which P. Sestius Capitolinus Vaticanus, consul in B. c. 452, is described as P. F. VIBI. N. The annexed coins refer apparently to this L. Sestius, as they were struck by a person of the same name who was the proquaestor of Brutus The obverse of the first represents a woman's head with L. SESTI PRO Q., and the reverse a tripod with a secespita on one side, and a simpuvium on the other, and the legend Q. CAEPIO BRVTVS PRO cos. The obverse of the second is nearly the same as the reverse of the first: the reverse contains a seat with a spear, in allusion to his being quaestor, and the legend L. SESTI PRO Q. (Eckhel, vol. v. p. 312.) LSES RO.C COINS OF L. SESTIUS. 7. P. SESTIUS P. F., to whom one of Cicero's letters (ad Fam. v. 17) is addressed, was a different person from P. Sestius L. F. [No. 5.] It appears from this letter, which was probably written in B. c. 53, that P. Sestius P. F. had been condemned on account of some offence. 8. L. SESTIUS PANSA. [PANSA.] 9. T. SESTIUS GALLUS, on whose estate P. Clodius was killed by Milo, in B. c. 52. (Cic. pro Mil. 31.) of the Assyrians at Pelusium is evidently only another version of the miraculous destruction of the Assyrians by the angel of the Lord, when they had advanced against Jerusalem in the reign of Hezekiah (2 Kings, xviii. xix. and particularly xix. 35; 2 Chronicles, xxxii.; Isaiah, xxxvi. xxxvii). According to the Jewish records, this event happened in B. c. 711. Herodotus speaks as if Sethon were king of all Egypt at this time; but we have shown in the article SABACON, that Upper Egypt at least was governed by the Ethiopian Taracus or Tirhakah, whe, as we learn from Isaiah, was ready to march against Sennacherib. The name of Sethon does not occur in Manetho, and it is probable that he only reigned over a part of Lower Egypt. SEVE'RA, JULIA AQUILIA. [AQUILIA.] SEVE'RA, MARCIA, T. F., a Roman artist in gold and precious stones (Auraria et Margaritaria), who lived in the Via Sacra (Doni, p. 319, No. 13; Muratori, Thes. vol. ii. p. cmlxiv. No. 1; Orelli, Inser. Lat. Sel. No. 4148). Her name is of some interest, on account of the small number of women who appear in the lists of ancient artists. (R. Rochette, Lettre à M. Schorn, p. 401, 2d ed.) [P.S.] SEVERIA NUS, son of the emperor Flavius Valerius Severus, was put to death by Licinius A. D. 313. (Auct. de Mort. Persec. 50.) [W. R.] SEVERIA NUS, JU'LIUS, a rhetorician who flourished under Hadrian, the author of a treatise Syntomata s. Praecepta Artis Rhetoricae, which will be found in the "Antiqui Rhetores Latini" of F. Pithou 4to. Paris, 1599, p. 302-312), and of This piece Capperonerius (4to. Argent. 1746). was published at Cologne in 1569 by Sextus Pompa, as Auli Cornelii Celsi de Arte dicendi Libellus, a title retained in the edition of Heumann, contained in the first volume of his Poecile (8vo. Hal. 1722, lib. iii. p. 378), and in that printed at Lunaeberg (12mo. 1745). There seems to be no doubt, however, that in the best MSS. the work is ascribed to Severianus, and their testimony seems to be confirmed by Sidonius Apollinaris (Ep. ix. 11, 15, Carm. ix. 312). Funccius conjectures that the real name of the writer may have been Julius Celsus Severianus, who in this manner became confounded with Aulus Cornelius Celsus. (Funccius, de Veget. L. L. senect. cap. v. § 2.) [W. R.] SETHON (ev), a priest of Hephaestus, is said by Herodotus to have made himself master of Egypt after the expulsion of Sabacon, king of the Ethiopians, and to have been succeeded by the Dodecarchia, or government of the twelve chiefs, which ended in the sole sovereignty of Psammitichus. Herodotus further relates that in his reign Sanacharibus, king of the Arabians and Assyrians, advanced against Egypt, at which Sethon was in SEVERIA NUS VERUS, an artist in silver great alarm, as he had insulted the warrior class, (Argentarius), mentioned in an inscription found in and deprived them of their lands, and they now Dauphiné. (Gruter, p. dcxxxix. 6; R. Rochette, refused to follow him to the war. In his perplexity Lettre à M. Schorn, p. 401, 2d ed.) [P.S.] he shut himself up in the temple of Hephaestus, SEVERI'NA, U'LPIA, the wife of the emwhere the god comforted him by a vision. Rely-peror Aurelian, well known from medals, and from ing, therefore, on the assistance of the god, he collected an army of retail-dealers and artizans, and marched out boldly to Pelusium to meet the enemy. The god did not forget his promised aid; for while the two armies were encamped there, the field-mice in the night gnawed to pieces the bow-strings, the quivers, and the shield-handles of the Assyrians, who fled on the following day with great loss. The recollection of this miracle was perpetuated by a statue of the king in the temple of Hephaestus, holding a mouse in his hand, and saying, "Let every one look at me and be pious" (Herod. ii. 141). This Sanacharibus is the Sennacherib of the Scriptures, and the destruction Sennacherib, which is the form familiar to us COIN OF SEVERINA. from the English version, comes from the Septuagint (evvaxnpie). The Hebrew is Sancherib In Josephus it is Σεναχηριος, in Herodotus Zavaxápibos. an inscription preserved by Muratori, ULPIAE. | opinions had rendered him a dangerous or a disSEVERINAE. AUG. COIUGI. D. N. INVICT. AURELIANI. AUG. No details regarding her history have been transmitted to us, but we learn from some Alexandrian coins that she survived her husband. (Eckhel, vol. vii. p. 487.) [W. R.] SEVE'RUS (Zevñpos). Greeks, literary and ecclesiastical. The name of Severus, though of pure Latin original, passed into the East, and was borne by various writers, whose works, chiefly in Arabic, are still extant in MSS. Only three persons of the name, however, require notice here, the two haeresiarchs (Severus the Encratite and Severus of Antioch) and Severus the rhetorician. For the others the reader is referred to Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis; Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. ii. p. 106, ed. Oxford, 1740-43; and Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. x. p. 623, &c. 1. ACEPHALORUM PRINCEPS [No. 2.]. 66 agreeable inmate of his Palestinian monastery; and he hoped to find a more cordial welcome or a securer shelter with Nephalius. In this hope he was disappointed: Nephalius embraced the side of Council of Chalcedon, and Severus and others were expelled from the monastery (Evagr. l. c.). Hereupon he fled to Constantinople, to plead his own cause and that of his fellow-sufferers; and in this way became known to the emperor Anastasius, who had (A. D. 491) succeeded Zeno. Severus is charged (Libellus Monachor. l. c.) with exciting troubles in the city of Alexandria, and occasioning the burning of many houses and the slaughter of many citizens, though the city had afforded him a shelter "in his adversity:" but it is difficult to fix the time to which these charges refer. If he was in Alexandria after leaving the monastery in Palestine, and before entering that of Nephalius, the expression "in his adversity" intimates that he had been diven from his monastery in Palestine: but it is not unlikely that the disturbances at Alexandria may have been consequent on his expulsion and that of his fellow-monks by Nephalius; and the term "his adversity" may be understood as referring to that expulsion. 2. Of ANTIOCH. An eminent leader of the Monophysites in the earlier part of the sixth century, whence he is designated HAERESIARCHA and ACEPHALUS (the Acephali, 'Aképaλo," the headless," were the stricter Monophysites, and were so called because they renounced the communion of Peter Mongus, the trimming head of their party), not to enumerate the other reproachful epithets heaped In what year Severus went to Constantinople, upon him by the members of the orthodox Greek or how long he abode there, is not clear. Tillemont and Latin churches. As a compensation for all places his arrival in A. D. 510; but he probably rethis abuse, it may be observed that he enjoys, to lied on a passage in Theophanes (Chronog. ad A. M. this day, the highest reputation among the Jaco- 6002) which is ambiguous. The fellow-monks bites of Syria and other parts of the East. He was for whom Severus came to plead, were partisans of born at Sozopolis, a town of Pisidia, in Asia Minor; Peter Mongus [PETRUS, No. 22.]; and Severus, and was in early life a pleader at Berytus in Syria, because he had formerly anathematized Peter, was being at that time a heathen. He is charged by reproached with inconsistency in taking their part his adversaries with having practised magic (Eva- (Liberat. l. c.). He appears to have been at Congrius, H. E. iii. 33; Epistola Orthodoxor. Episcop. stantinople, A. D. 512; when, in consequence of Orientalium, and Libellus Monachor. ad Mennam the disturbances, excited on account of Flavian, apud Concil. vol. v. col. 40, 120, 121, ed. Labbe). patriarch of Antioch [FLAVIANUS, Ecclesiastics, Having, however, embraced Christianity and been No. 2.], that prelate was deposed and banished to baptized in the church of St. Leontius, the Martyr, Petra in Idumaea (Evagr. H. E. iii. 32), and at Tripolis in Syria, he quitted the bar and devoted Anastasius eagerly seized the opportunity afforded himself to a monastic life, in a monastery of Pales- by this vacancy to procure the appointment of tine, between Gaza and its port Maiuma. He appears Severus to the patriarchate. The appointment to have embraced the Monophysite doctrine almost was most offensive to the orthodox party. Wheimmediately after his conversion; for he is charged ther Anastasius or Severus took any steps to abate (Libellus Monachor. l. c.) with renouncing, before its offensiveness is not clear. A letter of Epithe days of his baptism were complete, the church phanius, archbishop of Tyre, and some other preinto which he had been baptized; "calling the holy lates to the synod of Constantinople states it as a temples of God receptacles of heresy and impiety matter of common report, yet with a cautious ex(ibid.). It is probable, and indeed Theophanes pression of doubt as to its truth, that Severus, distinctly asserts it (Chronog. p. 241, ed. Bonn.), before his consecration as patriarch, renounced the that the monastery to which he withdrew, was a ordination to the office of presbyter, which he had monastery of the Monophysites; and it was there received when among the Monophysites. that he met with Peter the Iberian, bishop of Gaza, renunciation, if it really took place, implies that he a strenuous Monophysite and a follower of Timo- was re-ordained to the priesthood by some orthodox theus Aelurus [TIMOTHEUS], whose banishment prelate. Theodore Anagnostes or Lector (Hist. he had shared. Severus was so earnest a Mo- Eccles. ii. 31) states, on the authority of Joannes nophysite that he rejected the Henoticon of the Diacrinomenus, or John the Dissenter [comp. emperor Zeno [ZENO], and anathematized Peter JOANNES, literary and ecclesiastical, No. 2.], that Mongus, the more moderate Monophysite patriarch Anastasius obliged Severus to swear that he would of Alexandria [PETRUS, literary and ecclesias- not anathematize the Council of Chalcedon (comp. tical, No. 22.], because he received the Henoticon Synodicon, apud Fabric. Biblioth. Graec. vol. xii. (Liberat. Breviar. c. 19). Severus ridiculed the p. 401, and apud Concilia, vol. iv. col. 1414); but emperor's edict in his writings, calling it not the that Severus on the very day of his consecration, "Henoticon " (évwTIKóv, "edict of union"), but which appears to have taken place at Antioch, Kenoticon (KEVTIKOV, "edict of vanity"), and yielded to the urgent solicitations of his MonophyDiaereticon (diapeтikóv, "edict of disunion"). site friends, and, ascending the pulpit, publicly From his monastery in Palestine, Severus appears anathematized the Council, and afterwards (A. D. to have removed to another monastery in Egypt, 413) obtained the confirmation of the anathema of which Nephalius was abbot. Possibly his ultra | by a council which he assembled at Antioch (Sy This many minds by their abuse of their pre-eminence. nodicon, 1. c.). He anathematized Macedonius, the deposed patriarch of Constantinople [MACEDONIUS, No. 4.], and his own predecessor at Antioch, Flavianus. But he accepted the Henoticon of Zeno, and declared himself to be in communion with Timotheus and Joannes, or John III., the patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria; and restored to the diptychs the name of Peter Mongus [PETRUS, No. 22.], whom he had once anathematized. At the same time he received into communion Peter the Iberian, his old comrade in the monastery in Palestine, who had retained the more rigid Monophysite views which had marked the early years of Severus himself, and continued out of communion with the more moderate Monophysites of Alexandria who had received the Henoticon. In fact, from the time of his going to Constantinople, Severus's policy appears to have been to unite all the Monophysites, whether moderates or ultras, into one great body, and to resist the orthodox or supporters of the Council of Chalcedon, by whom his appointment was not recog-mained at Alexandria, protected by the patriarch nized, and against whom, if the representations of Timotheus: and, as if it was his destiny to be the his opponents may be believed, he directed a fierce troubler of the Church, he and his fellow-exile persecution with atrocious cruelty (Relatio Archi- Julian started the controversy on the corruptibility mandritarum Syriae apud Concil. vol. iv. coll. 1461, of Christ's human body before the resurrection, 1462; Libell. Monachor. l. c.; Supplicatio Clericor. Severus affirming, and Julian denying, that it Antioch. and Epistola Epiphani Tyrü, apud Con- was corruptible; the patriarch Timotheus rather cilia, vol. v. col. 157, 194, &c.). He is especially inclined to the side of Severus. After the death charged, in conjunction with Peter of Apameia, of Justin, and the accession of Justinian I., the with having engaged a "band of Jewish robbers," prospects of Severus became more favourable; and placing them in ambush for a company of three for although the new emperor himself [JUSTINIAhundred and fifty of the orthodox, who were all NUS I.] supported the Council of Chalcedon, his slain, and their limbs left unburied and scattered empress Theodora favoured the Monophysite party, about the road. Many of the bishops of Severus's and by her influence Severus obtained the empatriarchate fled from their sees, others were ba- peror's permission to return to Constantinople nished, and others apparently were compelled to (Evagrius, l. c.). On his arrival, Severus found that conceal their real sentiments. Elias I., patriarch of Anthimus, who had just obtained the patriarchate Jerusalem [ELIAS, No. 1.], was deposed, and the of Constantinople, A. D. 535, was a Monophysite, Monophysite party became triumphant in most and he prevailed on him to avow his sentiments. parts of the East. Their triumph indeed was not Timotheus of Alexandria was a Monophysite also, complete, nor of long duration. Some bishops of and the avowal of that obnoxious heresy by the Severus's own patriarchate renounced communion heads of the church, naturally excited the alarm of with him: two of them, Cosmas of Epiphaneia, and the orthodox party. Anthimus and Timotheus Severianus of Arethusa, had the audacity to send to were both deposed; and in the councils of Conhim a document declaring him deposed; and so stantinople and Jerusalem (A. D. 536), and in an strongly were they supported by the people of their imperial edict, Severus was again anathematized ; dioceses, that the emperor, who had sentenced his writings also were ordered to be burned. them to banishment for their contumacy, was These decisive measures secured the predominance obliged to leave them in possession of their sees, of the orthodox: and Evagrius boasts that the finding he could not remove them without blood- church remained from thenceforth united and pure. shed (Evagr. H. E. iii. 34). The patriarch of Jeru- But this result was obtained by the separation of salem who succeeded Elias, prompted by the Ana- Monophysites, and the formation of the great chorets Saba [SABA] and Theodosius, adhered to Jacobite schismatical churches of Egypt and the the orthodox faith, which was also supported by East, by whom Severus has been ever regarded as, the pope and the Roman Church. Still, notwith- to his death, legitimate patriarch of Antioch. standing this opposition, the Monophysites having Some authorities state that Severus was compelled men of their own party in the patriarchal sees of through the interference of Pope Agapetus (A. D. Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople, pos- 535, 536) to leave Constantinople and return to sessed a decided superiority. But the accession of Alexandria. The date of his death is uncertain: Justin I., who adhered to the Council of Chalcedon Joannes, bishop of Tela, his contemporary, in his [JUSTINUS I.], occasioned their overthrow; for in Liber Directionum (apud Assemani, Biblioth. Orient. the balanced state of parties, and the servility or vol. ii. p. 54) places it in the year of the Greeks, timidity of the ecclesiastics and people, the pre-i.e. the Seleucidae, 849=A. D. 538; the Chronicon dominance of one side or the other depended on of Gregorius Bar Hebraeus, or Abulpharagius (apud the individual filling the imperial throne. While eundem, p. 321), in the year of the Greeks 850= the heretical Anastasius survived, heresy was in the A. D. 539; and Assemani himself (ibid. note), in ascendant; it succumbed to orthodoxy, on the ac- A. D. 542. It is said to have taken place at Alexcession of the orthodox Justin. Another circum-andria, where he lurked in the disguise of a monk. stance which, perhaps, conduced to the overthrow The Jacobites recognize Sergius as his successor in of the Monophysites, was the re-action occasioned in the patriarchate. (Marcellinus, Chronicon; Victor title of 'ATÓкpiois, Responsum, to the question, Πώς νοητέον τὴν τοῦ Κυρίου τριήμερον ταφὴν καὶ dváσтaoi; Quomodo sit intelligenda triduana Domini sepultura et resurrectio? was given in the Quaestiones (Qu. lii) of Anastasius Sinaita [ANASTASIUS SINAITA, No. 3]; and was published by Gretser in his edition of that work. Fabricius has inaccurately confounded this extract Tunnunensis, Chronicon; Theophanes, Chronog. pp. | extract from a work of Severus is given under the 130-142, ed. Paris, pp. 104-113, ed. Venice, pp. 233—255, ed. Bonn ; Evagrius, Η. Ε. ll. cc. ; Concilia, ll. cc.; Liberatus, Breviarium Caussae | Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum, c. 19; Nicephorus Callisti, H. E. lib. xvi. 29–32, 34, 45, xvii. 2, 8, 9, xviii. 45, 49, 50; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 513, vol. i. p. 499; Tillemont Mémoires, xvi. pp. 682, &c. 709, &c.; Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, vol. ii. col. 730; Abulpharagius, Hist. Dynastia-with the fragment published by Montfaucon. rum, pp. 93, 94 of Pococke's Latin Version, 4to. Oxon, 1663; L'Art de vérifier les Dates, 8vo. Paris, 1818, vol. iv. p. 16, &c.) That Severus was a man of indomitable courage and perseverance is obvious from his history. He was, in fact, the leader of the Monophysite party, and may be regarded as the principal author of the great Jacobite schism. His career was consistent, and, to all appearance, guided by integrity and if he largely partook of the bitter and uncharitable temper which the religious struggles of his day had generated, the general prevalence of his fault may be pleaded as extenuating the guilt of the individual. To which it must be added, that we know him almost entirely from the representations of his opponents. His life was written by a contemporary; but the work is lost, and is known to us only in the citations and references of Evagrius (H. E. iii. 33), and Liberatus (Breviar. c. 19). A life of Severus in Syriac was noticed by Assemani among the MSS. of the Syriac convent of St. Mary, at Scete in the desert of Nitria, in Egypt, but it is not certain if it was the life of Severus of Antioch. (Assemani, Bibl. Orient. vol. iii. part 1, p. 19). Some statements of very doubtful credit, made by the Nestorians respecting him, are given by Assemani (ibid. p. 384, &c.). 2. Severus wrote a vast number of Aoyo, Sermones. Aóyos pέ', Sermo CLX., is cited in a MS. Catena in Prophetas Majores et Minores, in the King's Library at Paris (Montfaucon, l. c. p. 53), and there may have been many more than that number. Many of these Sermones are extant in MS. in a Syriac version, by Jacobus of Edessa [JACOBUS, No. 8] and others (Assemani, Biblioth. Oriental. vol. i. p. 494). Of the Aóyou of Severus some were designated 'Ev@poviaσrikol, Inaugurales; and a fragment of one of these was published by Le Quien, in his edition of the works of Joannes Damascenus (vol. i. p. 504), by whom it was cited in the Appendix to his Letter or Tract Пepl Tv dyiwv vnoтeiŵv, De Sanctis Jejuniis [DAMASCENUS, JOANNES]. Another citation from a discourse of Severus, entitled Homilia de Epithronio, appears in the Latin version by Masius of the Paradisus of Moyses Bar Cepha (Assemani, Biblioth. Orient. vol. ii. p. 129), published first at Antwerp, a. D. 1569, and reprinted in various editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum (vol. vi. ed. Paris, 1575, vol. i. ed. Paris, 1589 and 1654, vol. x. ed. Cologne, 1618, and vol. xvii. ed. Lyons, 1677). The polemical works of Severus, as might be expected from his character and position, were numerous. Citations are extant in MS. from his writings. 3. Κατὰ τοῦ Of the numerous works of Severus only frag- граμμатiкоû, Contra Grammaticum, or Κατά ments remain. There are citations from him in Ἰωάννου τοῦ γραμματικοῦ τοῦ Καισαρέως, Contra various Catenae in Genesim, in Jobum, in Esaiam, Joannem Caesareensem Grammaticum, in three in Matthaeum, in Lucam, in Joannem, in Acta books at least, written while in exile at Alexandria, Apostolorum et Catholicas Epistolas (Fabric. Bibl. after his deposition (Anast. Sinait. Hodegus, s. Viae Graec. vol. viii. pp. 646, 664, 676, 679, 684, 695, Dux, c. 6.). 4. Karà Þiλikioσíuov, Contra Fe696, vol. x. p. 616); and on the ground, apparently, licissimum, in four books at least. 5. Пpòs 'lovof these citations, Fabricius (vol. x. p. 616) ascribes λiavòv 'Aliкapνaoéa, Contra Julianum Halicarto him, 1. Commentarii on these various books of nassensem, in several books, or more probably Scripture, though the extracts may be from his several successive works; from this work a short Sermones, or some of his other works. A Com- passage is quoted by Photius (Bibl. Cod. 225). mentary on the Psalms is indeed mentioned by 6. Kard 'Aλecάvopov, Contra Alexandrum; or Gregorius Bar Hebraeus or Abulpharagius (Cave, Κατὰ κωδικίλλων ̓Αλεξάνδρου, Contra Codicillos Hist. Litt. p. 501), and a work, probably a Com- Alexandri, in several books. 7. Κατὰ τῆς διαmentary, on St. Luke's Gospel, is cited in a Ońкns Aаμπeтíov, Contra Testamentum Lampetii, Coislin MS. (Montfauc. Bibl. Coislin. p. 54). i. e. the work of Lampetius the Massalian, enMontfaucon published (Biblioth. Coislin. p. 68), titled Aankn, which, as well as the reply of under the name of Severus, and under the impres- Severus, is noticed by Photius (Biblioth. Cod. 52). sion that it had never before been printed, a Severus wrote this work before his elevation to the fragment, which he entitled Severi Archiepiscopi Patriarchate. Severus wrote also two works against Antiocheni Concordantia Evangelistarum circa ea the Council of Chalcedon: one, 8. Ta piλaańon, quae in Sepulcro Domini contigerunt: item de Sab- or rather 'O Þλaλńons, Philalethes s. Amator Veri batis et de Varietate Exemplarium S. Marci Evan- (comp. Anastas. Sinait. l. c.); the other, 9, in gelistae: but the fragment has been identified with defence of the former, under the title of 'Amoλoyía a piece previously published among the works of Toû þíλaλýbovs, Philalethae Apologia. Perhaps Gregory of Nyssa, ed. Paris, A.D. 1615 and 1638 the paλnons is only another title for No. 3. [GREGORIUS NYSSENUS], to whom, however, it 10. Fabricius mentions a work of Severus in does not belong; and A. D. 1648, again in the eight books, if not more, Пep tŵv dúo quoéwv, Auctarium Novum of Combéfis, by whom it was De duabus Naturis, but does not cite his authority. more correctly ascribed to Hesychius of Jerusalem Of the other works of Severus the principal were, [HESYCHIUS, No. 7]. How the piece came to be 11. his 'ETIσToλal, Epistolae, of which Montascribed to Severus is discussed by Galland in the faucon enumerates nearly sixty, without including Prolegomena (c. 3) to vol. xi. of his Bibliotheca those to the Emperor Justinian and the Empress Patrum, in which the piece is reprinted. An | Theodora, and to the patriarch Theodosius of | Alexandria, cited by Evagrius (H. E. iv. 10) and authentic record of the Old or Mosaic DispenNicephorus Callisti (H. E. xvii. 8), the Zuvudiká, | sation, promulgated by the Demiurgos, and as Synodica, or 'Emotoλal ovvadikal, Epistolae Sy such may have used them, and argued from them; nodicae, or 'Emotoλal ¿vůpoviotikai, Epistolae In- but yet denied their authority as binding upon augurales, issued by him on his promotion to the themselves, who had embraced the New Dispatriarchate, in which he anathematized the council pensation, which rested not on the authority of of Chalcedon, and all who supported the doctrine of the Demiurgos, but on the higher and opposite the two natures of Christ. (Evagr. H. E. iii. 33, 34; authority of the Supreme and All-merciful God. Niceph. Callist. H. E. xvii. 2.) Of his other works This explanation of two apparently opposite statethe following are cited in various MSS.: 12. Taкonments is at any rate consistent with the leading eis Tous μáprupas, Hypacöe in Martyres, or simply principles of Gnosticism. The curious opinions of Υπακοή, Ηραcoe. 13. Пpòs 'AvaσTáσiov dia- Severus, at least of the Severiani, as to the geneaMoyos, Dialogus ad (s. Contra) Anastasium. 14. logy of the Devil, and the origin of the vine, and Πρὸς Εὐπράξιον κουβικουλάριον αποκρίσεις, Re- of the formation of woman and man, are noticed sponsiones ad Eupraxium Cubicularium. 15. Els elsewhere [TATIANUS]. Severus denied the τὸ “aylos ó eòs," σúνтayμa, Syntagma in apostolic office of Paul, and consequently the illud, "Sanctus Deus;" and, 16. Bi6λos Tv authority of his writings; going in these respects ὑποσημειωθέντων ἰδιοχείρως διαφόρων κεφαλαίων, beyond Tatian. His followers also denied, according Liber capitum variorum manu propria subsignato- to Augustin, the resurrection of the body, which is rum, of which Joannes Damascenus cites a passage likely enough. It is not impossible that these in the Appendix to his De Jejuniis (Le Quien's ed. differences may have led to the temporary division c.). Several citations of the works of Severus of the sect of the Encratitae to which Severus and are given in the Hodegus s. Dux Viae of Anastasius Tatian both belonged, and to the formation of Sinaita, and by Photius (Biblioth. Cod. 230) and separate bodies under the respective names of in the Concilia; but they are chiefly, if not wholly, Tatiani and Severiani, who afterwards reunited from his Sermones and Epistolae. A work, Liber under the old and generic name of Encratitae. de Ritibus Baptismi et Sacrae Synaxis apud Syros The ascetic features, abstinence from marriage and receptis, published in Syriac, with a Latin version, from the use of animal food and wine, appear to 4to. Antwerp, 1572, under the name of Severus, have been common to the whole body, whether patriarch of Alexandria, is ascribed in some designated Tatiani, Severiani, or Encratitae. [TaMSS. to our Severus; and Cave inclines to assign TIANUS]. (Euseb. 1. c.; Epiphan. Haeres. xlv.; it to him. Dionysius Bar Salibi, a Syriac writer, Augustin. l. c. ; Theodoret. l. c.; Ittigius, De Haecites a work of "Severus patriarcha oecumenicus," resiarchis, sect. ii. c. xii. § xv.; Tillemont, Méwhich he entitles Canticum Crucis (Assemani, moires, vol. ii. p. 414; Neander, Church History Bibl. Orient. vol. ii. p. 205). The works of Severus (by Rose), vol. ii. p. 111; and (by Torrey) vol. ii. are enumerated imperfectly by Cave (Hist. Litt. p. 167, note 3.) ad ann. 513, vol. i. p. 499, and more fully by Montfaucon (Biblioth. Coislin. p. 53, &c.), and Fabricius (Biblioth. Graec. vol. x. p. 616, &c.). 3. ENCRATITA. There were two Severi emiment as leaders of bodies accounted heretical. The earlier was a leader of one of the divisions of the Gnostic body; the latter, and far more celebrated was the Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch [See No. 2.] We speak here of the former, who appears to have lived in the latter part of the second century. Little is known of his personal history. Eusebius (H. E. iv. 29), speaking of the sect of the Encratitae and their founder Tatian [TATIANUS], says that a certain person named Severus having strengthened the sect, gave occcasion to their being called, after his own name, Severiani. Theodoret also makes Severus posterior to Tatian (Haeret. Fabul. Comp. i. 21). Epiphanius, on the other hand, makes Severus anterior to Tatian. But the silence of Irenaeus, who mentions Tatian, but not Severus, makes it probable that Tatian was the earlier. Our account of the opinions of the Severiani is very obscure. According to Eusebius they admitted the Law and the Prophets (Euseb. H. E. iv. 29), while according to Augustin they rejected them (De Haeres. c. xxiv.). It is not improbable that they admitted them as an The Severus of Alexandria, to whom this Liturgy is ascribed, is apparently Severus surnamed Bar Maschi, who lived in the tenth century after the Saracen conquest had surperseded both the Greek government and the Greek language in Egypt; so that he comes not within the limits of our work. VOL. III. 4. HAERESIARCHA. [Nos. 2, 3.] 6. RHETOR. Of this writer nothing certain is There are |