What sort of clues do we have as to the authorship of Hebrews?

This essay was submitted in my first year (April 2012) of my undergraduate degree in Theology for the New Testament module. In style, it’s a ‘young Samuel’. I have since found the topic interesting, particularly keeping an eye on the discussion around the possibility of Priscilla being the/an author. 

What sort of clues do we have as to the authorship of Hebrews? 

The canonical epistle historically titled ‘To the Hebrews’ is described by Brown as ‘tantalizingly anonymous’.[1]Unlike the rest of the epistles which open with salutations and the author declaring their identity, the epistle to the Hebrews is silent and so identification of the author needs to be determined from clues found within the text or the history that surrounds it.

The issue of authorship is not a new one; it has been debated ever since the second century with Clement of Alexandria attributing it to Paul (but translated into Greek by Luke)[2] while Tertullian seems to indicate he believes Barnabas to be the author. [3] These conclusions are not unjustified based on the textual clues.

The most obvious clue is to be found, or rather not to be found, at the start of the epistle. There is no salutation, a distinguishing feature of an epistle. Yet it is still most definitely an epistle of some sort as pointed out by Bruce that not just in the personal notes at the end but throughout the text it is clear that it is addressed to a particular community.[4] The absence of the customary use of a salutation to identify the author and their intended recipients is particularly significant as the rest of the epistles in the cannon have one. Pauline epistles place a special emphasis upon these salutations as Paul opens 9 out of 13 with words to the effect of ‘Paul, an apostle’. The epistles to the Thessalonians and Philippians are not solely from Paul and so open with ‘Paul Silas and Timothy’ or ‘Paul and Timothy’. This demonstrates that when Paul writes a letter he is clear to A) identify himself and B) to establish his authority to say what he will say. So unless there is a justifiable reason for Paul to write the epistle to the Hebrews anonymously it would appear that it is unlikely for Paul to be the author. However, the Clement of Alexandria is recorded as having posited that ‘it is probable that the title Paul the apostle was not prefixed to it; for as he wrote to the Hebrews, who had imbibed prejudices against him, and suspected him, he wisely guards against diverting them from the perusal by giving his name’.[5] If that possibility is correct then within the text other clues should reinforce it.

One aspect of the text that should be considered is the literary style of the content. Origen uses this to reject Clement of Alexandria’s suggestion that Paul is author by pointing out that the epistle ‘has not that peculiar style which belongs to the apostle… But that this epistle is more pure Greek in the composition of its phrases’.[6] Guthrie supports this saying: ‘The language is a good literary style in koinē Greek and it certainly contains fewer irregularities of syntax than Paul’s epistles’.[7] It is often suggested that the style of Hebrews is only comparable, within the New Testament, to the Gospel according to Luke and the book of Acts.[8] One way to resolve these styles is to rely on the aforementioned suggestion of the Clement that Luke has translated a letter Paul wrote in Hebrew into the Greek form that has survived. It is possible that this could also account for lack of a personal salutation from Paul at the start. Heavily dismissive of this ‘translation’ theory Calvin demonstrates in a few sentences that the argument of Hebrews plays quite heavily on the theme of Testament in the 9th chapter. Had it been written in Hebrew the word could only mean ‘covenant’ but the Greek, διατήκη, has two meanings; that of covenant and that of testament. Calvin says that ‘This reason alone is enough to convince men of sound judgement that the epistle was written in the Greek language’.[9]

Calvin’s rebuttal of Hebrew origins doesn’t dismiss the possibility that Luke wrote it. There are three verses in particular which could be used to argue in favour of Hebrews being a Lukan work. Firstly the author uses the metaphor of weaning an infant off milk onto solid food; he says that they need ‘milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.’ This seems to be an allusion to Pauls teaching in 1 Corinthians 3.2 and if the author was Luke then it would have been conceivable that he would have been familiar with the metaphor. This verse could also be used in support of Tertullian’s reference to Barnabas being the author as it seems to echo the epistle of Barnabas’s theme of Milk and Honey.[10] [11] [12]

Another key verse in identifying the author is that of Hebrews 2.3: ‘This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.’ Bearing in mind how strongly Paul’s emphasis on his gospel coming direct from Christ (Galatians 1.1!) it is highly unlikely that Paul would attribute his gospel as second hand information.[13] [14] Yet it would fit the description of Luke as found in Luke 1.1-4. Luke in particular has carefully investigated everything and so would be assured of their salvation even though news of it comes through others and has already shown himself to be confident of writing of this salvation for others.

Lastly, another verse that seems to particularly support the possibility of Luke as author is Hebrews 13.23: ‘I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.’ A casual glance without weighing up the other clues such as the lack of salutation and the style would suggest that this shows Paul is writing. However, Calvin uses this to show that Paul isn’t writing by questioning Clements suggestion for Paul’s deliberate anonymity saying that if Paul designedly suppressed his name ‘why, then, did he mention the name of Timothy? as by this he betrayed himself’.[15] If it was Paul, then the mention wouldn’t make sense but Luke would be able to say this as 2 Timothy 4.11 would suggest that Timothy and Luke know each other, as does the narrative of Acts 16-20 where it is probable that they met each other as companions of Paul.

Luke isn’t the only possible explanation of the reference to Timothy, the German theologian Harnack proposed that the author was Pricilla and Aquila.[16] [17] They were ‘closely associated with Timothy’[18] as both they and Timothy were with Paul in Corinth and Ephesus (Acts 18:5; 19:22; 1 Cor. 16:10,19). There are other clues which could point to Priscilla and Aquila as authors, such as the elegant style of the argument, which is very precise and doesn’t digress except to exhort briefly.[19] The argument expands upon a good knowledge of scripture and explains the nature and purpose of Christ as a superseding and continuing of scripture. This type of teaching is demonstrated by the pair in Acts 18:26 where they took Apollos, a learned man with a thorough knowledge of scriptures, into their home and explained the way of God to him more adequately. Another part of the Jigsaw that could fit the picture of the pair as authors is Hebrews 13:24: ‘Those from Italy send you their greetings’. Romans 16:3-5 seems to indicate that Priscilla and Aquila were leaders of a church in Rome, and so from Italy, yet Acts 18.2 shows that they had been expelled from Rome by Claudius and so it could be possible that they were leaders of a church near Rome. Therefore they wrote from Italy rather than from Rome.

Returning to previous clues to see if they fit this possibility, it becomes apparent that Hebrews 2:3 could apply to Priscilla and as for the koinē Greek used well some argue that she was daughter of an eminent roman family and would have been trained in rhetoric of this nature.[20] Another clue for Hoppins and Harnack is the lack of attributed author, they argue that Priscilla’s gender is a cogent explanation for the loss of the authors name.[21] Had it been Paul, Luke, Barnabas or Apollos that wrote the epistle, Harnack argues, there would be no good reason why the author’s name would have been lost.[22]

Bruce mentions a final clue to the epistle being written by Priscilla and Aquila which is that the writer sometimes alternates between using the first person singular and plural. Most noticeably in 13:18-19. Bruce says that ‘the transition back and forth between “we” and “I” would be suitable to a married couple’.[23] Although in his footnotes Bruce recounts Harris’s objection to this based on the word διήγουμενον. ʼΗarris [says] “this masculine participle is the real rock in the track, if we want to refer the Epistle to… Priscilla” ’.[24] Harnack views it as an ‘indifferent’ phrase that is required as a formality of the Greek grammar rather than as something to be used to identify the author.[25]

There is one last commonly suggested author for the epistle to the Hebrews, though it would appear that modern scholarship has experimented with most male contemporaries of Paul such as Silas, Peter, Phillip, Jude and Aristion.[26] The last, and increasingly popular, suggestion is that of Apollos as proposed by Luther. As little has remained of his writings the arguments are based upon conjecture and theological dictionaries tend to say that there is insufficient evidence to support it. [27] [28] That said there are some clues in the text that could support Apollos as author. For instance he could fulfil the clues mentioned above concerning knowing Timothy, receiving Salvation through others and as Pauls missionary partner would have been familiar with Paul’s theology which could explain the similarities in ‘flavour’. Apollos first appears in Acts 18 and is mentored by Priscilla and Aquila and then in verse 28 to have ‘vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from scriptures that Jesus was the Christ’. This is precisely the overarching theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews and so Apollos could conceivably have written it as its within his realm of expertise. An observation by Thompson on the literary style of the text suggests that the text isn’t actually an epistle as it lacks the salutation and it refers to its self as a ‘word of exhortation’ which in Acts 13:15 uses as synonymous with a sermon.[29] Perhaps Apollos was writing to a community which was being challenged by Jews on Christ and so he wrote a sermon for them from afar and included an epistolary conclusion.

From the clues it is possible to build up a character profile of the author. He was a man who was closely associated with Paul and Timothy. He was someone who was well versed in the Septuagint and rhetoric. He wrote what has been described as ‘some of the finest Greek in the NT’.[30] He had a sophisticated vocabulary, with 168 of his 1038 words being unique in the New Testament to Hebrews.[31] Whilst his identity has remained shrouded in mystery, his arguments and obvious apostolic truth have, by the grace of God, been accepted since Clement and Origen as cannon. The clues from references in the text, the style and the grammar will probably always intrigue but as Origen said ‘But who it was that really wrote the epistle, God only knows’.[32]


Word Count: 1988

Footnotes below, for bibliography see: Bibliography

[1] Brown, Hebrews, 14.

[2] Eusebius, History, 6.14.

[3] Guthrie, Hebrews, 20.

[4] Bruce, Hebrews, 3.

[5] Eusebius, History, 6.14.

[6] Eusebius, History, 6.25.

[7] Guthrie, Hebrews, 22

[8] Thompson, ‘Hebrews’, 380.

[9] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[10] Tertullian, ‘Modesty’.

[11] Lightfoot, ‘Barnabas’.

[12] Wilkins, ‘Milk’, electronic ed.

[13] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[14] Guthrie, Hebrews, 22.

[15] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[16] Small, ‘Priscilla’.

[17] Bruce, Hebrews, 18.

[18] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[19] Guthrie, Hebrews, 50.

[20] Hoppins, ‘Hebrews’.

[21] Hoppins, ‘Hebrews’.

[22] Small, ‘Priscilla’.

[23] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[24] Harris, ‘Side-lights’, 175.

[25] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[26] Guthrie, Hebrews, 24.

[27] Nixon, ‘Apollos’, 57.

[28] Easton,‘Apollos’.

[29] Thompson, ‘Hebrews’, 381.

[30] Lane, ‘Hebrews’.

[31] Lane, ‘Hebrews’.

[32] Eusebius, History, 6.25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

Essay                                                                                                                          2

Introduction                                                                                                 2

Salutation and Literary Style                                                                    3

Metaphor Style and Attention to Detail                                                 3

Second Hand Teachings and Acquaintance with Timothy                 3

Pricilla and Aquila?                                                                                     4

Grammatically of male authorship?                                                        5

Apollos as possible solution to the clues                                                            5

Conclusion, Author Profile based on textual clues                               5

Bibliography                                                                                                             6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The canonical epistle historically titled ‘To the Hebrews’ is described by Brown as ‘tantalizingly anonymous’.[1]Unlike the rest of the epistles which open with salutations and the author declaring their identity, the epistle to the Hebrews is silent and so identification of the author needs to be determined from clues found within the text or the history that surrounds it.

The issue of authorship is not a new one; it has been debated ever since the second century with Clement of Alexandria attributing it to Paul (but translated into Greek by Luke)[2] while Tertullian seems to indicate he believes Barnabas to be the author. [3] These conclusions are not unjustified based on the textual clues.

The most obvious clue is to be found, or rather not to be found, at the start of the epistle. There is no salutation, a distinguishing feature of an epistle. Yet it is still most definitely an epistle of some sort as pointed out by Bruce that not just in the personal notes at the end but throughout the text it is clear that it is addressed to a particular community.[4] The absence of the customary use of a salutation to identify the author and their intended recipients is particularly significant as the rest of the epistles in the cannon have one. Pauline epistles place a special emphasis upon these salutations as Paul opens 9 out of 13 with words to the effect of ‘Paul, an apostle’. The epistles to the Thessalonians and Philippians are not solely from Paul and so open with ‘Paul Silas and Timothy’ or ‘Paul and Timothy’. This demonstrates that when Paul writes a letter he is clear to A) identify himself and B) to establish his authority to say what he will say. So unless there is a justifiable reason for Paul to write the epistle to the Hebrews anonymously it would appear that it is unlikely for Paul to be the author. However, the Clement of Alexandria is recorded as having posited that ‘it is probable that the title Paul the apostle was not prefixed to it; for as he wrote to the Hebrews, who had imbibed prejudices against him, and suspected him, he wisely guards against diverting them from the perusal by giving his name’.[5] If that possibility is correct then within the text other clues should reinforce it.

One aspect of the text that should be considered is the literary style of the content. Origen uses this to reject Clement of Alexandria’s suggestion that Paul is author by pointing out that the epistle ‘has not that peculiar style which belongs to the apostle… But that this epistle is more pure Greek in the composition of its phrases’.[6] Guthrie supports this saying: ‘The language is a good literary style in koinē Greek and it certainly contains fewer irregularities of syntax than Paul’s epistles’.[7] It is often suggested that the style of Hebrews is only comparable, within the New Testament, to the Gospel according to Luke and the book of Acts.[8] One way to resolve these styles is to rely on the aforementioned suggestion of the Clement that Luke has translated a letter Paul wrote in Hebrew into the Greek form that has survived. It is possible that this could also account for lack of a personal salutation from Paul at the start. Heavily dismissive of this ‘translation’ theory Calvin demonstrates in a few sentences that the argument of Hebrews plays quite heavily on the theme of Testament in the 9th chapter. Had it been written in Hebrew the word could only mean ‘covenant’ but the Greek, διατήκη, has two meanings; that of covenant and that of testament. Calvin says that ‘This reason alone is enough to convince men of sound judgement that the epistle was written in the Greek language’.[9]

Calvin’s rebuttal of Hebrew origins doesn’t dismiss the possibility that Luke wrote it. There are three verses in particular which could be used to argue in favour of Hebrews being a Lukan work. Firstly the author uses the metaphor of weaning an infant off milk onto solid food; he says that they need ‘milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.’ This seems to be an allusion to Pauls teaching in 1 Corinthians 3.2 and if the author was Luke then it would have been conceivable that he would have been familiar with the metaphor. This verse could also be used in support of Tertullian’s reference to Barnabas being the author as it seems to echo the epistle of Barnabas’s theme of Milk and Honey.[10] [11] [12]

Another key verse in identifying the author is that of Hebrews 2.3: ‘This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.’ Bearing in mind how strongly Paul’s emphasis on his gospel coming direct from Christ (Galatians 1.1!) it is highly unlikely that Paul would attribute his gospel as second hand information.[13] [14] Yet it would fit the description of Luke as found in Luke 1.1-4. Luke in particular has carefully investigated everything and so would be assured of their salvation even though news of it comes through others and has already shown himself to be confident of writing of this salvation for others.

Lastly, another verse that seems to particularly support the possibility of Luke as author is Hebrews 13.23: ‘I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.’ A casual glance without weighing up the other clues such as the lack of salutation and the style would suggest that this shows Paul is writing. However, Calvin uses this to show that Paul isn’t writing by questioning Clements suggestion for Paul’s deliberate anonymity saying that if Paul designedly suppressed his name ‘why, then, did he mention the name of Timothy? as by this he betrayed himself’.[15] If it was Paul, then the mention wouldn’t make sense but Luke would be able to say this as 2 Timothy 4.11 would suggest that Timothy and Luke know each other, as does the narrative of Acts 16-20 where it is probable that they met each other as companions of Paul.

Luke isn’t the only possible explanation of the reference to Timothy, the German theologian Harnack proposed that the author was Pricilla and Aquila.[16] [17] They were ‘closely associated with Timothy’[18] as both they and Timothy were with Paul in Corinth and Ephesus (Acts 18:5; 19:22; 1 Cor. 16:10,19). There are other clues which could point to Priscilla and Aquila as authors, such as the elegant style of the argument, which is very precise and doesn’t digress except to exhort briefly.[19] The argument expands upon a good knowledge of scripture and explains the nature and purpose of Christ as a superseding and continuing of scripture. This type of teaching is demonstrated by the pair in Acts 18:26 where they took Apollos, a learned man with a thorough knowledge of scriptures, into their home and explained the way of God to him more adequately. Another part of the Jigsaw that could fit the picture of the pair as authors is Hebrews 13:24: ‘Those from Italy send you their greetings’. Romans 16:3-5 seems to indicate that Priscilla and Aquila were leaders of a church in Rome, and so from Italy, yet Acts 18.2 shows that they had been expelled from Rome by Claudius and so it could be possible that they were leaders of a church near Rome. Therefore they wrote from Italy rather than from Rome.

Returning to previous clues to see if they fit this possibility, it becomes apparent that Hebrews 2:3 could apply to Priscilla and as for the koinē Greek used well some argue that she was daughter of an eminent roman family and would have been trained in rhetoric of this nature.[20] Another clue for Hoppins and Harnack is the lack of attributed author, they argue that Priscilla’s gender is a cogent explanation for the loss of the authors name.[21] Had it been Paul, Luke, Barnabas or Apollos that wrote the epistle, Harnack argues, there would be no good reason why the author’s name would have been lost.[22]

Bruce mentions a final clue to the epistle being written by Priscilla and Aquila which is that the writer sometimes alternates between using the first person singular and plural. Most noticeably in 13:18-19. Bruce says that ‘the transition back and forth between “we” and “I” would be suitable to a married couple’.[23] Although in his footnotes Bruce recounts Harris’s objection to this based on the word διήγουμενον. ʼΗarris [says] “this masculine participle is the real rock in the track, if we want to refer the Epistle to… Priscilla” ’.[24] Harnack views it as an ‘indifferent’ phrase that is required as a formality of the Greek grammar rather than as something to be used to identify the author.[25]

There is one last commonly suggested author for the epistle to the Hebrews, though it would appear that modern scholarship has experimented with most male contemporaries of Paul such as Silas, Peter, Phillip, Jude and Aristion.[26] The last, and increasingly popular, suggestion is that of Apollos as proposed by Luther. As little has remained of his writings the arguments are based upon conjecture and theological dictionaries tend to say that there is insufficient evidence to support it. [27] [28] That said there are some clues in the text that could support Apollos as author. For instance he could fulfil the clues mentioned above concerning knowing Timothy, receiving Salvation through others and as Pauls missionary partner would have been familiar with Paul’s theology which could explain the similarities in ‘flavour’. Apollos first appears in Acts 18 and is mentored by Priscilla and Aquila and then in verse 28 to have ‘vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from scriptures that Jesus was the Christ’. This is precisely the overarching theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews and so Apollos could conceivably have written it as its within his realm of expertise. An observation by Thompson on the literary style of the text suggests that the text isn’t actually an epistle as it lacks the salutation and it refers to its self as a ‘word of exhortation’ which in Acts 13:15 uses as synonymous with a sermon.[29] Perhaps Apollos was writing to a community which was being challenged by Jews on Christ and so he wrote a sermon for them from afar and included an epistolary conclusion.

From the clues it is possible to build up a character profile of the author. He was a man who was closely associated with Paul and Timothy. He was someone who was well versed in the Septuagint and rhetoric. He wrote what has been described as ‘some of the finest Greek in the NT’.[30] He had a sophisticated vocabulary, with 168 of his 1038 words being unique in the New Testament to Hebrews.[31] Whilst his identity has remained shrouded in mystery, his arguments and obvious apostolic truth have, by the grace of God, been accepted since Clement and Origen as cannon. The clues from references in the text, the style and the grammar will probably always intrigue but as Origen said ‘But who it was that really wrote the epistle, God only knows’.[32]

Word Count: 1988

 

Bibliography

Brown, Raymond, The Message of Hebrews, The Bible Speaks Today; Leicester: IVP, 1982.

Bruce, F.F, The epistle to the Hebrews, The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

Calvin, John and John Owen, Commentary on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews, Bellingham: Logos Bible Software, 2010.

Easton, M.G., Easton’s Bible Dictionary, Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996

Eusebius of Caesarea, An Ecclesiastical History to the 20th Year of the Reign of Constantine, London: Samuel Baster and Sons, 1847.

Guthrie, Donald, Vol. 15: Hebrews: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (17). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1983.

Harris, J. Rendell, ‘Side Lights on New Testament Research’, quoted in F.F. Bruce’s, The epistle to the Hebrews, The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

Hoppin, Ruth, ‘The Book of Hebrews Revisited: Implications of the Theology of Hebrews for Gender Equality’, Women Priests website (20/04/2012,http://www.womenpriests.org/scriptur/hoppin2.asp)

Lane, W.L., ‘Hebrews’, in Martin, Ralph P. and Peter H. Davids (eds.), Dictionary of the Later New Testament and its Developments, Electronic ed, Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Lightfoot, J.B., ‘The Epistle of Barnabas’, Early Christian Writings Website (18/04/2012, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html)

Nixon, R.E., ‘Apollos’, in Wood,D.R.W. and I. Howard Marshall (eds.), New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed., Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1996, 57.

Small, Brian, ‘Is Pricilla the author of Hebrews?’, Polumeros kai Polutropos Blog (20/04/2012, http://polumeros.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/is-priscilla-author-of-hebrews.html )

Tertullian, ‘On Modesty’, The Tertullian Project website (18/04/2012, http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf04/anf04-19.htm – P1279_349605).

Thompson, James.W., ‘Hebrews, the Letter to The’, in Paul J. Achtemeier (ed.), Harper’s Bible Dictionary, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985, 380-381.

Wilkins, M.J., ‘Milk, Solid Food’ in Martin, Ralph P. and Peter H. Davids (eds.), Dictionary of the later New Testament and Its Developments, electronic ed, Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

 

[1] Brown, Hebrews, 14.

[2] Eusebius, History, 6.14.

[3] Guthrie, Hebrews, 20.

[4] Bruce, Hebrews, 3.

[5] Eusebius, History, 6.14.

[6] Eusebius, History, 6.25.

[7] Guthrie, Hebrews, 22

[8] Thompson, ‘Hebrews’, 380.

[9] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[10] Tertullian, ‘Modesty’.

[11] Lightfoot, ‘Barnabas’.

[12] Wilkins, ‘Milk’, electronic ed.

[13] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[14] Guthrie, Hebrews, 22.

[15] Calvin, Hebrews, xxvii.

[16] Small, ‘Priscilla’.

[17] Bruce, Hebrews, 18.

[18] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[19] Guthrie, Hebrews, 50.

[20] Hoppins, ‘Hebrews’.

[21] Hoppins, ‘Hebrews’.

[22] Small, ‘Priscilla’.

[23] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[24] Harris, ‘Side-lights’, 175.

[25] Bruce, Hebrews, 19.

[26] Guthrie, Hebrews, 24.

[27] Nixon, ‘Apollos’, 57.

[28] Easton,‘Apollos’.

[29] Thompson, ‘Hebrews’, 381.

[30] Lane, ‘Hebrews’.

[31] Lane, ‘Hebrews’.

[32] Eusebius, History, 6.25

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s