No More Learning

34. 65) just as it is now journey to Rome, where they submitted the whole
read, in his fictitious letters (the 2d to Cicero); controversy to Pope Coelestinus, and induced him
and that one at least of the MSS. now extant (the by their representations to publish, in A. D. 431,
Guelferbytanus or Neapolitan) is undoubtedly as his well-known Epistola ad Episcopos Gallorum,
old as the thirteenth century. Whatever may be in which he denounces the heresy of Cassianus,
the merits of this question, it cannot be donbted and warns all the dignitaries of the church to pro-
that the MS. from which our copies are derived hibit their presbyters from entertaining and dis-
was very corrupt ; a fact which the followers of seminating tenets so dangerous. Armed with this
Van Santen do not pretend to deny.
authority, Prosper returned home, and, from the
The Editio Princeps of Propertius was printed numerous controversial tracts composed by him
in 1472, fol. ; it is uncertain at what place. There about this period, appears to have prosecuted his
is another edition of the same date in small 4to. labours with unfiagging enthusiasm. Soon after,
The text was early illustrated and amended by the however, he disappears from history, and we know
mann.
.


## p. 549 (#565) ############################################

PROSPER.
549
PROSPER
rein,
nothing certain with regard either to his subsequent ! Episcoporum Auctoritulcs de Gratia Dei et Libero
career or to the date of his death. In the chronicle | Voluntutis Arbitrio. Believed to have been com-
of Ado (A. A. D. 850) he is spoken of as the Nopiled about A. D. 431. It was first made known
tarius of Pope Leo, and in some MSS. is styled by Dionysius Exiguus who subjoined it to the
Episcopus Rhegiensis (i e. Ries in Provence), but Epistle of Coelestinus addressed to the bishops of
ecclesiastical bistorians agree in believing that Gaul. See the observations of the Ballerini in the
Prosper of Aquitaine had no claim to these titles. edition of Leo, vol. ii. p. 719.
The works usually ascribed to this writer may The following, although bearing the name of
be divided into three classes :- 1. Theological. Prosper, are certainly spurious:-1. De Vita Con-
II. Historical. III. Poetical.
templativa Libri tres. Composed, in all probability,
I. THEOLOGICAL. - 1. Epistola ad Augustinum as Sirmond has pointed out, by Julianus Pomerius,
de Reliquiis Pelagianac Haerescos in Gulliu. Written a Gaulish presbyter, who flourished at the close of
between a. D. 427—429, and considered of im- the fifth century. (Gennad. de Viris N. 98 ; Isi-
portance in affording materials for the history of dor. de Script. Eccles. 12. ) 2. De Promissionibus
Semipelagianism. 2. Epistola ad Rufinum de et Praedictionibus Dei. Referred to by Cassiodorus
Gratia et Libero Arbitrio. Written while Augustin as the production of Prosper, but apparently the
was still alive, and therefore not later than the work of some African divine.
middle of the year a. D. 430. 3. Pro Augustino II. HISTORICAL. -Two, perhaps we should say
Responsiones ad Capilula Objectionum Gallorum three, chronicles are extant bearing the name of
culumniantium. Written about A. D. 431. 4. Pro Prosper. It will be convenient to describe them
Augustini Doctrina Responsiones ad Capitula Ob separately according to the titles by which they are
jectionum Vincetitianarum. Written, probably, soon usually discriminated.
after the preceding. 6. Pro Augustino Responsiones 1. Chronicon Consulare, extending from A. D.
ad Excerpta quae de Genuensi Civitate sunt missa. 379, the date at which the chronicle of Jerome
Belonging to the same epoch as the two preceding. ends, down to A. D. 455, the events being ar-
6. De Gratia Dei et Libero Arbitrio Liber. In ranged according to the years of the Roman
reply to the doctrines of Cassianus respecting Free consuls. We find short notices with regard to
will, as laid down in the thirteenth of his Colla- the Roman emperors, the Roman bishops, and po-
tiones Patrum (CASSIANUS), whence the piece is litical occurrences in general, but the troubles of
frequently entitled De Gratia Dei adversus Collato the Church are especially dwelt upon, and above all
Written about A. D. 432. 7. Psalmorum a the Pelagian heresy. In the earlier editions this
C. usque ad CL. Expositio, assigned by the Bene- chronicle ended with the year A. D. 444, but ap-
dictine editors to A. D. 433, but placed by Schoene- peared in its complete form in the Historiae Fran-
mann and others before A. D. 424. 8. Sententia corum Scriptores Coaetanei of Andrew Du Chesne,
rum ex Operilus S. Augustini delibatarum Liber fol. Par. 1636–1649. Rösler infers from internal
unus. Compiled about A. D. 45). The whole of evidence, that it was originally brought down by
the above will be found in the Benedictine edition Prosper to A. D. 433, and that subsequently two
of the works of Augustin ; the epistle is numbered additions were made to it, either by himself or by
ccxxv. , and is placed immediately before another some other hand, the one reaching to a. D. 444,
upon the same subject by Hilarius ; the remaining the other to A. D. 455. We ought to observe also
tracts are all included in the Appendix to rol. x. that, as might be expected in a work of this
The authenticity of the following is very doubt- nature, we find it in some MSS. continued still
ful :-1. Confessio. Sometimes ascribed to Prosper further, while in others it is presented in a com-
Aquitanicus, sometimes to Prosper Tiro. It was pressed and mutilated form.
first published from a Vatican MS. by Sirmond 2. Chronicon Imperiale, called also Chronicon
(8vo. Par. 1619), in a volume containing also the Pithoeanum, because first made known by Peter
Opuscula of Eugenius, bishop of oledo, together Pithou, in 1588. It is comprehended within
with some poems by Dracontius and others. See precisely the same limits as the preceding (A. D.
also the collected works of Sirmond, Paris, 1696, 379—455), but the computations proceed accord-
vol. ii. p. 913. 2. De Vocatione Gentium Libri ing to the years of the Roman emperors, and not
duo. Ascribed in some MSS. to Ambrose. Great according to the consuls. While it agrees with
diversity of opinion exists with regard to the real the Chronicon Consulare in its general plan, it
author. Erasmus would assign it to Eucherius, differs from it in many particulars, especially in
bishop of Lyons, Vossius to Hilarius Prosperi, the very brief allusions to the Pelagian contro-
Quesnel to Loo the Great. The whole question is versy, and in the slight, almost disrespectful notices
fully discussed by Antelmius, in an essay, of which of Augustine. It is, moreover, much less accu-
the title is given at the end of this article, and by rate in its chronology, and is altogether to be
the brothers Ballerini in their edition of the works regarded as inferior in authority.
of Leo, vol. ii. p. 662 (Leo). Those who assign The singular coincidence with regard to the
it to Prosper suppose it to have been written about iod embraced by these two chronicles, a coin-
A. D. 440, while the Ballerini bring it down as cidence which, however, in some degree disappears
low as 496. 3. Ad Sacram Virginem Demetria- if we adopt the hypothesis of Rösler, would lead
dem Epistola s. De Humilitate Christiana Tractatus, us to believe that they proceeded from the same
supposed to have been written about A. D. 440. source ; but, on the other hand, the difference of
It is placed among the letters of Ambrose (lxxxiv. ) arrangement, and the want of harmony in details,
in the earlier editions of that father, claimed for would lead to an opposite conclusion. Hence,
Prosper by Sotellus and Antelmius, chiefly on while the greater number of critics agree in re-
account of a real or fancied resemblance in style, garding Prosper Aquitanicus as the framer of the
and given by Quesnel to Leo the Great. See the first, not a few are inclined to make over the se-
edition of the works of Leo by the Ballerini, vol. cond to Prosper Tiro, who, it is imagined, flourished
ii. p. 743. 4. Praclerilorum Sedis Apostolicuc in the sixth century. It must be remembered, at
NN 3


## p. 550 (#566) ############################################

. 550
PROSPER.
PROTAGORAS.
as
the same time, that the existence of this second published at Mayence, 4to. 1494, as “ Epigrammata
Prosper as a personage distinct from the antagonist Sancti Prosperi episcopi regiensis de Viuis et Vir-
of the Semipelagians, has never been clearly de- tutibus ex dictis Augustini," and reprinted by
monstrated, and consequently all statements re- Aldus, 4to. Venet. 1501, along with other Chris
garding him must be received with caution and tian poems. Next appeared the treatise De Gratis
distrust.
Dei, printed by Schoeffer at Mayence, 4to. 1524,
3. Labbe, in his Nova Bibliotheca MSS. Libro “S. Prosperi Presbyteri Aquitanici Libellus ad-
rum, fol. Paris, 1657, published the Chronicon Con- versus inimicos Gratiae Dei contra Collatorem," in
sulare, with another chronicle prefixed, commencing a volume containing the epistle of Aurelius, bisbop
with Adam, and reaching down to the point where of Carthage, the epistle of Pope Coelestinus, and
the Consulare begins. This was pronounced by other authorities upon the same subject. Then
Labbe to be the complete work as it issued from followed the Epistola ad Ruffinum and the Respon-
the hands of Prosper, the portion previously known sioncs ad Excerpta, &c. 8vo. Venet. 1538, and
having been, upon this supposition, detached from soon after Gryphius published at Leyden, fol.
the rest, for the sake of being tacked as a supple- | 1539, the first edition of the collected works, care-
ment to the chronicle of Jerome. The form and fully corrected by the collation of MSS. The
style, however, of the earlier section are so com- edition of Olivarius, 8vo. Duaci, 1577, was long
pletely different from the remainder, that the opi. regarded as the standard, but far superior to all
nion of Labbe has found little favour with critics. others is the Benedictine, fol. Paris, 1711, super-
For full information with regard to these chro- intended by Le Brun de Marette and D. Man-
nicles, and the various opinions which have been geaut.
broached as to their origin, we may refer to Ron- Full information with regard to the interminable
calli, Vetust. Lat. Script. Chronicorum, 4to. Patav. controversies arising out of the works of Prosper is
1787; Rösler, Chronica Medii Aevi, Tubing.
1793; contained in the notes and dissertations of the
Graevius, Thesaur, Antiq. Rom. vol. xi.
Benedictines, in the dissertations of Quesnel and
III. POETICAL. Among the works of the the Ballerini in their respective editions of the
Christian poets which form the fifth volume of the works of Leo the Great, and in a rare volume “ De
“ Collectio Pisaurensis” (4to. Pisaur. 1766), the veris Operibus SS. Patrum Leonis Magni et Pros-
following are attributed to Prosper Aquitanicus, peri Aquitani Dissertationes criticae, &c. " 4to.
but we must premise that they have been Paris, 1689, by Josephus Antelmius, to which
collected from many different sources, that they Quesnel put forth a reply in the Ephemerides Pa-
unquestionably are not all from the same pen, and risienses, viii
. and xv. August, 1689, and Antel-
that it is very difficult to decide whether we are mius a duply in two Epistolae duabus Epistolae
to regard Prosper Aquitanicus and Prosper Tiro, P. Quesnelli partibus responsoriae, 4to. Paris, 1690.
the latter name being prefixed to several of these (See the works on the Semipelagian heresy re-
pieces in the MSS. , as the same or as distinct in- ferred to at the end of the articles CASSIANUS and
dividuals.
Pelagius. )
(W. R. ]
1. Ex sententüs S. Augustini Epigraminatum Liber PROSTA'TIUS, a Roman artist in mosaic, of
unus, a series of one hundred and six epigrams in the time of the emperors, whose name is inscribed
elegiac verse, on various topics connected with on a mosaic pavement found at Aventicum (Aven-
speculative, dogmatical, and practical theology, and ches) in Switzerland. (Schmidt, Antiq. de la Suisse,
with morals. Thus the third is De Essentia Dei- pp. 17, 19, 24 ; R. Rochette, Lettre à M. Schorn,
tatis, the thirty-ninth De Justitia et Gratia, the p. 394. )
[P. S. ]
twenty-second De diligendo Deum, the hundred PROTAGORAS (IIpwrayopas), was born at
and fifth De cohibenda Ira.
Abdera, according to the concurrent testimony of
2. Carmen de Ingratis, in dactylic hexameters, Plato and several other writers. (Protag. p. 309, C. ,
divided into four parts and forty-five chapters. An De Rep. x. p. 606, c. ; Heracleides Pont. ap. Diog.
introduction is prefixed in five elegiac couplets, of Laërt. ix. 55 ; Cicero, de Nut. Deor. i. 23, &c. ) By
which the first two explain the nature and extent the comic poet Eupolis (ap. Diog. Laërt. ix. 50),
he is called a Teian (Trios), probably with refer-
Unde voluntatis sanctae subsistat origo,
ence to the Teian origin of that city (Herod. i.
Unde animis pietas insit, et unde fides.
168, &c. ), just as Hecataeus the Abderite is by
Adversum ingratos, falsa et virtute superbos,
Strabo. (See Ed. Geist in a programme of the
Centenis decies versibus excolui.
Paedagogium at Giessen, 1827; comp. Fr. Hermann
in the Schulzeitung, 1830, ii. p. 509. ) In the
3. In Obtrectatorem S. Augustini Epigramma, in manifestly corrupted text of the Pseudo-Galenus
five elegiac couplets. 4. Another, on the same (de Philos. Hist. c. 8), he is termed an Elean (com-
subject, in six elegiac couplets. 5. Epitaphium pare J. Frei, Quaestiones Protagoreac, Bonnae,
Nestorianae et Pelagianae haereseon, in eleven 1845, p. 5). By the one his father is called Ar-
elegiac couplets, in which “ Nestoriana Haeresis temon, by the others Maeandrius or Maeander
loquitur. ” Written after the condemnation of the (Diog. Laërt. ix. 50, ib. Interp. ), whom Philostratus
Nestorians by the council of Ephesus in A. D. 431. (p. 494), probably confounding him with the
6. Vxorem hortatur ut se totam Deo dedicet, in father of Democritus, describes as very rich ; Dio-
fifty-three elegiac couplets, with an introduction in genes Laërtius (ib. 53) as miserably poor. The
sixteen lambic Dimeters Catalectic (Anacreon- well-known story, however, that Protagoras was
tics). Besides the above there is a Carmen de once a poor porter, and that the skill with which
Providentia divina, in some editions of Prosper, he had fastened together, and poised upon his
which is rejected by Antelmius, and made over by shoulders, a large bundle of wood, attracted the
some scholars to Hilarius.
attention of Democritus, who conceived a liking
The first among the works ascribed to Prosper for him, took him under his care, and instructed
which issued from the press was the Epigrammata him (Epicurus in Diog. Laërt. x. 8, ix. 53 ; Aul
of the poem.


## p. 551 (#567) ############################################

PROTAGORAS.
651
PROTAGORAS.
Gellius, N. A. v. 3; comp. Athen. viii. 13, p. 354, that year, the laws which had been drawn up at
(-), - appears to have arisen out of the statement an earlier period by Charondas, for the use of the
of Aristotle, that Protagoras invented a sort of Chalcidic colonies (for according to Diod. xii. 11. 3,
porter's knot (Than) for the more convenient car and others, these laws were in force at Thurii
rying of burdens (Diog. Laërt. ix. 53 ; comp. Frei, likewise). Whether he himself removed to Thurii,
1. c. p. 6, &c. ). Moreover, whether Protagoras we do not learn, but at the time of the plague we
was, as later ancient authorities assumed (Diog. find him again in Athens, as he could scarcely
Laërt. ix. 50; Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 301, d. , have mentioned the strength of mind displayed by
&c. ), a disciple of Democritus, with whom in point Pericles at the death of his sons, in the way he
of doctrine he had absolutely nothing in common, does (in a fragment still extant, Plut. de Consola
is very doubtſul, and Frei (l. c. p. 24, &c. ) has ud Apoll
. c. 33, p. 118, d. ), had he not been an
undertaken to show that Protagoras was some eyo-witness. Ile had also, as it appears, returned
twenty years older than Democritus. If, in fact, to Athens after a long absence (Plat. Prot. p. 30).
Anaxagoras, as is confirmed in various ways, was c. ), at a time when the sons of Pericles were still
born about B. C. 500, and was forty years older alive (ibid. p. 314, e. , 329, a) A somewhat in-
than Democritus, according to the latter's own timate relation between Protagoras and Pericles
statement (Diog. Laërt. ix. 4); comp. 34), Pro-is intimated also elsewhere. • (Plut. Pericl. c. 36.
Ligoras must have been older than Democritus, as p. 172, a. ) His activity, however, was by no
it is certain that Protagoras was older than So- means restricted to Athens. He had spent some
crates, who was born B. C. 468 (Plat. Protag. time in Sicily, and acquired fame there (Plat.
p. 317, C. , 314, b. , 361, e. ; comp. Diog. Laërt. ix. Hipp. Maj. p. 282, d. ), and brought with him
42, 56), and died before him at the age of nearly to Athens many admirers out of other Greek cities
seventy (Plat. Meno, p. 91, e. ; comp. Theact. through which he had passed_(Plat. Prot. p. 315,
p. 171, d. , 164, e. , Euthyd. p. 286, c. ; the as- a. ). The impeachment of Protagoras had been
sumption of others, that he reached the age of founded on his book on the gods, which began
ninety years, Diog.