Book II — Source paragraphs and footnotes

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

It is justly remarked by Reuterdahl that no chapters of Eusebius’ History are so imperfect and unsatisfactory as those which relate to heresies, but that this is to be ascribed more to the age than to the author. A right understanding of heresies and an appreciation of any truth which they might contain was utterly impossible to men who looked upon heresy as the work of the devil, and all heretics as his chosen tools. Eusebius has been condemned by some, because he gives his information about heretics only from second hand, and quotes none of them directly; but it must be remembered that this method was by no means peculiar to Eusebius, and, moreover, it is highly probable that he did not have access to any of their works. The accounts of the heretics given by Irenæus, Hippolytus, and others would of course be preserved, but the writings of heretics themselves would be piously excluded as completely as possible from all Christian libraries, and the knowledge of them cannot have remained long in the Church. The sources upon which we have to rely at the present day for a knowledge of these heresies furnish an illustration of this. We know them almost solely through their enemies, and Eusebius knew them in the same way and very likely for the same reason.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-1 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Gitton was a village of Samaria, near Flavia Neapolis (the modern Nâblus), and is identified by Robinson with the present village of Kuryet Jît (see Robinson’s Biblical Researches, III. p. 144, note). Some have doubted the accuracy of Justin’s report, for the reason that Josephus (Ant. XXII. 7. 2) mentions a magician named Simon, of about the same date, who was born in Cyprus. There was a town called Κίτιον in Cyprus, and it has been thought that Justin may have mistaken this place for the Samaritan Gitton. But even if we assume the identity of the two Simons as many critics do, it is less likely that Justin, a native of Samaria, was mistaken upon a question concerning his own country, than that Josephus was. Simon’s activity may have extended to Cyprus, in which case Josephus might easily have mistaken his birthplace.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-8 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Justin here assigns Simon’s visit to Rome to the reign of Claudius (41–54 a.d.), as Irenæus also does. Other accounts assign it to the reign of Nero, but all differ as to the details of his death; suicide, death from injuries received while trying to fly, voluntary burial in expectation of rising again on the third day, &c., are reported in different traditions. All, however, agree that he visited Rome at some time or another.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-9 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

That is, on the island which lies in the middle of the Tiber, a short distance below the Vatican, and which now bears the name Isola Tiberiana, or di S. Sebastiano.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-10 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

In 1574 a statue, bearing the inscription Semoni Sanco deo fidio, &c., was found in the place described by Justin Martyr, but this statue was erected to the Sabine divinity Semo Sancus. It is therefore highly probable that Justin mistook this statue for a statue of Simon Magus. This is now the commonly accepted view, though the translator of Justin Martyr in the Ante-Nicene Fathers ventures to dispute it (see the Am. ed. Vol. I. p. 171, note). The report is given a second time by Justin in his Apol. 56, and also by Irenæus, I. 23. 1 (who, however, simply says “It is said,” and may have drawn his knowledge only from Justin Martyr) and by Tertullian, Apol. chap. 13. The last named is in general a poor authority even if he be independent of Justin at this point, which is not probable. Hippolytus, who lived at Rome, and who gives us an account of the death of Simon (Bk. VII. chap. 15), says nothing about the statue and his silence is a strong argument against it.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-11 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

A similar story is told of this Helen by Irenæus, I. 23; by Hippolytus, VI. 15 (who adds some important particulars); by Tertullian, De Anima, 34; by Epiphanius, Hær. 21; and by Theodoret, Hær. Fab. I. 1; compare also Origen, Contra Celsum, V. 62. Simon taught that this Helen was the first conception of his mind, the mother of all things, the impersonation of the divine intelligence, &c. The Simonians, according to Irenæus (I. 23. 4), and Hippolytus (VI. 15; see chap. 14, note 8), had images of Simon and Helen whom they honored as Jupiter and Minerva. Simon’s doctrines and practice, as recorded by these Fathers, show some of the general conceptions common to all the Gnostic systems, but exhibit a crude and undeveloped form of Gnosticism. Upon Helen, see Salmon, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 880 sq., and all the works upon Simon Magus.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-12 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

This conception of the idea (žννοια) is thoroughly Gnostic, and plays an important part in all the Gnostic systems. Most of these systems had a dualistic element recognizing the δύναμις and the žννοιαas the original principles from whose union all beings emanated. These general conceptions appeared in all varieties of forms in the different systems.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-13 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

This was the general opinion of the early Fathers, all of whom picture Gnosticism as a wilderness of absurdities and nonsense; and Irenæus, Hippolytus, and others undertake its refutation only for the purpose of exposing these absurdities. It is treated by none of them as an intelligent speculation with a foundation in reason or sense. This thorough misunderstanding of the nature and aim of Gnosticism has been perpetuated in our day by many writers upon the subject. Neander was the first to attempt a thoroughly philosophical treatment of it (in his Genetische Entwickelung d. gnost. Systeme, Berlin, 1818), and since that time the subject has been treated intelligently and discriminatingly by many writers, e.g. Baur, Lipsius, Lightfoot, Salmon and especially Harnack who has grasped the true principle of Gnosticism perhaps more fully than any one else. See his Dogmengeschichte, I. p. 158 sqq.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-17 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

This was true of the Simonians, who were very immoral and licentious, and of some other Gnostic sects, as e.g. the Ophites, the Carpocratians, &c. But many of the Gnostics, e.g. Marcion (but see below, IV. 11, note 24), Saturninus, Tatian, &c., went to the opposite extreme, teaching a rigid and gloomy asceticism. Underlying both of these extremes we perceive the same principle—a dualism of matter and spirit, therefore of body and mind—the former considered as the work of the devil, and therefore to be despised and abused: the latter as divine, and therefore to be honored above all else. The abhorrence of the body, and of matter and nature in general, logically led to one of the two opposite results, asceticism or antinomianism, according to the character and instincts of the person himself. See Schaff, Church Hist. II. p. 457 sqq. The Fathers, in their hatred of all forms of heresy, naturally saw no good in any of them, and heretics were therefore indiscriminately accused of immorality and licentiousness in their worst forms.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-18 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

On Justin’s Apology, see below, Bk. IV. chap. 18, note 2.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-6 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

See chap. 3, note 1.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-2 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

In his Apology, I. 26, 56.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-4 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

In Bk. IV. chaps. 8, 11, 16–18.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-5 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Justin’s Apology, I. 26.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-7 · Original source

1890 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Irenæus adv. Hær. I. 23.

Editorial footnote · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, editorial note cite_note-14 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

2. This is stated by Justin, one of our distinguished writers who lived not long after the time of the apostles. Concerning him I shall speak in the proper place. Take and read the work of this man, who in the first Apology which he addressed to Antonine in behalf of our religion writes as follows:

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 3 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

3. “And after the ascension of the Lord into heaven the demons put forward certain men who said they were gods, and who were not only allowed by you to go unpersecuted, but were even deemed worthy of honors. One of them was Simon, a Samaritan of the village of Gitto, who in the reign of Claudius Cæsar performed in your imperial city some mighty acts of magic by the art of demons operating in him, and was considered a god, and as a god was honored by you with a statue, which was erected in the river Tiber, between the two bridges, and bore this inscription in the Latin tongue, Simoni Deo Sancto, that is, To Simon the Holy God.

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 4 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

4. And nearly all the Samaritans and a few even of other nations confess and worship him as the first God. And there went around with him at that time a certain Helena who had formerly been a prostitute in Tyre of Phœnicia; and her they call the first idea that proceeded from him.”

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 5 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

5. Justin relates these things, and Irenæus also agrees with him in the first book of his work, Against Heresies, where he gives an account of the man and of his profane and impure teaching. It would be superfluous to quote his account here, for it is possible for those who wish to know the origin and the lives and the false doctrines of each of the heresiarchs that have followed him, as well as the customs practiced by them all, to find them treated at length in the above-mentioned work of Irenæus.

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 6 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

6. We have understood that Simon was the author of all heresy. From his time down to the present those who have followed his heresy have feigned the sober philosophy of the Christians, which is celebrated among all on account of its purity of life. But they nevertheless have embraced again the superstitions of idols, which they seemed to have renounced; and they fall down before pictures and images of Simon himself and of the above-mentioned Helena who was with him; and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations.

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 7 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

7. But those matters which they keep more secret than these, in regard to which they say that one upon first hearing them would be astonished, and, to use one of the written phrases in vogue among them, would be confounded, are in truth full of amazing things, and of madness and folly, being of such a sort that it is impossible not only to commit them to writing, but also for modest men even to utter them with the lips on account of their excessive baseness and lewdness.

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 8 · Original source

Date uncertain | Eusebius of Caesarea (historical work attribution)

8. For whatever could be conceived of, viler than the vilest thing—all that has been outdone by this most abominable sect, which is composed of those who make a sport of those miserable females that are literally overwhelmed with all kinds of vices.

Complete source paragraph · Book II, Chapter XIII.—Simon Magus.; original source section: Chapter 13, source paragraph 9 · Original source