The Treatise on the Apostolic Tradition of St

Hippolytus of Rome Bishop and Martyr Apostolik■

paradosis Antipope Hippolytus pdf download

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-treatise-on-the-apostolic-
tradition-of-st-hippolytus-of-rome-bishop-and-martyr-apostolike-
paradosis-antipope-hippolytus/

Explore and download more ebooks or textbooks

at ebookfinal.com
We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebookfinal.com
for more options!.

Hippolytus The Bacchae Webster s French Thesaurus Edition

Euripides

https://ebookfinal.com/download/hippolytus-the-bacchae-webster-s-
french-thesaurus-edition-euripides/

Hippolytus The Bacchae Webster s German Thesaurus Edition

Euripides

https://ebookfinal.com/download/hippolytus-the-bacchae-webster-s-
german-thesaurus-edition-euripides/

great treatise on the stages of the path to enlightenment

Tsong-Kha-Pa

https://ebookfinal.com/download/great-treatise-on-the-stages-of-the-
path-to-enlightenment-tsong-kha-pa/

Politics and Tradition Between Rome Ravenna and

Constantinople A Study of Cassiodorus and the Variae 527
554 M. Shane Bjornlie
https://ebookfinal.com/download/politics-and-tradition-between-rome-
ravenna-and-constantinople-a-study-of-cassiodorus-and-the-
variae-527-554-m-shane-bjornlie/
The Life of St Catherine of Siena The Classic on Her Life
and Accomplishments as Recorded by Her Spiritual Director
1st Edition St. Catherine Of Siena
https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-life-of-st-catherine-of-siena-the-
classic-on-her-life-and-accomplishments-as-recorded-by-her-spiritual-
director-1st-edition-st-catherine-of-siena/

Terrible Exile The Last Days of Napoleon on St Helena

Unwin

https://ebookfinal.com/download/terrible-exile-the-last-days-of-
napoleon-on-st-helena-unwin/

A Treatise on Money The Applied Theory of Money 2nd ed.

Edition Keynes

https://ebookfinal.com/download/a-treatise-on-money-the-applied-
theory-of-money-2nd-ed-edition-keynes/

A Treatise on Money The Pure Theory of Money 2nd ed.

Edition Keynes

https://ebookfinal.com/download/a-treatise-on-money-the-pure-theory-
of-money-2nd-ed-edition-keynes/

Treatise on Geomorphology The Foundations of Geomorphology

1st Edition Antony R. Orme And Dorothy Sack (Eds.)

https://ebookfinal.com/download/treatise-on-geomorphology-the-
foundations-of-geomorphology-1st-edition-antony-r-orme-and-dorothy-
sack-eds/
The Treatise on the Apostolic Tradition of St Hippolytus
of Rome Bishop and Martyr Apostolikē paradosis
Antipope Hippolytus Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Antipope Hippolytus, Gregory Dix (editor), Henry Chadwick
(editor)
ISBN(s): 9780700702329, 0700702326
Edition: Reprint
File Details: PDF, 8.83 MB
Year: 2006
Language: english
THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION
OF ST HIPPOLYTUS
 ~ l T O C " r O ~KH
J lT~j'~.AOCIC

THE TREATISE ON
THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION
OF ST HIPPOLYTUS OF ROME
Bishop and Martyr

Edited by
THE REV. GREGORY DIX
MONK OF NASHDOM ABBEY

Reissued
with corrections preface
and bibliography
by
HENRY CHADWICK

Master of Peterhouse College

in the University of Cambridge

LONDON AND NEW YORK

First published 1937
Second revised edition 1968
Reissued with additional corrections 1992

Transferred to Digital Printing 2006

Published in UK & USA by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
270 Madison Ave, New York NY 10016
ISBN 0 7007 0232 6

(c) Elmore Abbey 1991

All rights reserved

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hippolytus, Antipope, ca. 170-235 or 6.

[Traditio apostolica. English]
The treatise on the apostolic tradition of St. Hippolytus of Rome,
bishop and martyr = Apostolike paradosis] I edited by Gregory Dix,
reissued with corrections, preface, and bibliography by Henry
Chadwick.
p. em.
Parallel title romanized.
Translation of: Traditio apostolica, the Latin text of the lost
Greek treatise Apostolike paradosis (title romanized).
Reprint with additional corr. Originally published: 2nd rev. ed.
London: S. P. C. K., 1968.
Includes index.
1. Christian life-Early church, ca. 30-600-Sources. 2. Church
history-Early church. ca. 30-600-Sources. I. Dix. Gregory.
II. Chadwick, Henry, 1920- . III. Title. IV. Title: Apostolike
paradosis. V. Title: Apostolic tradition.
BR65.H84T7313 1991
270.1-dc20 91-7205
CIP
Publisher's Note
The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this
reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original may be
apparent
 REVERENDISSIMO DOMINO
DOMINO

GUALTERO HOWARD FRERE,

C.R., S.T.P.,

PRAESULI, PATRI, MAGISTRO

 CONTENTS
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION AND SELECT
BIBLIOGRAPHY

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION pageix

ptUJeix
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Apostolic
i. The A poBtolic Tradition xi
ii. St Hippolytus xii
Apostolic
the A
iii. Date of the· poBtolic Tradition xxxv
iv. The RepresentativeValue of the Evidenceof the
postolic Tradition
A poBtolic xxxvii
xxxvii
Infl.uence of the A poBtolic
v. The Inftuence postolic Tradition xliv
THE TEXTUAL MATERIALS Iii
i. The Latin Version lili
liii
ii.
11. The Arabic,Ethiopic,SahidicandBohairic
SahidicandBohairicVersions lvii
iii.
Ill. The Testamentof our Lord lxvi
iv .
iv. The Apostolic Constitutions lxxi
lxxi
v. The "Epitome
The" Epitomeof Apostolic Constitutions,Bk viii
viii""
or "Constitutionsthrough Hippolytus" lxxiv
VI. The Canonsof Hippolytus lxxvi
SYMBOLS USED IN THE TEXT lxxxii
ABBREVIATIONS lxxxii
THE ApOSTOLIC TRADITION page 1
Part I. Of the Clergy 2
Part II. Of the Laity 23
Part III. Church Observances 43
TEXTUAL NOTES 73
INDEX 87
I have to acknowledgemy deepobligation to the Managers
of the Rort
Hort Memorial Fund of the University of Cambridge
andto variousfriends,without whosegenerousfinancial help
the publicationof this volume would have beenimpoBBible.
I wish also to expreBB
expressmy cordieJ
cordial thanksto the staff of the
CambridgeUniversity PreBB, whose patience,care and skill
in this somewhatcomplicated piece of book-making have
been beyond all praise. Above all, lowe a great debt of
gratitude to Dr W. K. Lowther Clarke of the S.P.C.K.,
S.P.C.K.,
without whosefrequentand resourcefulcounselthesepages
would e.imost
almost certainly havehad to remainin manuscript.
Gr. D.
 PREFACE
PREFACE TO
TO THE SECOND EDITION
THE SECOND EDITION
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
AND SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
This book first appearedin 1937, 1937,and was a pioneercritical edition
of a documentwith a transmissionof extraordinarycomplexity.
For technicalscholarsits text has now been replaced replacedby the fine
edition producedby Dom BernardBotte in 1963. H163.11 Nevertheless,
there remainsa considerabledemandfor the earlier book, partly
becauseof Dom Gregory Dix Dix's's brilliantly acute introduction,
partly becausehis judgementon the textual problems retains
high value in its own right, and partly becaus becausee he provided an
English version for the convenience of students. students. In In many
respects Dix
respects Dix's's edition is still a very necessarycomplementto
Botte's.
Botte's.
Dix
Dix's's English translationwas not the first. He was anticipated
by the well-known American scholarB. S. Easton((IS7i-19iiO) 1877- 1950) in
1934. An unrevisedreprint of this translationwas issued in 1 \)62
1962
bv
by Archon Books, U. S.A. Easton's
U.S.A. Easton's volume is handyhandv for the
b~ginner
beginner and easy to use: but it has
and has to be admitterl"
admitterl that the
studentpaysa high pricefor theconvenience,sincethe truth about
the complexitiesof the textual evidenceis largely hiddenfrom his
sight. Moreover, Easton not only only left out a few well-attested
passagesbut took risks in his translationwhich the readercann cannotot
check or correct books. In
correct without recourseto other books. In onc
one respect
Easton prescribeda pattern for Dix: Dix : he divided the
the work into
chapterdivisions and sub-divisions
sub-divisionswhich Dix (against his own
better judgement) decided to keep for the convenienceof a
uniform system
systemof reference.
reference. The samenumberingwas preserv preserved ed
in the littl
littlee edition of the Latin and Greek fragments
fragments together
together
with a French translationproducedby Dom Botte in Ul46. I !l4(P2 In
his large critical edition, however
however, , Dom Botte has felt free to
adopt new chapter divisions. At one important point he has
rearran
rearra.ngedged the order (see p. j below), and the presenteditor is
convinced that he is right to have done so. But there have been
convinced
strong practical deterr e nts to making any far-reac
deterrents hing changes
far-reaching
in the printing of this seco nd edition. Accordingly, I give here
second here aa
concordancetable of the relation betweenthe two editions. editions.
1 La TraditTradit;o/l A1,osto/iqll(,(' d, Saillt
ioll Apostoliqlt Saint Hippolyte:
Hi ppolyte: fssni
e88f1.i de "constitul;on
r,colIstitllfiOIl par
pitr Bel'll anl
IkrllaJ'{1
Botte. LiturgiewiRsenRchaftlich('
BottI'. LiturJo(i('wissens~haftli('h{' Quellen Forschungen3!J
<.>ucllen und Forsehungen (MiillRter, IHIi:l).
3\J (Miillst<'l', I\Jti:1).
S( ' \lr ~e" ('hl·'·t
2 S"urces ('hr,'lienne, iel1lH's II (Paris, 1946).
(Paris, 1\J46).
b PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
Concordance of the chapter numbering in Dix and Botte
DIX BOTTE DIX BOTTE DIX BOT'fE
I I 16.9-25 I6 26.Ji) :l2 2.')
2 2 I7 I7 27 :1o
3 3 IS I8 28.1 5 :H
4 4 I9 I9 2H.fi s :l2
5 5 20 20 29 :tl
6 6 2I 21 :10 :l.t
7 omit 22 21 :H :35
8 7 23 21 :32.1 :m
9 8 24 22 :l2.2 3i
10 9 25 23 32.3 4 :1s
II 10 26.I 23 :3:1 :l!)
I2 II 26.2--i 26 34 40
I3 I2 26.5-6 2i :3ii 41
I4 13 26.7-I2 28 36 .tl
I5 I4 26.I3 29 3i 42
I6.I 8 15 26.14 l i 24 :1s .t:l

The Progress of Work on the Text

It is onlv fair to add that, for all its excellence:;;, Dom Botte ':-;
edition o'f I n6:3 will not be the last word on this controversial and
difficult text. His volume appeared in the same ~'ear as an
important diplomatic edition of the Latin \·ersion contained in
the palimpsest in the Yerona Cathedral library. This was thP
work of the Swedish philologist Erik Tidner. 3 Tidner"s readings
diverge in a numl){'r of details from those printed in Botte. Tlwn'
can be no doubt that more critical work is needed on the Orit>ntal
eddetu·t•. :\ new edition of thP Arabie Canons (d lliji}Jolyfll8
ap1wared in I!Hifi. edited b,\' Bene-( ;eorges ( 'oqui11 (Patroloyia
Ori1 nfali8 XXX l. ~). In 1!14ti a ~ o o d edition of the Ethiopic
version. ha:-;ed on mon• manust'l'i pt:-< t ha 11 were anti Ia bl(' to
Honwr. was prodnePd by H. Duensing.~ Dm·n:-<in~·,.; disa~r('t•­
ments with Horner are not very eon,.;idt>ra hie. Tlw ('opt it'
\·ersion was re-editPd with a Uerma11 translation in I !1.14 hv
\\'alter Till and ,J. Leipoldt.:• The late Dr Till himself wa,.; know;,
3 /Jidnsntliflt· Apw.:tolur11m rut/fJI/11111 rrrlf'sia-'tfirorum lrruliltouis flJIOsfofl,.,, ,., f'.«/oJif.'-i

latiuae. Tt>x!t• und l"ntt•rsu<"hlllll!'"" /.-, (lkrliH, 1!1ti:l).

• lier flflhioJ>i,.,·/,, 1'1·rt d~r
1\.irdlnltrrdtutuq 11!-' llif'l'"'!l'· .\hhandhll>j!<·n d!'r
:\kadt•mi<' rlPr \Yi""''nH<'haftt•n in t ;ottin~<'n.
phil. hist. Kl .• Ill F • .tw·. :l:.?. Tlw Et hi• •pi<"
ha" manv mon• varia11ts than l>ix waK a hlP to rPPonl.
• Tt·xtt• untl l'ut...rRHt"hull~t·ll .-.~
( BPrlin, l\1.->-l).
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION c
to be dissatisfiedwith this book, and someof the reviewerswere
severeto ititS-not always justly so. The volume is primarily an
6-not always

edition of the Sahidic version, with notes on the variants of the

Bohairic version. There is probably more to be said about the
Bohairic translation. Dom Botte is perhaps over-inclined to
dismiss it as being too recentand too likely to be contaminated
by the Arabic tradition. The colophonin the Berlin manuscripP
(or. quart. 519 (9488), now at Tubingen
Tiibingen University Library)
explains that the version was made in A.D. 1804,1804, and that the
translation has been made from the southerninto the northern
dialect, that is from Sahidic, not from Arabic. Admittedly the
translator'snative tonguemust havebeenArabic, but his version
may still be a valuablewitness to the Sahidic tradition, like the
Ar~bic canon-collection(also made from the Sahidic).
One important witness, the Testamentof our Lord, written in
Greek in the fourth century but preservedin Syriac, has not
lately received any special critical study. Rahmani'soriginal
edition of 1899 has been reprinted (1966).
(1966). The English transla-
transla-
tion by J.J. Cooper and Bishop A. J. J. Maclean (1902), giving a
revised translationand valuablenotes, remainsa rare book.
Two new Greek fragmentshave to be reportedhere. The first
is preservedin a dogmaticfiorilegium
florilegium of patristic quotationscon-
tained in two manuscripts,cod. Ochrid.86
Ochrid.86 (saec.XIII) f.192 and
Paris.gr.900(saec. XV) f.112. The discoverer,ProfessorMarcel Marcel
Richard, printed the excerpt from the Ap08tolic
Apostolic Tradition in
Symbolae08loense8
Osloenses38 (1963), page 79, and communicatedit to
Dom Botte in time for its inclusion in his edition of 1963. This
new fragment preservesthe original Greek of chapter xxxii. xxxii.l1
(= Botte 36):
'EK TWV 8l U'Ta.{EWV TWV
nov o£aT~Ewv 'TWV aYLwv a.1TOUTOAWV·
a.1TOaT<)Awv·
1TO., oE
1TOS 8£ 1T£UTO,
ma'TOS 1THpauBw,
1TElpaa()w, 1TpO TOV TtVO, ydJaaa()at, EuXap£uTLa,
nvos YEvuauBa£, Evxapta'TLas
-\\ f3 aVEW'
p..ETU/lap..
/1-ETal\a/1- ' El' "
H yap 1T£UTH \ ''f3
1TtaTEl /1-ETal\af3O£,
p..ETalla Ot, ovo
ouo
,~,
,~'" av
~ ()avaat/Lov
B ', ,,
avaatp..ov Tt,
ns
8wn av'T<p p..ETa 'TOVTO, ov KanaxiJaEl aVTOV
OWTJ aUTcp /LETa TOVrO, OU KanUXVUH aUTOV (cf. Mark xvi.18),
The secondGreek fragment comesfrom a ritual for the unction
of the sick containedin an eleventh or twelfth-century manu-
script at the monasteryof St Catherineon Mount Sinai. It was
found by the RussianscholarA. Dmitrievski and printed also by
A. Trebelas, M£KPOV EVXOAOYLOV (Athens 1950-5), i, p. 180. In
MtKPOV EUXOAOYWV

• Lefort in Museon (1954), pp. 403-5; Botte in BuU. Theol.

.'lfu8eon67 (1954). Thiol. Anc. Mid.
Med. 7 (1954).
(1954),
pp. 26 f.
7, In
In Botte's
Botte's edition of 1963.
1963, p. xxii, this manuscript
manuscriptis said to
to be in the British
Museum, but this
this must be a slip.
d PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

1964 Dr E. Segelberg8 drew attention to the fact that it is an

evident adaptation of the prayer for the consecration of oil
contained in Ap. Trad. v. It reads:
wEK7TEJLlfOV, KvptE, TiJv m077JTa Tov £.\l.ov> aov E7Tt Tov Kap7Tov rij>
El\ata>
,, I ~
TOVTOV, ~ ' OV.. EXptaa>
Ot
w ' ~ -1.. I R \ ~
tEp€ t>, 7TpO't'7JTa>, paatl\€ L> TE Kat
'

JLapTvpa> Kat evi.Svaa> Tfj XPTJaTOTT)Tl aov StKaLOaVVT)> evSvJLa, iva

I \ ""' '\ ..J..,. I \ I , N \ ) .J. 1\
YEV7JTat 7Tavn T£P ai\EL't"'JL€V£P Kat Y£VOJL€V£P EL> OVT)atV Kat w't'£1\Hav
~f-• ,.... \
't'vXTJS Kat aWJLaTO> Kat 7TV€VJLaTO>, Et> a7TOTp07T7JV 7TaVTO> KaKOV,
I ( \ ) I , ' \ \ ,..

El> Uy£lav Tip XPLOJLI.vr.p Sul. TOV Kvplov ~wvv 'l7JaofJ [XptaTofJ].
Segelberg draws attention to other descendants of Hippolytus'
prayer scattered in strangely diverse places, such as the Coptic
Euchologion of the White Monastery (edited by E. Lanne in
Patrologia Orientalis XXVIII, 2, 393ff) and the "Gelasian"
sacramentary (p. 70 Wilson, no. 381 Mohlberg).
Tidner's edition of the Latin text in the Verona palimpsest has
been mentioned above. In the present reprint I have tried to
take account of his revised readings, but have not consistently
altered Dix's Latin text to make it conform with Tidner's printed
text except where Tidner explicitly corrects Hauler. Hauler's
work of 1900 was masterly, and left relatively little for later
study to glean. There are a few places where Tidner diverges
from Hauler without noting the fact (lxxiii.15; lxxv. 20; lxxx. 20),
but as Tidner was not always impeccably served by his printer
these divergences may be simply misprints.

The Debate about the Authorship

R. H. Connolly in 1916 first made it a matter of argument (rather
than inspired conjecture) that an early third-century church'
order must be the foundation document underlying the Latin of
the Verona manuscript, the Oriental canon collections in Coptic,
Arabic, and Ethiopic, the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitu-
tions, and The Testament of our Lord. Connolly's monograph 9
remains an education to read, and contains much illuminating
commentary on the content of the work. His basic conclusion has
8
E. i:legelberg, "The Benedictio Olei in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus",
in Oriens Christimws 48 ( 1964 ), pp. 268-81. As Segel berg notes, its u_,xt suppor·ts the
Latin sanitatem against Dix's emendation (accepted by Botte) sanrtitntem.
9
The so.called Egyptian Church Order and derived dOf'uments, Texts and Htudics
VIII, 4 (1916).
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION e
remainedsecure.But not everyonehasacceptedhis identification
orderwith the work entitled Apostolic
of this recoveredchurch order Aposwlic
Tradition known to have been written by Hippolytus of Rome.
The principal argumentsfor identifying the recoveredchurch
order with Ap. Tr. may be tersely summarizedas follows:
(a) Hippolytus' name appearsas author in two of the derived
documents, namely the so-called Epitome of the Aposf,olic
Apostolic
Canons of Hippolytus (his name
Constitutions and the Arabic Carwns
appearsin Arabic as Aboulides). The Epitome introduces his
name at precisely the place where the compiler first begins to
incorporatematter directly from the recoveredchurch order.
(b) The statueof Hippolytus found in Romein 1551, now in the
Library,lO
Vatican Library, 10 gives a list of his writings, and namesa work
On charismatic gifts immediatelybefore the Apostolic Tradition.
The initial chapterof the recoveredchurch order, as attestedby
Latin, Greek,and Ethiopic, explainsthat the author,
au-thor, having said
everything necessaryconcerningcharismaticgifts, is now going
to deal with "the tradition that befits the churches".
argued,l1
It has been argued, II with some reason,that these considera-
tions taken by themselvesare not sufficient to prove what they
are claimed to show. The first point is especially weak, since
the ascription of an apostolic church order
orderto Hippolytus might
be comparedwith the claim of the Apostolic Constitutionsto be
mediated by Clement of Rome, disciple of St Peter. In the
Lausiac History of Palladius(c.
(c. 420), Hippolytus is said to have
been "known to the apostles" (H.L. 65). Accordingly, the
argument runs, the occurrence of Hippolytus' name in the
Epitomeand in the Arabic Carwns
Canonsof Hippolytus can be explained
on the hypothesisthat Hippolytus, with the reputationof being
a disciple of the apostles,was the kind of personto whom church
orders were easily ascribed. This argument, however, can be

,. The statuestood in the Vatican until the time of Pius IX, was then lllOVNI
10 moved to
the Lateran Museum, and was placed in the Vatican Library by John X XIII. The
best picturesand information about the discovery may be found in the inexpensive
San/'Ippolito dottore e martire del III 8ecolo
little book by G. Bovini, Sant'Ippolito secolo (Rome 1943).
1943).
11 The Dutch thesis of R. Lorentz, De Egyptische
Egypti8cheKerkordening en Hippol!lts
Hippolyts van
l'an
Rome (Ha.a.rlem 1929) was answeredin a very good monographby H. Elfers, Die
(Haarlem 1929)
Kirchenordnung Hippolyts von Rome (Paderborn1938). 1938). A strong sceptical attack
camefrom Dom H. Engberding,"Das angeblicheDokumentromischerLiturgie Litllrgie aus
ails
Jahrhunderts",in Mi8cellanea
dem Begiun des dritten JahrhundertB", MisceUanealiturgica in honorem L. C.
Mohlberg i (Rome 1948), answeredhim in ReA'h.
1948), pp. 47-71. Botte anRwered Thfol. Anc.
Rerh. de Thlol.
Med. 16 (1949),
Mid. (1949), pp. 177-85
177-85..
f PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

quickly reversed;that is, the existenceof a church order current

underthe nameof Hippolytus entitled Apostolic
Ap08tolic Tradition would
make it natural for a fifth-century writer to imagine that
Hippolytus must have beendirectly known to the apostles.
A much more formidable argument against ascribing the
recoveredchurch order to Hippolytus is the extremepaucity of
contactsand parallels between the church order and the later
liturgical practice of the Roman community.12 The principal
descendantsand imitators of the recoveredchurchchurch order lay in
the East. The Testamentof oj our Lord and the Apostolic
Ap08tolic Constitu -
Constitu-
tions point to currency in Syria. The Coptic archetype,from
which the extant Coptic, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions are all
ultimately derived, proves that the work was influential in
Egypt. The only strange figure is the Latin version of the
Verona palimpsest. This Latin version, indeed, bears so little
relation to other early Latin liturgies that there is at leastsome
a priori attractivenessabout the conjecture that the Latin
versionwas producedfor one of the Arian communitiesin North
Italy about350-40013 (Milan itself had anArian bishop,
bishop, Auxentius
from 355 to 373,
373, and there were other Western Arian centres).
The Arians tended strongly towards a liturgical conservatism.
It was one of their better theological argumentsthat the pre-
controversial, pre-Constantinianeucharistic formulas assumed
the subordination of the Son in mediating to the Father the
Church's prayers and thanksgivings.14 a An Arian group might
have been specially interestedin a pre-Nicene liturgi cal work
liturgical
with so augusta title. Nevertheless,it is not easyto discover in
the Verona Latin text any clear traces of Arianisms,
Arianisms, that is,
phrases which look like modifications in a specifically Arian
direction. So the conjecturecannotbe more than an interesting
guess.

12 This has been best argued

12 a"gued in a long paper by A. Salles Ro'",
i:lalles in He/} /l e de [,hisloi" des
ri, l'his/oirf
religions (1955). Salles has has also publisheda useful study of the baptis,"al baptislllal prayers prayers, ,
fr om Hippolytus but certainly
not from certainl y early,
early. interpolatedin the Ethiopi"
Ethiopi(' ver,ion vl' l',io11 after
ch. xxvii. Seehis provisional discussion in Trois antiquesritu.els
pl'Ovisional discussion rituels du
dn III/pUmp,
flllpt pwp, :-iollrc('s
~()ul'('.( ·S
Chretiennes59 (Paris.
Chretiennes (Paris, 19.')8).
13 The suggestionthat the translation'Jriginated
originatedin an Arian miliell
mili eu was first fil'8t l1Iad(',
Illadt',
I believe, by F. C. Burkitt in J.T.S.
J,T.S. XXXI (1930), p. 261. The h.vpoth('si"
hypothpsi8 is loohd lookpd on
with favour e.g. by A. F. Walls in Stud-iaStll.dia Patristica,
Pa/ristira, iii, Texte undun" Untersllchungen,
Untel'suphungell,
78 (Berlin 1961), p. 161, and by J. H. Crehan Crehan in J. T.S. n.S. xX (19M!).
J.T.S. (l!J!m), p. -t21.
p . .ttl.
14 A striking
striking exampleof the Arian argumentfrom lex orandi lP.r Ie." r.redpndi
rrpdpl1dl: Illay In ay he be
found in the fifth-century Arian fragmentsdiscoveredby Cardinal ~Iai. ~Iai, Scripl. I'I'pl
Sfripl. pl..
.vol'a coll.. III (1827), ii, pp,
Nova call pp. 208ft';
208ff; they are
are discussedby G. Merea!i Men'ati in St/ldi Stud; e
Test;
Testi 7 (1902).
(1902).
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION g
The fact that the recoveredchurchorderhadso largea posterity
in Egypt led ProfessorHanssensin 1959 to proposea series of
conjectural hypotheses. ls He suggestedthat Hippolytus was
15

originally an Alexandrian who moved to Rome to become a

Apo8tolic Tradition he was
presbyter there, and that in the Apostolic
describinghis liturgical ideals with his memories of Alexandria
as a model. This hypothesiswould account for the Egyptian
affinities of his churchorder. ProfessorHanssens'book is a mine
of learnedinformation, but his principal thesisis highly specula-
tive, and its plausibility might even appearweakenedif all his
argumentswere here to be rehearsed.
The crux of the entire debatemust be the internal evidenceof
the work itself. On any showing the recoveredchurch order is
century..
unquestionablya product of the first half of the third century
The Church is liable to persecutionand needsa ruling about the
statusof "confessors"who have been imprisonedfor their faith
(x.I-2, cf. xix.2). The church building is a private house(xvi. 1
I}.).
The liturgical practices fit well with other early third-century
evidence, for example in Tertullian and Cyprian. There is
nothing that requiresor even suggestsa later date: the rules for
the admissionof widows, virgins, subdeacons,and readers;the
organizationof the catechumenate;the admissionof infants to
baptism; the offerings of cheese,ls
cheese,16olives, and fruit (but not
vegetables;see p. mm below); the segregationof the sexes in
church services; the pattern of eucharistic rite with its basic
structure of thanksgiving, recitation of the Institution, the
Anamnesis, Invocation, and final doxology. Some curious
features actually point towards rather than away from Rome.Rome.
The Sanctusis absentfrom the Anaphora(if the transmittedtext
of the Latin and Ethiopic is what Hippolytus wrote; see below,
p. I). It is not certain that the Sanctushad a place in the

1.
•• J. M. Hanssens,La Liturgie d' H-ippolyte, Orientalia Christiana' Analecta 155
L-itury'i . d'Hippolyte,
appearedin 1965 with a substantialappendix
(Rome 1959). A reprint appearcd appel\dix of additional
notes.
notes principal thesis of the book is precarious,and the argument
. Although the principal
sometimesextravagant,the book containsmuch learning and valuablecomment.
,6
16 The blessingof cheesein ch. vi (the prayer seemsto echo Job x. x.l0)
l0) is preserved
It. helps to explain why St Perpetuahad a vision of a heavenly
only in the Latin. It
shepherdfeeding her with cheesein paradise paradise. Hippolytus' blessing of cheesegoes
. Hippolytus'
from the tree of life was the elixir of immortality
with a blessingof olive oil: the oil frolll
accordingto many ancienttexts. e.g. Life Eu 36; II Enoch viii.3-5;
Life of Adam and Et'e
Pilal, 3 (19); Acts(If Thomas157.
Apocalypseof Mosesix.3; Actsof Pilaff 157. For gnosticsources
seemy note on Origen, c.eds.
c.Cels. vi.27. So both cheeseand olive oil are associatedwith
paradise.
h PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

Roman liturgy before the fifth centuryY The baptismalinter-

rogationsare closely akin to later Romanforms, for examplein
the so-called"Gelasianum"(p. 86 Wilson = = 449 Mohlberg). The
Latin pontifical (Gelas. 144 Wilson =
(Gelas . p. 144 = 740 Mohlberg) has a
preciseparallel to the direction that the deaconis ordainednon
in sacerdotiosedin ministerio (ix.2). Moreover,in the "Gelasian"
prayers for Maundy Thursday (p. 70 Wilson = Mohlberg 381)
there is the parallel, alreadynoted above (p. d), to Hippolytus'
prayer for consecratingoil for the sick.
The atmosphereof the Eucharistin this church order stands
much nearer to the second century than to the fourth. The
dominantidea is that it is a thank-offeringsacrifice. There is no
languagesuggestinga propitiatory re-enactmentof the deathof
Christ. Thereis no mementoof the living and dead. The absence
of any commemorationof the saints points to a date before the
middle of the third century.
The objection that all the affinities of the church order lie in
Egypt andSyria is a real one; but it can be answeredby a number
of cumulativeconsiderations.First, thereis one obviousanalogy.
The letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians cameto have
a very similar history. The closing pagesof the letter contain a
long prayer with manifestechoesof the contemporaryliturgical
intercessionsat Romein the last decadeof the first century. The
future influence of this unquestionablyRoman documentlay in
the Greek East. A papyrusleaf of the latter part of the third
century, now at Wiirzburg,18 contains liturgical intercessions,
some of which are nearly related to the languageof 1 I Clement.
The papyrus is the earliest scrap of Egyptian liturgy hitherto
found. It would be hard to find any discernibleinfluence of the
letter of Clementon later Romanliturgy. As the languagespoken
by the Christians of Rome gradually changedfrom Greek to
Latin (a processgoing on during the centuryfrom 230 to 330), the
Romancommunitydid not remembervery much aboutits Greek
past. The writings of the greatesttheologian to live at Rome

17 A very interesting sermon transmitted under the name of St Ambrol!e and

)7

Sanctus,though universal in the Greek

probably of about A.D. 400 says that the Sanctus.
East,
East , was not so in the West
West:: de Spiritu sanctoiv.2 (Migne, P.L. 17.1005-12)re·edited
8acris Erudiri xi (1960).
by L. Chavoutierin Sncris (1960), pp. 136--92.
136-92. The authoris dependenton
Ambrose and is to be placed probably in Northern Italy; but whether he is Niceta
of Remesiana(as Ostkirrhl. Studienxi (1962).
(as K. Gamberproposesin Ostkirch}. (1962), pp. 204--6)
204-6) must
guesswork.
remain guesswork .
18 Wiirzburg papyrus3.
)8 (1933),
3, saec.III. ed. U. Wilcken in Ahhandl. Berl. Akad. (1933).
no. 6, pp. 31-6.
31-6.
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

during the secondcentury,JustinMartyr, did not achievetrans-

lation into Latin until the sixteenthcentury; and Justin did not
even gain entry to the Latin Kalender of saints until the ninth
century.l9
century.19 It is impossible to know what degreeof continuity
was maintained when the liturgy at Rome was first put into
Latin, probablyin the time of PopeDamasus(366-84).20 In any
event, in the third century liturgical forms were still extremely
fluid. The author of the recoveredchurch order was apparently
trying to resist rapid changes,but he makesit explicit that his
prayersare only models,designedto show the kind of thing that
is desirable. He neversupposedthat he was taking an important
step towards the establishmentof fixed forms.

The Order and Integrity of the Text

Liturgies in the ancientChurch were never thought of as immu-
table documents. Each bishop (as Justinputs it) "prayedto the
bestof his ability". 21 Somewere long. Justinsaysthat the Greek
anaphoraat Rome c. c. 1.'50
150 was of considerablelength.22 But
whereasGreek liturgies tended to be long, as in the immense
prayers in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, the
Latin genius was for brevity. Cyprian believedthat high-flown
prose and grandiloquent periods were out of place in public
worship, and thoughtthat the prayersof the Eucharistshouldbe
restrainedand quiet (orat. dom. 4). So eachbishopwould in some
degreemake his own liturgy. Hippolytus' work probablycontri-
buted much to making for more stable usages. But all liturgies
before 600 were subjectto a continual processof alteration and
adaptationas they were broughtup to dateby subsequent users.23
A text such as the Apostolic Tradition had a long snowball

•• I have collected evidence in my Early Christian Thought and the Classical

19
(1966), p. l27.
Tradition (l966), 127.
20 T. Klauser, "Der Uebergang
Uehergangder romischen Kirche von der griechischenzur
lateinischenSprache"in Miscellanea G. Mercati I, Studi 121 (Rome 1946),
tltudi e Testi l2l
pp. 467-82. The two principal piecesof evidenceare Marius Victorinus,
\'ictorinus, adv. Arium
ii.8. written about 360, who cites partsof the contemporaryRomanliturll:Y liturgy in Greek,
Novi TestamentilO9.2l
and Ambrosiaster,QuaestionesVeteris et }Olovi 109.21 (ed. Hauter,
Souter,C.S.E.L.
50.268), written between374 and 382, who cites the Roman liturgy in Latin.
2. Justin, Apol. i.67.5.
21 Justin.
Apol.
22 A pol. i.65.3.
23 There is much food for thought in the programmaticremarks of F. L. Cross,
J. T.S.n.s. xvi (l965),
"Early WesternLiturgical Manuscripts",in J.T.S. (1965).pp. 6l-7.
61-7. Cf. R.
R. P.C.
Hanson. "The Liberty of the Bishop to improvise prayer in the eucharist", in
Hanson,
Christianae xv (l96l),
Vigiliae Chrisfianae (1961), pp. l73-76.
173-76.
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

history in which it sufferedadditionsand modificationswith each

successiverecension. This processis most obviously seenin the
actual differencesof order among the various witnesses.
The order of the chaptersis virtually consistentin threeof the
witnesses, namely the Latin, Coptic, and Arabic; and the
of the Testamentof our Lord from this norm is not great.
deviationofthe
In the Canons of Hippolytus, however, chapters xxiv-xxviii
(= 22-32 in Botte) appearafter xxix-xxxvii (= 33-42 33- 42 Botte).
Botte).
The Ethiopic has been less drastically arranged, but has two
importanttranspositions.The openingchapterasit standsin the
Latin appearsin the Ethiopic just before the section about
offering the first-fruits (xxviii = 31 Botte). The Ethiopic,
moreover,disagreeswith all other witnessesin its placing of the
sectionson the deacon'sduties in taking the breadround to the
sick and poor, and on the prayersat the bringing in of the lamps
at the evening Agape (xxvi.l4-32).24
(xxvi .14-32).24 For most of thesesections
the Ethiopic (E) is the sole witness. Neverthelessparts of the
material occur in Test. Dom. and the Canonsof Hippolytus (K),
where they are placed before xxvi.2. Since in E the words of
xxvi.2 are repeatedas a doublet after xxvi.32, it is easy to see
that E bearswitnessagainstits own arrangement
arrangement.. In 1937 Dix
acceptedE's order as original, and was thereforefaced with the
difficulty that the Latin goes straight on from xxvi to xxvii. 1 ,
and apparentlyomits the section in a way that must raise the
gravestdoubts about the authenticity of the block if E's order
is right. Everything falls into place if E's material is indeed
acceptedas authentic Hippolytus but if the true order is that
Test. Dom. andK. The entire block then falls at a point
given by Test.
where, owing to a lacunain the VeronaMS., the Latin is deficient.
where,
No objection to the authenticity of the block can then be
groundedon its "omission" by the Latin version.
version.
A very minor additional reason can be givert
given fur regarding
xxvi. 14-32 as being at least no invention of the Ethiopic tradi-
tion, namely that the transmitted text of E in xxvi.I4-17
xxvi.l4-17 is
obscureand corrupt and bearsall the marks of a poor rendering
by an uncomprehendingtranslator.
.. The hymn 4>w~
"'W~ ,>'apov, "0 gladsome
').apov, gladsome light", long traditional in the time of Basil
the Great and still sung at Greek Vespers,was probably a third·century
third·century hymn sung
at this point. The momentwhen lights were brought in at a feast in antiquity was
marked by an acclamationand was the signal for the party to becomeexcited. This
is the backgroundof the vulgar slandersaboutthe Christianagapeand the enormities
that followed the bringing in and extinction of the lights. In fact the Christians
salutedthe entry of the light with praise and prayer
prayer..
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
EDITIO~ k
For the prayers in chapter vii, E again stands quite alone
alone,,
without a morsel of support from any other version. These
prayers
prayen; were rightly marked by Dix as a much later addition,
and the ehapteris entirely left out by Botte.

The Anaphora
The most mOHt controversialplace where modification of the original
text has been suspectedis in the Anaphora (chapter iv) iv).. Its
external attestation by LET (three completely independent
witnesHeH),
witnesses) , with somepartial support from A p. Const.,is extremely
support fn)lllAp.
powerful in its itH favour. The languageof the first part of it fits
Hippolytus perfectly. It is sufficient to refer hereto the magistral
HippolytuH magiHtral
commentaryon the Anaphorain the article by R. H. Connolly in
J.T.S.
J.T.S. xxxix (I !I:IH), !I:~H), 3;)()-o!1. Controversyhas concentrated
pp. 3;")()-o!l.
epiclesis.
on the epiclesis . At this point the witnesses witnesHesdivide, LE being
abandonedby T and Ap. ('onst. This is not in itself surprising surprising..
epicleHis underwent conHiderable
The epiclesis considerablemodificatiollmodification towards the
end of the f(llIrth fourt h century, century. and beeanw Iweanw much more prominentin
Greek liturgies. Here is the point at which modernizationwould
be natural and predictable. predictable. In tIlt' the Ap. Con8t. ConBt. it has becomean
unambigllollH invocation
unambiguous invocatioll of the ~pil ~pirit ' it upon ··this .. this sacrifice" to
"make this bread bl'ecul the bod.\' body of thy Christ and thil'; thii" cup the blood
of thy Christ".
ChriHt". In LE, LE , on the other hand, hand, the purpose of the
invocation iH not to changethe bread and wille but to
is Ilot t.o bless the
Chur('h in making that offering that it may he
Chureh he' a hond
bond of unity
alld a lIIl'all:-l
allll lIl('iWS of graet'.
In T almo:-lt
almost all of Hippolytus' Hip)lolytllls' anaphora
anaphol"ais inl'orpOl'ated
ilH'orpol"ated within
Illlleh long!'I'
a 1I111(:h long!'!" lind Hnd mort' ilion' f'la borat!' pray!'r.
claborat!' pl"ay!,r. Tile The cOlllpiler
eompiler took
Hippolytn:-l' t~'t~·:.-\t.;t
HiPI'0lytlls' tilled it out with expaJl,.;ioll:-l
and filled l':-,;pHn"iolls and Home minor
anel some
omi:-l:-lioll:-l. . But
omissiuns Bot T has no ('(1'1 p(tllintlent
i \"(\Ient of thp t ht' wor<i:-l
words found in LE I.E
··.-\n<l Wl' pm.'"
··.\nd pmy th('(' thp!' that thon tholl wouldl,,.;t s(,lId thy Holy
wOIII<11':-It :-lend Hol.v Spirit
~pirit upon
ohlation
the ohlat ion of thy t h.'" holy ('II Church". hl:-ltl'ad. 1Iatt tthe
IIreh ". In,.;tl'ad. point.
ht' critical point,
passl'sinto IIa long ill\'o('ation
T pa:-l:-ll':-I in\"/,eation of the TI'inity, Trinity. with intereessions
intereeHsionH. ,
finally ('omin/-!
('(Hllin/,! baek bac-k to the tIll' text of Hipl'0lytlls
Hip}JolytnH with the prayer
"Grant that all thosewho partakeof thy hol~- hoI." thingH
things be madeone
tlIPl', that tlH'Y
with tll(>('. tlw,\' maylIIay he fillpd
fillE'd with the Holy Spirit for the
COnfil'lllatiOlI of th!'
confil'lllation tIl(' faith in truth". The elaborateprayer to the
Trinity doeH <io£'''; not
\lot ineillde
inelnde an unambignouH
unalllhiguous('pic/esis epic/esisof the Spirit.
Bllt the shal'f'sha-pl' of this long pra~·er pra.'·er is so indi\-iduaLindiddual. without a
parallel ill otheranei£'nt
pamllel an('ient anaphoras.
a-naphora:-l.that it is extremelyhazardous
 PREFACE TO THE SECO:SD
SECOND EDITION
EDITIO:S

to deduce that the author of T had a text of the Apostolic

Tradition which had no invocation of the Spirit.
In a widely noticed paperin the first volume of the Journal of
Ecclesiusticullli8fory.
Ecclesiastical Jli.<;tory, ProfessorE. C. Ratcliff suggestedthat the
E'piclesiR as given
f'piclesis givE'n by LE was a fourth-century development
replacingtht' final paragraphof the original prayer which ended
with the Sanctus. The theory has attractionsand is well argued,
but it has difficulties
difficultieR to circumventwhich are probably fatal to
its acceptance. First of these is the absenceof any an.v certain
evidencethat the Sanctus
eddence Sanctu8actually formed a normal part of the
earliest Roman liturgy. Thewell-known ThE' well-known text of I Clement :14 :H is
sometimestaken as eddence evidenceof t he liturgical use of the Sanctus
in Home hf'f()J'(' hE't(Ir(' tht'tht. end of the firRt first century. It may he be so. But
tlwre
tll('re is nothing in CIE'm('nt's l'1f'ment's words to make thiR this conclusion
nE'cessarv. All that hE'
necessary. Rays is that the didded
hf' says divided Corinthian
commUl;ity
commm;ity ought to try to imitate the harmony of the angelic
ehoir
choir who. who, though
t'lOugh numberingten thousandtimes ten thousand
(and thE'refore
thereforeliahle liable to find it hard to keeptogether),neverthelE'ss nevertheless
chant their hymn h"mn in ab:o;olute
absoluteunison. Secondly, Secondlv.there is the real
pORsibility th'at
possibility th~t tlw tlU' author of the Testamentt~ay ,;'ay well have had
personalJ'('asons J"t'asonsfor pas:o;ingpassingover Hi},polytus'
Hippolytus' epiclesis. In fact,
ProfessorRatelifl
Pl'Ofessor Ratdifl himsE·lfhimst'lf thinks that the epiclesisof LE. I.E. which
II(' helieH's
Iw helien's to he ht' post-Hippolytean,
post-Hippol:vtean.already had a place in the
form of tl'xt tpxt lying b{>filt"{l bf'f(H'C theth(' compiler of the Testament.
TeRtament. The
concession, wl'Ung wrung from him perhaps pcrhaps by thE' the absenceof any
('\'idence that
(·yidenc(· compilei'' had a Sanctus
t hat till' compilei SanctuR before him at this
point, is surely
point. surt'ly ver. \"Cry\· damagingto t he conjecture.
There is nothing
nothillg in the transmittedtext of LE that Hippolytus
of [{ome Rome ('ould
eould 1I0t not havehayE' written.
w;r ittell . It is worth quoting the decisive
judgenwnt
judg<'llwnt of ({. Connoll,v (J.T.S
H. H. ('onnolly (.J. T."".. xxxix, p. :16i):
:l6i): "H('ading
"Rt'ading
till'
tht' Epidt'sis of our 0111' prayer in the light of eontE'mporarycontf'mporary idt'as,idt·as.
I am una unahlp hI!' to find filld in it a petition for any action of the th(' Holy
Spirit
~pit'it Oil tilt' ohlatioll itsdf.
tht' ohilltioll its{'\f. 'I'll('
The ollly
onl.\' action of the Hoi,\'
Holy ~pirit
whieh it sp('lIks speaksof. or impli('s. has fin'
01' impli(·s. till' its object thethE' minds and ltnd
IH-'ar·ts
Iwarts of til(' til{' fait hful eOlllmlHlicants.
fail hf1l1 eOlllmnnieants. whilp whil(' tIlt' COllstittlE'nt
tilE' constituent
elt'IIIt'llts of th('
(·lelm'lI1s thp oblation,
ohlation, a,; all'(,IHI.\' unified. :suggest
as already suggest what that
actioll
actio" should 1)(' III' ... to brillg pt·opl{' togE,ther
hrillg (;od's p('opl(' togpther 'into Olll'·
Olll",".. •
If this is eOlT('(·tly
eOITI'l'tI.\' stah'd
stated. . tI hen it is quite
I[uit(' within til('
tht' hounds
boundsof
possihility
possibility that Hippol."tlls· Hippolytus' <,pidesis ppielesiil owed
OWE'd somethingto models Illodels
of till' til(' (:repk
(;ret'k synagogup.
synagoglw.
IJ>ix lik('cI to lay grE'at
)ix lik('d great"tl'e,;s
stresson thE' thf' pre"ellce
p"f'Sf'nceof .Jewishlit.urgical
of.Jewish
tradition ill in the haekground
haekgronndof the Apostolir Tradition. He was
 PREFACE TO THE SECO:\D
SECOXD EDITION
EDITIOX m

surely right to do so. For example,Hippolytus' rule, at first sight

curious, forbidding the offering of pumpkins
pumpkins, , melom;,
melons,cucumbers,
(xxviii.6) must simply reflect the text
(leeks), onions, and garlic (xxyiii.6)
of Numbers xU') as interpreted in contemporary synagogue
tradition. His direction that at baptismfemale candidate" candidatesmust
loose their hair and lay asideall jewellery,
jewellery. has beenconvincingly
explainedby Frank Gavin and by 'V. W. C. Van Dnnik
Unnik as a custom
directl\' drawn from Jewish lustrations attestedin the contem-
directl"
(Shabbathvi.l,
porary'Mishnah(Shabbuth vi . I , translated Danby, p. 1(4)
tram;lated by Danby. 1(4) and
elsewhere. Neverthelessmost of the anaphorais not marked by
any features strongly suggesting the use of .Jewish liturgical
There is no long commemorationof the crcation,
models. Therc creation, and
the principal stresslies on the redemptivee\'ent eventofthe incamation
incarnation
and atonement:on the triumph ovcr over edl
c\'il powerR
pO\vcrs at the Descent
to Hades,the "limit"
" limit" of which (in time or space)was "fixed"·25" fixed" ·2.,
and on the
thc narrative of the institution of the Eucharist. This
anaphorais Hippolytus'
Hippolytus' personal crcation.
creation. It is only in the
institution narrative and probably in the cpielcsis epielesis that
that. he isiR
likely to be uRing
using traditional formulas, and that t hat for the epiclesis
could have been
becn taken from some hellenistic .Tewish .Jewish prayer.
praycr. Its
motif is not far from the prayer
praycr in the Didache praying that (;od (:od
would unitc
unite his people scatteredupon the mountains.

Note on xvi.22
A small detail in the text desern>s deserveshrief mcntioll. mentioll. InIII xvi.:!:! the
list of occupationsto he renounced renouneedat bapt baptism
ism ineludes variolls
\'ariolls
kinds of dealcr
dealerin magic and spell::<-a spell,,~-a charmer.an astrologer,an
charmcr. all
interpreter
intcrprcter of dreamsdreams, , a mountebankwho gatherscrowds in the
market placeto watch his tricks, a cutterof the fringes of clothing
(psalistes). and a maker of amulets
(psalistes), amulets. Psahsteswould mean a
. PS(llistes
snipper with scissors
scissors. . It is i" given only in til(' thl' Coptic text. text, and
could be Ha gloss by the Coptic translator. trallslator. The Sahidic
~ahidic text
actually
actuall,v rpad" }J-'uHistes. stammerer.
rpa<is 1J8f-,llistfS, stammerer,but the Coptic spelling of
(;"cpk words
(:n'pk \\'ord~ may take unusual
lIlay 11lI1l~l al f(lrms: psalisteswas
forms: jlsalistp8 waR restoredas
he correct J'eaoillg
tthe rearling here b.v by W. E. ('rum in II!I:H !I:H in a Ilote
note buried

2.; TI\('I'I'
Th .. r.. i. all
all an"h'j!<H,,_ id .." in th .. IOllg fraguwnt
a II aIII!!,'"'' '' i,l.-a fragnH'1I1 011 Had,," a~'Tihed a~c'rihed (prohahl,v
(fll'lIhahl .v
'n
2;
rightl\') to J{ippolvtns,
rightly) Hippolyt1l8. dp IInir",.'". and dle,l
dp IInil"'r.'", dtec\ in the th,· Sf/f.T1I prillt ..,1
I'f/mlle/", ; pl'illl
811(7(/ l'lIml/,!.,; d in
H;'II, Fragment,'
K. Holl. rornie'iil/ischer 1\
Fmgmnlterorn;,·r;III'.schn irchfll1,dter 'tlt
K irchnl"dter 8 dell Sacra
flitS PltraUida. (1899).
Sacra. Pftraj{da p. 13!I.
(1899). fl. 1311,
lin!' 4H. }'or
lin(' 48. thi" lost work of HippolytuR
For thiR Hippol,vtuA ReE>tiel' W. J. Mallpy,
MaIlI'Y. "Four" Follr unedited
lInedit..d fragments
fragml'nt..
"ftlu' /h I'/Ii,.,r"" .. ,". ,/.'1'.8. II.'. x\-i
"I' tl ... II< /'"i,.""", ...... i ll.t. T. S. 11.", "'i (HII;;)).
ill (\!Iii;;). pp. 13- 2;•.
13,~:;.
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Roberts'
Chester Guide [1858]
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Roberts' Chester Guide [1858]

Author: Hugh Roberts

Editor: John Hicklin

Release date: July 1, 2020 [eBook #62534]

Most recently updated: October 18, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Transcribed from the [1858] Hugh Roberts edition by David

Price

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ROBERTS'

CHESTER GUIDE [1858] ***
Transcribed from the [1858] Hugh Roberts edition by David Price,
email [email protected]
 ROBERTS’
CHESTER GUIDE;

WITH

FORTY-SIX ENGRAVINGS.
AND AN

ILLUSTRATED PLAN OF THE CITY.

REVISED BY

JOHN HICKLIN,
Editor of the Chester Courant, and Honorary Secretary of the Chester Archæological
and Historic Society.

CHESTER:
HUGH ROBERTS, EASTGATE ROW.
LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO.; AND WHITTAKER & CO.
AND OTHER BOOKSELLERS.
 INDEX.

PAGE

Abbey Gate 57
Bars 46
Bridge Gate 41
Bridge 42
Bridge Street 60
Cab Fares 106
Cathedral 65
Castle 35
Cemetery 35
Chester—Its Ancient History 1
Chester—Its Ecclesiastical History 11
Chester—Its Municipal Institutions 12
Churches 78–90
City Gaol 32
County Gaol 37
County Hall 37
Dissenting Places of Worship 90–95
Distances 108
Eastgate 45
Eaton Hall 97
Exchange 56
Grosvenor Bridge 40
Hotels 108
House of Industry 35
Infirmary 31
Mayors of Chester 15
Music Hall 58
Museum 30
Newgate 44
Northgate 27
Old Houses 54
Pemberton’s Parlour 29
Phœnix Tower 26
Population 107
Railway Station 105
Roman Antiquities 17
Roodeye 33
Rows 49
Schools 95
Streets 51
Training College 29
Walls of Chester 26
Water Gate 32
Water Tower 30
 PREFACE.

The visit of the Royal Agricultural Society of England to Chester in

July, 1858, seems a fitting occasion on which to present to the public
an entirely NEW EDITION of the CHESTER GUIDE, which has been
carefully revised throughout, with the requisite care and intelligence
for securing to strangers a useful memorial of the “old city.” The
work is also embellished with a numerous series of engravings, and
an illustrated plan, which will facilitate the visitor’s inspection of the
interesting remains and modern attractions with which Chester
abounds; and also supply a pictorial reminiscence of scenes and
places that may perchance excite pleasant memories. In this hope
our Manual is committed to public favour, which, the editor trusts, will
be so heartily manifested, as to require, at no very distant day, a
renewal of his services as a literary “Guide.”
Chester, June 24, 1858.
 ILLUSTRATIONS.

Chester, from Curzon Park to face page 1

Edgar’s Cave 6
Stone Altars 18
City Walls 25
King Charles’s Tower 26
Water Tower, &c. 30
Chester Cemetery 35
Watergate Street Row 49
Eastgate Street 53
God’s Providence House 54
Bishop Lloyd’s House 56
Old Palace House 58
Chester Cathedral 65
Cloisters ditto 70
St. John’s Church 79
Chancel Ruins of ditto 82
Independent Chapel 92
With a Novel Plan, containing Eight Views of Eaton Hall:—
 West Front East Front
Grosvenor Lodge Eaton Lodge
Dining Room Drawing Room
Saloon Library
Together with Twenty-One other Illustrations:—
Chester from the Dee Northgate Street
Eastgate Street Eastgate
Chester Castle Railway Station
Chester from Boughton Ford Abbey Gate
Bridge Street Roman Bath
Watergate Street Row, North Diocesan Training College
Savings’ Bank Grosvenor Bridge Exchange
Northgate Street Row Blue Coat Hospital
Crypt, Bridge Street Eastgate Street Row
Bridge Street Row (West)
and the Bridge Gate.
 CHAPTER I.
THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF
CHESTER.

Three are but few places, if indeed there are any, which can present
such varied attractions to the antiquary as this remarkable and
ancient city. It is rich in memorable incidents and associations. It
has a history chronicled not only in books, but in its walls, towers,
rows, and venerable remains.
The origin of Chester is of very remote date. No definite conclusion
has been reached respecting the exact time of its foundation.
Various hypotheses have been started, some of them grotesque and
ridiculous enough, but its origin is lost in those mists of antiquity
where history fades into fable.
It is quite clear, as an authenticated matter of fact, that Chester was
in very early possession of the Romans. It was the headquarters of
the 20th Legion, which, we find, came into Britain before the year 61;
for it had a share in the defeat of Boadicea by Suetonius. After that
important victory this mighty and intrepid people marched onward
towards North Wales, and established their authority in Cheshire.
Scattered through the city, have been discovered many vestiges of
their power, which enable us to trace their history with considerable
distinctness. Wherever they planted their settlements, they left
permanent records of their greatness and skill. Many of these
memorials have been discovered, in various parts of the old city; and
through the intelligent and zealous investigations of the Chester
Archæological Society, these antiquities are now made tributary to
the instruction of the inhabitants respecting the history of their own
locality.
Not only to the antiquarian, however, is Chester interesting; there is
scarcely any order of mind or taste but may here find its
gratification. Its noble arched bridge, venerable cathedral and
churches, unique rows, and ancient walls encompassing the city, with
a considerable number and variety of relics, all combine to make
Chester an attractive place of resort. It is the metropolis of the
county palatine of that name, and is pleasantly situated above the
river Dee, on a rising ground. Its names have been various. Its
Roman name was Deva, undoubtedly, because of its being situated
on the river Dee. Then Cestriæ, from Castrum, “camp;” and Castrum
Legionis, “the Camp of the Legion.” Its British names were Caer
Lleon, “the Camp of the Legion;” and Caer Lleon Vawr, or Ddyfrdwy,
“the Camp of the Great Legion on the Dee.”
During the brilliant lieutenancy of Julius Agricola, A.D. 85, it became a
Roman colony; and the place was called from them and from its
situation, Colonia Devana. This is clearly demonstrated by a coin of
Septimus Geta, son of Severus, which has this inscription:—

Col. Devana. Leg. xx. Victrix.

For two or three centuries after this date, Chester appears to have
continued undisturbed in the power of the Romans; during which
period “it was a centre of operations while conquest was being
produced; a centre of civilization and commercial intercourse when
the dominion of the empire was established. The actual form of the
city, its division by streets into four quarters, exhibits the
arrangement which the Romans established in their camp, and which
they naturally transferred to the cities which took the place of their
military stations. Traces of the work of that wonderful people still
remain on our walls, and on the rocky brows which surround them;
and excite the attention, and reward the diligence of the antiquarian.
Those pigs of lead, the produce of Roman industry, which are first
mentioned, in ‘Camden’s Britannia,’ as being found in the
neighbourhood of Chester, and two of which have recently been
discovered, are memorials of the early period at which the mineral
wealth of this district was known, and of the commerce to which it
gave rise.” It is a fact, clearly established by history, that to the
Romans we are greatly indebted for the introduction of a much
higher order of civilization than that which they found existing when
they took possession of the country. They were the pioneers of
social and religious progress. Previous to the Roman invasion, the
inhabitants were unacquainted with the laws and arts of civilized life;
—painted their bodies,—despised the institution of marriage,—
clothed themselves in skins,—knew very little of agriculture,—were
furious in disposition, and cruel in their religious superstitions. We
find that the practice of human sacrifices was very general amongst
them, and in every respect their social and moral condition rude and
barbarous in the extreme. So wedded were they to their idolatrous
worship and cruel rites, that the Romans, after their conquest, found
it necessary to abolish their religion by penal statutes; an exercise of
power which was not usual with these tolerating conquerors. About
the year 50, the Emperor Claudius Cæsar subdued the greater part of
Britain, and received the submission of several of the British states
who inhabited the south-east part of the island. The other Britons,
under the command of Caractacus, still maintained an obstinate
resistance, and the Romans made little progress against them until
Ostorius Scapula was sent over, in the year 50, to command their
armies. This renowned general found the country in a state of great
excitement and dissatisfaction, but speedily advanced the Roman
conquests over the Britons—defeated Caractacus in a great battle—
took him prisoner, and sent him to Rome—where his magnanimous
behaviour procured him better treatment than those conquerors
usually bestowed on native princes. He pardoned Caractacus and his
family, and commanded that their chains should immediately be
taken off.
Holinshed is of opinion that Ostorius Scapula was the founder of
Chester, and the reasons he adduces are certainly very plausible. He
says, “It is not unlike that it might be first built by P. Ostorius
Scapula, who, as we find, after he had subdued Caractacus, King of
the Ordonices, that inhabited the countries now called Lancashire,
Cheshire, and Salopshire, built in those parts, and among the Silures,
certeine places of defense, for the better harbrough of his men of
warre, and keeping downe of such Britaines as were still readie to
move rebellion.”
Passing over the space of a few years, we find Julius Agricola
completing the conquest of this island. Such was his formidable
power and skilful policy in governing the people, that we are told
they soon became reconciled to the supremacy of the Roman arms
and language. He quelled their animosity to the Roman yoke, and
certainly did very much for the progress of the people in civilization,
knowledge, and the arts of peace.
There is perhaps no place in the kingdom that can boast of so many
monuments of Roman skill and ingenuity as Chester; but as these will
be described in detail as we proceed, we need not specify them here.
About the year 448 the Romans withdrew from the island, after
having been masters of the most considerable part of its territory for
nearly four centuries, and left the Britons to arm for their own
defence. No sooner, however, had the Romans withdrawn their
troops, than the Scots and Picts invaded the country with their
terrible forces, and spread devastation and ruin along the line of their
march. These vindictive and rapacious barbarians, fired with the lust
of conquest, made a pitiless onslaught upon the property and lives of
the people. The unhappy Britons petitioned, without effect, for the
interposition of Rome, which had declared its resolution for ever to
abandon them. The British ambassadors were entrusted with a letter
to the legate at Rome, pathetically stating their perilous dilemma,
and invoking their immediate aid.
The intestine commotions which were then shaking the Roman
empire to its centre prevented the masters of the then world from
affording the timely aid sought at their hands.
Despairing of any reinforcement from Rome, the Britons now invoked
the aid of the Saxons, who promptly complied with the invitation, and
under Hengist and Horsa, two Saxon chiefs, who were also brothers,
wrested Chester from the hands of the invaders. The Saxons,
perceiving the weakness of their degenerate allies, soon began to
entertain the project of conquering them, and seizing the country as
their spoil. During the conflict which ensued between the Britons and
Saxons, who from allies became masters. Chester was frequently
taken and retaken, and suffered severely in various sieges.
Ultimately, the Aborigines were totally subjugated under the mightier
sway of Saxon arms.
In 607 Ethelfrid, King of Northumbria, waged a sanguinary battle with
the Britons under the walls of Chester, whom he defeated.
It is recorded that he came to avenge the quarrel of St. Augustine,
whose metropolitan jurisdiction the British monks refused to admit.
Augustine is said to have denounced against them the vengeance of
heaven, for this reason, three years previously.
Sammes, in his Antiquities of Britain, gives an interesting statement
of this celebrated battle: “Edelfrid, the strongest King of the English,
having gathered together a great army about the city of Chester, he
made a great slaughter of that nation; but when he was going to give
the onset, he espied priests and others, who were come thither to
entreat God for the success of the army, standing apart in a place of
advantage; he asked who they were, and for what purpose they had
met there? When Edelfrid had understood the cause of their coming,
he said, ‘If, therefore, they cry unto their God against us, certainly
they, although they bear no arms, fight against us, who prosecute us
by their prayers.’”
The victory was not destined, however, to be an abiding one. The
supremacy of Ethelfrid over the Britons was not long in duration.
History tells us that a few years after he had achieved his conquest,
the united forces of Brocmail and three other British princes rescued
from his hands the possession of Chester, and put his armies to
flight. In 613, the Britons assembled in Chester, and elected Cadwon
their king, who reigned with great honour for twenty-two years.
From this period to the close of the Heptarchy, we have but very
scanty materials respecting the history of Chester. The Britons
appear to have retained possession of it until about the year 828,
when it was finally taken by Egbert, during the reign of the British
prince Mervyn and his wife Esylht.
In a few years afterwards (894 or 895) the city underwent a heavy
calamity, from its invasion by Harold, King of the Danes, Mancolin,
King of the Scots, and another confederate prince, who are said to
have encamped on Hoole heath, near Chester, and, after a long
siege, reduced the city. These predatory pirates were soon after
attacked and conquered by Alfred, who utterly routed them from the
military defences in which they had embosomed themselves, and
destroyed all the cattle and corn of the district.
After the evacuation of the city by the Danes, it remained in ruins
until about the year 908, when it was restored by Ethelred, the first
Earl of Mercia, and Ethelfleda, his wife, who, it is said, enlarged it to
double the extent of the Roman town. Sir Peter Leycester says that
“Ethelred and his countess restored Caerleon, that is Legecestria,
now called Chester, after it was destroyed by the Danes, and
enclosed it with new walls, and made it nigh such two as it was
before; so that the castle that was sometime by the water without
the walls, is now in the town within the walls.” All the narratives
which have been handed down to us of this celebrated woman
represent her as possessed of incomparable talent, great enterprise,
and pure mind. She employed the great power and opportunity she
possessed with admirable wisdom, and made them subservient to
acts of munificence and piety. She died at Tamworth in 922, whence
her body was translated to Gloucester. Leycester gives a lengthy
record of her good deeds, which prepares us for the fact that her loss
was deeply and universally regretted throughout the whole kingdom.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com