(3) The process of confusion of Papias' Aristion with Eusebius' Aristo of Pella begins with the Syriac translator (c. 400), followed by the Armenian ; or, if Maximus Confessor be right in attributinij to Clement's Hypotyposeis the (conjectural?) assign- ment of the anonymous Dialuqueof Jason andPapis- eus to this author, perliaps with Clement. The late and unsupported statement of Maxinms (c. 600), quite in conflict with all that is known either of the Dialogue or the writer, is really valueless,
(4) The Armenian historian Moses of Chorene (5th cent. ?) appears really to have known, as he claims, Aristo of Pella. His quotation, where it goes beyond that of Eusebius, shows more and more manifestly the secular, non-Christian writer. His statement that Aristo was secretai-j; of Ard- asches, which was so unfortunately ambiguous as to seem to make him secretary of Mark, bishop of Jerusalem, seems to be the starting-point for the last stage of the process.
(5) The scribe ' John ' who wrote the Armenian Codex of the Gospels in a.d. 989 (found by Cony- beare at Efiniadzin), departed from previous Ar- menian tradition by appending, after the row of discs by which he had marked the end of the Gospel of Mark, at Mk 16', the spurious ending vv."--", literally translated from the ordinary Greek text. To justify this unusual insertion, he crowded in 'by an afterthought' between the first line and the row of discs, in small, craniped, red letters, the title ' Of the Elder Aristo.' That he knew the Eusebian passage about Papias' informant is indi- cated by his use of the title ' Elder ' and the form ' Aristo ' ; for only the A rmenian Eusebius has these peculiarities. That he should have identified the writer of the Markan appendix with ' the Elder Aristo' is most probably explained by his finding in Moses of Chorene what lie took to lie the statement that Aristo (of Pella) was secretary of Mark, the bishop of Jerusalem, in the time of Hadrian. Who indeed should venture to complete Mark's unfinished Gospel, if not his secretary ?
B. W. Bacon.
ARMOUR.— Lk 11== speaks of the iravoTXla (fix. Xey. in Gospels ; also Eph 6"- ", witii which cf. 1 'ih 5') of ' the strong man ' = the Wicked One — the def. art. 6 (v.=') indicating a single and de- finite person. The 'armour' is the potent influ- ences at his disposal, called by St. Paul (Eph 6") 'wiles' and (6'") 'fiery darts,' by which he deludes and overcomes. Trusting to these, he with his possessions is ' at peace ' until ' tlie stronger than lie' (l(TxvpiTcpos avroO [cf. Lk 3'"]) comes on the scene, when the armour is taken away and he is spoiled of his possessions.
The passage has a .soteriologieal and an eschato- logical bearing. ( 1 ) It points to the power of Christ as able to dislodge evil passions and habits from the heart (cf. Mt 10=« el pass.). He is 'stronger' than ' the strong man,' and has ' power to heal ' (Lk 5"). He thus fulfils the prophecy of Is 49=^- « and 53'=, delivering the prey and dividing the spoil. (2) Eschatologically it points to the final victory of good over evil. Cf. Col 2'^ where we have the word a.TcKdmd^i.ei'oj (cf. Lighfoot's note, in loc). The '.stronger' had already come into the ' strong one's ' house and had delivered many ; the conflict was continued by Him and against Him till His death, when He overcame him that had the power of death ; the same conflict of evil against good is still continued. His ' spoiling ' is going on, He is still taking from His adversary one and another of his |iu>mv,1,,iis, till in the end He shall bind him in lli" ;il.\ - :iii.l utterly destroy him(cf. esp. 1 Co 15--- ;in.| lirv Hi'-"".),
For passages descriplivr of Kuiuan armour of the time, in Polybius and Josephus, see Hastings' DB, s.v. I cf. also Martial, Epigr. ix. 57. With these St. Paul's description of the Christian's armour is in close harmony ; but to find a ' diabolic ' significance in the several details is rather fanciful than helpful.
Literature.— Hastinprs'DB.s.ti.; Ecce Hnmo, ch. xiii.; Exims. Times, iii. (1892) p. 349 ff.; Bunyan, Uolii War, ch. ii.
K. Macpher.son. ARH7. — 'Armies' (arpaTevnaTa) are mentioned by Jesus as the natural instruments of discipline at the command of an Eastern king (Mt 22'). He
AKNI
ARREST
119
also foretells (Lk 21-") the day vlien ' Jerusalem shall be compassed with armies' {a-TparoTreSa). Otherwise there is little allusion to armies in the Gospels, and comparatively small )ise is made of lessons or figures drawn from military life. The Roman soldier, the leRionary, did not loom very large in Palestine. When the Church spreads into the Province Asia, to Rome and Corinth, the impression of the army of Rome is much stronger both in the incidents of the Acts and in the figurative allusions of the Epistles.
John the Baptist found soldiers (see art. SOLDIER) among the crowds who came to him to be baptized (Lk 3") ; and the most remarkable bond of union between the military character and the character conformed to God, that of discipline and orderly subordination, was suggested to our Lord by the conduct of a centurion (Lk 7*).