253,
did not persecute until 257. In that year St. Cyprian
in the Mareotis, after being tried, together with one
was banished to Curubis, and St. Dionysius to Kephro
priest and two deacons, before Æmilianus, the prefect
of Egypt. He himself relates the firm answers he
made to the prefect, writing to defend himself against
graceful flight. Cyprian suffered in 258, but Dio-
a certain Germanus, who had accused him of a dis-
toleration was decreed by Gallienus in 260. But not
nysius was spared, and returned to Alexandria directly
to peace, for in 261-2 the city was in a state of tumult
little less dangerous than a persecution. The great

DIONYSIUS

thoroughfare which traversed the town was impassable. The bishop had to communicate with his flock by letter, as though they were in different countries. It was easier, he writes, to pass from East to West, than from Alexandria to Alexandria. Famine and pesThe inhabitants of what was still tilence raged anew. the second city of the world had decreased so that the males between fourteen and eighty were now scarcely so numerous as those between forty and seventy had been not many years before. A controversy arose in the latter years of Dionysius of which the half-Arian Eusebius has been careful to make no mention. All we know is from St. Athanasius. Some bishops of the Pentapolis of Upper Libya fell into Sabellianism and denied the distinctness of the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity. Dionysius wrote some four letters to condemn their error, and sent copies to Pope Sixtus II (257-8). But he himself fell, so far as words go, into the opposite error, for he said the Son is a roinua (something made) and distinct in substance, évos Kar' ovolav, from the Father, even as is the husbandman from the vine, or a shipbuilder from a ship. These words were seized upon by the Arians of the fourth century as plain Arianism. But Athanasius defended Dionysius by telling the sequel of the history. Certain brethren of Alexandria, being offended at the words of their bishop, betook themselves to Rome to Pope St. Dionysius (259-268), who wrote a letter, in which he declared that to teach that the Son was made or was a creature was an impiety equal, though contrary, to that of Sabellius. He also wrote to his namesake of Alexandria informing him of the accusation brought against him. The latter immediately composed books entitled "Refutation" and "Apology"; in these he explicitly declared that there never was a time when God was not Father, that Christ always was, being Word and Wisdom and Power, and coeternal, even as brightness is not posterior to the light from which it proceeds. He teaches the "Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity"; he clearly implies the equality and eternal procession of the Holy Ghost. In these last points he is more explicit than St. Athanasius himself is elsewhere, while in the use of the word consubstantial, ouoovotos, he anticipates Nicæa, for he bitterly complains of the calumny that he had rejected the expression. But however he himself and his advocate Athanasius may attempt to explain away his earlier expressions, it is clear that he had been incorrect in thought as well as in words, and that he did not at first grasp the true doctrine with the necessary distinctness. The letter of the pope was evidently explicit and must have been the cause of the Alexandrian's clearer vision. The pope, as Athanasius points out, gave a formal condemnation of Arianism long before that heresy emerged. When we consider the vagueness and incorrectness in the fourth century of even the supporters of orthodoxy in the East, the decision of the Apostolic See will seem a marvellous testimony to the doctrine of the Fathers as to the unfailing faith of Rome.

We find Dionysius issuing yearly, like the later bishops of Alexandria, festal letters announcing the date of Easter and dealing with various matters. When the heresy of Paul of Samosata, Bishop of Antioch, began to trouble the East, Dionysius wrote to the Church of Antioch on the subject, as he was obliged to decline the invitation to attend a synod there, on the score of his age and infirmities. He died soon afterwards. St. Dionysius is in the Roman Martyrology on 17 Nov., but he is also intended, with the companions of his flight in the Decian persecution, by the mistaken notice on 3 Oct.: Dionysius, Faustus, Gaius, Peter, and Paul, Martyrs (!). The same error is found in Greek menologies.

The principal remains of Dionysius are the citations in
EUSEBIUS, H. E., VI-VII, a few fragments of the books On
Nature in IDEM, Præp. Evang., xiv, and the quotations in
A collection of these
ATHANASIUS, De Sententia Dionysii, etc.

13

XIV, reprinted in P. G., X. The fullest ed. is by SIMON DE
and other fragments is in GALLANDI, Bibl. Vett. Patrum, III
MAGISTRIS, S. Dion. Al. Opp. omnia (Rome, 1796); also
ROUTH, Reliquiæ Sacra, III-IV. Syriac and Armenian frag-
ments in PITRA, Analecta Sacra, IV. A complete list of all
the fragments is in HARNACK, Gesch. der altchr. Litt., I, 409-27,
but his account of the passages from the Catena on Luke
(probably from a letter to Origen, On Martyrdom) needs com-
Heracleia (Leipzig, 1902). For the life of Dionysius see
pleting from SICKENBERGER, Die Lucaskatene des Niketas von
TILLEMONT, IV; Acta SS., 3 Oct.; DITTRICH, Dionysius der
Grosse, eine Monographie (Freiburg im Br., 1867); MORIZE,
DOM MORIN tried unsuc
Denys d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1881).

Επιστολη διακονικὴ διὰ Ιππολύτου (EUSFB., H. E., VI, 456)
Also MERCATI, Note
cessfully to identify the Canons of Hippolytus with DIONYSIUS'
in Revue Bénédictine (1900), XVII, 241.
di letteratura bibl. et crist. ant.: Due supposte lettere di Dionigi
Aless. (Rome, 1901). For chronology see HARNACK, Chronol.,
On the
I, 202, II, 57. A very good account, with full bibliography, is
in BARDENHEWER, Gesch. der altkirchl. Litt., II.
Chiliastic question see GRY, Le Millénarisme (Paris, 1904), 101.
JOHN CHAPMAN.

Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite.-By "Dionysius the Areopagite" is usually understood the judge of the Areopagus who, as related in Acts, xvii, 34, was converted to Christianity by the preaching of St. Paul, and according to Dionysius of Corinth (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., III, iv) was Bishop of Athens. In the course of In the first place, a time, however, two errors of far-reaching import arose in connexion with this name. series of famous writings of a rather peculiar nature was ascribed to the Areopagite and, secondly, he was popularly identified with the holy martyr of Gaul, Dionysius, the first Bishop of Paris. It is not our purpose to take up directly the latter point; we shall concern ourselves here (1) with the person of the PseudoAreopagite; (2) with the classification, contents, and characteristics of his writings; (3) with their history and transmission; under this head the question as to the genuineness, origin, first acceptance, and gradual spread of these writings will be answered.

Deep obscurity still hovers about the person of the Pseudo-Areopagite. External evidence as to the time and place of his birth, his education, and later occupation is entirely wanting. Our only source of information regarding this problematic personage is the writings themselves. The clues furnished by the first appearance and by the character of the writings enable us to conclude that the author belongs at the very earliest to the latter half of the fifth century, and that, in all probability, he was a native of Syria. His thoughts, phrases, and expressions show a great familiarity with the works of the neo-Platonists, especially with Plotinus and Proclus. He is also thoroughly versed in the sacred books of the Old and the New Testament, and in the works of the Fathers as far as Cyril of Alexandria. (Passages from the Areopagitic writings are indicated by title and chapter. In this article D. D. "Celestis hierarchia"; E. H. for "Ecclesiastica hierarN. stands for "De divinis nominibus"; C. H. for chia"; Th. M. for "Theologia mystica", which are all found in Migne, P. G., vol. III.) In a letter to Polycarp (Ep. vii; P. G., III, 1080 Á) and in "Cæl. hier.” (ix, 3; P. G., III, 260 D) he intimates that he was formerly a pagan, and this seems quite probable, considering the peculiar character of his literary work. But one should be more cautious in regard to certain other personal references, for instance that he was chosen teacher of the "newly-baptized" (D. D. N., iii, 2; P. G., III, 681 B); that his spiritual father and guide was a wise and saintly man, Hierotheus by name; that he was advised by the latter and ordered by his own superiors to compose these works (ibid., 681 sq.). And it is plainly for the purpose of deceiving that he tells of having observed the solar eclipse at Christ's Crucifixion (Ep., vii, 2; P. G., III, 1081 A) and of having, with Hierotheus, the Apostles (Peter and James), and other hierarchs, looked upon "the LifeBegetting, God-Receiving body, i. e. of the Blessed Virgin" (D. D. N., iii, 2; P. G., III, 681 C). The former of these accounts is based on Matt., xxvii, 45,