apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

DATE OF THE MARTYRDOM. 715
latter having lieen founded, as the name betokens, to commemorate
this emperor either by himself or by his successor. We thus fall back
once more upon the kolvo. 'Acrias. It should be added also that in the
'Asiatic' calendar the month Xanthicus is
designated ' Hierosebastus '
(see above, p. 679), thus pointing to some imperial commemoration at
this season. All this however is
merely
tentative. We need further
epigraphic aid which the discoveries of future years may afford, before
we can advance beyond the region of conjecture.
Ou the date of Pionius' Martyrdom.
It may be convenient, before entering on this investigation, to
premise that the two years with which we are especially concerned are
designated by the following consulships.
.D. 250 fl mp. Caesar C. Messius Quintus Trajanus Decius Augustus II.
Vettius Gratus.
.D. 251 (I mp. Caesar C. Messius Quintus Trajanus Decius Augustus III.
Q. Herennius Etruscus Messius Decius Caesar.
See Klein Fasti Consularcs p. 105. The latter year
is sometimes
designated 'duobus Deciis,' the emperor and his son being colleagues
in office.
I have explained already (p. 641) the relation in which these Acts
of Pionius stood to those of Polycarp in the copy used by Eusebius.
The volume comprised (i)
The Letter of the Smyrnczajis, containing the
narrative of Polycarp's martyrdom ;
Pionius and others
(2) The Acts of
who were martyred with him ; (3) The Acts of Carpus, Papylus, and
Agathonice (see above, p. 559 sq). Eusebius ascribed all the three to
the time of M. Aurelius. In the case of the first he was not far wrong,
though we have seen reasons for assigning it to the previous reign.
The third seems certainly to belong to the epoch of an associated
sovereignty, and may have been correctly ascribed by him to the age of
M. Aurelius, who during a great part of his reign had a colleague in the
empire, first his ' brother ' Verus and then his son Commodus (see
above, p. 642 sq). In the second case alone Eusebius seems to have
been wide of the mark. All the extant recensions of the Acts of
Pionius place his martyrdom a century later, in the reign of Decius.
Yet, even so, the mistake of Eusebius is explicable. First ; these Acts
at the opening speak of the celebration of Polycarp's day and might
suggest to a careless reader the impression that they were contempo-