Online Encyclopedia

ERATURE

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V02, Page 180 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!
ERATURE. (b) Legendary. (d) Didactic. Book of Baruch (see Sirach (see EccLEsIAs- BARUCH). TICUS). Judith. Tobit. ii. Hellenistic Jewish Literature: Historical and Legendary. Didactic. Additions to Daniel (q.v.), Book of Wisdom (see W1s- , Esther (q.v.). DOM, BOOK OF.) Epistle of Jeremy (q.v.). 2 Maccabees (q.v.). Prayer of Manasses (see MANASSES). Since, all these books are dealt with in separate articles, they call for no further notice here. 2 (a). Other Old Testament Apocryphal Literature: (a) Historical. (c) Apocalyptic. History of Johannes Hyr- (See separate article.) canes. (b) Legendary. (d) Didactic or Sapiential. Book of Jubilees. Pirke Aboth. Paralipomena Jererniae, or the Rest of the Words of Baruch. Martyrdom of Isaiah. Pseudo-Phile's Liber Antiquitatutn. Books of Adam. annex and Jambres. JJoseph and Asenath. (a) Historical.—The History of Johannes Hyrcanus is mentioned in I Mace. xvi. 23-24, but no trace has been discovered of its existence elsewhere. It must have early passed out , of circulation, as it was unknown to Josephus. (b) Legendary.—The Book of Jubilees was written in Hebrew by a Pharisee between the year of the accession of Hyrcanus to the high-priesthood in 135 and his breach with the Pharisees some,years before his death in ios B.C. Jubilees was translated into Greek and from Greek into Ethiopic and Latin. It is i Thus some of the additions to Daniel and the Prayer of Manasses are most probably derived from a Semitic original written in Pales-tine, yet in compliance with the prevailing opinion they are classed under Hellenistic Jewish literature. Again, the Slavonic Enoch goes back undoubtedly in parts to a Semitic original, though most of it was written by a Greek Jew in Egypt. preserved in its entirety only in Ethiopic. Jubilees is the most advanced pre-Christian representative of the midrashic. tendency, which was already at work in the Old Testament 1 and 2 Chronicles. As the chronicler rewrote the history of Israel and Judah from the basis of the Priests' Code, so our author re-edited from the Pharisaic standpoint of his time the book of Genesis and the early chapters of Exodus. H,is work constitutes an enlarged targum on these books, and its object is to prove the everlasting validity of the law, which, though revealed in time, was superior to time. Writing in the palmiest days of the Maccabean dominion, he looked for the immediate advent of the Messianic kingdom. This kingdom was to be ruled over by a Messiah sprung not from Judah but from Levi, that is, from the reigning Maccabean family. This kingdom was to be gradually realized on earth, the transformation of physical nature going hand in hand with the ethical transformation of man. (For a fuller account see JUBILEES, BOOK OF.) Paralipomena Jeremiae, or the Rest of the Words of Baruch.—This book has been preserved in Greek, Ethiopic, Armenian and Slavonic. The Greek was first printed at Venice in 16o9, and next by Ceriani in r868 under the title Paralipomena Jeremiae. It bears the same name in the Armenian, but in Ethiopic it is known by the second title. (See under BARUCH.) Martyrdom of Isaiah.—This Jewish work has been in part preserved in the Ascension of Isaiah. To it belong i. 1, 2a, 66-13°; ii. 1-8, 12; v. I'-14 of that book. It is of Jewish origin, and recounts the martyrdom of Isaiah at the hands of Manasseh. (See ISAIAH, ASCENSION OF.) Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum.—Though the Latin version of this book was thrice printed in the 16th century (in 1527, 1550 and 1599), it was practically unknown to modern scholars till it was recognized by Conybeare and discussed by Cohn in the Jewish Quarterly Review, 1898, pp. 279-332. It is an Haggadic revision of the Biblical history from Adam to the death of Saul. Its chronology agrees frequently with the LXX. against that of the Massoretic text, though conversely in a few cases. The Latin is undoubtedly translated from the Greek. Greek words are frequently transliterated. While the LXX. is occasionally followed in its translation of Biblical passages, in others the Massoretic is followed against the LXX., and in one or two passages the text presupposes a text different from both. On many grounds Cohn infers a Hebrew original. The eschatology is similar to that taught in the. similitudes of the Book of Enoch. In fact, Eth. En. Ii. 1. is reproduced in this connexion. Prayers of the departed are said to be valueless. The book was written after A.D. 70; for, as Cohn has shown, the exact date of the fall of Herod's temple is predicted. Life of Adam and Eve.—Writings dealing with this subject are extant in Greek, Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Armenian and Arabic. They go back undoubtedly to a Jewish basis, but in some of the forms in which they appear at present they are christianized throughout. The. oldest and for the most part Jewish portion of this literature is preserved to us in Greek, Armenian, Latin and Slavonic. (i.) The Greek Ocilynutc rep; 'Aberµ Kai Eiiac (published under the misleading title 'Aaoci Xvinr MwvQEwr in Tischendorf's Apocalypses Apocryphae, 1866) deals with the Fall and the death of Adam and Eve. Ceriani edited this text from a Milan MS. (Monumenta Sacra et Profana, v. 1). This work is found also in Armenian, and has been published by the Mechitharist community in Venice in their Collection of Uncanonical Writings of the Old Testament, and translated by Conybeare (Jewish Quarterly Review, vii. 216 sqq., 1895), and by Issaverdens in 19o1. (ii.) The Vita Adae et Evae is closely related and in part identical with (i.). It was printed by W. Meyer in Abh. d. Munch. Akad., Philos.-philol. Cl. xiv., 1878. (iii.) The Slavonic Adam book was published by Jaji6 along with a Latin translation (Denkschr. d. Wien. Akad. d. Wiss. xlii., 1893). This version agrees for the most part with (i.). It has, moreover, a section, §§ 28-39, which though not found in (i.) is found, hi (ii.). Before we discuss these three documents we shall mention other members of this literature, which, though derivable ultimately from Jewish sources, are Christian in their present form. (iv.) The Book of Adam and Eve, also called the Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, translated from the Ethiopic (1882) by Malan. This was first translated by Dillmann (Das christl. Adambuch des Morgenlandes, 1853), and the Ethiopic book first edited by Trump (Abh. d. Munch. Akad. xv., 1879-1881). (v.) A Syriac work entitled Die Schatzhohle translated by Bezold from three Syriac MSS. in 1883 and subsequently edited in Syriac in 1888. This work has close affinities to (iv.), but is said by Dillmann to be more original. (vi.) Armenian books on the Death of Adam (Uncanonical Writings of O.T. pp. 84 sqq., 1901, translated from the Armenian), Creation and Transgression of Adam (op. cit. 39 sqq.), Expulsion of Adam from Paradise (op. cit. 47 sqq.), Penitence of Adam and Eve (op. cit. 71 sqq.) are mainly later writings from Christian hands. Returning to the question of the Jewish origin of i., ii., iii., we have already observed that these spring from a common original. As to the language of this original, scholars are divided. The evidence, however, seems to be strongly in favour of Hebrew. How otherwise are we to explain such Hebraisms (or Syriacisms) as 1.11 Ake. TO eXawv 4E a$rov (§ 9), ov etire, . . . 127? 0ayeiv air' airoll (§ 21). For others see §§ 23, 33. Moreover, as Fuchs has pointed out, in the words gall Ev µaraiots addressed to Eve. (§ 25) there is a corruption of 1:+5_n into a'SS,n. Thus the words were: " Thou shalt have pangs." In fact, Hebraisms abound throughout this book. (See Fuchs, Apok. u. Pseud. d. A.T. ii. 511; Jewish Encyc. i. 179 sq.) Jannes and Jambres.—These two men are referred to in 2 Tim. iii. 8 as the Egyptian magicians who withstood Moses. The book which treats of them is mentioned by Origen (ad Matt. xxiii. 37 and xxvii. 9 [Jannes et Mambres Liber]), and in the Gelasian Decree as the Paenitentia Jamnis et Mambre. The names in Greek are generally 'Iavvnr Kai 'Ia,Opij (= n'i~n't eu') as in the Targ.-Jon. on Exod. i. 15; vii. i 1. In the Talmud they appear as trazot ']rat'. Since the western text of 2 Tim. iii. 8 has Mapi3pis, Westcott and Holt infer that this form was derived from a Palestinian source. These names were known not only to Jewish but also to heathen writers, such as Pliny and Apuleius. The book, therefore, may go back to pre-Christian times. (See Schtirer3 iii. 292-294; Ency. Biblica, ii. 2327-2329.) Joseph and Asenath.—The statement in Gen. xli. 45, 50 that Joseph married the daughter of a heathen priest naturally gave offence to later Judaism, and gave rise to the fiction that Asenath was really the daughter of Shechem and Dinah, and only the foster-daughter of Potipherah (Targ.-Jon. on Gen. xli. 45; Tractat. Sopherim, xxi. 9; Jalkut Shimoni, c. 134. See Oppenheim, Fabula Josephi et Asenethae, 1886, pp. 2-4). Origen also was acquainted with some form of the legend (Selecta in Genesin, ad Gen. xli. 45, ed. Lommatzsch, viii. 89-9o). The Christian legend, which is no doubt in the main based on the Jewish, is found in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, Slavonic and Medieval Latin. Since it is not earlier than the 3rd or 4th century, it will be sufficient here to refer to Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biog. i. 176-177; Hastings' Bible Dict. i. 162-163; Schiirer, iii. 289-291. (d) Didactic or Sapiential.—The Pirke Aboth, a collection of sayings of the Jewish Fathers, are preserved in the 9th Tractate of the Fourth Order of the Mishnah. They are attributed to some sixty Jewish teachers, belonging for the most part to the years A.U. 70-170, though a few of them are of a much earlier date. The book holds the same place in rabbinical literature as the Book of Proverbs in the Bible. The sayings are often admirable. Thus in iv. 1-4, "Who is wise? He that learns from every man. . . . Who is mighty? He that subdues his nature. . . . Who is rich? He that is contented with his lot. . . . Who is honoured? He that honours mankind." (See further PIRKE ABOTH.) 2 (b). New Testament Apocryphal Literature: (a) Gospels: Uncanonical sayings of the Lord in Christian and Jewish writings. Gospel according to the Egyptians. Hebrews. Protevangel of James. Gospel of Nicodemus. „ Peter. „ Thomas. the Twelve. Gnostic gospels of Andrew, Apelles, Barnabas, Bartholomew, Basilides, Cerinthus and some seventeen others. (b) Acts and Teachings of the Apostles: Acts of Andrew and later forms of these Acts. „ John. „ Paul. Peter. Preaching of Peter. Acts of Thomas. Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. Apostolic constitutions. (c) Epistles: The Abgar Epistles. Epistle of Barnabas. „ Clement. " Clement's " 2nd Epistle of the Corinthians. Epistles on Virginity. to James. Epistles of Ignatius. Epistle of Poly-carp. Pauline Epp. to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians. 3 Pauline Ep. to the Corinthians. (d) Apocalypses: see under APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE. (a) GosPELs.--Uncanonical Sayings of the Lord in Christian and Jewish Sources.—Under the head of canonical sayings not found in the Gospels only one is found, i.e. that in Acts xx. 35. Of the rest the uncanonical sayings have been collected by Preuschen (Reste der ausserkanonischen Evangelien, 1901, pp. 44-47). A different collection will be found in Hennecke, NTliche Apok. 9-11. The same subject is dealt with in the elaborate volumes of Resch (Aussercanonische Paralleltexte zu den Evangelien, vols. i.-iii., 1893–1895). To this section belongs also the Fayum Gospel Fragment and the Logia published by Grenfell and Hunt.l The former contains two sayings of Christ and one of Peter, such as we find in the canonical gospels, Matt. xxvi. 31-34, Mark xiv. 27-30. The papyrus, which is of the 3rd century, was discovered by Bickell among the Rainer collection, who characterized it (Z. f. kath. Theol., 1885, pp. 498-504) as a fragment of one of the primitive gospels mentioned in Luke i. I. On the other hand, it has been contended that it is merely a fragment of an early patristic homily. (See Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 780–790; Harnack, Texte and Untersuchungen, v. 4; Preuschen, op. cit. p. 19.) The Logia (q.v.) is the name given to the sayings contained in a papyrus leaf, by its discoverers Grenfell and Hunt. They think the papyrus was probably written about A.D. 200. According to Harnack, it is an extract from the Gospel of the Egyptians. All the passages referring to Jesus in the Talmud are given by Laible, Jesus Christus im Talmud, with an appendix, " Die talmudische,n Texte,” by G. Dalman (2nd ed. 1901). The first edition of this work was translated into English by A. W. Streane (Jesus Christ in the Talmud, 1893). In Hennecke's NTliche Apok. Handbuch (pp. 47-71) there is a valuable study of this question by A. Meyer, entitled Jesus, Jesu Junger and das Evangelium im Talmud and verwandten jildischen Schriften, to which also a good bibliography of the subject is prefixed. Gospel according to the Egyptians.—This gospel is first mentioned by Clem. Alex. (Strom. iii. 6. 45; 9. 63, 66; 13. 92), subsequently by Origen (Horn. in Luc. i.) and Epiphanius (Hoer. Ixii. 2), and a fragment is preserved in the so-called 2 Clem. Rom. xii. 2. It circulated among various heretical circles; amongst the Encratites (Clem. Strom. iii. 9), the Naassenes (Hippolyt. Philos. v. 7), and the Sabellians (Epiph. Haer. Ixii. 2). Only three or four fragments survive; see Lipsius (Smith and Wace, Dicl. of Christ. Biog. ii. 712, 713); Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 628-642; Preuschen, Reste d. ausserkanonischen Evangelien, 1901, p. 2, which show that it was a product of pantheistic Gnosticism. With this pantheistic Gnosticism is associated a severe asceticism. The distinctions of sex are ' These editors have discovered (1907) a gospel fragment of the 2nd century which represents a dialogue between our Lord and a chief priest—a Pharisee.179 one day to come to an end; the prohibition of marriage follows naturally on this view. Hence Christ. is represented as coming to destroy the work of the female (Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 9. 63). Lipsius and Zahn assign it to the middle of the 2nd century. It may be earlier. Protevangel of James.—This title was first given in the 16th century to a writing which is referred to as The Book of James (s) 0i.(3Xor 'IaKWOov) by Origen (tom. xi. in Matt.). Its author designates it as `Iaropia. For various other designations see Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 1 seq. The narrative extends from the Conception of the Virgin to the Death of Zacharias. Lipsius shows that in the present form of the book there is side by side a strange " admixture of intimate knowledge and gross ignorance of Jewish thought and custom,” and that accordingly we must " distinguish between an original Jewish Christian writing and a Gnostic recast of it.” The former was known to Justin(Dial. 78, sot) and Clem. Alex. (Strom. vii. 16), and belongs at latest to the earliest years of the 2nd century. The Gnostic recast Lipsius dates about the middle of the 3rd century. From these two works arose independently the Protevangel in its present form and the Latin pseudo-Matthaeus (Evangelium pseudo-Matthaei). The Evangelium de Nativitate Mariae is a redaction of the latter. (See Lipsius in Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biog. ii. 701-703.) But if we except the Zachariah and John group of legends, it is not necessary to assume the Gnostic recast of this work in the 3rd century as is done by Lipsius. The author had at his disposal two distinct groups of legends about Mary. One of these groups is certainly of non-Jewish origin, as it conceives Mary as living in the temple somewhat after the manner of a vestal virgin or a priestess of Isis. The other group is more in accord with the orthodox gospels. The book appears to have been written in Egypt, and in the early years of the 2nd century. For, since Origen states that many appealed to it in support of the view that the brothers of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the book must have been current about A.O. 200. From Origen we may ascend to Clem. Alex. who (Strom. vi. 93) shows acquaintance with one of the chief doctrines of the book—the perpetual virginity of Mary. Finally, as Justin's statements as to the birth of Jesus in a cave and Mary's descent from David show in all probability his acquaintance with the book, it may with good grounds be assigned to the first decade of the 2nd century. (So Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, i. 485, 499, 502, 504, 539; ii. 774-780.) For the Greek text see Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 1-5o; B. P. Grenfell, An Alexandrian erotic Fragment and other Papyri, 1896, pp. 13-17: for the Syriac, Wright, Contributions to Apocryphal Literature of the N.T., 1865, pp. 3-7; A. S. Lewis, Studia Sinaitica, xi. pp. 1-22. See literature generally in Hennecke, NTliche Apok. Handbuch, 1o6 seq. Gospel of Nicodemus.—This title is first met with in the 13th century. It is used to designate an apocryphal writing entitled in the older MSS. uao,uvibuara Tov Kvpiov ii,Li:v 'I11aov Xpco-Tov 1rpaxOfvTa irri IIovriov IILXhTov: also " Gesta Salvatoris Domini . . . inventa Theodosio magno imperatore in Ierusalem in praetorio Pontii Pilati in codicibus publicis.” See Tischendorf, Evang. Apocr.2 pp. 333-335. This work gives an account of the Passion (i.–xi.), the Resurrection (xii.–xvi.), and the Descensus ad Inferos (xvii.–xxvii.). Chapters i.–xvi. are extant in the Greek, Coptic, and two Armenian versions. The two Latin versions and a Byzantine recension of the Greek contain i.–xxvii. (see Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocryphal, pp. 210-458). All known texts go back to A. D. 425, if one may trust the reference to Theodosius. But this was only a revision, for as early as 376 Epiphanius (Haer. i. I.) presupposes the existence of a like text. In 325 Eusebius (H.E. ii. 2) was acquainted only with the heathen Acts of Pilate, and knew nothing of a Christian. work. Tischendorf and Hofmann, however, find evidence of its existence in Justin's reference to the "Accra Hixhrou (A poi. i. 35, 48), and in Tertullian's mention of the Acta Pilati (Apol. 21), and on this evidence attribute our texts to the first half of the 2nd century. But these references have been denied by Scholten, Lipsius, and Lightfoot. Recently Schubert has sought to derive the elements which are found in the Petrine Gospel, but not in the canonical gospels, from the original Acta Pilati, while Zahn exactly reverses the relation of these two works. Rendel Harris (1899) advocated the view that the Gospel of Nicodemus, as we possess it, is merely a prose version of the Gospel of Nicodemus written originally in Homeric centones as early as the 2nd century. Lipsius and Dobschiitz relegate the book to the 4th century. The question is not settled yet (see Lipsius in Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biography, ii. 708-709, and Dobschiitz in Hastings' Bible Dictionary, iii. 544-547). Gospel according to the Hebrews.—This gospel was cited by Ignatius (Ad Smyinaeos, iii.) according to Jerome (Viris illus. 16, and in Jes. lib. xviii.), but this is declared to be untrustworthy by Zahn, op. cit. i. 921; ii. 701, 702. It was written in Aramaic in Hebrew letters, according to Jerome (Adv. Pelag. iii. 2), and translated by him into Greek and Latin. Both these • translations are lost: A collection of the Greek and Latin fragments that have survived, mainly in Origen and Jerome, will be found in Hilgenfeld's NT extra Canonem receptum, Nicholson's Gospel according to the Hebrews (1879), Westcott'sIntrod. to the Gospels, and Zahn's Gesch. des NTlichen Kanons, ii. 642-723; Preuschen, op. cit. 3-8. This gospel was regarded by many in the first centuries as the Hebrew original of the canonical Matthew (Jerome, in Matt. xii. 13; Adv. Pelag. iii. 1). With the canonical gospel it agrees in some of its sayings; in others it is independent. It circulated among the Nazarenes in Syria, and was composed, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 722), between the years 135 and 15o. Jerome identifies it with the Gospel of the Twelve (Adv. Pelag. iii. 2), and states that it was used by the Ebionites (Comm. in Matt. xii. 13). Zahn (op. cit. ii. 662, 724) contests both these statements. The former he traces to a mistaken interpretation' of Origen (Hon. I. in Luc.). Lipsius, on the other hand, accepts the statements of Jerome (Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christian Biography, ii. 709-712), and is of opinion that this gospel, in the form in which it was known to Epiphanius, Jerome and Origen, was " a recast of an older original," which, written originally in Aramaic, was nearly related to the Logia used by St Matthew and the Ebionitic writing used by St Luke, " which itself was only a later redaction of the Logia." According to the most recent investigations we may conclude that the Gospel according to the Hebrews was current among the Nazarenes and Ebionites as early as 100-125, since•Ignatius was familiar with the phrase " I am no bodiless demon "—a phrase which, according to Jerome (Comm. in Is. xviii.), belonged to this Gospel. The name " Gospel according to the Hebrews " cannot have been original; for if it had been so named because of its general use among the Hebrews, yet the Hebrews themselves would not have used this designation. It may have been known simply as " the Gospel." The language was Western Aramaic, the mother tongue of Jesus and his apostles. Two forms of Western Aramaic survive: the Jerusalem form of the dialect, in the Aramaic portions of Daniel and Ezra; and the Galilean, in isolated expressions in the Talmud (3rd century), and in a fragmentary 5th century translation of the Bible. The quotations from the Old Testament are made from the Massoretic text. This gospel must have been translated at an early date into Greek, as Clement and Origen cite it as generally accessible, and Eusebius recounts that many reckoned it among the received books. The gospel is synoptic in character and is closely related to Matthew, though in the Resurrection accounts it has affinities with Luke. Like Mark it seems to have had no history of the. birth of Christ, and to have begun with the baptism. (For the literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apok. Handbuch, 21-23.) Gospel of Peter.—Before 1892 we had some knowlege of this gospel. Thus Serapion, bishop of Antioch (A.D. 190–203) found it in use in the church of Rhossus in Cilicia, and condemned it as Docetic (Eusebius, H.E. vi. 12). Again, Origen (In Matt. tom. xvii. 1o) says that it represented the brethren of Christ as his half-brothers. In 1885 a long fragment was discovered at Akhmim, and published by Bouriant in 1892, and subsequently by Lods, Robinson, Harnack, Zahn,:Schubert, Swete. Gospel of Thomas.—This gospel professes to give an account of our Lord's boyhood. It appears in two recensions. The more complete recension bears the title ew a 'laparjkirov cbtXovbcl)ov p7jra els rd vau&cea rov Kupiov, and treats of the period from the 7th to the 12th year (Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha', 1876, 140-157). The more fragmentary recension gives the history of the childhood from the 5th to the 8th year, and is entitled I (Pry pa/.t,u a rov ayiov borovrbXou 6w/la irepi r'fjs aa2S&Ki)s avavrpo¢rijs rov Kupiov (Tischendorf, op. cit. pp. 158-163). Two Latin translations have been published in this work by the same scholar—one on pp. 164-18o, the other under the wrong title, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, on pp. 93-112. A Syriac version, with an English translation, was published by Wright in 1875. This gospel was originally still more Docetic than it now is, according to Lipsius. Its present form is due to an orthodox revision which discarded, so far as possible, all Gnostic traces. Lipsius (Smith's Dict. of Christ. Biog. ii. 703) assigns it to the latter half of the 2nd century; but Zahn (Gesch. Kan. ii. 771), on good grounds, to the earlier half. The latter scholar shows that probably it was used by Justin (Dial. 88). At all events it circulated among the Marcosians (Irenaeus, Haer. i. 20) and the Naasenes (Hippolytus; Refut. v. 7), and subsequently among the Manichaeans, and is frequently quoted from Origen downwards (Horn. I. in Luc.). If the stichometry of Nicephorus is right, the existing form of the book is merely fragmentary compared with its original compass. For literature see Hennecke, NTliche Apokryphen Handbuch, 132 seq. Gospel of the Twelve.—This gospel, which Origen knew (Hom: I. in Luc.), is not to be identified with the Gospel according to the Hebrews (see above), with Lipsius and others, who have sought to reconstruct the original gospel from the surviving fragments of these two distinct works. The only surviving fragments of the Gospel of the Twelve have been preserved by Epiphanius (Haer. xxx. 13-16, 22: see Preuschen, op. cit. c-1r) It began with an account of the baptism. It was used by the Ebionites, and was written, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 742), about A.D. 170.
End of Article: ERATURE
[back]
ERATOSTHENES OF ALEXANDRIA (c. 276-C. 194 B.C.)
[next]
ERBACH

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.