The party mentioned in the Apocalypse left be- hind them no historical trace, for there is no good reason for identifying with them the sect men- tioned by Irenaus, Hippolytus, Kuseliins, psendo- Tertullian, and Jerome. The last fonr of these writers merely repeat Iren.ens, who in his turn seems to have been elaborating on his own un- supported authority the references in the Apoca- lypse (I. xxvi. 3) ; indeed, in one passage (III. xi. I) lie asserts that the Nicolaitans had disseminated their heresy long before Cerinthus, and he makes their founder Nicolas, one of the Seven. Hippo- lytus {vii. 24) repeats Irensus and adds notliing of his own, e.xcept that he emphasizes the Greek character of Nicolaitan teaching. Tertullian (de Priuscr. 33) speaks of there being now 'another sort of Nicolaitans,' and he seems to identify them with the Cainites. By the 4th cent, the legend liad grown, and pseudo-Tertullian [adv. Omnes Hcvr. 1) bluntly assigns certain Gnostic specula- tions to the Nicolaitans. The Apost. Const, (vi. 8) originated the description of tlie Nicolaitans as being ' falsely so called,' and it is followed by the interpolator of the Ignatian epistles (Trail. 11 and Philad. 6). Epiphanius (adv. Hwr. 25), Georgius Hamartolus (Chronicon, iii. 135), and Jerome (adv. Lucif. 24) cany on the tradition without adding to it. Clement of Ale.xandria, how- ever (.Sirom. iii. 4; of. Eus. J!7£iii. 29), hasan inde- pendent tradition about Nicolas which vindicates his character. On the whole, all that the evidence justities us in concluding is that the Nicolaitans of the ecclesiastical writers were among the Gnostics, that their paternity and distinctive doctrines are unknown, and that their identity with the party named in the Apocalypse is doubtful.
W. F. Cobb.
NICOLAS. — Nicolas, one of the Seven appointed to look after the ministration of alms to the Hellenist widows, is described in the Acts as a proselyte of Antioch (Ac &). He comes last in the list. This description of him is inserted because his admission to oflice in the Christian Church marks a step taken towards the extension of the Church to the Gentiles. As far as we know, no proselyte, i.e. convert to Judaism from the heathen world, had been given office in the Church, up to this point. A. Harnack (The Acts of the Apostles, Eng. tr., 1909, p. 172) quotes the descrip- tion of him as a proselyte of Antioch as a proof that this section of the Acts was probably derived from an Antiochene source — surely a very un- certain inference. On his supposed connexion with the Nicolaitans of Rev 2^- " see art. Nicol.\itans.
W. A. Spooner.
NICOPOLIS (N(K(i7roXis, 'City of victory ').— In daj's of almost constant warfare, when many triumphs had to be commemorated, this was a favourite name for newly founded cities. T. Zahn enuiiiuiates no fewer than nine Nicopoleis (Introd. to NT, Eng. tr., 1909, ii. 53 f.), of which one in Cappadocia, a second in Egypt, and a third in Thrace had some importance. Chrysostom and Tlieodoret took the last of these to be the place referred to in Tit 3'-. But by far the most famous Nicopolis was the city in Epirus which Augustus founded after the battle of Actium. He intended it to be ' at once a permanent memorial of the great naval victory and the centre of a newly flourishing Hellenic life' (T. Mommsen, Provinces of Rom. Empire, new ed., 1909, i. 295). It was laid out where the victor's headquarters had been stationed just before the battle, at the narrowest part of the promontory which separates the Ambracian Gulf from the Ionian Sea. Augustus peopled it, after the fashion set by Alexander's
successors, by uniting the inhabitants of a largo number of minor townships in one great urban domain. He made it a free city like Athens or Sparta, and instituted so-called Actian Games, wliich he put on the same level as the four ancient Hellenic festivals. Nicopolis became the foremost city of Western Greece, and (at some uncertain date) the capital of the new province of Epirus. Tacitus calls it tirbeni Achaice (Ann. ii. 53, for the year A.D. 18), but Epictetus, its most famous citizen (born c. A.D. 60), speaks of an iwhpo-n^os 'HTTfipov residing in Nicopolis and governing the land (Diss. III. iv. 1).
It was natural that St. Paul should sooner or later think of this splendid GiiecoKoman city and its neighbourhood as a held for evangelistic work. In an epistolary fragment which has been preserved, he bids Titus, who has been labouring in Crete, give diligence to join him at Nicopolis, as he has decided to winter there (Tit 3'-). Some MSS of the epistle (A and P) have the subscrip- tion, ' It w.as written from Nicopolis,' and the.se are followed by the Greek commentators (Chrys. Theod. et al.) ; but the Apostle would have said ude, not iKft, if he had been actually writing in the city. It has been generally assumed that St. Paul, after being acquitted by his Konian judges, resumed his labours in the East, and that his letter summoning Titus to Nicopolis belongs to this period. It has further been conjectured that the Apostle made his way, as he intended, to Nicopolis, and that his second arrest took place there (Cony- beare-Howson, St. Paul, new ed., 1877, ii. 571 f.). But the evidence for a release is far from convin- cing, and the question arises whether the Nicopolis episode can be fitted into his biography without this doubtful 'final phase.' In reference to Tit 3'^-, H. von Soden says: 'This is all intelligible in itself and as a part of the life of St. Paul, and the fulness of particulars gives an impression of authenticity' (The History of Enrli/ Christian Literature, Eng. tr., 1906, p. 316). It seems certain that Titus' work in CTrete (Tit P) cannot have begun till after the writing of 2 Cor., for he was occupied with the settlement of difficulties in the Corinthian Church. But St. Paul may have visited the island with his fellow-worker, and left him to labour there, shortly before his final visit to Corinth. As regards Ac 2U-, it has been suggested that the writer knew very little about the details of St. Paul's life at the time to which this passage refers (A. C. McGittert, A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, 1897, p. 411 n.), and a short campaign in Crete may well have been one of his activities duiing that period. On this hypothesis, the letter to Titus, in its original, comparatively brief form, must have been written before St. Paul's stay of three winter months in Corinth (20'). Titus probably hastened, as directed, to Nicopolis, but some new turn of events jirevented St. Paul from carrying out his purpose of wintering in that city, though he m.ay have paid it a brief visit. Nothing is known about its actual evangelization, either at that time or later. After falling into decay, the city was restored by Julian ; and Jus- tinian repaired the havoc wrought by the Goths ; but in the Middle Ages it was supplanted by Prevesa, three miles to the south. Its ruins are extensive. James Strahan.