Inscription of Abercius

A Greek hagiographical text, which has, however, undergone alterations, and a Greek inscription of the second century have made known to us a certain Abercius, Bishop of Hieropolis, in Phrygia, who, about the middle of the century in question, left his episcopal city and visited Rome. On his way home he travelled through Syria and Mesopotamia, and was received with great honours in various places. He died shortly after his return to Hieropolis, but not before he had composed his own epitaph, conveying a most vivid impression of all he had admired during his stay in Rome. This epitaph may well have inspired the Life of Abercius such as it has come down to us, since all its details may be explained by the hints contained in the inscription, or else belong to the common foundation of all legends of saints. The Life, as a matter of fact, includes a transcription of the epitaph. Tillemont was greatly struck by the ideas therein expressed, and Pitra endeavoured to prove its authenticity and its important bearing on Christian symbolism. Renan regarded both the Life and inscription as fanciful compositions, but in 1882 an English traveller, W. Ramsay, discovered at Kelendres, near Synnada, in Phrygia Salutaris (Asia Minor), a Christian stele (inscribed slab) bearing the date of the year 300 of the Phrygian era (A.D. 216). The inscription in question recalled the memory of a certain Alexander, son of Anthony. De Rossi and Duchesne at once recognized in it phrases similar to those in the epitaph of Abercius. On comparison it was found that the inscription in memory of Alexander corresponded, almost word for word, with the first and last verses of the epitaph of the Bishop of Hieropolis; all the middle part was missing. Mr. Ramsay, on a second visit to the site of Hieropolis, in 1883, discovered two new fragments covered with inscriptions, built into the masonry of the public baths. These fragments, which are now in the Vatican Christian Museum, filled out the middle part of the stele inscribed with the epitaph of Abercius. It now became possible, with the help of the text preserved in the Life, to restore the original text of the epitaph with practical certainty. Certain lacunae, letters effaced or cut off by breaks in the stone, have been the subject of profound discussions, resulting in a text which may henceforth be looked on as settled, and which it may be useful to give here. The capital letters at the beginning and end of the inscription represent the parts found on the inscription of Alexander, the son of Anthony, those of the middle part are the remaining fragments of the epitaph of Abercius, while the small letters give the reading according to the manuscripts of the Life:

The interpretation of this inscription has stimulated ingenious efforts and very animated controversies. In 1894 G. Ficker, supported by O. Hirschfeld, strove to prove that Abercius was a priest of Cybele. In 1895 A. Harnack offered an explanation which was sufficiently obscure, making Abercius the representative of an ill-defined religious syncretism arbitrarily combined in such a fashion as to explain all portions of the inscription which were otherwise inexplicable. In 1896, Dieterich made Abercius a priest of Attis. These plausible theories have been refuted by several learned archaeologists, especially by De Rossi, Duchesne, and Cumont. Nor is there any further need to enter into the questions raised in one quarter or another; the following conclusions are indisputably historical. The epitaph of Abercius is generally, and with good reason, regarded as older than that of Alexander, the son of Anthony, i.e. prior to the year of Our Lord 216. The subject of it may be identified with a writer named Abercius Marcellus, author of a work against the Montanists, some fragments of which have been preserved by Eusebius. As the treatise in question was written about the year 193, the epitaph may be assigned to the last years of the second, or to the beginning of the third, century. The writer was bishop of a little town, the name of which is wrongly given in the Life, since he belongs to Hieropolis in Phrygia Salutaris, and not to Hierapolis in Phrygia Pacatiensis. The proof of this fact given by Duchesne is all that could be wished for. The text of the inscription itself is of the greatest possible importance in connection with the symbolism of the early Church. The poem of sixteen verses which forms the epitaph shows plainly that the language used is one not understood by all; Let the brother who shall understand this pray for Abercius. The bishop's journey to Rome is merely mentioned, but on his way home he gives us the principal stages of his itinerary. He passed along the Syrian coast and, possibly, came to Antioch, thence to Nisibis, after-having traversed the whole of Syria, while his return to Hieropolis may have been by way of Edessa. The allusion to St. Paul the Apostle, which a gap in the text renders indecipherable, may originally have told how the traveller followed on his way back to his country the stages of St. Paul's third missionary journey, namely: Issus, Tarsus, Derbe, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia, and Apamea Cibotus, which would bring him into the heart of Phrygia. The inscription bears witness of no slight value to the importance of the Church of Rome in the second century. A mere glance at the text allows us to note: (1) The evidence of baptism which marks the Christian people with its dazzling seal; (2) The spread of Christianity, whose members Abercius meets with everywhere; (3) The receiving of Jesus Christ, the Son of God and of Mary, in the Eucharist, (4) under the species of Bread and Wine. The liturgical cultus of Abercius presents no point of special interest; his name appears for the first time in the Greek menologies and synaxaries of the tenth century, but is not found in the Martyrology of St. Jerome.

PITRA, in the Spicilegium Solesmense (Paris, 1855, III, 533; IV, 483); DUCHESNE, Abercius, eveque d'Hieropolis, in the Revue des questions historiques (1883), XXXIV, 533; LECLERCQ, in Dict. d arch ol. chr t. et de liturgie, I, 66- 87; LIGHTFOOT, Apostolic Fathers (London, 1889), II, i, 492-501.

H. LECLERCQ