# Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology/Hippolytus 2.

​HIPPO′LYTUS (Ἱππόλυτος). 1. An early ecclesiastical writer of considerable eminence, but whose real history is so uncertain, that almost every leading point of it is much disputed. He appears to have lived early in the third century; and the statement commonly received for a long time was, that he was bishop of Portus Romanus (the harbour of Rome), at the mouth of the Tiber (for which the Paschal Chronicle is one of the earliest authorities, if not the earliest), and that he suffered martyrdom under Alexander Severus, or about his time, being drowned in a ditch or pit full of water. That his learning was great, and his writings numerous, we have the testimony of Eu- sebius and .lerome, the earliest writers who speak of him. They both speak of him as a bishop, but without naming his see (for the passage in the Chronica of Eusebius, in which he is called iwicTKo- TTos UopTov Tou KUTci 'Pw/xTju, is evidently corrupt), and Jerome expressly asserts that he could not ascertain it. His episcopal dignity, in the common understanding of the word eTrlaKoiros, is disputed by C. A. Heumann, who contends that he was " praefectus " of the port of Ostia ; but we are not aware that this opinion has found any supporters. (Heumann, Primiiiae Gottivg. No. xvii. p. 239.)
As Eusebius thrice mentions Hippolytus, in im- mediate connection with Beryl! us, bishop of Bostra in Arabia, it is contended by Le Moyne, Asse- mani [Bibl. Orient, vol. iii. p. i. c. vii. p. 15), and others, that Hippolytus was also an Arabian bishop, and Le Moyne contends that he was a native of that country. In the treatise De Duahus Naturis, generally regarded as a work of pope Gelasius I. [Gelasius, No. 3], he is called " Arabiae Metro- polita," but this, so far as his metropolitan rank is concerned, is an error, the probable origin of which is pointed out by Basnage. The ignorance of Jerome as to his see, and the mistake of Gelasius as to his dignity, render it very ixnlikely that he was bishop of any place in the immediate neigh- bourhood of Rome, still less of Rome itself, as Le- ontius of Byzantium, and Anastasius Sinai ta, appear to have held. The fact of his works being in the Greek language increases the improbability of his being an Italian bishop, or of his belonging at all to the west of Europe ; though the instances of Clement of Rome and Irenaeus prevent this argu- ment from being quite conclusive. That he was an Arabian, at least an Eastern bishop, is most likely; but the opinion of Le Moyne and others, that he was bishop of the city in the territory of Adana, which was the great emporium of the Roman trade (Philostorg. H. E. iii. 4), and was therefore called Portus Romanus, is very questionable. Its only support is the subsequent currency of the belief that Hippolytus was bishop of the Portus Roma- nus, near Rome ; but this belief is more likely to have gained ground from the mouth of the Tiber, or its vicinity, being the scene of Hippolytus's martyrdom.
The time in which he lived is determined by Eusebius, who places him in the early part of the third century ; and whose statement leads us to reject the account of Palladius {Hist. Lausiac. c. 148, apud Bibl. Pair. vol. xiii. p. 104, ed. Paris, 1654) and Cyril of Scythopolis ( Vila S. Euthymii apud Cotelerius, Eccl. Graec. Monuni.yol.'w. p. 82) that he was acquainted with the apostles. Photius makes him a disciple of Irenaeus, which may be true ; the same may be said of the statement of Baronius, who " had read somewhere " that he was a disciple of Clement of Alexandria ; a statement repeated by some moderns (Semler, Hist. Eccles. Selevta Capita, vol. i. p. 73), but supported by no other appeal to ancient authority than tlie very in- distinct one of Baronius. Photius says that Hip- polytus was an intimate friend and admirer of Origen, whom he induced to become a comment- ator on the Scriptures, and for whose use he main- tained at his own cost seven amanuenses or clerks, to write from his dictation, Taxy7pu^o/, and aa
​many others (ypdcpovTes els KoiWos) to write out a fair transcript. But although the acquaintance of Hippolytus with Origen is confirmed by the asser- tion of Hippolytus himself, who stated (according to Jerome) that he had Origen among his hearers Avhen preaching, the other particulars given by Photius are founded on a misunderstanding of a passage in Jerome, who asserts that Ambrosius of Alexandria, a Marcionite, whom Origen had con- verted, induced by the reputation which Hippoly- tus had acquired as a commentator, engaged Origen in the exposition of Scripture, and supplied him with the amanuenses already described.
The martyrdom of Hippolytus is not mentioned by Eusebius ; but Jerome calls him martyr {Praef. ad Matthaeum) ; and Photius and subsequent writers commonly so designate him. His name is found in the Roman, Greek, Coptic, and Abys- sinian martyrologies ; but the variations in the calendars are such, that we must suppose them to record the martyrdom of several Hippolyti. Pru- dentius, a Christian poet of the earlier part of the fifth century, has a long poem {Liber irepl ^.recpd- vaiv, sen De Coro7iis : Hymn. ix. ) on the martyrdom of Hippolytus ; but this is a different person from the subject of the present article, unless we sup- pose, with some critics, that Prudentius has con- fused three Hippolyti, and made them one. The date of the martyrdom of our Plippolytus is doubt- ful. Alexander Severus, under whom it has been commonly placed, was not a persecutor ; and if we suppose, with some of the best critics, that the Eochortatorius ad Severinam, enumerated among the writings of Hippolytus, is the work noticed by Thendoretas addressed ^rpos fiaaiXiSa rivd, "to a certain queen " or " empress," and that Severina was the wife of the emperor Philip the Arabian, we must bring his death down to the persecution of Decius (about A. d. 250), if not later ; in which case Hippolytus, if a disciple of Irenaeus, who died in or near a. d. 190, must have been a very old man. The place of his martyrdom was probably near Rome, perhaps the mouth of the Tiber or the adjacent sea, and the mode drowning, with a stone round his neck. In this case he must have left the East and come to Rome ; and there may be some truth in the statement of Peter Damiani, cardinal bishop of Ostia, near Rome, a writer of the eleventh century {Opera, vol. iii. p. 217, Opuscul. xix. c. 7, ed. Paris, 1743), that after converting many of the Saracens (a circumstance which accords with the supposition that his diocese was in Arabia) he resigned his bishopric, came from the East to Rome, where he suffered martyrdom by drowning, and was buried by the pious care of his fellow- Christians. In 1551 the statue of a man seated in a monastic habit, and with a shaven crown, was dug up in the neighbourhood of Rome ; some of our authorities say near a church of St. Laurence, others say of St. Hippolytus (perhaps the church was dedi- cated to both, as their names are united in the Martyrologies) : on the sides of the seat were in- scribed the Canon of Hippolytus, and a list of his works. Three plates of the statue are given in the edition of the works of Hippolytus published by Fabricius.
In the Acta of a council held at Rome under pope Sylvester, a. d. 324 (Labbe, Concilia, vol. i. col. 1547, &c.), the deacon Hippolytus was con- demned for the Valentinian heresy. It is very doubtful if this is our Hippolytus, who was so far from being a Valentinian, that Epiphanius mentions him (Panar. Haercs. xxxi. c. 33), with Irenaeus and Clement, as having written against them. The Acta are so corrupt, if indeed they are not spurious, that they cannot be relied on ; and if the memory of our Hippolytus (for he himself had been long dead) incurred any censure at the council, it was probably for differing from the Roman church in the calculation of Easter, to which subject he had given great attention.
Several of the works of Hippolytus are enume- rated by Eusebius, Jerome, and Photius, and are known by citations in ancient writers. Various portions of them are extant, most of which were collected and published by J. A. Fabricius, under the title of S. Hippolyti Episcopi et Martyris Opera, 2 vols. fol. Hamb. 171— 18. Mills, the editor of the N. T., had contemplated an edition of Hippolytus, and after his death his papers were transmitted to Jo. Wil. Janus, of Wittemburg, who was also prevented by death from bringing out the work. The collections of Mills and Janus con- tained some pieces or fragments not included by Fabricius ; and further collections appear to have been made by Grabe and others. The genuineness of the extant writings of Hippolytus has been dis- puted. Semler doubts the genuineness of the whole ; and Oudin and Mills {Proleg. ad N. T. p. Ixii.) of nearly the whole. The extant works and fragments were reprinted by Gallandius {Bill. Pair. vol. ii. fol. Venet. 1766), who arranges them in the following order: — 1. 'AiroSet^is irepl TOW Xpi(TTo3 Koi 'AvTixpic^TOv, Demonstratio de Christo et Antichristo. This was first published by Marquardus Gudius, 8vo. Paris, 1661, and was given by Combefis in his Auctar. Novissim. vol. i. fol. Paris, 1672, with a Latin version, which was reprinted in the Dihlioth. Pair. vol. xxvii. ed. Lyon. 1677. Mills makes this work the only exception to his judgment that the extant works of Hippo- lytus are spurious : he admits that it is " perhaps " genuine. The work published with a Latin version by Joannes Picus as a work of Hippolytus, Tlepl rijs avvTcXeias rov kSct/xov koi irepl tov 'Avtj- XpttTTOu KoX els rrjv devrepav Trapovaiav rod Kv~ plov riixwv 'Itjcou Xpicrrou, De Consummatione Mundi et de Antichristo., et secundo adventu Domini nostri Jesu Christi, is pronounced by Combefis to be spurious, and as such is, in the edition of Fa- bricius, given in an Appendix to the first vol. The work of Hippolytus, De Antichristo, is mentioned by Jerome and Photius. 2. Ets riv ^coadwav. In Susannam. This was also published by Combefis, as above, with a Latin version, which was reprinted in the Biblioth. Patrum, with the foregoing. It is apparently part of the commentary on Daniel men- tioned by Jerome, of which some other parts re- main. Hippolytus interprets the history of Susanna allegorically : Susanna is a type of the church. 3. 'AirodeiKTiK'fi irpds 'louSaious, Demoristratio adver- sus Judaeos. Fabricius gave in his 1st vol. a Latin version of this fragment, by Franciscus Turrianus, which Possevinus had printed {Appar. Sac. vol. i. p. 763, &c.), and in his 2nd vol. the original Greek, which Montfaucon had communicated to him. As the piece appears to be a paraphrase of Psalm Ixix. Fabricius suspects it is part of Hippolytus's Com- mentary on the Psalms. 4. npds "EWrjvas yos. This is only a fragment. Its authorship is claimed for Hippolytus, on the authority of the inscription on his statue, where it is called llpos "EAKiivas koX ​irpns TlaTwt'a f} Kal Trepl rod iravros. It was pulj- lished by Hoeschelius in his notes to Photius, and by Le Moyne in his Varia Sacra, as well as by Fa- bricius. It appears to be the work described by Pho- tius, under the title Hepl tuv iravTOS, or Uepl ttjs Tov iraurds airlas, or iravros ovcias. Its authorship was in his time very doubtful. At the head of his Codex (No. 48) it was called a work of Josephus ; but he says it was variously ascribed to Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Caius, to which last he himself attributes it. The genuineness of this fragment is admitted by Oudin. 5. Els t7)i/ aLfjeaiv Noerou tiv6s. Contra Haeresin Noeti. This is probably the concluding portion of his work Upos dirdcras ras alpecrfis, Adversus omnes Iluereses, mentioned by Eusebiiis and Jerome, and described by Photius as directed against thirty-two heresies, beginning with the Dositheans, and ending with Noetus, the contemporary of Hippolytus. 6. KaroL hTJpwvos Koi "HKiKos Twv alpeTiKuu trepl ^eoo'yias Kal aapKoiaeoos, De Tiieologia et Incarnaiione contra Beronem et Hdiconem (s. Helicem) haereticos. The eight fragments given by Gallandius of this work, which is perhaps another portion of the work against heresies, are preserved by Nicephorus of Con- stantmople, in his Anth'rMtica contra Iconomachos, and were first published in a Latin version in the Lectiones Antiquae of Canisius, vol. v. p. 154 (4to. Ingolstadt, 1604), and in Greek by Sirmond, in his Collectanea Anastasii BibliotJiccarii, 8vo. Paris, 1620. These pieces form the pars prima of the writings of Hippolytus given by Gallandius.
The second part contains the following works: 7. Fragmenta ex Commentario in Genesin^ printed by Fabricius from a MS. in the Imperial Library at Vienna, 8. Fragmenta ex Commentariis in varios Sacrae Scripturae Libros, viz. in Hex'demero7i, in Genesin, in Numeros, in Psalmos, in Psalm II., in Psalm XXIII.^ in Proverbia, in Canticum Canti- corum, in Isaiam, in Danielem, and in Canticum Trium Puerorum. These fragments were collected by Fabricius from MSS. or from the citations of ancient writers. The expository writings of Hip- polytus are mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome, from whom we learn that he wrote several other expositions besides those mentioned above. 10. Fragmenta alia, from the work Adversus Haereses, from the work IlepI roO ayiov Ilao-xo, De Sancto Pasclux, mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome ; and from the Ylpbs $a(niSa tipcL eTricrToArf, Epistola ad quamdam lieginam, which is thought to be the npoTpeiTTiKds irp6s 2,€§T^p€tvav, Exhortatorius ad Severinam, of the inscription on the statue. 11. YiepX xapKrixarwv dno(XToiKr) irapdBocris, De Charis- matibus Apostolica traditio, and some extracts from the Constitutiones Apostolicae, lib. viii. The author- ship of these pieces is claimed for Hippolytus on the authority of the inscription on his statue, and of some MSS. 1*2. Narratio de Virgine Corin- thiaca et de quodam Magistriano, from Palladius {^Hist. Lausiac. c. 148). 13. Canon Pascludis, or Table for Calculating Easter, together with a cata- logue of the works of Hippolytus, from the inscrip- tion on the statue. The Paschal Cycle of Hippo- lytus was of sixteen years. The table appears to have been part of his work Ilepl toD Ilacrxa, men- tioned by Eusebius, and of which an extract is given among the Fragmenta mentioned in No. 10. The canon of Hippolytus has been illustrated by the labours of Joseph Scaliger, Dionysius Petavius, Franci^us Blanchiuius, and others. The iragment of the Commentary of Hippolytus on Genesis, pub- lished by Fabricius, from an Arabic Catena, in Syriac characters, from a MS. in the Bodleian Library, with a Latin version by Gagnier, is re- jected by Gallandius as not belonging to the subject of this article ; and the short pieces, TLepX twv i6' diroaToKwv, De Duodecim Apostolis, and TlepX tuv o' dirocTToKoiv, De Septuaginta Apostolis, given by Fabricius in the appendix to his first volume, are either of doubtful genuineness or confessedly spurious.
There were several other works of Hippolytus enumerated bv Jerome and other ancient writers now lost. (Euseb. H. E. vi. 20, 22, 23; and Chronic, lib, ii. ; Hieronym. De Viris Illust. c. 61; Phot. Bibl Cod. 48, 121, 202 ; Chron. Paschal, p. 6, ed. Paris, vol. 1. p. 12, ed. Bonn ; Le Moyne, Diatribe de Hippolyto in the Prolegomena to his Varia Sacra; Baron. Annal. ad ann. 229, iv. ; Tillemont, Mtm. vol. iii. p. 238, &c. ; Lardner, Credibility, &c., pt. ii. c. 35 ; Oudin, Commeiit. de Scriptor, Eccles. vol. i. p. 220, &c. ; Basnage, Animadversiones de S. Hippolyto, prefixed to his edi- tion of Canisius, Lect. Antiq. ; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 183, &c., and Proleg. and Notes to his edit, of Hippolytus ; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. i. p. 102, &c. ed. Oxon, 1740—1743; Galland. BM. Patrum, vol. ii. Prolegom. c. xviii.)
2. Jerome mentions an Hippolytus whom (ac- cording to the common but perhaps a corrupt read- ing) he designates a Roman senator, among the writers who defended Christianity against the Gentiles. There is much difference of opinion among critics as to the person meant. Some sup- pose that the bishop of the Portus Romanus (No. 1 ) is intended, and that Jerome has converted him from a bishop into a senator. Fabricius suggests that the senator may be one of two Hippolyti recorded in the Martyrologies as suffering in the persecution under Valerian. (Hieron. Epist. 83 (olim 84) ad Magnum ; Opera, vol. iv. pars ii. col. 656, ed. Benedictin. Paris, fol. 1693, &c. ; Ya^onc. Bibl. Gr, vol. vii. p. 198.]
3. Of Thebes, a writer of the tenth or eleventh centuries, of whose personal history nothing is known, and whose date can only be approximately given. In his principal work, his Chronicle, he cites Symeon Metaphrastes, whom he calls, as if speaking of a contemporary, 6 Kvpios 'S.vfxedv ; but the age of Symeon himself (fixed by some in the 10th century, by others in the 12th) is too doubtful to afford much aid in determining that of Plippo- lytus. Hippolytus is quoted by Michael Glykus, a writer of the middle of the twelfth century, and who confounds, as do some moderns, Hippolytus of Thebes with Hippolytus of Portus Romanus (J^^- nales, pars iii. p. 227, ed. Paris, p. 423, ed. Bonn), and by Nicephorus Callisti, who died A. D. 1327. (/f. ^. ii. 3.)
The principal work of Hippolytus is his Cliro- nicon, 'IttttoAutou &ri§aiov XpoviKov ^vvrayixa (or 2vyypaixixa). A Latin version of a fragment of this was published by Joannes Sambucus, 8vo. Padua, 1556, under the title of Libellus de Oriu et Cognatione Virginis Mariae ; and a part in Greek, with a Latin version, Avas given in the third volume of the Lectiones Antiquae of Canisius. Various fragments were given in the Commentarii de Biblioth. Caesar, of Lambecius ; and some others were added by Emanuel Schelstratenus in his Antiquitat. Ec- desiae JUustralis, fol. Rome, 1692, in which he ​made important ccrrections in the text, and most or all the portions thus collected were reprinted by Fabriciua in his edition of the Works of Hippolytus of Portus, partly in the appendix to the 1st vol. and partly in the 2d vol. Basnage, in his edition of Canisius, made some farther additions, and the whole, with one or two additional fragments, were given in the Bihlioth. Patrum of Gallandius, vol. xiv. p. 106, &c.
Two short pieces, riepl roov l€' 'AttocttoXoji' and ITepl Twv o 'Airo(rT6u}u, which some have ascribed to Hippolytus of Portus (No. 1), the first of which had been published by Comb^fis in his Auctariuni Novum^ vol. ii. fol. Paris, and which are given by Fabricius a mong the " dubia ac supposititia," in his edition of Hippolytus, are also given by Gallandius as the productions of Hippolytus of Thebes : and Fabricius, in his Bibl, Gr. vol. vii. p. 200, considers them to be portions of his Chronicon. (Gallandius, Frolegom. to his 14th volume, p. v. ; Fabric, BihL Graec. vol. viii. p. 198 ; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. ii. p. dQ, ed. Oxford, 1740—1743.)
Some other Hippolyti enumerated by Fabricius {Bill. Gr. vol. vii. p. 197, &c.) are too unimportant to require notice here.
[J.C. M.]