CIRCA ANNUM DOMINI DXXXV COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES NOTICE.
(Andr. Galland. *Veterum Patrum Biblioth.* t. XI, Proleg., p. xviii.)
I. A Cosmas the Egyptian, and specifically an Alexandrian, as he himself seems sufficiently to intimate A, called Indicopleustes from his voyage to India, first practiced commerce, and afterward embraced the monastic life, as is clearly evident from the inscription of his *Christian Topography*, just as various handwritten codices report it. Isaac Vossius seems to have doubted the author's own name. Indeed, Fabricius B suspects that this writer was called Cosmas for the reason that he elaborated a description of the *kosmos* (world), just as Joannes, the Sinaite abbot called Climacus, was so nicknamed because he published a book inscribed *Klimax* (Ladder): an ingenious conjecture, to be sure, but one less firm in the judgment of Cave and others.
However, the notation of the time in which Cosmas flourished is easy to deduce from the author himself. For while he was committing the books of his work to writing, he reveals that at that time there had elapsed more or less C twenty-five years since the expedition of Elesbaan, king of the Axomites, against the Homerites: which expedition, as Pagi teaches, fell in the year 522, and the fifth of the Emperor Justin. Now, if to this notation of years you add the twenty-five years mentioned above, the year 547 arises, the twenty-first of Justinian, under whose reign, therefore, the author is understood to have flourished and written these things. But Book X, near the end, speaking about Timotheus, the bishop of Alexandria—whom he calls "the younger" to distinguish him from Elurus—reports that he had RECENTLY passed away, whom we know to have died in the year 535. Furthermore, the same Cosmas, at the time he was completing Book XI of his *Topography*, makes mention of Theodosius, the heretical patriarch of Alexandria, who went into exile in the year 536 because he refused to subscribe to the Council of Chalcedon.
These things, however, regarding the calculation of the times handed down by the same author, if they are looked at rightly, we acknowledge with the illustrious Montfaucon are by no means contradictory (*asystata*). "I would certainly think," says that learned man, "that Cosmas, who spent a long time working on these things, and often retracted and expanded them in the face of those opposing his opinion, placed the final notation of the year 535 when he was first working on them; but afterward, when in the subsequent time and with many years passed he returned to his original work and was revising it according to his custom, he either added the former notation or reduced the one already set down to the year in which he was doing this."
II. D We learn from the author himself that he wrote many things: namely, first, a *Cosmography*, where the whole earth is described more broadly; furthermore, Astronomical Tables, in which he delineated the motions of the stars according to the model of the organic system of the outer sphere for the sake of his own system, and inscribed them to Homologus the deacon; then a commentary on the *Canticle of Canticles*, which Theophilus, his friend, had requested of him. In addition to these, Cangius in his *Greek Glossary* mentions an *Exposition by Cosmas Indicopleustes on the more difficult passages of the Psalms* from the MS. Colbertine codex 1476; and the same is true of Codex II among the Greeks of the Royal Library of Turin. And indeed Montfaucon, unfolding codex CLXXXVII of the Coislinian library, in which the Psalter is contained, albeit mutilated at the beginning, also counts our Cosmas among the authors of commentaries on the same Psalter.
Furthermore, as observed by Colomesius in his *Paralipomena on Ecclesiastical Writers*, a fragment of this same *Exposition of the Psalms* by Indicopleustes exists in the Catena Corderiana on Psalm XVI, 14. From that single comma accidentally detected as belonging to our author, the most illustrious editors of the aforementioned Library of Turin thought that one could securely argue that that Catena Corderiana should be attributed to him. Which, indeed, I would not concede easily. For why would he have inserted that place of his into that Catena?
Indeed, it is not the custom among compilers of Catenas—who prefer to make use of other men's excerpts rather than their own when weaving together patches of this kind—to do so. Furthermore, if we once admit the opinion of the learned men whom we have just praised, must we not also attribute to the same Cosmas that other Coislinian Catena, mentioned a little earlier by Montfaucon, and every other one that exists in which Indicopleustes is also listed among the authors? Surely no one, as I think, could justly argue that. Therefore, the author of the Catena Corderiana seems to be someone other than our Cosmas, one who excerpted that fragment from the Exposition of Indicopleustes.
As for that preface to the Psalter which bears the name of Cosmas Indicopleustes, and which is prefixed as a kind of prologue to the Psalms in the Turin, Barocci A (a), and Vatican CCCXLII manuscripts, among others, Montfaucon long ago observed (b) that it was taken from this same Cosmas's *Christian Topography*. Yet that very learned man, while busy with other matters, later published that same preface again as if it were unpublished, among the works of Chrysostom (c), from an Ottoboni manuscript in which it is ascribed to that same Chrysostom; where, although he does not admit it as a product of Chrysostom, he nevertheless did not think to identify its legitimate author, as he had before. Nor should it be omitted here that Martin Crusius (d) took it upon himself to publish this preface to the Psalms by Indicopleustes, reconstituted from two Barocci manuscripts; he noted that the version Montfaucon presents in the *Christian Topography* was mutilated. From this, I should think that Crusius's Barocci copies perhaps agree with the Ottoboni manuscript, from which the aforementioned distinguished man published the same preface again, as we noted a little while ago; where, indeed, it appears fuller toward the end than the common version in the *Christian Topography*. Finally, a much richer prologue to the Psalms was recently published from a Vallicelliana manuscript by that very learned man to whom we attribute the Daniel according to the LXX accepted from Origen's Tetrapla (e). Having observed these things, it is also pleasing to add that Colomiès published the fact (f) that Matthias Flacius, in his Greek-Latin New Testament, had prefixed our Cosmas's Greek Arguments to the four evangelists, which I would suppose were copied from his *Christian Topography* (g), just as was done with Cosmas's preface to the Psalter, as we have just intimated.
III. Furthermore, all these literary monuments of Indicopleustes reviewed up to this point, if you except a few excerpts from the Exposition on the Psalter, have either perished completely or still lie hidden in the archives of libraries. One work, however, remains, noted under the title *Christian Topography*, which at the beginning of this century the celebrated Montfaucon brought to light from two manuscripts, the Vatican and the Parisian Laurentian. Of this work, only Photius (h) among the ancients makes mention, whose review Fabricius (i) presents and illustrates, though it was passed over by the most learned editor. The author dedicated his work to Pamphilus the Hierosolymite, who had come to Alexandria, where Indicopleustes was living, and had urged him to write (j). Thus, indeed, writes Photius (k), who, however, progressing further in his reading of the work, noticed that only the first six books were addressed by the author to this Pamphilus; the seventh, however, to a certain Anastasius, whom Cosmas calls B *philoponikotaton kai philochriston* ("most diligent and most Christ-loving") (l); the eighth, in fact, to Peter his friend (m), whom we mentioned before. The remaining four, we know, are not explicitly inscribed to anyone. The most learned Montfaucon (n) observes many things worthy of note in this work by Indicopleustes: such as his scope and opinion regarding the shape of the world, and his narrations concerning Egyptian, Ethiopian, and Indian affairs; in which other miscellanies of memorable things are seen to be interwoven. Indeed, in the first place he discusses (o) the things which Cosmas consigned to writing concerning matters pertaining to Holy Scripture and the Church: such as the things concerning the Festal Letters of Saint Athanasius and other fragments of the ancient Fathers, produced by the same author in the tenth book of his *Topography*. Further, concerning the value of these books by Cosmas, the celebrated editor has this to say (p): «Although there be not a few things in so prolix a work which could be ignored or neglected without loss—as is wont to happen among the writers of this age—nevertheless, no fair judge of things would deny that very few among those who flourished from the sixth century pass around so many documents of various things as we find in our Cosmas. For, besides Ethiopian, Egyptian, and Indian affairs, many other well-founded things occur from time to time most worthy of light, which bring no small accession to literature: among these, indeed, not a few fragments of ancient writers, and eleven excerpts of Athanasius from the Festal Letters, which have long since perished.» Thus he speaks: by which judgment of that most learned man, the opinion of Photius seems to be softened, who says that our author not only presents certain incongruities, but also relates some incredible things, so that it would be fair for a man to classify him among fabulous rather than trustworthy writers (q).
IV. Moreover, among the singular things that Cosmas reports here and there in this work, there stands out a truly excellent monument of antiquity, namely the inscription of Ptolemy III, King of Egypt, C surnamed Euergetes, located at Adulis, which is a city of the Ethiopians...
The author himself transcribed it and illustrated it with some scholia (a), which Montfaucon later augmented with richer notes (b). This Adulitic monument was first edited at Rome in 1631 by Leo Allatius, though very faultily, in the judgment of Vossius (c), who also illustrates some parts of that same monument. Afterward, having been more accurately transcribed from the Laurentian Florentine codex by Emericus Bigotius, it was published in French at Paris in 1666 by Thevenot (d). Subsequently, at the beginning of this century, John Hudson again published the same monument, with the annotations of Dodwell, in the third volume of the *Geographi Graeci* at Oxford. Furthermore, Fabricius presented it to us, augmented with notes, at Hamburg in 1716 (e). Finally, the Adulitic monument, previously edited with rivalry by learned men, after Spanheim, Dodwell, and other scholars, was brought forward by Edmund Chishull in his *Antiquitates Asiaticae Christianam aram antecedentes*, published at London in 1728, as we learn from the *Acta Eruditorum* of Leipzig (f); and it is vindicated by that most learned man from suspicion [of being a forgery] against Beger and Hardouin. Finally, adding his own learned annotations to the few of Cosmas himself and the richer ones of Montfaucon, he clearly showed that the prophecy of Daniel XI, 8, concerning the King of the South, that is, Ptolemy, is wonderfully illustrated by this monument.
But beyond other things worth noting which Indicopleustes describes in his *Christian Topography*, there is also the fact, which adds to the greatness of the work, that the author provides throughout original drawings of the things discussed in the work, delineated by his own hand and not without skill. For, as Montfaucon says (g), Greek scribes delight especially in pictures and images by which they might represent in their own colors the things described by the authors. Hence, it is usually possible to understand things that are obscure and not so clearly stated. The learned man caused many of the images of these things—which are present in our Cosmas’s Vatican and Laurentian codices and which were useful for understanding the subjects—to be engraved on copper plates. He also presents very many other icons taken from the same Cosmas in another outstanding work entitled *Antiquité expliquée*, in the two indices of which you may see Cosmas cited.
Moreover, the author of the *Chronicon Paschale*, commonly called the Alexandrian, seems to have plundered the records of our topographer, since in that chronicler, who is clearly later than Indicopleustes, many things are read in almost the same words as those Cosmas uses. Of this sort is that which Simonius reports in the epistle *De inspiratione librorum sacrorum*, prefixed to a work whose inscription is: *Réponse au livre intitulé: "Défense des sentiments,"* etc. (h). That passage, indeed, taken by that critic from the author of the lauded chronicle (i), occurs word-for-word in our Cosmas (j). From this, Allatius (k) wrongly suspected that the *Chronicon Paschale* should be attributed to the author of the *Christian Topography*, whom we find to have existed almost an entire century before the Alexandrian chronograph. On this matter, consult Fabricius (l) and Cave (m).
V. One or two things still remain to be noted regarding the restoration of Cosmas’s text or the reformation of its interpretation. And first, indeed, Wesseling (n) notes that a passage of Hyperides reported by Indicopleustes (o) occurs also in Pollux (p), but perhaps less accurately. Moreover, John Alberti (q) discusses the same passage, cited by our author, in his own *Hesychius*. Furthermore, the other passage of Menander, immediately subjoined by Cosmas, was restored as follows by the aforementioned Wesseling: *συνετῇ ἐλέᾳ*, where it was wrongly [printed] in the edition of Montfaucon.
But of more serious weight, as far as interpretation is concerned, must be considered the observation of the learned Joseph Simon Assemani (r). In his response to Croze’s booklet written in French and entitled *Histoire du Christianisme des Indes*, he first reports with praise what had been learnedly noted by him concerning the Nestorians. "Certainly," he says, "he (s) shows that Cosmas Indicopleustes was a follower of the Nestorian heresy (which neither Photius saw (t), nor did Montfaucon note (u)), and he brings forward these reasons: first, that Cosmas praises Patricius (v), who was later archbishop of all Persia, when that region was infected with Nestorianism, calling him a divine man and an illustrious teacher. Second, in listing the names of heretics (x), he names Manichaeans, Marcionites, Eutychians, Arians, Apollinarians, but nowhere Nestorians. Third, in his exposition of the Scriptures (y) and in his system of the world, he everywhere follows Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodore of Tarsus, the primary Nestorian teachers. Fourth, concerning Christ and the incarnation of the Word, he uses the same turns of phrase as the Nestorians (z)." These things having been culled from Croze, the most learned man proceeds, saying: "I willingly embrace Croze’s opinion, and I confirm it from the most certain documents of the Nestorians. Patri-
NOTICE FROM FABRICIUS' LIBRARY
A for he himself and his disciple, Thomas of Edessa, whom Cosmas mentions (a), were Nestorians, as I have demonstrated elsewhere (b). The Syrians call him Abam, or Mar-Abam, whom Cosmas calls Patricius in Greek. That Abam was the Catholicos of all Persia is clear from the Catalog of Nestorian patriarchs (c). Hence, from the testimony of Cosmas already cited, which is obscure according to Montfaucon's version, a great light shines forth. These are the words of Cosmas (d): "Not setting out from my own home, nor molding or conjecturing from myself, but instructed by the divine Scriptures, and having received through a living voice from the most divine man and great teacher Patricius, who—as if fulfilling an Abrahamic order, having arrived from the Chaldeans, along with the disciple then among the saints, Thomas of Edessa, who followed him everywhere, and who now, by the will of God, has exchanged life for death in Byzantium—bestowed piety and most true knowledge upon me, who also myself, now by divine grace, have been raised to the high and archiepiscopal thrones of all Persia, having been established as Catholicos over them." "Not from myself, nor from my own opinion and conjecture, but instructed by the divine Scriptures, and receiving from the living voice of the most divine man and great teacher Patricius, who, when he had fulfilled the Abrahamic order, having departed from Chaldea together with the holy man, then with his disciple, Thomas of Edessa, who followed him everywhere, but now in Byzantium, God willing, has exchanged life for death; he handed down the gift of pious religion and true science, he who also now, through the grace of God, has been raised to the B sublime and archiepiscopal thrones, having been established as Catholicos bishop there." Indeed, Patricius or Aba, having fulfilled the Abrahamic order—that is, either by imitating the patriarch Abraham, who migrated from Chaldea to the land of Canaan by God's command, or rather by having finished the course of monastic life in the Ilzen monastery, which the archimandrite Abraham had restored to its pristine splendor (e)—traveled to Byzantium with his disciple Thomas of Edessa, and there, upon Thomas's death, returned to Chaldea whence he had come, and was raised to the archiepiscopal throne of all Persia, being established as Catholicos, as Mares, Amrus, Barhebraeus, and other Nestorian or Jacobite writers record (f). Montfaucon, interpreting the Greek text of Cosmas incorrectly, refers what is said about Patricius or Aba to Thomas of Edessa, and notes in the margin (g) that the same Thomas was established as Catholicos of Persia. Croze also remarks upon this regarding Montfaucon's Latin version (h). So far the learned man. But here we must note that Montfaucon himself clearly recognized (i) that both the archbishop of Persia and all other bishops and presbyters subject to him were addicted to the tenets of Nestorius, so that it was by no means unknown to him whether Patricius, the Catholicos of all Persia, or Thomas of Edessa, his disciple, were Nestorians; even though Cosmas Indicopleustes, who celebrates them, omitted to stain them with the mark of such heresy. Let us proceed further.
SECOND NOTICE.
(Fabric. Bibliotheca Græca ed. Harles, tom. IV, p. 251.)I. De monumento Adulitico sive Adulitano Ptolemæi Evergetæ.
The outstanding monument of Ptolemy Evergetes (a) in Adule, a maritime city of the Ethiopians, was observed by a certain Greek author, who was still surviving in his own time (b) and inserted it into his Christian Cosmography; he was famous under the Emperor Justin and testifies that he reached those places for the sake of commerce. He found a *sippos*, or throne, of white marble at the entrance of the city, consecrated to Mars by the king, and having images of Hercules and Mercury carved upon the rear part, and inscribed on all sides with Greek letters, celebrating in a sufficiently glorious way both the great expeditions happily undertaken by Ptolemy and his most ample victories. . . .
With the passing of years, just as Bernard de Montfaucon reviewed the complete Christian Topography of Cosmas, the Egyptian monk, so also, along with it, the inscription of that marble throne, long since lost, or the Adulitan monument, he reviewed according to the authority of both codices, the Vatican and the Florentine, in *Collectionis novæ Patrum*, Paris 1706, folio, vol. II, p. 141 sqq., with the addition not only of the scholia of Cosmas on the inscription of Ptolemy, but also his own brief observations, and indeed a depiction.
II. Christian Cosmography, once read by Photius without the author's name, a fact which escaped the notice of the most learned Montfaucon.
The work itself in which this monument exists is titled *Christian Topography of the Whole World*, a description of the entire universe according to the mind of the Christians, and it is distributed into twelve books, although they were not published by the author all at once, because initially he had not conceived of so many books in his mind. The twelfth is missing in the Vatican manuscript; in the Medicean codex it was found mutilated at the end (namely, with the final folio of the last book lost), and thus it was edited by Montfaucon as complete along with the other eleven. The argument of the work is described succinctly by Photius, whose passage—which escaped the notice of the most learned editor—I shall append. Indeed, thus he writes in Codex XXXVI:
"A book was read, the title of which is *Christian Book, an Interpretation of the Octateuch*. It is addressed by the author to a certain Pamphilus; he flourished in the days of Justin, the King of the Romans. It begins, then, with certain ecclesiastical dogmas, defending them, as it seems to him, with testimonies from Holy Scripture. He uses a humble diction, and more..."
[The scholarly notes provided by the editor at the bottom of the page:]
(a) Lib. I, at the beginning, and p. 114 sqq.; lib. II, p. 125, 126; lib. VII, p. 275.
(b) In no way does this work hold the title *Exposition on the Octateuch*, or on the first eight books of sacred Scripture. Therefore these words suggest rather an exposition or treatise, consisting of eight books, or ending in the eighth book. For although soon after by Photius himself twelve books are numbered, yet the last four were written only after an intervening time and added to the former, and are referred to by Photius separately.
(c) To Pamphilus the Hierosolymitan. See lib. I, p. 114; lib. II, p. 134, and lib. VIII, p. 305. He calls this most God-beloved Father [Theophile-staton Pater], lib. II, p. 185; lib. VI, p. 266; [and] *timia kephale* to the same, lib. V, p. 260.
(d) Lib. II, p. 141: "Being present, therefore, in these parts some twenty-five years more or less before these, at the beginning of the reign of Justin, King of the Romans, the then King of the Axumites, being about to go out to war against the Himyarites across [the sea], etc." That expedition of Elesbanus, King of the Ethiopians, took place in the year of Christ 522 (compare Pagi, vol. II, *Critic. Baron.*, p. 517). Therefore, in the fifth year of the Emperor Justin, the author was writing these things at Alexandria (see lib. I, p. 144; lib. V, p. 6, p. 264), in the year of Christ 517, [and] the twenty-first of Justinian.
[Editor's note:] Understand the pages as those of the Montfaucon edition, which we have taken care to print in the text in bolder type.
NOTITIA FROM FABRICIUS' LIBRARY
than with ordinary composition. But he tells certain incredible things, so that it is right to rank the man among writers of fables rather than writers worthy of belief. For the doctrines which he most earnestly defended are these: that the heaven is not of a spherical figure, nor indeed is the earth, but that the former is like a vault, and the latter is oblong, A and that the ends of the heaven are joined to the ends of the earth. And that all the stars are moved, with angels serving them in their motion, and other such things. He also makes mention, as it were by way of digression, of Genesis and Exodus, and he dwells upon the description and contemplation, for the most part, of the tabernacle. He runs through the prophets and then the apostles. He says that the sun has the size of two climates, and that the angels are not in heaven, but only above B the firmament and dwelling with us. And that Christ, having ascended from the earth, entered into the place between the heaven and the firmament, and that this alone is the kingdom of heaven. He also brings forward other absurdities. He dedicated six books to a certain Pamphilus; and of the six remaining (for all his books are twelve in total), he dedicated the seventh to Anastasius, in which he denies that the heavens are to be dissolved; and the eighth he dedicated to Peter, in which he interprets the canticle of Ezechias and the regression of the sun, testifying that he had also explained the Canticle of Canticles C in a commentary. The remaining four books were not addressed by the author to any specific person.
D
III. Whether Cosmas is the author of the Christian Topography.
It is evident from this passage that Photius found no author's name inscribed in his codex. Nevertheless, he is called Cosmas Indopleustes by learned men. Allatius, pages 20 and 47, cites "Christinus" or "Christianus" in the *Christian Topography*. [Fabricius, book III, near the end, has brought forward other passages from Allatius.] In the Medicean codex [cod. 28, plut. IX], this is the index of the work: *This book is the Christian Topography, called so by us as containing the whole world.* [Bandini in the *Catalogus manuscriptorum Græcorum bibliothecæ Laurentianæ*, vol. I, pp. 437-449, is copious concerning that codex, which was written in the tenth century, the subject matter of the work, and Cosmas himself. In the Laurentian codex, page 20 verso, after the prologues, it reads, however: *Discourse 1 of the monk Cosmas to those wishing to be Christians, against those who, thinking outside the faith, believe and hold that the heavens are spherical.* Bandini already mentions that only a fragment exists in the codex of the Imperial Library at Vienna, in Lambecius's *Commentarii de bibliotheca*, lib. II, cod. IX. Yet Kollarius, in his note to Lambecius’s *Commentarii* III, page 47 sqq., shows that there are only four excerpts, which he also carefully designates, having compared them with Montfaucon's edition. The Vatican codex was written by hand on parchment in uncial characters around the ninth century, with figures taken from an older exemplar and, in Bandini’s opinion, copied from an autograph; but it lacks book XII. For Cosmas, says Bandini, after editing his *Christian Topography*, later produced it in another form in most places, expanded it in many parts, and, because it was necessary to refute objections when works were challenged by obstinate men fighting vigorously against his opinion, he added new books (a); whence it happens that copies emanating from the first autograph are far shorter than others that were transcribed after the work had been mended and patched. Of the latter sort is the Laurentian codex of the tenth century, upon whose authority Montfaucon oversaw his edition in the *Collectio nova Patrum*, vol. II, with the assistance of Antonio Maria Salvini. Nevertheless, Jac. Gronovius, in his notes to Minucius Felix, ch. 37, says: "I do not recall having read this opinion more beautifully illustrated than by Cosmas the monk in that *Christian Topography*, recently published in Paris in such a way that it could have been rendered more accurately." The same Montfaucon had various plates described, with which the codex is quite well adorned in its entirety; though Bandini laments that the most elegant ones, and those of the greatest value to students of antiquity, were omitted. Bandini proves that Salvini offered assistance from Montfaucon’s own letters, given to the same Salvini in the year 1700, and published in vol. II, pp. 149 sqq. of Gori’s *Symbolæ litterariæ*. From the fifth letter, page 200, it is concluded that the task of illustrating the plates, which were almost erased in the Vatican codex, was entrusted to Anselmo Maria Banduri, by whom, however, some inscriptions, difficult to discern, were omitted. — Cosmas’s proem to the Psalter is cited by Nicetas Choniates in the *Thesaurus orthodoxæ fidei*, as witnessed by Bandini, vol. I of the aforementioned Catalogus, p. 432 B. The prologue itself to the Psalms is in the Venetian codex of St. Mark (Catal. p. 261). Magnus Crusius, in his 1728 Leipzig dissertation *Epistolica*, promised he would publish a more complete prologue of this Cosmas to the Psalms than the one in Montfaucon, vol. II, p. 223. Yet the *Ecphrasis* on the Psalms in the Vienna codices, vol. III, p. 272, and vol. IV, p. 475, should not be confused with this; for it is neither by Cosmas of Jerusalem, as Lambecius opined, nor written in iambic verse, but in political verse, as Kollar teaches regarding both Lambecius's loci. Cf. Fabric. *Bibl. Gr.*, vol. X, p. 218, where several of the name Cosmas are enumerated: to whom are added in this place by Fabricius: Cosmas, deacon of Constantinople, in the time of Chrysostom (Lambec. VIII, p. 300); Cosmas whose parenetic sermon is *To a stubborn sinner* (Lambec. VIII, p. 449; Nessel. V, p. 24); the *Interpretation of the art of goldsmithing* by the hieromonk Cosmas, MS in the Royal and Laurentian codices (see Bandin. III, p. 356); Cosmas, Bishop of Alexandria (Asseman. vol. II *Bibliotheca Orientalis*, p. 474). Fabricius was unaware of Cosmas Cyparissiota, whose *Suppliant Office to Jesus* is in the Laurentian Medicean codex, according to Bandini, vol. I of the *Catalogus*, cod. XVII, p. 40. Ibid. p. 530, there occur two sentences regarding tenant farmers by the masters of the offices under the elder Emperor Romanus. His decree *On the Coloni (tenant farmers)* exists in the Venetian codex of St. Mark (Catal. p. 103). HARL.] — Thom. Bartholinus, in his book *De unicornu*, ch. 24, p. 211, cites the *Christian Geographer* from the Medicean library regarding animals of India.
But I fear that this is not his proper name, namely, Cosmas Indopleustes. For just as he was called Indopleustes from his voyage undertaken to far-distant places (b), so he seems to be called Cosmas because he had written a topography of the *kosmos* or world (c). Similarly, John, the Sinaite abbot, was called Climacus because he had written a book titled *Climax* (The Ladder), not to mention other examples of this kind, already known to the learned, and partly collected by Adrien Baillet in his book...
in French, in which he reviews writers who lie hidden under a false or anonymous name, p. 322. I also see that Isaac Vossius expresses doubt about the author, page 275, on Mela: "How old the term is becomes clear from the author of the 'Christian Topography,' whether that be Cosmas Indopleustes or someone else." And page 276: "Cosmas Indopleustes or whoever else is the author of 'Christian Topography' agrees with this." The Greek scholia on Apollonius, Vol. IV, vs. 262, cite a Cosmas—I do not know if it is our author—in the first book of the *Aegyptiaca*. However, Cosmas Indopleustes is cited by Corderius in the *Psalms*, Vol. I, pp. 53, 303; and by Petrus Gyllius, Book II of *Topographia Constantinop.*, chap. 25. M. V. La Croze (in *Bibl. Bremensi*, t. V, p. 663; in *Museo Bremensi*, t. I, p. 85; and in *Historia Christianismi apud Indos* p. 27 sqq., published in French, The Hague 1724, in-12) notes most certainly that the author of the *Topographia* was a Nestorian, although he does not deny that Mary is called Theotokos by him, p. 260 C. Add Joseph Sim. Assemani, Book III of *Bibl. Orient.*, part II, pp. XCI, DCXVII, who declares that he wrote around the year 539 A.D. Three Cosmas are listed among the patriarchs of Alexandria in the *Chronicon Orientale*, pp. 126, 132, 133. The author of the *Topographia* indeed spent much time in Egypt, and wrote in Alexandria, as he himself testifies in II, p. 114; VI, p. 264. That he engaged in trade, he reveals in more than one place, II, p. 130, III, p. 178; XI, p. 336. The inscription of the book calls him a monk: "Cosmas, the Egyptian monk, Christian Topography." That monks formerly practiced manual crafts is sufficiently established, even by Epiphanius, LXXX, 3 sq., and Palladius in the *Lausiac History*, p. 92, 142, 143, etc., not to mention those matters which Alteserra has collected for this subject in *Asceticis*, Thomassin in *De disciplina ecclesiastica*, and Gundling in his notes to the delineation of the Greek Church by Eustratius, p. 21 sq. But the business of trade and the frequency of travel seem less in accord with the monastic profession. Therefore, perhaps the author had said farewell to commerce before he embraced the monastic life. That the Patriarch of Cairo, John Abulmagued, engaged in trade and traveled to India quite often before he ascended to the patriarchate, one reads in the *Chronicon Orientale*, fol. 139, for the year 6707. In the fifth book of the *Topographia* there occur many things which I remember reading in almost the same words in the *Chronicon Paschale*, which common usage calls the Alexandrian. Perhaps both writers drew from common sources. Hence Allatius, in his *Consensu de purgatorio*, p. 942, suspected that Cosmas was the author of the *Chronicon Alexandrinum*. The same Allatius, page 50, in *De libris Græcorum ecclesiasticis*, citing a passage from the *Christian Topography*, calls the author "Christinus" or "Christianus": and likewise on page 528 of *De consensu utriusque Ecclesiæ*. But in *De purgatorio*, p. 936, and in *De consensu*, p. 260, he calls him "an ancient author," without any name added. Cf. Vossius, *De histor. Græcis*, II, cap. 23, p. 219. The reading of this topography is especially delightful for the reason that from it the opinion of the ancient Christians—that the world refers to Noah's ark and is not spherical, but flat (a)—is not only explained clearly but also defended with various arguments, and is proposed in such a way that it is understood how those good men conceived and perceived, according to this hypothesis, the eclipses and the rising and setting of the stars. Luberius reports a similar opinion of the Siamese in his *Description du Royaume de Siam*, published in French, t. I, p. 199; Laneus regarding the Indians, *Mem. de Trevoux*, 1713, p. 1861; Theodorus of Mopsuestia in Jo. Philoponus in his *Hexaemeron*; Diodorus of Tarsus in Photius; Chrysostom and others in Petavius, *Lib. dogmat. theol.*, on the creation of the world, chap. 12; Lactantius III, 24.
IV. Index of writers and certain others mentioned in the Christian Topography.
Amphilochius, a friend of St. Basil, in his iambics to Seleucus. Book VI, p. 292. Anastasius, a mechanic. VI, p. 264. The same, as it seems, to whom he inscribed the seventh book. "Most hardworking of men." VII, p. 274. "Lover of Christ" 275. Apion, a grammarian, writer on Egyptian affairs. XII, p. 341. Apollinaris the heretic. V, 242. Apollonius, Molo, whom he cites among the writers on Egyptian matters (from Josephus, as it seems). XII, p. 341. Archimedes, a geometer and incomparable arithmetician. III, p. 182. His "Squaring of the Circle," ibid. Aristotle. I, p. 121; III, pp. 177, 179. Against him, because the heavens do not consist of a certain fifth essence. I, p. 117 sq. His opinion on the dual quality of the individual elements is exploded, p. 123. Arius the heretic. V, p. 242. Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. VII, p. 292. From his festal letters: the second, fifth, sixth, twenty-second, twenty-fourth, twenty-ninth, fortieth, forty-second, third, and fifth. X, pp. 316-319. The "External" (secular) Attics. V, p. 197. Babylonian opinion, that the heaven is a sphere. VIII, p. 305. Basil, a friend of Amphilochius. VII, p. 292. Berosus, "Chaldean writings." XII, p. 340. Brahmins. II, p. 137.
A Cadmus of Tyre brought letters into Greece. V, p. 206; XII, p. 343. Chaeremon, writer on Egyptian affairs. XII, p. 341. Chaldaeans, "of the race of Abraham," handed down the barbarian sphere to the Egyptians. III, p. 159. A Christian writer, who, having professed that the heaven is spherical, teaches that it must be dissolved, in opposition to the heathens, is impugned. VII, p. 274, 299. Dius and Menander, who translated the antiquities of the Tyrians into the Greek language. XII, p. 342. Ephorus, from the fourth book of whose history a remarkable fragment is produced. II, p. 148. This was published in Greek, as excerpted from the Medicean codex of Cosmography, by Jac. Gronovius at the end of the appendix to *Geographica antiqua*. Leiden, 1699, in-4. Epiphanius on weights and measures. X, p. 326. Catholic Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude are not all received by all the Churches. VII, p. 292. "Those outside," "those from without," "the others." III, p. 175; IV, p. 190; IX, p. 310, etc. Euclid, mathematician and geometer. III, p. 182. Eudoxus of Cnidus, Pythagoras, and Plato learned astrology in Egypt. III, p. 159. Eusebius Pamphili. III, p. 174. His *Ecclesiastical History*. VII, p. 292. Eutyches the heretic. V, p. 242. The Greeks, "Greek error." VI, p. 260, 272, etc. Gregory Nazianzen's sermon on Easter. X, p. 319. The apostle Paul, author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. V, p. 254, 255. The Hebrews in the desert inscribed on many stones the memory of their journey in Hebrew letters, which the author testifies that he has seen. V, p. 205. Homer never used the word *nomos* (a). XII, p. 343. Hyperides' oration against Patrocles. V, p. 197. John, requested by the faithful, wrote the Gospel as a supplement to the others, which he approved. V, p. 248. John Chrysostom's sermon on almsgiving. X, p. 327. Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians. Ibid. On the Hebrews, p. 328. Josephus. III, p. 174. Irenaeus. VII, p. 292. Jews expecting "the anointed" or the Messiah. VI, p. 271. B Lycurgus the legislator. XII, p. 342. Lysimachus, writer on Egyptian affairs. XII, p. 341. Manetho on Egyptian affairs. XII, p. 341. Manichaeans. V, p. 242, 262; VI, p. 271, 272, 273. Marcionites. V, p. 242. Menander the historian. See above under Dius. Menander the comic poet. V, p. 198. Montanists. V, p. 262. Moses, the first writer taught letters by God. III, p. 174. Origen. VII, p. 298, 299. Pamphilus of Jerusalem, to whom the author dedicated the first six books. I, p. 114; II, p. 124; VIII, p. 305. "The honorable head." VI, p. 260. "O most God-beloved father," p. 266. Patricius the mathematician, who set out from Chaldaea to Egypt, from whom the author was taught what he recounts concerning the world. VIII, p. 306. Perhaps the same one whom he calls "most divine master," II, p. 132; V, p. 192. Died at Byzantium. II, p. 125. Peter, to whom he dedicated book VIII. P. 300, 307; "Christ-loving," p. 308. Philo of Carpathus' commentary on the Song of Songs. X, p. 329. On the *Hexaemeron*, p. 330. Plato. III, p. 177, 179. His *Timaeus*. XII, p. 341. See also above under Eudoxus. Proclus' commentary on Plato's *Timaeus*. XII, p. 341. Ptolemy "who warred against Ethiopia." VI, p. 268. Ptolemy, namely Evergetes I, whose Adulitan monument he reports. II, p. 141 sq. (Claudius) Ptolemy. III, p. 177. Incomparable astronomer, p. 182. Pythagoras. III, p. 179. See also above under Eudoxus. Pytheas of Massilia. II, p. 149. For Solomon (b) read Solon. XII, p. 342. Samaritans. V, p. 262; VI, p. 271, 272. Severianus, bishop of Gabala, book one, two, three, four, and six on the *Hexaemeron*. X, p. 320. Book against the Jews. VII, p. 192. C Socrates. III, p. 179. Solon. See a little earlier under Solomon. Sopater the merchant, with whom the author associated. XI, p. 338.
(a) Our author borrowed this observation, like others, from Josephus. See Book I *Against Apion*, p. 1071. The word *nomos* does indeed occur in the hymn to Apollo, v. 20, but not in reference to civil law or morals, but to *odes*. (b) You will observe a similar error in Theophilus of Antioch, Book III, *To Autolycus*, p. 120, Paris edition, and in Nazianzen's Oration XV, p. 225. D
NOTITIA FROM FABRICIUS’S LIBRARY ON COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES
Stephanus the mathematician, presbyter of Antioch. VI, p. 264. Syri. VII, p. 292. The Teratologists. V, pp. 205, 213. Teucer, legislator of the Locrians. XII, p. 342. Theodosius, Alexandrian schismatic dwelling in Constantinople, still alive at the time the author was writing. His sermon on the Assumption in Lent. X, p. 331. Another explanation, ibid. On the saying, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me," ibid. Theophilus of Alexandria, first festal epistle. X, p. 320. Thomas of Edessa, disciple of Patricius, Archbishop and Catholicos of Persia. II, p. 125. Timaeus the philosopher (in Plato). XII, p. 340. Timotheus the Younger, predecessor of Theodosius of Alexandria. XI, p. 332 sq. Tryphon Phaleris, whom Philadelphus consulted regarding translating the sacred books of the Hebrews into the Greek language. XII, p. 344. The author calls him Tryphon instead of Demetrius, by a slip of memory, it seems. Xenophanes. II, p. 149.
V. Lost Works of Cosmas.
This author of the *Cosmographia* had written other things, some of which he mentions himself. These are as follows:
1. A Description of the Earth towards Constantine: [A book in which is written more broadly the whole earth, both that beyond the Ocean, and it itself, and all the regions, and also the southern parts from Alexandria to the southern Ocean—I speak of the river Nile and the regions and nations lying nearby, of all Egypt and Ethiopia. And furthermore also the Arabian Gulf and the regions and nations lying nearby as far as the same Ocean again, likewise also the middle land of both the river and the gulf and the nations that are in it.] Lib. I, p. 113. The loss of this work seems to Montfaucon as something to be wept for even with tears.
2. Adumbration or image of the universe and the movement of the stars made in imitation of the armillary sphere, and a book on that image [dedicated] to the deacon Homologus. [The sketch of the universe and the starry motion which took place for us in imitation of the organic sphere from without, and the discourse concerning it sent to the most God-beloved deacon, Homologus.] Lib. I, p. 114. Perhaps the same short work is referred to in VII, p. 274, where he says that he taught in another treatise that the heaven is not a sphere, nor does it move circularly.
3. Commentary or *Hypomnemata* on the Song of Songs, to Theophilus his friend. VII, p. 300.
4. Cosmas is cited in the manuscript catena of Macarius Chrysocephalus on Matthew. [Ought he to be understood as Cosmas Hierosolymitanus? For he is cited among many other old theologians, according to Lambecius, *Commentar.* III, p. 165, just as he is in codex CCI Coislin., according to Montfaucon in *Catal. bibl. Coislin.*, p. 251, in a catena or very extensive commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. That he also wrote on Luke, Cave conjectures in *Hist. litterar.*, part II; but the passage he brings forward does not prove this, and as Fabricius observed in a manuscript note, it was taken from Book V of the *Cosmographia*, p. 217. Similarly the arguments of the four Gospels, which Matthias Flacius exhibits in his illustrious *Glossa on the N. T.* under the name of Cosmas Indicopleustes for Matthew and Mark, and under the name of Cosmas Indicopleustes for Luke and John, taken from an old codex, are, as Fabricius notes in a manuscript note, taken from the same place in the *Cosmographia* (Basel, 1570, folio, Greek and Latin). From there, perhaps, were also taken the short prefaces of Cosmas Indicopleustes to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the Nanian codices VIII and XI, pp. 6 and 8 of the *Catalogi Græcorum codd. mss.* preserved among the Nani. HARL.]
5. Exposition on the Psalms, of which some things are noted as far as III. It is described at length in the Turin Library and in the catalogue of Greek manuscripts, p. 67 sqq. The editors first observed that that codex contains most extensive commentaries on the Psalms and the canticles of both Testaments, which truly seem to be the same as those that Charles Du Fresne relates in *Glossarium mediæ et intimæ Græcitatis*, p. 516, under the title that is read in the Colbertine codex: *Cosmas Indicopleustes’ explanation of the Psalms historically and anagogically*, etc. The preface with the epigraph, which bears the name of Cosmas Indicopleustes, the editors say is the same throughout as the one in the Baroccian codex in Oudin, Vol. I, p. 1412: *Cosmas Indicopleustes’ prologue to the Psalms*. Montfaucon published this preface to the Psalms in Vol. V of the *Works of Chrysostom*, p. 540, from an Ottobonian manuscript, in which it is ascribed to John Chrysostom. The second preface follows the text of the Psalms with an exposition of difficult passages. The editors of that catalogue, however, discovered a consensus with those things which Corderius published in his *Catena*. There is also a commentary of this Cosmas on the prophet David (as Plüer wrote in *Itinerarium per Hispan.*, p. 163), or on the Psalms in the Escorial Library and in codex XIX of the Greek Royal Library of Naples. HARL.] — Exposition by Cosmas on the Psalms with a protheoria on the method of the Psalms in Colbertine codex 1476. Johann Christoph Wolf, p. 23 of *De catenis Patrum*, testifies that he possesses a description from the Baroccian codex, and there he describes in Greek the exposition by Cosmas on Psalm 110:4, from Nicetas’s *Thesaurus of the Orthodox Faith*. That prologue, communicated to me by the aforementioned Wolf from the Baroccian codex XV, I saw to be nothing other than the *protheoria* which is read on p. 223 of the *Topographia*, but with a few additions after the words, p. 224. He is also praised by Allatius, p. 595, *De processione Spiritus sancti*. — [In codex XXVI, n. 2, of the Royal Library of Naples, there is Cosmas the Monk’s *Canon for Palm Sunday, for the Great Week*. HARL.]
PREFACE TO THE CHRISTIAN TOPOGRAPHY OF COSMAS EGYPTIUS, Or the opinion of the Christians concerning the world, Wherein many lost works of Athanasius appear.
PROŒMIUM.
Cosmas, who is called Indicopleustes from his voyage to India, is mentioned in the *Christian Topography* by Peter Lambeck, Imperial Librarian, Book III, Codex 9, p. 21; and it is said that it extends from folio 28 to folio 34 in the ninth codex, from which it is manifest that not the whole work, but only a fragment, exists in the Imperial collection. Indeed, in the Vatican library there is a most elegant parchment codex of the same author in uncial script, dating from about the ninth century, with figures depicted from an older exemplar, and perhaps from the autograph itself: but the twelfth book is missing from it. For, as we indicate at the end of the work, Cosmas, in the second revision of the *Christian Topography* published by himself, brought it into another form and in many places expanded it, and since he had to repel the objections of men who were aggressively and strenuously fighting against his contrary opinion, he thought it necessary to add new books, as you will discover in the course of the work. Whence it happens that the copies which stemmed from the first autograph are much shorter than others which were copied after the work was repaired and protected. Of the latter kind is the Laurentian parchment codex of the tenth century, by the reliability of which we have adorned our edition: it includes all twelve books of Cosmas, missing only the final folio of the last book. A Mention of this author was made by Joannes Jacobus Frisius in his *Bibliotheca Universalis*, where he is called Cosmas Indicopleustes; and by Possevinus, by whom he is called Indicoplensis through a similar slip. But they testify that they had seen a preface to the Psalter, which is prefixed in certain manuscripts: that preface, however, was excerpted from this work, as we have noted in its proper place. A much greater knowledge of Cosmas was brought to us later by the late Emericus Bigotius, who, having traveled through parts of Italy, excerpted certain things from a Florentine Laurentian codex, namely the inscription of Ptolemy Euergetes, and other items of great value pertaining to Ethiopian and Indian affairs. But as usually happens to those who prepare excerpts in passing, the learned man omitted much of the same subject matter, and indeed much that was excellent. Furthermore, since these Bigotian fragments were inserted only into travelogues written in French and published by Thevenot, they scarcely reached the notice of others. And what is more, besides Ethiopian, Egyptian, and Indian affairs, many other things occur here and there that are very worthy of light, which provide no small contribution to literary material, as will be discovered in the course of this Preface: among these are not a few fragments of ancient writers, and eleven excerpts of Athanasius from his *Festal Epistles*, which have long since perished. For these reasons we have yielded to the urging of friends who were very eager that this writer, offering the excerpts of Athanasius, should be conjoined to the Athanasian collection. For even if in so prolix a work there are not a few things which could be ignored and neglected without loss, as usually happens in the writers of this age, yet no fair judge of things would deny that very few of those who flourished from the sixth century onward disseminate as many documents of history here and there as we find in our Cosmas, as will be manifest from what follows.
CHAPTER FIRST. ON THE AGE AND WRITINGS OF COSMAS.
I. Cosmas wrote the *Christian Topography* in about the year 535, during the reign of Justinian. II. He also described a universal cosmography, now lost. III. And other minor works.
I. Cosmas Egyptius Alexandrinus, at first a merchant who, for the sake of commerce and gain, had traveled through Ethiopia, India, and other eastern regions, was, for that age, a man of paramount learning. Afterward, having entered the monastic life, he wrote many things which he mentions in various places throughout this work. Although it might seem that a calculation can be easily made from a note of time which he records in the second book of the *Christian Topography*, yet the matter presents difficulty because the same thing is read in the eleventh book. For in the first place he said, while he was writing the second book, that 25 years had elapsed since the expedition of Elesbaan, king of the Ethiopians, against the Homerites: B this expedition falls in the year 522: if you add 25 years to this computation, it is necessary that he wrote this in the year 547, in the reign of Justinian. But in the eleventh book, speaking about Theodosius the heretical patriarch of Alexandria, he says: [Greek text translated:] "I shall add the testimony of a certain new schismatic father of theirs, who is still living and residing in Constantinople, and doing this out of superabundance, bearing witness, whether from ignorance or compelled by the truth itself, to our writing," and afterward follows: [Greek text translated:] "Theodosius, Bishop of Alexandria." This is, "I shall bring forth from superabundance the testimony of a certain new schismatic of their father, still living and residing in Constantinople, who, whether from ignorance or compelled by the truth itself, supports our book." And on page 332: [Greek text translated:] "Passing over him also, let us move on to the one before them, who has now died, the new Timothy."
MONTEFALCONI'S PREFACE
31 A This (S. Theodosius) being set aside, let us come to his predecessor, who died recently, Timotheus the Younger. That Timotheus, whom Cosmas calls "the Younger" to distinguish him from Aelurus, died in the year of Christ 535. The heretic Theodosius was substituted in his place; after he had stayed in Alexandria for a short time, he went to Constantinople, and after one year and four months had passed from his ordination, because he was unwilling to subscribe to the Synod of Chalcedon, he was sent into exile in the year of Christ 536: at which time, clearly, Cosmas was finishing the eleventh book of this work; indeed, the fact that Cosmas states that Timotheus had recently died, shortly after the departure of Theodosius to Constantinople, seems to indicate that the same book was written, that is, in the year 535. How then can this note for the eleventh book, which falls in the year 535, square with that of the second book, which expresses the year about 547? And truly, in both codes, namely the Vatican B and the Laurentian, the same number of years is assigned. I should have thought that Cosmas, who spent a long time working on these matters, and as men of the contrary opinion opposed him, frequently revised and expanded these points, placed the final note of the year 535 then, when he was first devoting effort to these things; afterwards, however, when with the passing of much time he returned in subsequent years to his former work and reformed it as he was accustomed, he either placed the earlier note or, with one already placed, reduced it to the year in which he was working on these things.
II. Now we must proceed to the other works that Cosmas published, lost to the injury of time. First occurs that Cosmography, where the whole earth was described more broadly, as much that which is situated beyond the Ocean as this one with all its regions; and the southern parts from Alexandria to the southern Ocean, namely the river Nile and the adjacent regions, and the peoples of universal Egypt and Ethiopia; furthermore the Arabian gulf with the regions and peoples situated around it as far as the same Ocean; to this, the middle earth, C which lies between the river and the gulf, with the cities, regions, and peoples inhabiting it. This work was dedicated to a certain Constantine, and its loss is to be deplored even with tears: for neither Strabo, nor Ptolemy, nor any of the ancients could know the Ethiopian, Arabian, and Indian regions, in particular, as accurately as our Cosmas, who had been present in those places for many years, and with wondrous sagacity observed the locations of places, the customs of nations and their manner of trading, and the nature of animals and plants. We award the palm for discovering this most worthy work, if indeed it lies hidden anywhere, to those who nowadays institute travels to eastern parts.
III. Cosmas also sent astronomical tables to the Homologos, where he delineated the motion of the stars, according to the rationale of his system. Our writer also mentions a Commentary on the Song of Songs fashioned by himself, all of which were equally obliterated and destroyed by age.
CAPUT II.
32 A
COSMAS' SCOPE AND HIS OPINION ON THE FIGURE OF THE WORLD.
I. Many of the ancients had the opinion that the figure of the world was flat. II. And likewise almost all ancient Christian writers. III. Cosmas refutes those astronomers who defend the sphere. IV. His opinion about the world.I. It was the opinion of many of the ancients that the figure of the world was flat, and that the heaven was erected in the manner of a vault and joined to the extremities of the earth, so that heaven and earth together made one great chamber: in this space, they thought, the motions of the stars and all phenomena B were circumscribed. Thus, first among writers, Herodotus, not without laughter, repudiates those who held the opinion of the sphere. Indeed, many interpret a certain place in Herodotus in *Melpomene* in this way. But to me, seriously examining the matter, it does not seem that such an opinion is expressed by the words of Herodotus as they extract from his dictation. But to discuss this matter at greater length is not the present intent. Certainly, from those ancient times, as many as devoted effort to astronomy, or were at least established at the threshold of the art, knew well that the motions of the stars, lunar eclipses, and countless other things could not be explained except according to the opinion of the sphere; others on the contrary, although grave in doctrine and erudition, since they did not observe the motions of the luminaries and stars, destitute of skill in things of this kind, not even hearing of the antipodes and antichthones walking with opposite footprints, and rain falling in the contrary direction, derided the astronomers proclaiming the sphere not without loud laughter. Whence Cicero, *Acad. Quaest.* I, iv: "He says that Xenophanes said they inhabit the moon, and that it is a land of many cities and mountains. C These seem like portents: but yet, neither he who said it could swear that the thing is so, nor I. Do you not also say that there are those in a region opposite to us, on the contrary part of the earth, who stand with opposing footprints against our footprints, whom you call antipodes? Why are you more angry with me, who do not reject these things, than with those who, when they hear you, judge you to be insane?" Thus finally the matter has always stood, that what astronomers proved by clear demonstrations, others unskilled in these matters rejected with mockery.
II. Then indeed almost all Christian writers, having embraced the common opinion, abhorred the very name of the sphere: and, induced both by the opinion of many of the ancients and by not a few places of sacred Scripture, which they believed could not consist with the opinion of the sphere, they thought the surface of the earth was flat. Hence Lactantius, l. III, c. 24: "What of those who think there are antipodes opposite to our footprints, do they say anything? Or is there any one so foolish who believes that there are men whose footprints are higher than their heads? D Or that things which lie among us hang upside down? That crops and trees grow downwards? That rains and snows and hail fall upwards to the earth? And does anyone marvel that the hanging gardens are narrated among the seven wonders; when philosophers also [claim] fields and the—
cities, and hanging mountains! And the rest that he pursues there at greater length. Similar things are reported by Augustine, *De Civitate Dei*, lib. xvi, c. 9; Chrysostom, *in Ep. ad Hebræos*; Severianus of Gabala, *serm. 2 in Hexaemeron*; Bede, and many others, whom it would be superfluous to list, since the matter is trite and known to everyone. A There was also another thing that swayed the Holy Fathers away from the opinion of the sphere, namely, those passages of Holy Scripture which seem to reject the spherical shape of the heavens and the earth. But in this matter, two points are chiefly to be considered: first, that passages of this kind are not set forth so clearly as not to allow for another interpretation; second, that Holy Scripture, whose one goal it is to instruct men in piety and the contempt of the fleeting things of the world, speaks of this matter according to the common opinion of the nations. "For," as Basil says (a), "it is of no interest to us whether the earth be a sphere, or a cylinder, or like a disk, and evenly turned into a circular shape from all sides, or like a fan and concave in the middle; nor, because Moses did not discourse on the circuit of the earth, on eclipses, and other things of this kind, are the oracles of the Holy Spirit to be considered inferior to the wisdom of this world; nay rather, thanks are to be given to Him who did not allow our mind to be entangled in the dogmas of vain and futile philosophy, but willed only those things to be written down which He had foreseen to be especially useful for the instruction of souls and for placing them in a tranquil state." The opinion of the flat shape of the world was indeed defended by most theologians up until the fifteenth century; so much so that Tostatus himself (b), a few years before the other hemisphere was reached, rejected the opinion of the sphere as being not safe in faith and rash.
For the reasons mentioned above, therefore, the almost unanimous opinion was that the surface of the earth was flat, yet distinguished here and there by mountains, and that the heavens were joined to the earth at their extreme parts. And, as is likely, many at least refrained from further inquiry into the matter; nor did they consider that such an opinion could in no way coincide with the course of the luminaries and stars. For how could the sun, rising on one side of the world and setting on the other, return to its original place while hidden, unless it performed a circular motion? B For I make no account of the ridiculous opinion of certain ancients, who thought that the sun, having fallen into the ocean, was carried through the swift channel of the waters to the opposite side of the world during the whole space of the night, and thence rose again. And likewise, in what way can the eclipses of the moon be valid, occurring with that roundness of shadow which they report, unless the earth, placed between the sun and the moon, is round? I omit other things that would overwhelm such a system. It is no wonder, therefore, that many of the Christians who were devoted to astronomy in the age of Cosmas turned to the opinion of the sphere; and it is much more astonishing that Cosmas, who was himself an astronomer and who observed the motions of the heavens and the course of the stars, fought for the opposite opinion: in which matter, however, he did us this favor, that we might understand how the Holy Fathers, at least those who had investigated the matter more deeply, explained the course of the sun, the eclipses of the moon, and the motions of the stars according to that common opinion.
Chapter III
III. Since, therefore, the astronomers whom Cosmas frequently mentions and refutes protested and asserted that the shape of the heavens and the earth was spherical, Cosmas exerted himself against them, affirming that the sphere could be consistent neither with Holy Scripture nor with reason. For he argues that it is repugnant to right reason that men should walk with opposite footprints, that rain should fall with an upward slant, etc., as others whom we mentioned above. From Holy Scripture, indeed, he strives to prove that the heavens are so joined to the earth that they form the shape of a huge and lofty vaulted chamber, fashioned like an arch, relying most of all on this place of Isaiah: *He who established the heaven like an arch, and stretched it out like a tent to dwell in*: which place, however, can be derived to the other opinion as well; and similarly he usurps this place of Job: *He inclined the heaven to the earth, and the dust was poured out like the earth: he joined it like a square stone.* Which words are indeed brought to the point by Cosmas. But these passages, taken from the version of the LXX Translators, deviate somewhat from this opinion in the Hebrew. C And although sometimes Holy Scripture might use words according to the opinion of Cosmas, it is clear that they are adapted to the common estimation of the nations. For if the Holy Spirit, while discoursing on the warnings of salvation and other things pertaining to the felicity of man, had introduced the sphere and the antipodes, the readers, moved by the strangeness of the matter, would have given their attention to this one statement, neglecting those things which looked to the instruction of souls and to the blessedness of man. To refute the sphere, Cosmas also uses these arguments: Holy Scripture usually says that the heaven and the earth comprehend all things, which will be true not in the least if we admit the sphere: for if that is set up, one heaven will contain all things together with the earth. To these, St. Paul said that the tabernacle built by Moses was a figure of this world; however, the tabernacle was four-square and oblong, and so it must needs have been that the world is four-square and oblong. He dwells on this argument at greater length, and in order to exhibit more accurately the conformity of the tabernacle with the earth, he explains both the whole and its individual parts, with added figures and delineations of each; which we have also taken care to have depicted, with explanations of the tables added: which thing, I hope, will be neither unpleasant nor fruitless to the reader. Cosmas thinks that the most powerful argument of all for refuting the opinion of the sphere is that God prepared from the beginning the dwelling places of both the present and the future world, namely, the earth and the heaven; but he does not think that the heaven of the blessed is to be found if the sphere and the revolution of the heavens are set posits: believing that such a perpetual revolving cannot consist with the blessed life. To this, the Christian defenders of the sphere replied that these heavens which we see, at the consummation
to be destroyed, and others to be created anew. But Cosmas replies, and demonstrates from the places of Scripture that Christ was introduced into these heavens, and that the saints are to be introduced; and since he proves that the pivot of the entire difficulty hinges on the proof of this matter, he gathers more appropriate A places from all the books of holy Scripture and from the holy Fathers, in order to show that God had prepared those two mansions from the beginning. Furthermore, it would be pointless to waste time in refuting the reasonings of Cosmas; for as anyone who is even moderately skilled perceives, all things are deduced either from passages incorrectly explained, or from the destruction of the heavens, which was badly conceded by his adversaries.
IV. After we have brought forward the arguments of Cosmas against the sphere, it remains for us to explain his B system by which he explains the movements of the stars, sun, and moon, and likewise the eclipses of the moon. Therefore, he believes the world to be flat, and the surface of the earth to be square and oblong, so that its length from east to west is twice as great as its breadth, which breadth extends from north to south. He contends that this parallelogram is enclosed by walls; and he thinks that the walls on the eastern and western sides rise straight from the bottom to the top and terminate in a semicircle; but he thinks that the walls on the northern and southern sides are also erected until they reach the semicircle, for then he says the walls curve in such a way that they fashion an oblong chamber in the manner of an arched roof. Furthermore, he reckons that the firmament, like a certain ceiling, is extended where the walls begin to curve and to bend into a semicircle, and that it separates the highest place and the seats of the blessed from the lower place. He opines, moreover, that the sun, moon, and stars are beneath the firmament. And in order to explain the order of nights, days, and eclipses, he invents a very high mountain at the extreme north: and he contends that the sun, moon, and stars complete their course around the mountain, so that when the sun looks upon the part of the mountain opposite to us, then it appears to us, and it is day; but when it completes its course behind the mountain, then it causes night. He thinks that the eclipses of the moon occur when the mountain is interposed between the sun and the moon: and since that mountain presents a hemisphere from its summit, he believes that from this it comes about that the shadow which we see on the moon terminates in a semicircle. The reason for this fiction of his may be more clearly understood by the diagram placed at the first table, where you ought to read the explanation C adjoined in the margin. Cosmas testifies that he borrowed this doctrine from a certain old man named Patricius; and that this itself, as is likely, is the reason and method of understanding of the Fathers, when they contend that the surface of the world is flat. And thus Severianus of Gabala explains his view, whose passage Cosmas cites in his tenth book. But since our writer delights in digressions, he brings forward many remarkable things to and fro, which will come to be explained in the following chapters: and it can truly be said to be *the secondary matter more important than the work itself.*
CHAPTER III. DE REBUS AEGYPTIACIS, AETHIOPICIS ET INDICIS APUD COSMAM.
I. Cosmas offers a very remarkable monument to those who study antiquity, when he recorded in letters the inscription of Ptolemy the Third, king of Egypt, surnamed Euergetes, which was copied by him in the furthest parts of Ethiopia which face Egypt. It recounts his every expedition, both in the East and in the parts of Ethiopia and Arabia, in such detail that a more beautiful one, and one more opportune for history, could nowhere be found. But after the inscription reported the things which Ptolemy had performed in the parts of the East, Asia, the Hellespont, and Thrace, and likewise of Mesopotamia and Babylon, it says that Ptolemy sent his forces through the canals, D *Δυνάμει ἀπέστειλε διὰ τῶν ἀρυχθέντων ποταμῶν*, where we translate literally as follows: "He sent his forces through the canals of the rivers made by hand." Bigotius [translates it] into French: *Et faisant des canaux, où il estoit nécessaire, pour rendre à ses troupes le passage plus aisé.* Where he explains the matter paraphrastically, and indeed, I think, not quite successfully; for the inscription, as is clear, neither expresses, nor does reason persuade, that those canals, which he traversed with his troops, were constructed by his own work. For why would he have undertaken such an arduous matter, and one of longer labor, to be finished for the passage of his troops, when it was easy for him to return by the same way he had previously crossed? Therefore, we think that the canals had long since been dug before Ptolemy crossed them. It remains, however, for us to examine which canals he crossed with his army: whether the canals of the Nile, or those by which the river discharges itself into the Mediterranean Sea, some of which were made by hand; or the canal led from the Nile to the Red Sea? It cannot even be dreamed that this is to be understood of the mouths of the Nile. Nor is it probable that here it refers to the canal which the kings of Egypt led from the Nile to the Red Sea: for it is not one canal that is expressed, but several; yet that one which was led from the Red Sea was unique. Moreover, for what purpose would he, returning from the Persian expedition, immediately send his forces through canals to the Red Sea, when he only undertook the subsequent expedition into Ethiopia, and the naval one into Arabia, after many years? Wherefore the following inscription was not carved on the same stone, but on a marble chair; and in this way it began the narrative, *Μετὰ δ᾽ ἀνδρειώσας*, "Afterwards acting bravely." Add to this the labor attempted by many on the canal which would join the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, which never succeeded for anyone as they desired. For Herodotus in *Euterpe*, c. 158, says that Necho, king of Egypt, having attempted that work, when a plague had consumed many thousands of men who were toiling at it, interrupted the matter. Diodorus Siculus, book 1, and Tzetzes, *Chiliad* vii, agree with Herodotus. But Aristotle, *Meteor.,* book 1, c. 14, narrates that Sesostris the elder attempted it, and many centuries later Darius, and that having labored in vain, they left the matter unfinished, lest the waters of the sea mixed with the fluvial waters should corrupt the Nile: and Pliny reports the same.
Still, the passage in its entirety is frequently traversed from the Egyptian sea, which is threefold: one from Pelusium, etc. Here is the whole history of such an attempted canal. From which you may infer that the canal was never in use, nor did Evergetes transport his forces through it. It remains, therefore, that the A *orychthentas potamous*, or man-made river channels, are the channels of the Euphrates and Tigris, whose original bed had been altered by many kings and diverted elsewhere, as Pliny and other writers attest. That the former inscription is truncated and, due to a broken corner of the stone, mutilated by a few words, is indicated both by Cosmas and by the sketch of the stone itself, which we have had engraved on copper; wherefore it can hardly be conjectured through which channels Ptolemy Evergetes sent his forces; but wherever he may have sent them, it seems clearly established that no other channels are signified here than those of the Tigris and Euphrates. Furthermore, what Evergetes magnificently narrates in this inscription concerning his having subjugated Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Susiana, Persis, Media, and all the remaining regions up to Bactriana, is not to be taken literally. For in the course of this—and certainly not long-lasting—incursion, he could at most have devastated the fields and broken the forces of Seleucus Callinicus, who was then reigning, in a few successful battles; but he was unable to annihilate them completely or subject the mentioned regions to his rule, as he boastfully indicates.
II. That this Ptolemy, surnamed Evergetes, was the grandson of Lagus and the son of Philadelphus is evident from the inscription; and Cosmas (a) manifestly errs in thinking him to be Philometor, or Evergetes II, known as Dionysus, who reigned before the last Cleopatra. He arrived at this opinion because he wrongly thought that they had only reached the twenty-seventh year of their reign after Philadelphus. Eusebius in his *Chronicle* seems to support this opinion, where he assigns the death of Evergetes I to the twenty-fourth year of his reign. But the authority of the excellent inscription, which is said to have been carved in the 27th year of Ptolemy Evergetes, is to be preferred by far: and it testifies that this Ptolemy was the son of Philadelphus and the grandson of Lagus. Therefore, this Ptolemy set up the inscription in the twenty-seventh year of his reign and, it is believed, passed from the living in that same year.
III. We have noted various readings from the Vatican codex, as well as the scholia of Cosmas on the Ptolemaic inscription from the same source: all of B which had been overlooked by Bigot. You may notice where many other things, which were arranged differently in Bigot's papers, have been restored by us. Moreover, in the enumeration of the Ethiopian nations which the inscription claims Ptolemy conquered, you may see a great many still distinguished by the same name to this day, as we have observed in our notes. Although the Greeks, according to their usual custom, called all nations of diverse language and various rites "barbarians," there was a particular Ethiopian nation that was called Barbara, and its region Barbaria—not that which occupied the seacoast from the Strait of Gades to Egypt, which we call Barbary today, but that which was situated in interior Ethiopia beyond the strait of the Arabian Gulf, which was also called *Libanotophoros ge*, or incense-bearing land. Toward the end of the inscription, in these words which follow the enumeration of Ptolemy's infantry and naval expeditions: *Kathelthon eis ten Adoulen to Dii kai to Arei, kai to Poseidoni thysai hyper ton ploizomenon*, that is, "I descended to Adulis to sacrifice to Zeus, Ares, and Poseidon for the navigators"; or, for the successful completion of the naval expedition, I would have you observe here that the offerings were made not only for the naval but also for the infantry expeditions; for that *hyper ton ploizomenon* ("for those sailing") refers to Neptune, who was mentioned in the last place; but sacrifices were made to Zeus and Ares for other aspects of the expedition. I also wish to notify the reader that, at page 132, where Cosmas narrates his own navigation in the Red Sea as far as the Arabian Strait (which had been omitted by Bigot), and mentions that Zingium is beyond the strait, we have thought that *Zygion* is the same as the modern *Zangui* and *Zanguebar*: and this is certainly true. However, that we added that Zanguebar is the same as the sea of Zangui is not similarly approved by a certain most learned and friendly man: who, from the best documents of African affairs and from the Nubian geographer, thinks that the name Zanguebar is formed not from *Zangi* and *bahar* ("sea of Zangi"), but from *Zangi* and *bar* ("the continent of Zangi"): for the Nubian geographer sometimes calls that continent *el barr* as an absolute term. We willingly assent to his opinion.
IV. Cosmas, having traveled to the very places himself, was the first of the writers to speak clearly and accurately about the true source of the Nile, as the matter stands. To investigate its origin seemed so arduous to the ancients that it became a proverb, "to search for the source of the Nile," speaking of those who attempted things exceeding human strength. And the matter remained in doubt until almost our own time, until the Reverend Jesuit Fathers, having traveled through parts of Ethiopia for the sake of the Gospel, revealed both the location and the names of the places where the sources of the Nile were. Therefore, in the region of Agau, as Cosmas had narrated many centuries ago, and as the recent Jesuits testify, the source of the Nile is held to be. And that region is situated in the kingdom of Goiam, within the domain of the Abyssinians.
V. Our Cosmas treats of India admirably in most places, of which some were omitted by the renowned V. Bigot: for not all C
as he was able to exhibit, who copied out the A *apospasmata* (fragments) in a cursory fashion here and there. Cosmas therefore says that China, whence silk was brought, is situated at the edge of the east on the eastern Ocean: and that the journey from the head of the Persian Gulf to the island of Sielediva (Ceylon) is approximately the same as from Sielediva to China. He describes the island of Sielediva accurately, and says it is divided into two kingdoms: one of which was called the kingdom of Hyacinth, after a very famous hyacinth which was kept there in a temple in a public place; the other held the rest of the island. Our Cosmas says in more than one place that this same island of Sielediva, or Sielediva (for it is read in both ways), is what we call Taprobane, to which most ancient geographers and the vast majority of modern ones subscribe: nor do I think this can be called into doubt. He says the circuit of the island is three hundred miles: modern geographers assign only two hundred miles to the circumference of the island: but as we have observed in most places, and as has been noted before by learned men, the ancients reckoned shorter miles than the moderns. As for the rest pertaining to that island, you may read it safely, studious reader, in this work, not without pleasure. Cosmas lists the regions situated between Sielediva and China, namely Marallo, abounding B in snails; Caber, where the *alabandenus* is found, and another region from which the clove was brought. However, *caryophyllum* here does not signify what the name sounds like, namely "nut leaf." For, passing over the passage in Pliny and the explanation of Julius Scaliger concerning the meaning of *caryophyllum*, because these look to more ancient times; in the age of Cosmas, and indeed even of Paul of Aegina, who is older than Cosmas, *caryophyllum* was the very thing that that odorous nail is, which we call *clou de girofle*. For from *caryophyllum*, in Italian *garofolo*, and thence we form *girofle*. On this matter, see Gorraeus and Robert Stephanus in their *Thesaurus*.
On the other side of India, which we call Malabar today, these were the more famous cities and emporia: Sindu, Orrhotha, Calliana; the same, as it seems, which we call Calicut today; Sibor, and Male, having five emporia: Parti, Mangaruth, Salopatana, Nalopatana, and Pudapatana. From Male, Malabar was undoubtedly formed. For *Male barr* signifies "containing Male": and *pros antidiastolen* (by way of distinction) that Malabar series of the region positioned against the islands is called *Maldive*, that is, the islands of Male. But in the northern part of India was a very populous kingdom of the Huns, as Cosmas calls them, whose king, called Gollas, led forth two thousand elephants and much cavalry to war. When he besieged a city of the Indians surrounded by water, he captured the city after the soil had been C dried up by the long drinking of the elephants and horses. This event may perhaps not seem incredible to those who have read in Herodotus of rivers dried up by the drinking of the nearly infinite multitude that Xerxes had led out to suppress Greece. From these Huns, furthermore, originated those Huns who for many centuries laid waste to Europe with both formal expeditions and raids, whose seats were bordering on Bactria. And the Huns were a Scythian race, who are sometimes called Massagetae, sometimes Magyars, sometimes Avars, and are called by other names. The rest concerning Indian and Ethiopian animals, and the plants and trees of those regions, you have described in Table IV, with the added explanations. For it was the custom of Cosmas to depict the form of the remarkable things he was treating.
VI. Now indeed it remains that we should say a few words concerning the state of Christianity in India, such as Cosmas, a man experienced in these matters and for the most part an eyewitness, describes in various places. All those who lived in Persia, India, and Arabia Felix were Christians and were subject to the archbishop of Persia, by whom also the bishops of those regions were ordained. In Persia, however, he records that the preaching of the Gospel was done by the apostle Thaddaeus. This archbishop had his see at Babylon: and in the age of Cosmas himself, around the year 530, a certain Thomas of Edessa, his friend and a disciple of the old man Patritius, was elevated to the archiepiscopal D thrones of all Persia. But that Babylon was far different from that ancient Babylon situated on the Euphrates; which had been leveled to the ground and destroyed for many centuries now. But this Babylon was the same as Seleucia, situated on the Tigris and the capital of the kingdom of the Persians, which the Arabs call *Madayeno Cosra*, the City of Chosroes. The Arabic Nicene canons, which are to be regarded as supposititious, have mention of this archbishop or Catholicos. See Labbe, *Conc.* t. II, p. 301. In p. 328 it is read: "Let the Lord of Seleucia, which is Almodaion (read *Almadaion*), be honored above all the metropolitans of the Romans: since he is held in the place of a patriarch in the East." Under these, however, with the cities of Chosroes destroyed in the Saracen invasion, the patriarch or Catholicos of Seleucia had his reception in the city of Mosul, built not far from ancient Nineveh. The archbishop of Persia used to send a bishop ordained by himself to Calliana, which we believe to be modern Calicut. In the aforementioned emporium of Male, there was a church of Christians; and likewise in the island of Sielediva, a church of Christians, with a priest and deacon ordained in Persia, and the rest of the ecclesiastical ministry. Likewise among the Bactrians, the Huns, of whom above, the rest of the Indians, Persians, Medes, Elamites, and in all the region of Persia, there were infinite churches, bishops, and Christian people in great number, many martyrs, monks, and hesychasts. Similarly also on the island which was called Dioscorides, now *Zocotora* by a corrupted name, situated in the Indian Sea, whose inhabitants, he says, were settlers sent there by the Ptolemies and spoke Greek; there were clergy sent there from Persia, and a church of Christians who dwelt there in great number. All these things, omitted by the illustrious Bigotius, Cosmas reports; they are the more pleasant to the reader because they have perhaps been recorded in such detail by no one else. The archbishop of Persia, however, was a Nestorian, as were all the other bishops and presbyters subject to him.
Chapter IV. Miscellany of memorable things in Cosmas. I. Places of the ancients. II. Roman coins throughout the world. III. What hieroglyphics are.
IV. When letters were invented. V. The worship of Mithras among the Persians.
I. Cosmas continually cites passages from ancient writers: among these is Ephorus, a contemporary of Aristotle, who had written thirty books of history; our writer cites an excerpt from the fourth book of his histories A; where you may see what was the opinion of the ancients regarding the position of the globe and the nations dwelling in the extremities of the earth. They thought, therefore, that the Indians occupied the outermost edge of the east; the Celts, the west; the Scythians, the north; and the Ethiopians, the south. But the eastern and western sides are far narrower than the northern and southern, such that these latter sides occupy twice as much space. These points coincide with the opinion of Cosmas regarding the shape of the earth, as we have explained above. But whatever he adopts from the ancients regarding Pytheas of Massilia, Xenophanes, and others, you, learned reader, should observe throughout.
II. Cosmas says that the coinages and currency of the Romans are used everywhere for commerce. With their coin, he says B, all nations conduct trade: and in any place, from the extremities of the earth to the opposite borders, it is admitted; all men and kingdoms wonder at such currency, because in any other kingdoms whatever, nothing like it appears.
III. He notes that Egyptian hieroglyphs are not letters, but symbols of things: which indeed, I think, is the truer opinion. For as one may discover in the obelisks which still remain at Rome, those hieroglyphic letters, which appear in great numbers arranged in squares, are the very same repeated below twice, three, or four times with a certain conciseness and elegance, which would by no means have been the case if one had composed a speech or a certain narrative in a single series. Wherefore the explanation of the Roman obelisk's hieroglyphs—which is attributed to Ammianus Marcellinus, compiled by a certain Hermapion—is held by learned men to be fictitious; nor is more faith placed in Athanasius Kircher, who, having rejected Hermapion’s interpretation, adorned one far different, supported by no authority himself. Cosmas, therefore, judges that the use of letters was first brought into the world by the legislator Moses, who had been instructed in letters by God on Mount Sinai, long after many others.
IV. But he does not notice that Holy Scripture is manifestly at odds with his opinion: since even before the Law was given on Mount Sinai, after the victory won over the Amalekites, Moses is ordered to record this in letters (Exod. XVII, 14): *And the Lord said to Moses: Write this for a memorial in a book, and deliver it to the ears of Josue: for I will blot out the memory of Amalec from under heaven.* Whence it is clear that the use of letters had already been brought into the world at that time. Moreover, things worthy of note are recounted under these heads. When, he says, the Hebrews had received the Law written by God, there they first learned letters; and as if in a certain quiet literary school for forty years, God allowed them to be exercised in drawing letters. Wherefore, in the desert of Mount Sinai and in all the wanderings of the Hebrews, one can see stones all fallen from the mountains, inscribed with Hebrew letters, as I, who have traveled1 that way, testify. Certain Jews who read them told us that these inscriptions signify: "Such a departure, from such a tribe, in such a year, in such a month"; as many people in our own age are accustomed to write in inns. But they, being people who had recently learned letters, wrote more frequently and multiplied the letters, so that all those places are full of inscribed Hebrew letters: which, as I indeed judge, are preserved to this day for the sake of unbelievers. Furthermore, it is permitted to anyone to approach these places and inspect them, or to inquire of others, so that he may learn that we tell the truth. When, therefore, the Hebrews had first been instructed and educated in letters by God through the tablets written and handed down by Him during those delays of forty years in the desert, they passed them on to their neighbors, the Phoenicians, at which time Cadmus was first reigning over the Tyrians: from whom the Greeks received letters, which thence emanated to all nations. What Cosmas reports regarding the inscriptions of this kind seen by him, I think should be called into doubt by no one, for he is a trustworthy and sincere writer if there ever was one. Whether those inscriptions were the wanderings of the ancient Hebrews in the desert is a matter we leave to the sagacious reader to judge: for our part, we judge it more probable that Cosmas was deceived by a Hebrew lie.
V. From the narration of others, he says that among the Persians, up to his own time, the celebration of Mithras, or the sun, was carried out every year in memory of the sign given under King Hezekiah: when, being in extremes, he received a granted sign of health, namely, the retrocession of the sun. But most authors report that the sun was called Mithras among the Persians, and was worshipped by them as a deity and god: and, although some recent writer may appear to call this into doubt, I do not think a matter testified by so many authors can be brought into controversy.
CAPUT V. OF MATTERS PERTAINING TO HOLY SCRIPTURE AND THE CHURCH.
I. A certain singular thing regarding the history of the LXX Interpreters. II. Regarding the place of the crossing of the Israelites through the Red Sea. III. Regarding the vestments of the Hebrews in the desert. IV. Regarding the terrestrial paradise. V. Regarding the Epistle to the Hebrews. VI. Whether souls are circumscribed. VII. Regarding the day of the Nativity of the Lord. VIII. Rites of baptism. IX. Prayer for the dead. X. Regarding the catholic Epistles.
I. It is marvelous what Cosmas C relates concerning the history of the Seventy Interpreters. "Thence," he says, "Ptolemy, surnamed Philadelphus, when he had inquired curiously of Tryphon the Phalerian concerning the Jewish books and had learned the truth of the matter, he zealously sought them out: having sent to Eleazar..."
the high priest and brought them to the temple with most numerous gifts, etc. Here you see Demetrius placed in the stead of Tryphon, with no affinity of the name. Although it can scarcely come into one’s mind by what reason Demetrius could have been changed into Tryphon, since Aristeas, Philo, Josephus, and many others consistently cite Demetrius, I would prefer to believe it to be a A lapsus of our Cosmas.
II. Concerning the place where the Israelites crossed the Red Sea on dry land, Cosmas has this: That place is in Clysma, as they call it, on the right of those going to the mountain. Where also the tracks of chariots are seen, and they appear in a long stretch reaching to the sea, preserved to this very time as a sign for the unbelievers, though not indeed for the believers. Concerning these tracks of chariots remaining in the age of Cosmas, Paulus Orosius also treats; but regarding the place of the crossing, Philostorgius tells the same in the excerpts of Photius, book III, c. 6: “For the Red Sea, stretching out for a great distance, is divided into two gulfs; and one part of it travels toward Egypt to Clysma, where the sea that bears the name ends; through which in ancient times the Israelite people, fleeing from the Egyptians, passed over the sea bed on dry ground. But the other part reaches toward Palestine by the city of Aila, called by an ancient name,” that is, the Red Sea, extended to a greatest length, is divided into two gulfs: the one of which tends toward Egypt, named from Clysma, the place where it ends; beneath which at one time the Israelites, fleeing the Egyptians, crossed on dry land. The other part turns toward Palestine, to the city which from ancient times is called Aila. But Clysma is said by Athanasius to be in Arabia, near to the Arabian mountain, to which place Philo, the Egyptian bishop, was once sent into exile by Constantius for the Catholic faith. For although Clysma lay on the shore of the sea toward Egypt, yet by many it was reckoned to be in Arabia, and its inhabitants were counted as Arabs. For those were called Egyptians only who occupied both sides of the Nile, albeit to a certain limit on either side. That which Philostorgius says, that the Red Sea ends in two gulfs on the northern side, is asserted by modern geographers and is confirmed by the frequent access of Europeans. But the city of Aila, situated on the shore of the other gulf, is called 'Ex in the Vatican codex of the Egyptian Cosmas; but according to the Laurentian codex it is called Anha. About Clysma and Ela, Jacobus Golius has this in his notes on Alferganus, p. 144: "Colzuma, a small town on the shore of Egypt, at one time the joint defense post of it and Syria. Which seems to be nothing other than the Clysma of Ptolemy, as the site of both, and the agreement of the name and its meaning, argues. Hence the Red Sea is called Bahar el Colzum; specifically indeed in its lowest part; but also in its entirety... There it terminates into a twin gulf; the western one distinguished as Colzuma; the eastern as Elana. But the other shore of the sea, at which the Israelites arrived on dry land, was in the age of Cosmas called Phoenicon (a); that is, from the palms with which the place was planted." Elim, likewise a place in the desert, was called Raithu, where Cosmas testifies that in his own time those twelve springs mentioned in Scripture were present: but the same man relates that Raphidin is the other station of the Hebrews, and that it is called Pharan in his own age.
III. Regarding this place in Deuteronomy xxix, 5: *He led you forty years in the desert: your garments have not worn out, and your shoes have not been worn off from your feet*, Cosmas offers this interpretation, and surely not without reason: "For neither, as some tellers of portents hold, especially those who are of the circumcision, are their garments and shoes not worn out, even if Moses may seem to speak so; but," he says, "nothing was lacking to them in the desert, because merchants frequently supplied them with necessities." For let these men say, I ask, how could infants born in the desert use their fathers' garments and shoes, with such a difference in stature? Who would have been commanded to prepare the loaves of proposition fresh daily, unless merchants had brought them grain? etc., which surely no one would deny does not stray far from the plausible: and this also seems to have been the opinion of Aben-Ezra. Nevertheless, the almost unanimous opinion is that it was not without a miracle that the garments of the Hebrews remained unharmed and not worn out in the desert for forty years. And we think we must stand by this opinion.
IV. As to the location of the paradise of pleasure, B Cosmas reports things similar to the narrative of the ancients. For since, as we said above, he thinks that the earth is square and oblong, surrounded on all sides by the Ocean; he devises another earth beyond the Ocean, which surrounds the whole Ocean on all sides, and which is joined to the heavens at its extreme parts. In this extreme earth he thinks the paradise of pleasure was located. Moreover, he thinks that the four rivers from paradise flow through subterranean channels across the spaces of the Ocean, to permeate our earth, and where the sources of the rivers are found, they emerge from the depths of the earth, namely: Gehon, which he estimates to be the Nile, in Ethiopia; the Tigris and Euphrates, in Persarmenia; Phison, which he thinks to be the Ganges, in India. Philostorgius, book III, c. 10, and Theodoret on Genesis, report things almost similar to this, who likewise narrate that the four rivers of paradise flow for a vast distance under the earth, until they are finally brought to the places of their springs, and burst forth.
V. He says (b) that Paul wrote to the Hebrews in Hebrew: but that his Epistle was translated into the Greek language either by Luke or by Clement, and similarly the Gospel according to Matthew.
VI. He defends most pugnaciously that the souls of men are circumscribed. But if you weigh the arguments by which he strives to assert that opinion, Cosmas wants only to prove one thing, namely that the souls of men are truly in a place; so that, for example, the soul of any man truly exists in this room, and is not found outside: nor does he intend that the soul dwells in a place in such a way that part corresponds to part; which…
… [thus would be his thought, if] it were necessary to say that the soul is truly circumscribed. And so it seems clear that between Cosmas and his adversaries, against whom he inveighs sharply, the question is merely one of terminology.
VII. Furthermore, what Cosmas has to say regarding the day of the Lord’s Nativity is worthy of observation; for he speaks as follows concerning the rite of the Egyptians and the Jerusalemites: "When Zechariah had entered the temple on the seventeenth of the month, according to the tradition of the law, and had received the message concerning John who was to be born to him by Elizabeth, in the sixth month after that, the Virgin also received the message; so that at that time it was the beginning of the first month. For since Zechariah received the announcement on the seventeenth of the month, and Elizabeth conceived in that same month, it is indeed clear that six months of the year had then passed, and six remained, excluding those ten days; or perhaps two others, or three, or seven, until Zechariah departed for home, so that there remained 168, or 167, or 163 days. The beginning therefore of the Lord's conception, that is, the beginning of the first month, was the sixth month of Elizabeth's [pregnancy] according to the tradition of the Evangelists: for God has always preserved and does preserve this order. Hence it is clear that we all celebrate the birth of Christ in the ninth month after the beginning of the first month, that is, Choiac 28, or December 25th; but the Jerusalemites, as if by the authority of blessed Luke, who says that Christ was baptized at the beginning of about thirty years, celebrate the Nativity on the day of the Epiphany. And indeed both Luke and the Jerusalemites calculate correctly; yet the precise reasoning is not as they say, although the baptism did occur on the very day of the birth, as Luke and the Jerusalemites suggest. But the Church from ancient times, lest by celebrating those two solemnities on the very same day it should cause the oblivion of one or the other, has ordained that, according to the number of the apostles, twelve days should intervene, and then the solemnity of the Epiphany should be celebrated: just as it also ordered the forty-day fast of the Lord—which he fulfilled before entering into combat with the devil—to be concluded by the Lord's resurrection; so that we also, fighting according to our ability following his example, and imitating Christ, may receive the Lord's passion and resurrection, even if it did not occur on the same days. In a similar manner, therefore, it ordered the Epiphany of our Lord Jesus to be celebrated twelve days after his Nativity. The Jerusalemites alone, by probable conjecture but not by accurate reasoning, celebrate the Nativity on the day of the Epiphany; on the day of the Nativity, however, they celebrate the memory of David and James the apostle: not because both died on the same day, but, as I suspect, so that they themselves might not be neglected outside the feast of Christ’s kin, everyone honors their memory."
What Cosmas maintains, that Zechariah, the father of John, had entered the temple on the seventeenth of the month, is related in exactly the same way in the epistles of Cyril of Jerusalem to Pope Julius and in [the *apocryphal* writings] of Julius to the same, from which perhaps Cosmas borrowed this opinion. Indeed, those mutual epistles of Cyril and Julius are brought forward in the epistle of John, Archbishop of Nicaea, to Zechariah, Catholicos of Armenia. Where you may see it declared that the day of the Lord’s Nativity is to be celebrated on the twenty-fifth of December by Pope Julius. And you may note that the reasoning of this calculation is sought and adopted from a certain book of the historian Josephus, discovered, as it is said there, in Rome. These words of Josephus are brought forward as testimony: "Ὅτι ἐν μηνὶ τῷ ζ', ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ τῆς Σκηνοπηγίας, εἰς τὴν ἡμέραν τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, ὤφθη ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ κωφωθεὶς ὁ ἱερεύς," that is, in the seventh month, at the feast of Tabernacles, on the day of propitiation, the angel of God appeared. And the priest became mute, etc." Under these circumstances, John of Nicaea adduces Julius comparing the Hebrew months with the Roman. For because he found, upon the published computation, that the Annunciation and the Incarnation, being the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, fell in the Hebrew month of Nisan, he concludes from this that Christ was born on the 28th of the month of Choiac, or December 25th. See Combefis, *Hist. Monothelitarum*, p. 298.
However, the ancient Egyptians and all the Orientals, as is the common opinion of all, celebrated the feast of both the Epiphany and the Lord's Nativity with equal rite on January 6th; but toward the middle of the fourth century, a custom was introduced in those same regions to celebrate the Nativity on the twenty-fifth of December, whence Athanasius designates the birth of Christ on December 25th (supra, p. 26). But that Cosmas is a witness that this ancient custom was preserved in the Church of Jerusalem up to his own time, while others were observing the rite introduced later, is clear. And John of Nicaea confirms the very same thing when he says that the Jerusalemites assert that James, the brother of the Lord, the first bishop of Jerusalem, assigned the sixth day of January for celebrating the day of Christ's Nativity. Cosmas, however, either entirely ignored or deliberately remained silent about the ancient Egyptian rite, by which they celebrated the Nativity not on December 25th, but on January 6th. Although, as was said above, the Orientals did not even know of the rite of celebrating on December 25th until the middle of the fourth century, as can be seen in the sermon of Gregory of Nyssa on the day of the Nativity: "Now," he says, "throughout the whole inhabited world, a harmonious sound is heard of those celebrating the feast-day; now, indeed, not before." Moreover, in the oration on the Lord's Nativity, in volume V of the Works of Chrysostom, which some think was pronounced by him while he was still a presbyter at Antioch, it is said that the feast of the Lord's Nativity had come to the knowledge of the Orientals only a few years prior, having been brought from the Occidentals into the Orient. Among the Occidentals, however, the feast of the Nativity had not been established until after the solemnity of the Epiphany; and hence it was that in the Occident and in the city of Rome, the Epiphany was held in higher regard than the Nativity, as is read in the ancient Roman Ordinal. Nor must this be passed over, that the second Nativity of Christ (by which the Epiphany is understood), being illustrated by so many mysteries, is more honorable than the first, that is, the Nativity: which is also read verbatim in the book *De divinis Officiis*, chapter concerning the Baptism of the Lord, which is indeed ascribed to Alcuin, but is thought to have been published no earlier than after the tenth century. Nor should we pass over Cosmas, when he says, "From the tradition of the divine law," he indicates the law of Moses...
care; and to think that Zacharias entered into the sanctuary on the day of atonement, as is prescribed in the law. Furthermore, in the law, that duty is ascribed to the high priest alone: by which you may see that it was Cosmas’s opinion that Zacharias, the father of John, was indeed the high priest. Nor is it surprising that this was Cosmas’s opinion, since the same thing, though false, was believed by many of the ancients. Thus Chrysostom, in the same sermon on the Nativity of the Lord, regarding Zacharias as high priest, concludes that he entered the sanctuary on the feast of Tabernacles; or rather, on the day of Atonement, which precedes the feast of Tabernacles by only ten days, the day on which the high priest alone was permitted to perform this function. Hence, perhaps, Cosmas borrowed what he says about Zacharias. However, this sermon of Chrysostom is called into suspicion by some learned men: A but whatever the case may be, it is certain that the tract is very ancient and was written before the fifth century had elapsed: and from it Cosmas could have fished out what he reports about Zacharias. But as for the epistles of Pope Julius and Cyril of Jerusalem, which, as has been said above, are brought forward by John of Nicaea, I should not hesitate to point out that they are commonly and not unjustly considered to be supposititious.
VIII. Whoever was baptized (a), made a confession about the holy Trinity and about the resurrection of the flesh, which was a very ancient custom, and one also commonly accepted in the age of Saint Athanasius.
IX. In the sacred liturgy, priests prayed not only for the living, but also for the dead in this manner: "Grant rest to the soul of this person, O Lord: resurrecting also his flesh, on the day which you have decreed according to your true promises." And this, as is detected from the series in Cosmas (b), was done for certain dead persons specifically mentioned by name, whose kin offered gifts to the priest.
X. What Cosmas says about the Catholic Epistles is not to be approved in the same way: "But we dismiss in silence," says he, "that the Catholic Epistles B were already from ancient times placed among the doubtful by the Church. Certainly none of those who published commentaries on the divine Scriptures paid any attention to the Catholic Epistles. Furthermore, as many as have compiled a canon of the books which have a place in divine Scripture, placed them among the doubtful; namely, Irenaeus, bishop of Lugdunum, an illustrious man of most excellent life, who lived not long after the apostles; Eusebius Pamphili, Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, and Amphilochius bishop of Iconium, a friend and intimate of Saint Basil, in his iambic verses written to Seleucus, pronounced them doubtful. Likewise, Severianus, bishop of Gabala, in his book against the Jews, proscribed them. For the majority say that they are not the work of the apostles, but of certain other simple presbyters. Wherefore Eusebius Pamphili says in his Ecclesiastical History that there are two tombs in Ephesus, one of John the Evangelist, the other of John the presbyter, who wrote two of the Catholic Epistles, the second and the third; in which the inscription reads as follows: 'The Presbyter to the Elect Lady'; and, 'The Presbyter to the beloved Gaius.'" C For indeed, only the first of Peter and the first of John, he himself, as Irenaeus also says, are of the apostles; but others are not of the apostles, but of presbyters. For the first, second, and third of John are inscribed; as if it were manifest that those three are of the same person. Others, however, admit also the Epistle of James with these two, while others receive all of them. But among the Syrians, only the three aforesaid are found, namely of James, of Peter, and of John: for others are not even held among them. Here, certainly, Cosmas does not deal with the matter accurately. For what he says, that the Catholic Epistles were never illustrated by the commentaries of the ancients, is said falsely: for Didymus the Alexandrian published complete commentaries on those seven Epistles, as Jerome testifies. And if those were not illustrated by such a frequency of commentaries as many other books of the Scriptures, the same could be said of many other books of Sacred Scripture which are indeed undoubted. Of the canon of the Scriptures of Irenaeus, if he ever published one, nothing remains. But as to the canon of Athanasius, I am surprised that Cosmas, who had read through his Festal Epistles, many fragments of which he brings forward in the tenth book, did not notice that the canon of the Scriptures is contained in the thirty-ninth, where the seven Catholic Epistles are enumerated among the books of Sacred Scripture, and indeed those that are subject to no suspicion. Moreover, that he adds that the seven Epistles are not admitted by all Churches does not hinder their D authenticity. For we admit indeed that there was doubt about some of them in some Churches, just as also about some other books of Scripture; but finally all were admitted by the common vote of the Church and placed in the canon.
CHAPTER VI. ON THE FESTAL EPISTLES OF ATHANASIUS, AND OTHER FRAGMENTS OF THE ANCIENT FATHERS, WHICH EXIST IN THE TENTH BOOK OF COSMAS.
I. On the Festal Epistles of Athanasius. II. Why they are called Paschal. III. On other places of the holy Fathers brought forward by Cosmas.
I. It is clear that the Festal Epistles of Athanasius, of which some fragments survive, were once in great number, since Cosmas brings forth certain excerpts from forty-five [of them]. But in the Life of Saint Athanasius composed in Arabic by the Copts, the Latin version of which we have provided in our recent edition of Athanasius, they are numbered at forty-eight. Furthermore, we have conjectured that they were written and sent to the Alexandrian people while Athanasius was lying hidden in the desert for fear of Constantius: for it does not seem that the name of "epistle" can be adapted to the sermon or homily of a person who is present. Nevertheless, the Festal Epistles of Theophilus of Alexandria and of his successor Cyril are thought to have been recited by the authors themselves while they were present and preaching to the people, so that the same difficulty always remains: namely, why the homilies and sermons of those who are present obtain the name of "epistles."
II. But the same Festal Epistles are also called Paschal by some, because they were recited to the people especially on the days of the Pasch.
and perform them. And you may find not only those that are distinguished by the name of Paschal or Festal letters—which are customarily read during the solemnities of Pascha itself, but also those read during Lent, while the Christian people prepare themselves for the worthy celebration of holy Pascha through fasts, vigils, and other good works. Thus, the Festal letter of Athanasius, which is marked as the twenty-eighth in Cosmas, is found to have been delivered on Palm Sunday, as the paschal solemnity was imminent.
Cosmas extracted fragments from eleven of Athanasius’s Festal letters, namely from the second, fifth, sixth, twenty-second, twenty-fourth, twenty-eighth, twenty-ninth, fortieth, forty-second, forty-third, and forty-fifth.
III. Following those excerpts from the Festal letters of Athanasius, a few passages from Gregory Nazianzen are presented. Then, excerpts from the Festal letters of Theophilus of Alexandria; from the homilies on the Hexaemeron of Severian, bishop of Gabala, which in the Savilian edition circulate under the name of Chrysostom; and from Epiphanius, John Chrysostom, and Philo of Carpathus from his commentaries on the Canticles, as well as from his commentaries on the Hexaemeron, a work which has perished. He mentions Theodosius of Alexandria, who held the episcopate in the time of Cosmas, and then his successor, Timothy the Younger, who, as is evident from the fragments, excelled in elegance and fluency of speech. Speaking of the latter two, he lists the names of the Alexandrian churches in which they had preached. These were the one called the Great Church, the *hieron* or temple, the church of St. Serapammon, who was killed by the Arians under Constantius, the church of St. Theodore, the church of Quirinus, and the church of St. Victor. Let this be said concerning the Topography of Cosmas. But before we conclude this preface, my spirit bids me commemorate the labor performed for us in bringing these to light by Antonio Salvini the Florentine; for he was a man outstanding in learning and to be numbered among the foremost in his skill in the Greek language, and he spent many whole days with me transcribing Cosmas: he not only always assisted me when asked, but often anticipated my wishes by the performance of his duty—he is truly worthy for the benevolent reader to render, along with me, the gratitude he has earned.
INDEX OF THE BOOKS OF COSMAS
PROLOGUE I.
PROLOGUE II.
Christian Topography of the entire world, which is proven by demonstrations taken from Divine Scripture, concerning which it is not permitted for Christians to doubt.
BOOK I OF COSMAS THE MONK. Against those who, while wishing to be Christians, think and hold the opinion, in accordance with outsiders, that the heaven is spherical.
BOOK II. Christian hypotheses concerning the shape and position of the entire world, which are proven from Divine Scripture.
BOOK III. That Divine Scripture is firm and worthy of faith, and that it is in harmony with itself and consistent, both the Old and the New Testament, while it signifies the utility of the configurations of the entire world.
BOOK IV. A brief recapitulation and description of the configurations of the world according to Divine Scripture, and a refutation of the sphere.
BOOK V. In which the description of the tabernacle is contained, and the harmony of the prophets and apostles is proven.
BOOK VI, superadded. On the magnitude of the sun.
BOOK VII. On the duration of the heavens.