apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

DATE OF THE MARTYRDOM. 675
same critical offence which he charges against his opponent, and to
postulate an imperial visit to the East of which history records nothing.
The avTOKpaTwp of Aristides Oj^.
i.
pp. 451, 453, who is represented as
being in Syria at the time, could be none other according to his view
than M. Aurelius himself, lie is forced therefore to send M. Aurelius
to the East about a.d. 166 to conclude the negotiations with Vologesus
(p. 70 sq), though the silence of history in this case would indeed be
strange, where it has preserved at least an outline of the Parthian
war under M. Aurelius and of the expeditions of this emperor.
Wieseler's own reconstructions deserve a passing notice. He supposes
the eratpos mentioned by Aristides (Op. i. p. 523) as the successor
of Severus in the proconsulate to be his friend and fellow-citizen
Rufinus, whose name occurs elsewhere in this discourse (pp. 510, 514,
532 sq). But Rufinus is not mentioned in any close connexion with
the passage relating to the successor of Severus, whereas the account of
his intercourse with Quadratus has immediately preceded Moreover
it.
at least two other persons are called specially his kjolpci in this very
speech— Pyrallianus (p. 519) and Pardalus (p. 527); while of several
persons collectively he says (p. 509) that 'from that day forward they
all became his iraipoi.' There is therefore no reason why Rufinus
should be singled out here. There was however a person of the name
M. Junius Rufinus Sabinianus proconsul of Asia in a.d. 170 (see
Waddington Fasces Asiatiques p. 233), and Wieseler identifies him with
Aristides' friend. Moreover the senior colleague of this Rufinus in the
consulship (a.d. 155) was C. Julius Severus. Wieseler supposes (pp.
taret', but this same writer says two innotuit'. Wieseler supposes the historian
chapters later § 7 ' Post excessum Divi to be referring to Antoninus Pius. Yet
Pii, a senatu coactus regimen publicum Marcus in reply says ' Scis enim ipse quid
capere,/ra/r£'w sibi participem in imperio
avos tints Hadrianiis dixerit', and Lipsius
is
designavit...Caesaremque atque Angus- probably correct in supposing that
turn dixit. ..Antonini mox ipse nomen Hadrian is intended by Lucius also. The
recepit, et quasi pater Lucii Commodi utmost that can be made of such passages
esset, et Verum eum appellavit addito is that Lucius privately regarded himself
Antonini nomine filiamque suam Lu- as standing in a quasi filial relation to
cillamy;-^/;- despondit.' Again Spartian. Marcus. But the language of contem-
'
Ael. Ver. 5 Antoninus Verus, qui adop- porary and succeeding generations alike
tatus est a Marco vel certe cum Marco, is unanimous in designating them 'broet
cum eodem aequale gessit imperium
'. thers.' See on this subject Lipsius yahrb.
It must be remembered that there is such
f. Protest. Theol. 1871, p. 756 sq. Lucius
a thing as ' adoptatio in fratrem ', as well was forty years old at the time when Arisas
'adoptatio in filium '.
Again in tides is supposed so to designate him,
Vulcat. Gallic. Avid. Cass, i Lucius being only seven or eight years younger
writes to Marcus ' sub avo meo patre tuo than Marcus.
43—2