Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study

174 Pages·038.016 MB·English

by  Tertullian

Oxford UniaersiE Press, Walton Street, Oxford OXz6DP
London New Tork Toronto
Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi
Kuala Lumpur- Singapore Hong Kong Tok2o
Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Taun
CONTENTS
MelbourneA ucklnnd
and associatedc ompaniesin
Beirut Berlin lbadan Mexico Citlt Nicosia Abbreviations xr
Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford Uniuersit2 Press r. Introduction I
Publishedi n the United States
PART ONE
b7 Oxford Uniuersit2P ress,N eu fork
rr. The Evidence ofJerome 3
@ Oxford Uniaersit2P ress, rgTr
ru. Tertullian's Father I3
First published rgTt
rv. The Jurist Tertullianus 22
Reissuedw ith correctionsa nd a postscript tg85
v. Chronology 3o
All rights reseraedN. o part of this publication ma2 be reproduced,
storedin a retrieuals )stem,o r transmittedi,n anyform or b1 any means,
electr onic, mechanicalp, hotocoypingr, ecording,o r otherwise,u ithout PART TWO
thep ior pnmission d Orford Uniaersity Press vr. Tertullian's Life and Background 57
BritishL ibraryC ataloguinign PublhationD ata vrr. christianity in Africa 6o
BamesT, imoth2D .
Tertulliana: historicaal ndl itcrarys tud2. vil. Christians and Pagansi n Carthage B5
r. Tertullian
I. Title IX. Knowledge or Revelation? II5
878'.otog BR65.T7
ISBNo -rg-8t662-r x. The New Prophecy r30
Librar2o f CongresCsa taloguinign PublicatioDn ata xr. Persecution r43
'Bames,
TimothyD aaid
Te.rtulliana: histoical andl itera:rys tudy. XII. Martwdom t64
Oiginalu publhhed:O xford: ClarendoPn ress,r g7t. xm. A Pagan Education r87
Bibliographlp: .
Includesin dex. xry. The Christian Sophist 2tl
t. Tertulliane, a.r 6o--caz.3 o.I . Title.
23o'.r3'o924 85-3ooo
8R65.77836 ry85 Appendices 23g
ISBNo -rg-9tg6z-t
Editions, Commentaries and Translations 286
Bibliography 292
Pinted in GreatB itain at
thc UniaersityP ress,O xford Index of Names and Subjects 309
b2D aoidS tanfoil,
Pinter lo the Uniursitt
Passageso f Tertullian Discussed 319
Tertullian Revisited: A Postscript 32r
Tuy"*l
FEEHAN i';''::fiT,]*
:)r ir''
ST' tilAn*
*" t'ipg ut' tl' lLLlNol9
-
PREFACE
A HrsroRrcAl and literary study of Tertullian needs no
/l apology or lengthy justification. Books, monographs and
J. Ilearned articles proliferate on many aspectso f Tertullian's
writings and theology. Yet a central task has long been forgot-
ten, if not deliberately omitted. No author-least of all an
orator, polemicist, pamphleteer and satirist-can be rendered
fully intelligible unlessh e is set in his proper historical and cul-
tural milieu. Since Tertullian was active in Carthage in the
reigns of Septimius Severus and his son Caracalla, there must
be four main points of reference.F irst, the contemporary history
of the Severana ge. Next, the provincial society of Roman Africa
and its metropolis. Third, the Second Sophistic Movement in
the Greek world, whosem ost adequately known protagonist in
the west was Apuleius of Madauros, himself an African of the
generation before Tertullian. Finally, and perhaps most im-
portant, the development of Christianity. I have written on the
assumption that only in terms of this unique historical environ-
ment can we hope to explain what Tertullian was, or what and
why he wrote. To neglect the background precludes genuine
understanding.
The presentw ork is the product of a huppy decades pent in
Oxford, first as an undergraduate at Balliol, subsequently for
two years as a Senior Scholar at Merton and for four years as a
Junior Research Fellow of Queen's. I am deeply grateful to all
three collegesf or the opportunities which they have given me,
both to study and to enjoy the friendship of those to whoseh elp I
owe so much. Any attentive reader will note the pervasive in-
fluence of the published works of Sir Ronald Syme and Fergus
Millar: I have tried to perform for a Christian writer something
of what they have achieved for Tacitus and CassiusD io. I have
also had the immense good fortune to be taught by both these
scholars.T he present book is an expansiono f an Oxford doctoral
Viii PREFACE
thesisc ommenced in October 1964 under the supervision of Sir
Ronald Syme and completed in January rgTo under that of
Fergus Millar. The former gave me the courage and confidence
to tackle a task which appeared impossibly daunting, the latter
provided constant help and advice at every stage ofthe actual It is the concrete being that reasons; pass a number of years, and I
composition, and neither has ever failed to offer me the con- find my mind in a new place; how? the whole man moves; Paper
tinuil guidance and inspiration without which I would have logic is but the record of it'
been totally unable to write. JOHN HENRY NEWMAN
Many others have aided in shaping the work, either in con-
versation or by their comments on the text. I am grateful to
them all, and must ask their forgivenessi f I record but a few
by name. Three have an especiali nterest in early Christianity:
Geoffrey de Ste Croix has frequently drawn my attention to
relevant evidence and fresh problems; Peter Brown read my
thesis and suggestedc onsiderable improvements in it; and the
Very Reverend Dr. Henry Chadwick acted as my mentor at a
critical juncture. Michael Reeve has provided much salutary
criticism and advice on literary and linguistic problems, and I
must thank my examiners, the Reverend Dr. S. L. Greenslade
and Mr. R. G. M. Nisbet, for their painstaking care in detect-
ing several serious errors and oversights. Numerous others
doubtlessr emain.
My greatest debt of gratitude, however, is to my wife, for
creating the mental and emotional tranquillity which has
enabled me to devotes o large a part of my energiest o historical
scholarshiP'
T.D.B.
Oxford
16J UQ rgTo
AUTHOR'S NOTE
Portions of this book are closely based upon articles published
in the Joumal of Roman Studiesa nd the Joylr?l- of Theological
Studies.-Refereniesto Tertullian follow the division into chap-
ters and sections of CorpusC hristianorumS, eries Latina I/II.
I'-
ABBREVIATIONS
AE L'Annie Cpigraphique
BMC Catalogur of Coht in tlu British Museum
CCL CorpusC hristi.arcrumS, eries T.atina (Turnhout, 1953-)
AL CorpusI nsniptionum Lati.narum
CQ Classi.calQ garterl2
CR Classical Rcaiew
CSEL CorpusS criptorun EcclesiasticorumL atinorum (Vienna, t86G-)
FIRAI S. Riccobono and others, Fontes luris Romani Antejustinianiz
(rg+o-+g)
GC,S Die Griuhisclun Christlichen Schriftsteller der usten drei Jahr-
hunderte( Berlin, I8g7-)
IGRR Inscri,ptionesG raecaea d res Romanasp erti.nentes
LCV H. Diehl, InscriptionzsL atina,eC hristianaeV eteres(t gz5-3r)
ilS II. Dessau, Insdptiones Lati.naeS electac(1 892-1916)
IRT Insctiptions of Roman Tripolitania
JEH Journal of EcclesiasticalH istorlt
tnS Journal oJ Roman Studies
JTS Jounnl of Tluological Studies
PG J. P. Migne, PatrologiaG raua
PIR ProsopographiaIm peii. Roman'i
PL J. P. Migne , Patrologia Latina
P-W Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Ercldopddie der Clasisclun Altertumswis'
senschdt( rBg+-)
RAC ReallexiconfiirA ntike undChristentum(S tuttgart, I94I-)
TLL Tlusaurus Linguae Lati.nae
I
INTRODUCTION
r o c RAp Hrr enjoys a permanent popularity. Tacitus wrote
Histories and Annals, concentrating on the political and
social history of the senatorial order at Rome. His con-
temporary Suetonius provided easier reading matter: lives of
the emperors from Julius Caesar to Domitian. Tertullian con-
flated the two traditions and alluded to Tacitus' Annals as
'vitae
Caesarum'.1I n recent times the genre retains its appeal,
despitei nappropriateness.A long serieso f treatises,s ermonsa nd
letters, together with a spiritual autobiography, reveal the
gradual development of the intricate mind of Augustine, and
permit the composition of a modern biography at once serious
and illuminating.z But Augustine stands virtually alone among
men of the ancient world. Even such voluminous writers as
Cicero and Jerome are best treated in a style other than the
biographical. And what of the biographies of Roman em-
perors? On an unfavourable view, their authors have all but
forfeited anv claim to be historians.
Paucity of evidence renders a firll biography of Tertullian
impossible.H ence, for the most part, the task of setting him in
his historical context or cultural milieu has been shirked.
Scholarly attention has been happily engrossedo n peripheral
problems or isolated aspectso f Tertullian's thought and writ-
ings. Nonetheless,a conventional picture of his life has firmly
established itself, whose main outlines run briefly as follows.
Tertullian was born in Carthage c. ts1rthe son of a centurion in
the Roman army. As he grew up, he rebelled against the mili-
tary ideals of his father, which neverthelesse xerted an impor-
tant influence upon his theology. In early manhood, he went
to Rome to study law, where he acquired a reputation as a
iurisconsultuasn d may have composed two legal textbooks (De
castrcnspi eculio and, fotaestionesw) hich are cited in the Digest and
r Scor!,r S.3 (p. zoa).
z P, Brown, Augustineo f Hipfo, A Biography( 1967).
INTRODUCTION
Institutionso f Justinian. His sympathy with Stoicism made him
susceptiblet o Christian ideas: the fortitude of martyrs and his
consciousnesosf the moral superiority of Christianity led him to PART ONE
conversionc . Ig3. He then (or perhaps before his conversion)
returned to Carthage. Soon he was ordained a priest, but his
natural propensity to revolt and his detestation of worldly
priests drove him to join the Montanists. As a Montanist, he
became ever more hostile to the Roman Empire and to Roman II
civilization, and was soon so dissatisfied with even the Mon-
tanists that he founded his own sect of Tertullianistae. He died
at a great age, perhaps as late as 2go or 24o. THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME
The first part of the present work will provide a demolition.
First, the evidence of Jerome will be tested and rejected: r Tertullian's life very little is known. A single ancient
that will remove any reason for believing either that Tertul- account is extant, of a mere twenty lines: the fifty+hird
lian's father was a soldier or that he himself was ever a priest
(Chs. II, III). Next, the identification of Tertullian with the
jurist Tertullianus will be decisively discounted (Ch. IV). this account, of which a full translation will be helpful.
Finally, the chronology of Tertullian's works will be examined
Terhrllian, the next Latin writer after Victor and Apollonius, was
afresh and some standard dates refuted. Only when demolition
a priest, a man of the province of Africa and the city of Carthage,
is complete can reconstruction commence-with a new chrono- and the son of a centuriop roconsularis,H e possesseda sharp and
logical framework (Ch. V), which will be assumeda nd employed violent talent, and flourished in the reigns of Severus and Caracalla..
for the second part (Chs. VI-XIV). These chapters address He wrote many volumes, which I shall omit because they are well
themselves to a twofold problem: what was Tertullian's in- known. I myself saw a certain Paul, an old man of Concordia
tellectual and literary development? and how does Tertullian (which is a town in ltaly) : he told me that as a youth he had seena
illuminate the obscure world of early Christianity ? These are man at Rome, who had been the secretary of the aged Cyprian, and
not two separate problems, since it is precisely Tertullian's who recalled that Cyprianwould never let a day passwithout reading
'Give
Tertullian, and that he often said to him me my master',
development which must dispel the obscurity. The single prob-
clearly meaning Tertullian.
lem has both an objective and a subjective dimension. Eusebius
Tertullian was a priest of the church until middle age, but then,
was almost completely ignorant of Tertullian: therefore
becauseo f the envy and insults of the blergy of the church of Rome,
Tertullian can be used to disprove Eusebius' interpretation of he lapsed into Montanism and refers to the New Prophecy in many
early ecclesiasticalh istory and to penetrate beneath his theories treatises. In particular, he directed against the church discussions
to the real situation of Christians in the reign of Septimius of modesty, of persecution, of fasting, of monogamy, and of divine
Severus.W ithin this objective framework, however, Tertullian possession( in six books, with a seventh against Apollonius). He
must be treated as a living figure. His experiences and his is said to have lived to an advanced age, and to have published
reactions to the society in which he found himself must be many tracts which are no longer extant.
recreated and relived.
t Jerome had already given Tertullian a brief entry in }rlis Chronich, under e.o.
co8: Tertullianus Afer, centurionis proconsularis filius, omnium ecclesiarum ser-
mone celebratur (GCS XLVII. zrr). Later he cmployed t}n.eD e Viis lllustribus fot
his letter to the Roman orator Magnus (Er'p. LXX, 3 tr,).
4 THE EVTDENCEO F JEROME THE EVIDENCEO F JEROME 5
Jerome was writing in Bethlehem in 392 or early 393.1T he The De Viris lllustrikrr was composed at the suggestion of
De Viris Illustribusi s a serieso f short notices on Christian writers Nummius Aemilianus Dexter (!rotf.), a prominent supporter
up to the time of its composition.C ontemporariesa re included, of Theodosius and a devout Christian. Having visited Jerome
and even the author himself (lSS). The aim is apologetic. in Bethlehem, it seems,D exter came away the recipient of the
'
Jerome proclaims ash is chief models Suetonius'work of the same treatise. In it he was appropriately flattered: both he and his
name and Cicero's Brutus, and setso ut to demonstrate that the father, bishop Pacianus of Barcelona, are accorded the warmest
achievementso f Christian scholarship and literature are in no praise (ro6; r3z). Other contemporaries were treated less
way inferior to those of the pagans. Celsus, Porphyry and charitably. Jerome forestalled criticism by advising those who
Julian, he warns, those savage denigrators of Christ, will no were omitted to blame their own obscurity rather than the
longer be able to accuset he Christians of uneducated simplicity. author's lack of industry Qrod.).And he hinted darkly at the
On the contrary, they will be forced to recognize their own faults of a personal enemy, iefixing to proffer a verdict on the
lack of learning (protf.). Jerome furthers his aim with some writings of Ambrose, lest he be castigated for adulation---or for
subtlety. The persistent and insidious addition of laudatory being truthful (rz4).
epithets cannot fail to convey to the reader an exaggerated In his undertakingJerome had no predecessorsH. is informa-
impression of the attainments of the Fathers of the Church.z No tion comes,h e affirms, from Eusebiusa nd from his own reading
wonder that the De Viris lllustribus was so popular in the of the authors discussed( protf.). These sourcesh e supplements
Christian Middle Ages.r from personal recollection. Does his chapter on Tertullian,
The historical context is not irrelevant. Christianity was on therefore, derive solely from his reading of Tertullian and his
the threshold of its final victory. In 39r the emperor Theodosius encounter with Paul of Concordia?
issued an edict forbidding the public celebration of pagan
cults.l Almost at once the great Serapeum in Alexandria was' With Constantine tJre Christian church emerged from dark-
destroyed, and the ruin of other important shrines was soon to nessi nto light. For the fourth and subsequentc enturies there is
follow.s In 392 pagan hopes rose again when Bugenius was put a vast masso f evidence concerning its history; and for the fourth
up as emperor by Arbogast the Frank. But Arbogast and centuryJerome could draw on his own memory and the recol-
Eugenius were defeated in September 3g4 at the battle of the lections of older contemporaries. Such oral sources might
Frigidus, and paganism ceasedt o be a political force.6O r rather, sometimes,a s with the story of Cyprian's reading of Tertullian,
the early fifth century saw a coalescenceo f the two cultural produce reliable information for the middle of the third century.
traditions, Christian and pagan.zA nd, if pagan scholarship and But that was exceptional. For the years before 3oo, the genuine
learning saw a final flowering with Macrobius, nevertheless evidence outside Eusebius was almost as exiguous then as it
Jerome's boast about the past came true in the present: is now. Its volume was inflated early by legend and invention:
Christian learning was now at least equal to pagan. sometimes even Eusebius was taken in, as by the fictitious
exchange of letters between Jesus and Abgar, which was
t ApP. r.
preserved in the state archives at Edessa.t
zNote the following figurcs:'elegans' occurs sixteen times;'clarus' and its
derivatives twelve; 'insignis' eleven; 'eloquens' or 'eloqucntia'eightl 'enrditus'or The earliest Christians to write in Latin pose a special prob-
'eruditio'
seven;'disertus' six. lem. For Eusebius had little interest in the development of
(rrg Frozr )t.he details, A. Fede4 Studicn ztm Sclriftstcllnkatalog dcs luiligm Hinonymus Christianity in the western half of the Roman Empire, except
tCod. Tlpod, XVI. ro, ro: nemo se hostiis polluatr... nemo delubra adeat, when it impinged on the eastern half. His knowledge of Chris-
templa perlustret et mortali opere formata simulacra suspiciat, etc. tian literature in Latin was extremely restricted. Of Minucius
5 Rufinus, HE XI. zz tr.
c O. Seeck, Gcsehichtdcz s Untergangds er antikm l|clt Y (rgrg), zr7 tr, Felix and Victorinus of Poetovio he appears entirely ignorant,
z As Gibbon perceived (Dulinc anil Fall, Ch. XXVIII). tHEl.rS.Sft.
6 THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME 7
and he could bring Cyprian into his EcclesiasticaHl istory only he was betrayed by a slave and obtained leave to compose a
becauseh e found some letters from Cyprian and Cornelius in defenceo f his faith, which he read in the Senate. Nevertheless,
the episcopal archives at Antioch and becauseh e was named in the Senate sentencedh im to be beheaded, becausea n ancient
a letter ofDionysius ofAlexandria.t His knowledge ofTertullian law forbade confessingC hristians who had been denounced to
was confined to the Apologeticuma, nd that in a poor Greek be set free. Jerome is here clearly dependent on Eusebius, and
translation, which he uses simply as a historical witness to in the case of Apollonius copies his very words. His belief that
certain facts or alleged facts for which he has little or no better Apollonius was a senator is no more than an inference from his
evidence.zT hus Tertullian'is cited for Pilate's letter to Tiberius trial before the Senate: Eusebius strongly implies that he was
'
about Jesus and the emperor's letter to the Senate in favour of not, when he assertso nly that he was famous for his learning
the Christians, for the persecutionso f Nero and Domitian, for and philosophy.l The work by Victor whose titleJerome quotes
Pliny's execution of Christians, and for the miracle of the was written in Greek. For it was Victor's contribution to a
'Thundering
Legion'.r Eusebius missed, however, the state, conflict which broke out in Asia and in which all the other
ments in another work that Severus protected some senators disputants wrote in Greek.z As for the other short tracts, it
who were Christians from the fury of the mob, and that must remain doubtful whether Jerome knew of anytJring
Caracalla was virtually brought up as a Christian.r These besides the letters of excommunication which Victor sent to
would have constituted valuable support for his interpretation Asia.c Jerome's belief that Victor and Apollonius wrote in
of Christian history.s Jerome's treatment of the early Latin Latin is a simple but erroneous deduction from the fact that
Fathers is thus of necessity often entirely independent of they wrote in Rome. Hippolytus still wrote in Greek a genera-
Eusebius. tion later, even when attacking the bishop of Rome with a
According to Jerome, the first Christian to be distinguished Roman audience in view.
in Latin letters was Seneca( rz). Jerome admits that he would After Tertullian (53), the next Latin writer is Minucius Felix
not have included him but for his correspondencew ith Paul, (58). He was a famous advocate at Rome who composed the
which was widely read.o He quotes a remark from one of the dialogue OctaaiusJ. erome refuseso n stylistic grounds to admit
letters, and adds that Seneca died two years before Peter and Minucius' authorship of another work attributed to him, De
Paul. PerhapsJ erome's obvious caution should be interpreted Fato or Contra Mathematicosa, nd concludes by recording that
as disbelief in the authenticity of the letters.z Lactantius mentioned 1titn.+ Jerome has clearly read the
The next two Latin writers in Jerome's catalogue in fact Octauiusa nd the De Fato. He has inferred Minucius' profession
wrote in Greek. Victor, who was the thirteenth bishop of Rome and place of residence from the former.s But, though he cor-
and ruled tfre church for ten years under Septimius Severus, rectly puts him after Tertullian, he fails to assign Minucius a
'super
wrote quaestione paschae' and other short tracts (34). precised ate.'
Apollonius was a senator of Rome (42).t Utd.r Commodus For Cornelius, bishop of Rome, Jerome gives a catalogue of
his writings, adding the date and length of his episcopate, the
I HEvI.43.3; VII. g.
zA. Ilarnack, Tcxh u. Untcrs.V III. 4 (1892), I ff. name of his successorL ucius and that he died a martyr (66).
t HEII.2.4tr.;II.25.4;III.zo.7 (alsoc iting Hegesippus)I;I I. 93. g; V. 5. St r Jerome has taken the final items from his edition of Eusebius'
(also citing Apollinaris). Chroni.clea,an d perhaps ultimately from the Chronographer of
Ie TFoerr tutlhlieasne, leStctearps,. 4.c f5. f,C. W. Barlow5, C fE, HpisEto Vla.c zSre. nrc cfaf.ea d Paulum ct Pauli ad 354.?T he list of Cornelius' works is copied from Eusebius, not
Smccam 'quac oocantui ( r gg8) ; A, Momigliano, Contributo alla storia degti studi classici I HE V. zr. z. For tle problems posed by the various accou.otso f Apollonius'
(1955), 13 ff. trial, cf. tRS LVIII (1968), 4o; 46 ff.
z Barlow, o.c. Br. 2H EV. z3 f.; d. III. gr. e.
e A fourth century phrase, d. R. Sgnc, Ammianus and tlu Histnria Augusta 1968), t HEV.24. g. t Dia.I nst.V , r. na. s Oct. z. r ff.
t52. 6 GCSX LVII. zr8 f. t Mon, Genn.H ist,, Arct. Ant, IX. 75.
8 THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME 9
corrected Eusebiust hrough his knowledge of Cyprian. Eusebius
without a serious blunder: the second letter which Jerome
'de alleged that the schism originated with Novatus, a priest at
attributes to him (that Novatiano et de his qui lapsi sunt')
Rome.t But the correspondenceo f Cyprian reveals that it was
correspondst o what appearsi n Eusebiusa s a letter of Cyprian.t
Novatian who fomented trouble at Rome, while Novatus
But Jerome has been able to add a fact from his knowledge of
opposed Cyprian in Carthage and went to Rome only after the
Cyprian, that the bishop of Carthage had sent Cornelius
start of the dissensions.z
eight letters.z
On Cyprian, Jerome is both well informed and owes nothing Jerome knows little about Victorinus of Poetovio (74). Apart
from a notice of his martyrdom (which lacks a date), he merely
to Eusebius (67). He had read the Vita Cypriani by Pontius as
refers to and makes brief observations upon his works. The
well as the works of Cyprian himself. He relates that Cyprian
source of the latter can only be the works themselves and
at first taught rhetoric until he was converted to Christianity by
the priest Caecilius. Once a Christian, he gave all his wealtJr to Jerome's reflections upon them.r The sole earlier mention of
Victorinus anywhere is a passing (and confusing) reference in
the poor, and soon became a priest and the bishop of Carthage.
Jerome declines to give a catalogue of his works since they are Optatus.+P erhapsJ erome's knowledge of Victorinus' works and
martyrdom was acquired during his youth in Dalmatia.s
too famous, and the chapter closesb y recording that Cyprian
Arnobius taught rhetoric at Sicca under Diocletian (79). His
was martyred under Valerian and Gallienus, on the same day
pupilsincludedLactantius( Bo),w howassummonedwithF laviuso
as Cornelius but in a different year. Though the information
the grammarian to Nicomedia to teach rhetoric, still under
about Cyprian's death comes from another hagiographical
Diocletian. The Latin rhetor lacked pupils in the Greek city,
source (perhaps the actap roconsularia)t,h e rest of the chapter is
and turned to writing.'In his old age he became the tutor of
drawn from Pontius. Before Jerome it is Pontius alone who
Constantine'ss on Crispus in Gaul.Jerome also givest he custom-
relates that Cyprian gave away all that he possessed.Tr here is
ary catalogue of the writings of Arnobius and Lactantius. The
also an error. Pontius reports the name of the man who con-
works of the latter could be the source of all the biographical
verted Cyprian as Caecilian6;+Jerome reproducest he name
information in these two chapters. He composed a symposium
as Caecilius and declares that it was from him that Cyprian
in Africa while young, a hexameter poem describing his
acquired the cognomeCna ecilius.
journey from Africa to Nicomedia, and a book entitled
The short notice'on Pontius (68) need be based on nothing
Grammaticusn, one of which is still extant. The dialogue and
besidesh is encomiastic biography of Cyprian.s That he was a
poem ought to have depicted the author's life at Sicca and his
deacon of the bishop was either stated in Jerome's manuscript
teacher Arnobius. The Grarnnaticus wlll presumably have
of the Vin. (though it is anonymous in the extant manuscripts),
narrated Lactantius' miseries in Nicomedia and analysed the
or is an inference from it whose validity is uncertain.6
failure of Diocletian's attempt to make Latin the one language of
Novatian was a priest in Rome who attempted to usurp the
the empire. As for his being tutor to Crispus, that could be a
positiono f Corneliusa nd founded the secto f the Novatiani (7o).
Jerome adds that the instigator was Novatus, a priest under fact still remembered in the late fourth century which Jerome
need not have found in a written source. He might, however,
Cyprian, and gives a list of Novatian's works. Here Jerome has
I HEYI. 43.9. I HE VI.43. r. But the Chronirle appears to have distinguished the two (@,5
tit VVViiitzfaa. W CClibyaipanrnii ia n4e,..E 7rP.. pS,Xo m^LeIe Vd,i XtoLrsVp , riXntL V'CIaI,e cXiliLuVs'I:I Ia,n uLnIj,u LstIiIf,i eLd IeXm, eLnXda.tiont o XXtzr . DL Cieetyt plzeSr6 ic)ah.insis ,n mEo.Dw po pne.xaxIttY.a n;I .t , gcL.f;. ELI. I.Dekkers, Clutis Patrum Ldtinorumz (196r), t6 ff.
ha5rm Poonntiziues w' aituht hJeorroshmipe .was denied, for inadequate rearons,b y R. Reitzenstein, 5 For Jerome's education, cf. F. de Cavallera, St. JCrdtne,S a uie et son auwe I
(rgzz), 6 ff.
Sitcz Aw.g Islabrnn.da .c Hk,c iTdcexlbtcuu g.c UAr nhtocdts.d ,X . X%XsIXs.., P3h il(.r-9hri3st)., Kzl. f.r9rg, Abh, 14, 46 ff. e Or Fabius, cf. the edition of C. A. Bernoulli (t8g5), xlv.
IO THE EVIDENCE OF JEROME THE EVIDENCEO FJEROME II
have taken it from the lost letters of Lactantius, which he had perhaps refer to Tertullian's own feelings and behaviour as
certainly read.lJerome himself reveals that Lactantius addres- evidenced in his Montanist writings.
sed two books of epistlest o Acilius Severus (rrr), Pretorian Two ofJerome's assertionsr emain whose origin and validity
Prefect, ordinary consul for 3e3 and Prefect of the City not are yet untested: that Tertullian was a priest, and that his
long after.z father was a 'centurio proconsularis'. Modern scholarship has
built much on accepting Jerome, using these two ostensible
Jerome's sources are identifiable. Almost everything comes facts both to determine the chronology of Tertullian's works and
from Eusebius where he is relevant, or from the works of the to explain his whole intellectual development.t But both mani-
writers discussed.T he only items which come from elsewhere festly derive from Jerome's reading (or misreading) of Ter-
derive from memory or a hagiographical source. There is a tullian. Since there are treatises cast in the form of sermons,i t
strong presumption, therefore, that the whole of the chapter on would be easy for anyone to conclude that their author really
Tertullian, excepting only the story heard from Paul of Con- was a priest.z And Jerome himself will have wished to believe
cordia, derives from Tertullian's writings. that a writer whom he so much admired was a priest, especially
Tertullian himself frequently states or implies that he is in a priest who (like himself) had been treated badly by the Roman
Carthage in the reigns of Severusa nd Caracalla. That he lapsed clergy.r The facts are easily ascertained. Tertullian never
into Montanism in middle age is possibly true; but it need be describes himself as ordained or appeals to his position as a
no more than an inference from the long series of his works. priest in order to strengthen an argument. On tJre contrary,
The assertiont hat he lived to an extreme old age may perhaps he twice classesh imself among the laity.+ As for Tertullian's
rest on oral tradition.3 More probably (and some tracts by father, the title 'centurio proconsularis' is unparalleled and
Tertullian were known toJerome only as titles in a cataloguer), improper.s It betrays ignorance of what troops were at the
his extreme old age derives from the same inference. For on service of the proconsul of Africa in the second century. He
one matter of some importance Jerome is silent. He fails to had an urban cohort permanently stationed in or near Car-
mention the contemporary Tertullianistae. This Carthaginian thage, and a detachment sent annually from the legion III
sect was received back into the church by the bishop, but only Augusta at Lambaesis.oN o centurion in either body of troops
after it had propagated itself in Rome by gaining some spec- was a 'centurio proconsularis'. Nor did any centurion any-
tacular conversionsin 3BB.s where ever bear that title: 'proconsularis' is never (for obvious
'invidia
Tertullian lapsed into Montanism et contumeliis
clericorum Romanae ecclesiae'.W hat doesJerome mean? That
t e.g., P. Monceaux, Rca,P hil.2X XII (1898),82 ff.; W. H. C. Frcnd, Maillr-
Tertullian was impelled by the envy and insults of the clergy of doma ndP ersecutioi.nn t heE arl Church( 1965), 366.
Rome ? If the words are interpreted thus, a further problem z But an error, cf. p. r r7.
arises. Has Jerome preserved a valuable fact, or has he pro- tr EMxoluhrrtm.Caansnt,. T o,. gc;. 3M8o7n f.. rz. z. For full discussion,H . Koch, Hbt. Jahrbruhf ur
jected back into the past his own quarrel with the priests of GdnesgcsetlschaftXXVl(lIl go7), 95tr.;leitsclv.filr Kirclungcsch.XXXV(I9r4)' I ff.;
Rome ? The latter seemsf ar more likely.o But the phrase could TluologischSe tudfunu nd Kritiken CIII (r93I), ro8 ff'; II. von Qampenhausen,
r CSEtXr XVII. r55f f. Kofi rcKhotcirhlu'ss Aamrgtu umde ngtcsis (ttthboluu gVho lhnnoot dtthti ne dmzonsc tr simtapnJo arhtarhnut)n dwaertract( regx5pgl)o, dre5do bffy. PS.o mdee
32 JAe. rComhaes statagtneosl',f Leertsu Fra vsitxeissd sce Ia': fPorrl fahtiusr ues dec o Rf o'fneer atuur B', acso-Emmppairree( D 1e9 6Vz)ir,7, 7Il l.f .gz3 aLlathboriuogllhe ,t oB usull.p dp'oasncrT . elirtttu. cllita dn'a rac hla,cy hmrlatn. I IcI om(rc9srh 3a),r dr 6ctv effo' tToh meroed telrrne mpraiettsetsr r(ee.sgt.s,t
r3I0 J;e rr3om2.e, EPp, LXIV . zz (De Aamn aestibts). s App. r g. JC. laQsusaitsstYen:E., aPial2hI onlotign ITI lu(oIgh5g3 )(,1 925467)i ,rS t.) .L. Greanslade,T lu Library of Clvistian
- c S. von Sychowski, Hicronlnrusa ls Lilterarhistmiher( 1894), t4z; C. Mohrmann, s For the normal titles of centurions, see T. Wegeleben', Dic Rangor&wngd er
Ehtdzss ur le Latin desC hrCtienlsll ( r 965), gB7 f. On the other side, however, note A. fimischmC cnturianc(nD iss, Berlin, r9t3), 7 ff'; A. von Domaszewski-B.D obson,
Ilarnack, Die Clmnolagb dcr alblvistliclnn Liltztaht bis EascbiusII (r9o$, zgr4 f.; Dic Rangordnngd zsr dmisclung tossz (t967), xxiii ff.; 9o tr
P. de Labriolle,L a cise montanis(trrget 3), 954. c R. Cagnat, L'ande romained 'Afriqwz (r9r3), zl r f,