xiv. .3-8) knows that Polycarp, who was taught by the apostles and who lived with several persons who were eye-witnesses of the Lord, received his appointment in Asia from the apostles as bishop in the Church of Smyrna (inrb tuv a.ToirT6\wi> Kara- (TTadeis iisTrjv'Aaiav^vr^ iv'ZfxvpvT) iKKK7]al<f.4trl<jKoiro$), It is hardly possible to take these words literally : Polycarp could not have been old enough to lie made bishop by the apostles (in the plural) ; the apostle John at the most could have taken jKirt. Nor was Polycarp made bishop for Asia, since Asia had other bishops in other cities besides Smyrna. These words of Irenseus tlierefore are not without verbal emphasis. The fact remains that Irenseus is the )nincipal historical witness of Polycarp. He knew him at a time when he liim- self was a youth. As the birth of Irenseus cannot have been before 130, and must, to all appearances, be placed c. 140, it would therefore be about the year 150 that Irenreus as a child could have known Polycarp as an old man at Smyrna. If, as we shall see, Polycarp was eighty-si.\ years old when he died in 155, his birth must be dated A.D. 09.
We may compare this information of Irenieiis with that of Papias (Eus. HE III. xxxix. 4) on the apostles and the presbyters whose evidence he has collected. Papias knew Polycarp ; so, at least, Irena;us assures us {Haer. v. xxxiii. 4, quoted in Eus. HE III. xxxix. 1) : ' Papias,' he says, ' was a hearer of John and a companion (eraTpos) of Poly- carp.' When Irenseus quotes as evidence of the Catholic doctrine words of the presbyters who were disciples of the apostles, and especially of the apostle John, it may be taken for granted that he sometimes quotes the words of Polj'carp (see the ' Presbyterorum reliquise ab Irenseo servatse,' collected in F. X. Funk, Patres apostolici", Tubin- gen, 1901, i. 378-389). What is possible for Iren- seus is equally possible for Papias, who among the presbyters that he mentions as hearers of John could name Polycarp (see the ' Papise fragmenta,' Funk, op. cit. pp. 346-379). But critics should give up identifying what may properly be from Poly- carp in the various quotations (A. Harnack, Chronologic deraltchr. Lilt., Leipzig, 1897, i. 333- 340).
In a letter to Victor, bishop of Rome, Irenoeus mentions the fact of the journey to Rome of Poly- carp, bishop of Smyrna, in the time of Anicetus, i.e. at the very end of Polycarp's life and just at the beginning of the episcopate of Anicetus, as Polycarp must have died at the beginning of 155, and the promotion of Anicetus to the See of Rome must have been about 154-155 (see below). At that time the controversy about the date of Easter was in progress : Polycarp, who could only be a quartodeciman, came to confer with the Roman Church. The text of Irenseus, cited by Eusebius ( HE V. xxiv. 16 f . ), states that the blessed Polycarp himself also paid a visit to Rome in the time of Anicetus (iirl ' AviK-qrov). (On the use of the names of the Roman bishops as chronological marks in the time of Irenseus and Tertullian see L. Duchesne, Le Liber Pontificalis, i. [Paris, 1884] 2.) Anicetus and Polycarp had several other disagreements between them of very little import- ance, continues Irenoeus ; they immediately made peace with one another ; but on the subject of the date of Easter they did not fall out. As a matter of fact, Anicetus could not persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed in con- formity with the apostle John and the other apostles with whom he had lived (/xerd 'luavi'ou , . . Kai rwv '\oLTruv aTTOffTbXwv oh ffvydUTpi^ev). Polycarp, on his side, did not convert Anicetus to an observance contrary tothatof the presbyters who (at Rome) had preceded him (twv irpd aiiroO -n-pea^v- Tipav). Matters remained thus. They comnmni-
POLYCAEP
POLYCAKP
243
cated with each other, and in tlie Church (at Konie) Anicetus conceded (o Holycarp as a mark of respect the honour of |ire.sidin<,' ut the Eucharist. They parted from each other in jieace.
Irenanis (Ilacr. III. iii. 4) says tliat Polycarp wlien in Koine attracted to tlie Cliurcli of (iod a number of lierelics belongiuf; to the .sects of Valen- tinus and Maroion. He taught them, sa3-s Iren- a>us, that tliere was only one trufli left by the apostles and .transmitted by the Church. Tliese words of Irenteus are (luoted by Eusebius {HE IV. xiv. 5). Irenajus reports in the same passage that one day, when Polycarp met Marcion, the latter said to the bishop, ' Recognize us,' and the bishop answered, 'Ay, ay, I recognize the hr.st-born of Satan' {ib. 7). Irenseus does not say that this meeting of Marcion and Polj-car]) took place at Rome. As Marcion flourished about 14U-150, it is possible that Polycarp had quarrelled with him long before coming to Rome to visit Anicetus. As regards the replj' given by Polycarp to Marcion, it is quite in the manner of Polycarp (cf. the following words in his letter to the Philippians [vii. 1]: 'Whosoever shall not confess the testi- mony of the Cross is of the devil ; and whosoever shall pervert the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts and say that there is neither resurrection nor judgment, that man is the first-born of Satan').