hrygia, and also to Eleutherus, Bishop of Rome, relating the events
which had occurred.... This Epistle has in great part been preserved by
Eusebius;' and again, II. p. 210; 'We know that he [Irenaeus] was
deputed by the Church of Lyons to bear to Eleutherus, then Bishop of
Rome, the Epistle of that Christian community describing their
sufferings during the persecution,' etc. [So also in the Complete
Edition.] Accordingly in the index, pp. 501, 511, Irenaeus is made the
bearer of the Epistle.

This is a confusion of two wholly distinct letters--the letter to the
Churches of Phrygia and Asia, containing an account of the persecution,
which is in great part preserved by Eusebius, but of which Irenaeus was
certainly not the bearer; and the letter to Eleutherus, of which
Irenaeus was the bearer, but which had reference to the Montanist
controversy, and of which Eusebius has preserved only a single sentence
recommending Irenaeus to the Roman Bishop. This latter contained
references to the persecutions, but was a distinct composition: Euseb.
_H.E._ v. 3, 4.

[260:1] Iren. iii. 3. 3.

[260:2] Iren. iii. 21. 1.

[260:3] _De Pond. et Mens._ 16, 17. Epiphanius states that Antoninus
Pius was succeeded by Caracalla, who also bore the names of Geta and M.
Aurelius Verus, and who reigned seven years; that L. Aurelius Commodus
likewise reigned these same seven years; that Pertinax succeeded next,
and was followed by Severus; that in the time of Severus Symmachus
translated the LXX; that 'immediately after him, that is, in the reign
of the second Commodus, who reigned for thirteen years after the
before-mentioned L. Aurelius Commodus,' Theodotion published his
translation; with more of the same kind. The _Chronicon Paschale_ also
assigns this version to the reign of Commodus, and even names the year
A.D. 184; but the compiler's testimony is invalidated by the fact that
he repeats the words of Epiphanius, from whom he has obviously borrowed.

I should be sorry to say (without thoroughly sifting the matter), that
even in this mass of confusion there may not be an element of truth; but
it is strange to see how our author's habitual scepticism deserts him
just where it would be most in place.

[261:1] _S.R._ II. p. 213, 'We are therefore brought towards the end of
the episcopate of Eleutherus as the earliest date at which the _first
three books_ of his work against Heresies can well have been written,
and the rest _must_ be assigned