Hesychius

bishop of Salona in Dalmatia, who flourished about the beginning of the fifth century, maintained a friendly intercourse with St. Augustin and St. Chrysostom, as we gather from their works; a letter has been preserved addressed to him by Pope Zosimus in A. D. 418. Works Letter

The only epistle written by Hesychius himself now extant will be found among the correspondence of St. Augustin, and is numbered Cxcviii. in the Benedictine edition. Further Information

Augustin, De Civ. Dei, 20.5, Ep. cxcvii, cxcviii, cxcix. vol. ii. ed. Bened. ; Schönemann, Bibl. Patrum Lat. vol. 2.14 ; Bähr, in his Geschichte der Römischen Litterat. suppl. band. II. abtheil. § 141, by some mistake apparently names this prelate Hegesippus instead of Hesychius. [W.R]

(Ἡσύχιος).

1. Libanius appears to have had two friends and correspondents of this name about the middle of the fourth century: one a priest (Ep. 636), the other a magistrate (Ep. 773, 914). One of them had two sons, Eutropius and Celsus, to whom Libanius was much attached, and who were possibly his pupils, and several daughters, to one of whom a cousin of Libanius was married (Ep. 375). Libanius was anxious to promote the marriage of a grandson of an Hesychius (perhaps one of the two above mentioned) by his son Calliopius, with a daughter of Pompeianus (Ep. 1400). Possibly the magistrate Hesychius, the correspondent of Libanius, may be the Hesychius or Esychius mentioned by Jerome (Epistola 33 (olim 101) ad Pammach. ; Opera, vol. iv. pt. ii. col. 249, ed. Benedictin.) as a man of consular rank, bitterly hated by the patriarch Gamaliel, and who was condemned to death by the emperor Theodosius for bribing a notary, and pillaging some of the imperial records. Fabricius understands the notice in Jerome of Hesychius, who was proconsul of Achaia, under Theodosius II. A. D. 435 (Cod. Theodos. 6. tit. 28.8); but this is not likely, for if the Benedictine editors are right in fixing A. D. 396 as the date of the letter to Pammachius, the Theodosius there mentioned must have been Theodosius I. the Great; and if Hesychius was executed (as Jerome seems to say)in his reign, he could not have been proconsul in the reign of his grandson Theodosius II. The Hesychius of the Codex Theodosianus may perhaps be the one mentioned in the letters of the monk Nilus, the pupil of Chrysostom. (Libanius, Epistolae, ll. cc., and Ep. 1010; Cod. Theodos. l.c.; Hieron. l.c.; Nili Ascetae Epistolae. Lib. ii. Ep. 292, ed. Allatii; Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 547.)

2. A devoted disciple of St. Hilarion, whose dead body he surreptitiously conveyed from the isle of Crete, where he died, to the Holy Land. (Hieron. Vita S. Hilarionis, passim; Opera, vol. iv. pars ii. col. 74, &c. ed. Benedict; Sozom. H. E. 3.14; Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 552.]

3. Aegyptius. An Egyptian bishop, who suffered martyrdom in the persecution under Diocletian and his successors in the East, perhaps about A. D. 310 or 311. It is not clear whether he was executed at Alexandria or elsewhere. Hody and others regard him as identical with the Hesychius who revised the Septuagint, and whose revision was commonly used in Egypt and the adjacent churches. Fabricius, who thinks this identity probable, is also disposed to regard the martyr Hesychius as the same person as Hesychius of Alexandria, the author of the Lexicon; but Thorschmidius regards the author of the Lexicon as a distinct person. [Hesychius of Alexandria, below.] (Euseb. (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 8.13; Hieronym. Praef in Paralipom. and Praefat. in Quattuor Evang.; Opera, vol. i. col. 1023, 1429, ed. Benedictin; Hody, De Biblior. Textibus Original., fol. Oxford, 1705, p. 303; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. 7.547; Thorschmidius, De Hesych. Miles. Illustr. Christian. Commentat. sect. i. apud Orellium, Hesyc/hii Opusc.)

4. Of Alexandria. See below.

5. Of Apameia, called, in the older editions of Porphyry's life of Plotinus, Justinus (Ἰουστῖνος) Hesychius, but in Creuzer's edition of Plotinus, to which the life by Porphyry is prefixed, Ustillianus (Οὐστιλλιανὸς) Hesychius, was the adopted son of Amelius, one of the later Platonists in the latter half of the third century. [Amelius.] Amelius gave or bequeathed to him a hundred books of commentaries, in which he had collected or recorded the instructions of the philosopher Numenius. Further Information

Porphyr. Vit. Plotini, 100.3, apud Creuzer. Opera Plotini, 3 vols. 4to. Oxford, 1835; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. iii. p. 180, vol. vii. p. 152.)

6. Of Constantinople, a writer of unknown date, who wrote Εἰς χαλκοῦν ὄφιν λόγοι δ̓́. Photius, from whom alone we learn any thing of this writer, says that," so far as could be judged from this piece, he appeared to be orthodox." Probably he was the Hesychius, one of the clergy of Constantinople, who raised in that city the cry of heresy against Eunomius, apparently about A. D. 360. [Eunomius.] Thorschmidius thinks that he was perhaps the author of the Ecclesiastical History, known by one or two citations, and generally regarded as a work of Hesychius of Jerusalem. [Hesychius Hierosolymitanus, No. 7.] (Phot. Bibl. Cod. 51; Philostorg. H. E. 6.1 ; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 547.)

7. Hierosolymitanus, or of Jerusalem, an early Christian writer of considerable repute in his day, many of whose writings are extant. The date of his life and his official rank in the church have been much disputed. Cyril of Scythopolis, in his life of St. Euthymius (Βίος τοῦ ἁγίου πατρὸς ἡμῶν Εὐθυμίου, Cotel. Eccles. Graec. Monum. vol. iv. p. 31), speaks of Hesychius, "presbyter and teacher of the church," as being with Juvenal patriarch of Jerusalem, when he dedicated the church of the " Laura," or monastery of Euthymius, A. D. 428 or 429. Theophanes records the προβολὴ, advancement (i.e. ordination ?) of Hesychius, "the presbyter of Jerusalem," A. M. 5906, Alex. era (= = A. D. 414); and notices him again as elninenlt for learning (ἤνθει ταῖς διδασκαλίαις) the year following, A. D. 415. He gives him no higher title when recording his death, A. M. 5926, Alex. era,= = A. D. 434. Photius, who has described some of his works, also calls him" Hesychius, presbyter of Jerusalem," but without mentioning the time when he lived. Yet, notwithstanding these tolerably clear intimations, Miraeus (Auctarium de Scriptor. Eccles. No. clxxv.), Possevinus (Apparatus Sacer, vol. i. p. 739, ed. Col. 1608 ), Cave, and Thorschmidt (Comment. de Hesychio Milesio), consider Hesychius the writer to be identical with the Isysius or Isacius (Ἰσάκιος), bishop or patriarch of Jerusalem, to whom pope Gregory the Great wrote an epistle (Epistol. 11.40.; Opera, vol. ii. col. 1133, ed. Benedict.), and whose death occurred, according to the Alexandrian or Paschal chronicle, in A. D. 609. (Chron. Pasch. p. 382, ed. Paris, vol. i. p. 699, ed. Bonn.) But the absence of any higher designation than presbyter in Photius and Theophanes forbid the supposition that their Hesychius ever attained episcopal rank; and the want of any distinguishing epithet leads us to conclude that there was no other Hesychius of Jerusalem who had acquired distinction as a writer. The account of Hesychius in the Greek Menology is probably correct in its general outline. According to it, he was born and educated at Jerusalem, where, by meditating on the Scriptures, he acquired a deep acquaintance with divine things. He afterwards left Jerusalem, and followed a monastic life "in the deserts" (it is not stated in what desert, but it was probably in Palestine), gathering from the holy fathers there, with beelike industry, the flowers of virtue. He was ordained presbyter, against his will, by the patriarch of Jerusalem, and spent the rest of his life in that city, or in other places where the Lord Jesus Christ had suffered. Trithemius, who calls him Esytius (De Scriptor. Eccles. No. lxxxii), and Sixtus of Sena (Bibl. Sancta, lib. iv. p. 245, ed. Col. 1586), say, but we know not on what authority, that he was a disciple of Gregory Nazianzen, which is hardly probable. Works

His principal writings are,-- 1. In Leviticum Libri septem. Editions

A Latin version of this was published fol. Basel, 1527, and 8vo. Paris, 1581, and is reprinted in the Bibliotheca Patrum (vol. xii. p. 52, &c., ed. Lyon. 1677). Authorship and Original Language

The authorship and original language of this work have been much disputed. In some passages the writer evidently speaks as one to whom the Latin tongue was vernacular; and in some of the MSS. he is called Isychius, presbyter of Salona, not to be confounded with the Hesychius the correspondent of Augustin (Augustin, Ep. 197, 198, 199; Opera, vol. ii. col. 737, &c., ed. Benedict. 1679, and vol. ii. p. 1106, ed. Paris, 1836), whom Augustin addresses as his "coepiscopus;" but Tillemont thinks that the original was in Greek, and that there are internal indications that the writer lived at Jerusalem; and Cave suggests that the passages in which the writer speaks as a Latin are the interpolations of the translator, whom he supposes to have been Hesychius of Salona. The work is cited as the work of Hesychius of Jerusalem by Latin writers of the ninth century. The Latin version is ancient, though subsequent to the time when the Latin version of the Scriptures by Jerome came into general use in the church. Considerable pains are taken in the work to confute the opinions of Nestorius, and, as is thought by many, of Eutyches. Now, as the heresy of the latter was not denounced until A. D. 448, fourteen years after the death of Hesychius of Jerusalem, according to Theophanes, this circumstance would appear fatal to his claims to the authorship. But Tillemont thinks that the opinions controverted are not those of Eutyches, but the nearly similar errors of the Apollinarists [APOLLINARIS, No. 2; Eutyches]. 2. Στιχηρὸν

(or Κεφάλαια) τῶν ιβʼ προφητῶν καὶ Ἠσαΐον, Sticheron (or (Cupita) in duodecim Prophetas Minores et Esaiam. Editions

This was published by David Hoeschel with the Εἰσαγωγὴ, Isagoge, of Adrian [Adrianus], 4to. Augsburg, 1602. It is contained also in the Critci Sacri (vol. viii. p. 26, ed. London, 1660). 3. Ἀντιρρητικά

or Εὐκτικά. This work is considered to be the one mentioned by Photius (Phot. Bibl. 198)) as the last piece in a collection of ascetic writings described by him. Editions

It was printed with the Opuscula of Marcus Eremita, 8vo. Paris, 1563, and reprinted by Ducaeus (Du Duc) in the Biblioth. Patrum Gr. Lat. (commonly cited by the title of Auctarium Ducaeanum) vol. i. p. 985, fol. Paris, 1624. Editions

A Latin version of it is given in the Bibliotheca Patrum (vol. xii. p. 194), with the title Ad Theodulum Sermo Compendiosus animae perutilis, de Temperantia et Virtute, quae dicuntur ἀντιρρητικὰ καὶ εὐκτικὰ, hoc est, de ratione reluctandi ac precandi. 4. Homiliae de Sancta Maria Deipara ; Editions

These two discourses on the Virgin Mary were published by Ducaeus in the Bibliotheca Patrum Gr. Lat. vol. ii. p. 417, and a Latin version by Joannes Picus of Paris in the Bibl. Patrum (vol. xii. p. 185, &c.) 5. Τὸ εἰς τὸν ἅγιον Ἀνδρέαν ἐγκώμιον, Oratio demonstratixa in S. Andream Apostolum.

Several extracts from this piece are given by Photius (Phot. Bibl. 269), from whom we take the title, in which Bekker, on the authority of a MS. at Paris, and on internal evidence, has properly restored the word Ἀνδρέαν in place of the common reading Θωμᾶν. Editions

A Latin version of the whole is in the Biblioth. Patr. vol. xii. p. 188, &c. 6. De Resurrectione Domini Nostri Christi, Editions

ascribed in some MSS. to Gregory Nuyssen, and printed in some editions of his works. 7. De Hora Tertia et Sexta, quibus Dominus fuisse crucifixus dicitur, or Qua Hora crucifixus est Dominus? Editions

These two pieces are contained in the Novum Auctarium of Combefis, vol. i. fol. Paris, 1648, and a Latin version in the Bibl. Patrum, vol. xii. p. 190c. 8. Εἰς Ἰάκωβον τὸν Ἀδελφὸν τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Δαβὶδ τὸν Θεοπάτορα, Sermo in S. Jacobum Fratrem Domini, et in Davidem τὸν Θεοπάτορα. Editions

Extracts from this are given by Photius (Phot. Bibl. 275). 9. Μαρτύριον τοῦ ἁγίου καὶ ἐνδόξου Μάρτυρος τοῦ Χριστοῦ Λογγίνου τοῦ Ἑκατοντάρχου, Acta S. Longini Centurionis.

This piece is of very doubtful genuineness. Editions

It is given in the Acta Sanctorum of Bollandus, Martii, vol. ii. (a. d. xv), a Latin version in the body of the work at p. 368, and the Greek original, in the Appendix, p. 736. 10. In Christi Nativitatem. Editions

An extract from this is given by Ducange in his illustrations of the Paschal Chronicle, subjoined to that work in the Paris (p. 424) and Bonn editions (vol. ii. p. 116) of the Byzantine writers; and by Hody, in the Proleg. c. xxiv. prefixed to the Chronicon of Jo. Malalas, Oxon. 1691; and a part of this extract is cited by Cave, Hist. Litt. vol. i. p. 398, ed. Oxford, 1740-1743. 11. Ἠ Εὐαγγελικγ͂ὴ Συμφωνία, Consonantia Exangelica. Editions

Some fragments of this are published in the Noxum Auctarium of Combefis, vol. i. p. 773, fol. Paris, 1648. 12. Συναγωγὴ ἀποριῶν καὶ ἐπιλύσεων ἐκλεγεῖσα ἐν ἐπιτομῇ ἐκ τῆς Εὐαγγελικῆς Συμφωνίας, Collectio Difficultatum et Solutionum, excerpta per compendium ex Exangelica Consonantia. Editions

An abridgment of No. 11, published in the Ecclses. Graec. Monum. of Cotelerius (vol. iii. p. 1). 13. In Canticum Habacuc et Jonae. Editions

Some fragments of this are given by Cardinal Antonio Caraffa in his Catena Veterum Patrum in Cantica Veteris et Noui Testamenti. Other Works

These are all the works of Hesychius, of which the whole or any considerable fragments have been published. He wrote also, 14. Commentarius in Psalmos a Ps.

77 ad 107, inclusive, et in Ps. 118, extant in MS, and sometimes ascribed to Chrysostom, from whose published commentary on the Psalms it is altogether different. Anselmo Banduri promised to publish this commentary of Hesychius, but did not. Lost Works

Several other pieces are extant in MS., but some of the most important of this writer's works are lost, including, 15. Ecclesiastica Historia.

A Latin version of a passage in this is cited in the Collatio of the fifth oecumenical or second Constantinopolitan council (Labbe asid Cossart. Concil. vol. v. col. 470). The work is also cited in the Chron. Paschale (p. 371, ed. Paris, vol. i. pp. 680, 681, ed. Bonn). 16. Comnmentarius in Epistolam ad Hebraeos et in Ezekielem.

17. Hypotheses in Libros Sacros.

Cotelerius speaks of this work (Eccles. Graec. Monumenta, vol. iii. p. 521 ) as having been mentioned by Usher, but does not give a reference to the place in Usher's works. Further Information

Phot. Bibl. ll. cc., ed. Bekker; Theophanes, Chronog. vol. i. pp. 71, 79, ed. Paris, vol. i. pp. 129, 142, ed. Bonn; with the notes of Goarus in loc. in both editions; Acta Sanct. ll.c. and Martii, vol. iii. p. 173; Menolog. Graec. jussu Imp. Basil. edit. (ad Mart. xxviii.) pt. iii. p. 33; Cotelerius, Eccles. Gr. Monum. ll. cc.; Cave, Hist. Litt. l.c., and vol. i. p. 570, &c., ed. Oxford, 1740-43; Tillemont, Mémoires, &c., vol. xiv. p. 227, &c., and notes, p. 744, &c.; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. pp. 419, 548, et alibi.

8. Hierosolymitanus, patriarch of Jerusalem at the beginning of the seventh century. [No. 7.]

9. Of Miletus, is called by almost all the ancients who mention him ὁ Ἰλλούστριος, which is commonly understood as an indication of rank (Illustris), derived from some office which he held, though by some construed as a cognomen " Illustrius." He was a native of Miletus, son of Hesychius, a δικήγορος, or pleader, and his wife Sophia (Σοφία), as she is called in Suidas and in the older editions of Photius, but, according to Bekker's Photius, Philosophia (Θιλοσοφία). He lived in the time of the emperors Anastasius I., Justin I., and Justinian I.; but nothing is known of his history, except that he had a son Joannes, whose loss prevented his continuing his account of Justinian's reign. Works

Hesychius is known as the author of the following works: 1. Περὶ τῶν ἐν παιδείᾳ λαμψάντων σοφῶν (De his qui Eruditionis Fama claruere.)

The word σοφῶν in the above title is rejected by some critics as spurious. The notice of Hesychius in the present copies of Suidas, which is probably corrupt,--at any rate it is obscure, --is understood by some to affirm that Hesychius wrote two works, one entitled Πίναξ τῶν ἐν παιδέᾳ ὀνομαστῶν, the other called Ὀνοματολόγος, an epitome of the Πίναξ. Meursius, who contends that the passage is corrupt, proposes a conjectural emendation, according to which the two titles belong to one and the same work, Ὀνοματολόγος ἢ Πίναξ, κ. τ. λ., which he supposes Suidas to have described as an epitome of Diogenes Laertius, De Vitis Philosophorum. The work is in its general character similar to that of Diogenes ; and though a good deal shorter, comprehends much of the same matter. But the differences are too great to allow one to be regarded as the epitome of the other. As the ecclesiastical writers are avowedly omitted by Hesychius, the opinion has been entertained that he was a pagan; but his belief in Christianity has been satisfactorily shown by several writers, especially by Thorschmidius in a dissertation on the subject, reprinted by Orellius in his Hesychii Opuscula. Editions

The work of Hesychius was first published with a Latin version by Hadrianus Junius, 8vo. Antwerp, 1572, and has been reprinted several times. For a long time the standard edition was that of Meursius, in his Hesychii Opuscula, 8vo. Leyden, 1613, reprinted in the seventh vol. of the Opera Meursii, fol. Florence. 1741, &c. A late edition of the Opuscula Hesychii, that of Joan. Conrad. Orellius of Zurich, 8vo. Leipzig, 1820, contains much valuable illustrative matter, especially the dissertation of Thorschmidius above mentioned. 2. Πάτρια Κωνστινουπόλεως (Res Patriae Constantinopolitanae)

It is probable that this work is a fragment of that next mentioned. A considerable part of it is incorporated, word for word, in the Περὶ τῶν Πατρίων Κωνσταντινουπόλεως,, De Originibus Constantinopolitanis of Codinus [Codinus]. Editions

This was first printed in A. D. 1596, by George Dousa; but the work (or fragment) of Hesychius with the author's name, was first published by Meursius in his Hesychii Opuscula, noticed above, and was reprinted in the Florentine edition of the works of Meursius, and in the Opuscula Hesychii of Orellius. 3. A Synoptic View of Universal History

A work described by Photius as Βιβλίον ἱστορικὸν ὡς ἐν συνόψει κοσμικῆς ἱστορίας, a synoptical view of universal history, and by Suidas as Χρονική τις Ἱστορία, and by Constantine Porphyrogenitus as Χρονικά. It is described by Photius as divided into six parts (τμήματα), or, as the writer himself called them, διαστήματα, by which term they were commonly quoted, e. g. ἐν τῷ εʼ (sive σʼ) διαστήματι τής ἱστορίας . (See Charles Labbe's Veteres Glossae Verborum Juris quae passim in Basilicis reperiuntur, s. vv. Παλματίοις ἐκούοις (Palmatiis equis), Θόλις.) The whole history comprehended a period of 1920 years, and extended from the reign of Belus, the reputed founder of the Assyrian empire, to the death of the Byzantine emperor, Anastasius I., A. D. 518: according to Photius, it was thus distributed among the six parts:-- (1) Before the Trojan war. (2) From the taking of Troy to the foundation of Rome. (3) From the foundation of Rome to the abolition of kingly power and the establishment of the consulship in the 68th Olympiad. (4) From the establishment of the consulship in the 68th, to the sole power (μοναρχία) of Julius Caesar in the 182d Olympiad. (5) From the sole power of Julius Caesar till Byzantium (Constantinople) was raised to greatness, in the 277th Olympiad. (6) From the settlement of Constantine at Byzantium to the death of Anastasius in the 11th year of the indiction. The Πάτρια Κωνσταντινουπόλεως, published by Meursius, appears to be the earlier part of the sixth book. 4. A book on the reign of Justin I.

A book recording the transactions of the reign of Justin I. (A. D. 518-527), and the earlier years of Justinian I., who reigned A. D. 527-566. This work, which was discontinued through domestic affliction, is lost. It was apparently intended as a continuation of the foregoing, and as the work of a contemporary whose high office (for the title "Illustris" was given to the highest officers, the praefecti praetorio, praefecti urbi, &c.) must have implied political knowledge, and have procured access to the best sources of information, it was probably the most valuable part. Assessment

Photius characterizes the historical style of Hesychius as concise, his language well chosen and expressive, his sentences well constructed and arranged, and his figures as striking and appropriate. Hesychius of Miletus has sometimes been confounded with Hesychius of Alexandria, the author of the Lexicon. Further Reading

Phot. Bibl. Codd. 69 ; Constant. Porphyrog. De Themat. lib. i. th. 2, lib. ii. th. 8; Suidas, s. v. Ἡούχιος μιλήσιος; Tzetzes, Chil. 3.877; the notes of Meursius in his Hesychii Opuscula ; Cave, Historic Litt. vol. i. p. 518; Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. pp. 446, 544; Thorschmidius, De Hesychio Milesio Illustri Christiano Commentatio, ap. Orellium, Hesychii Opera.

10. Of Syria, a monk, apparently of one of the monasteries near Antioch, whose remarkable dream, regarded as prophetic of the fortunes of his contemporary Chrysostom, is recorded by Photius. (Bibl. Cod. 96.)

11. Tachygraphus (ὁ ταχυγράφος ). Codinus cites an author by this name in his Περὶ τῶν Πα τρίων Κωνσταντινουπόλεως (p. 9, ed. Paris). Fabricius supposes him to be the same with Hesychius of Miletus (No. 9), but this cannot be, as Codinus speaks of Hesychius Tachygraphus as a contemporary with Constantine the Great. The Tachygraphi, as the name indicates, were writers employed where speed rather than beauty was required, and were distinguished by the use of abbreviations and other compendious methods. (Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. vii. p. 552.)

Various other Hesychii are noticed by Fabricius and by Thorschmidius in the Commentatio de Hesych. Mileto Illustri Christ. referred to in the course of this article. [J.C.M]

(Ἡσύχιος), an Alexandrian grammarian, under whose name a large Greek dictionary has come down to us. Respecting his personal history absolutely nothing is known. Works The Dictionary

The dictionary is preceded by a letter addressed by Hesychius to a friend Eulogius, who is as little known as Hesychius himself. In this prefatory letter the author explains the plan and arrangement of his work, and tells us that his compilation is based upon a comprehensive lexicon of Diogenianus, but that he also availed himself of the lexicographical works of Aristarchus, Apion, Heliodorus, and others, and that he devoted himself to his task with great care and diligence. Valckenaer was the first that raised doubts respecting the genuineness of this letter in his Schediasma de Epistola ad Eulogiumn (in Ursinus, Virgil. Collat. p. 150, &c.), and he conceived that it was the production of some later Greek, who fabricated it with a view to deceive the public and make them believe that the dictionary was his own work; but Valckenaer at the same time admits that the groundwork of the lexicon is a genuine ancient production, and only disfigured by a number of later interpolations. But a close examination of the prefatory epistle does not bring forth any thing which is at variance with the work to which it is prefixed, nor does it contain any thing to justify the opinion of Valckenaer. The investigations of Alberti and Welcker (in the Rhein. Mus. ii. pp. 269, &c., 411, &c.) have rendered it highly probable that Hesychius was a pagan, who lived towards the end of the fourth century of our era, or, as Welcker thinks, previous to A. D. 389. This view seems to be contradicted by the fact that the work also contains a number of Christian glosses and references to ecclesiastical writers, as Epiphanius and others, whence Fabricius and other critics consider Hesychius as a Christian, and identify him with the Hesychius who in the third century after Christ made a Greek translation of the Old Testament, and is often quoted by Hieronymus and others. But it is now a generally established belief that the Christian glosses and the references to Christian writers are to be considered as interpolations introduced into the work by a later hand. We may therefore acquiesce in the statement of the prefatory letter, that the work is based on a similar one by Diogenianus, and that Hesychius made further use of other special dictionaries, especially such as treated of Homeric λέξεις. There can be little doubt that the lexicon in its present form is greatly disfigured and interpolated, even setting aside the introduction of the Christian λέξεις, or glossae sacrae, as they are commonly called; but notwithstanding all this, the work is of incalculable value to us. It is now one of the most important sources of our knowledge, not only of the Greek language as such, but, to some extent, of Greek literature also; and in regard to antiquarian knowledge, it is a real storehouse of information, derived from earlier grammarians and commentators, whose works are lost and unknown. It further contains a large number of peculiar dialectical and local forms and expressions, and many quotations from other writers. The author, it is true, was more concerned about the accumulation of matter derived from the most heterogeneous sources than about a skilful and systematic arrangement ; but some of these defects are, perhaps, not to be put to the account of the original compiler, but to that of the later interpolators. This condition of the work has led some critics to the opinion, that the groundwork of the lexicon was one made by Pamphilus of Alexandria in the first century after Christ; that in the second century Diogenianus made an abridgment of it, and that at length it fell into the hands of the unknown Hesychius, by whom it was greatly interpolated, and from whom it received its present form. The interpolations must be admitted, but the rest is only an unfounded hypothesis. To restore a correct text under these circumstances is a task of the utmost difficulty. Editions

The first edition is that of Venice, 1514, fol., edited by the learned Greek Musurus, who made many arbitrary alterations and additions, as is clear from the Venetian MS. (the only one that is as yet known; comp Villoison, Anecdot. Graec. ii. p. 254; N. Schow, Epistolae Criticae, Rome, 1790, 4to., reprinted as a supplement in Alberti's edition.)

The edition of Musurus was followed by those of Florence (1520, fol.), Hagenau (1521), and that of C. Schrevelius (Lugdun. Bat. et Amstelod., 1686, 4to.) The best critical edition, with a comprehensive commentary, is that of J. Alberti, which was completed after Alberti's death by Ruhnken, Lugd. Bat. 1746-1766, 2 vols. fol. A supplement to this edition was published by N. Schow (Lugd. Bat. 1792, 8vo.).

The glossae sacrae were edited separately, with emendations and notes, by Ernesti, Leipzig, 1785. Further Information

Comp. Alberti's preface to vol. i., and Ruhnken's to vol. ii.; C. F. Ranke, De Lexici Hesychiani vera Origine et genuina Forma Commentatio, Leipz. et Quedlinburg, 1831, 8vo.; Welcker, l.c. [L.S]

(Ἡσύχιος). (1) A Greek grammarian of Alexandria, who lived probably towards the end of the fourth century A.D. He composed, with the assistance of the works of earlier lexicographers (especially the Περιεργοπένητες of Diogenianus), a lexicon (Γλῶσσαι), which has come down to us in a very confused form, but is nevertheless among the most important sources of our knowledge of the Greek language, and throws much light on the interpretation and criticism of Greek poets, orators, historians, and physicians. Editions by Alberti and Ruhnken (Leyden, 1746-66), with additions by Schon (Leipzig, 1792); and by M. Schmidt (5 vols. 1858-61). The Christian glosses, which are interpolations, have been separately edited by Ernesti (Leipzig, 1785). See Ranke, De Lex. Hesych. Vera Origine (Quedlinburg, 1831).

(2) A Milesian, called Illustris, who lived about A.D. 540, and wrote an Onomasticon or biography of illustrious men (ed. by Orelli, 1820), and a Chronicon or synopsis of universal history, in six parts, beginning with Belus, the alleged founder of the Assyrian State, and ending with the death of the Byzantine emperor, Anastasius I. (A.D. 518). The latter work is lost. See Krumbacher, Grundriss der byzantinischen Literatur (in I. Müller's Handbuch, vol. ix.), pp. 110 foll.