whose junction all beings emanated. Simon and Helena were the incarnations in which these principles resided. Simon's first encounter with Peter took place at Csesarea Stratonis (according to the Const. Apost. vi, 8), whence he followed the apostle to Rome. Eusebius makes no mention of this first encounter, but represents Simon's journey to Rome as following immediately after the in- terview recorded in Scripture (//. E. ii, 14) ; but his chronological statements are evidently confused, for in the very same chapter he states that the meeting be- tween the two at Rome took place in the reign of Clau- dius, some ten years after the events in Samaria. Justin Martyr, with greater consistency, represents Simon as having visited Rome in the reign of Claudius, and omits all notice of an encounter with Peter. His success there was so great that he was deified, and a statue was erected in his honor with the inscription "Simoni Deo Sancto" (Apol. i, 26, 56). Justin's authority has been impugned in respect to this statement on the ground that a tablet was discovered in 1574 on the Tiberina insula, which answers to the locality described by Justin (iv t(jJ Ti- /3fpi 7rorrtjU(fi fitTciS,v ruji' Svo yKpvpuJv^, and bearing an inscription, the first words of which are "Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio." This inscription, which really applies to the Sabine Hercules (Sancus Semo), is generally sup- posed to have been mistaken by Justin, in his ignorance of Latin, for one in honor of Simon. Yet the inscrip- tion goes on to state the name of the giver and other particulars :" Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio sacrum Sex. Pompeius, Sp. F. Col. IMussianus Quinquennalis decus Bidentalis donum dedit." That Justin, a man of litera- ry acquirements, should be unable to translate such an inscription — that he should misquote it in an Apoloffi/ duly prepared at Rome for the eye of a Roman emperor — and that the mistake should be repeated bj' other early writers whose knowledge of Latin is unquestioned ( Irenseus, Adv. Hieres. i, 20; Tertullian, Apol. 13) — these assumptions form a series of difficulties in the way of the theory (Salmasius, Ad Spartianum, p. 38; Van Dale, De Oraculis, p. 579; Burton, Heresies of the Apos- tolic Age, p. 374, etc.). The above statements can be reconciled only bj^ assuming that Simon made two ex- peditions to Rome — the first in the reign of Claudius; the second, in which he encountered Peter, in the reign of Nero about the year 68 (Burton, Lectures, i, 233, 318) ; and even this takes for granted the disputed fact of Pe- ter's visit to Rome. See Peteh. This later date is to a certain extent confirmed by the account of Simon's death preserved by Hippolytus {Adc. Hares, vi, 20) ; for the event is stated to have occurred while Peter and Paul (the term cncoaToXoiQ evidently implying the presence of the latter) were together at Rome. Simon's death is associated with the meeting in question. Ac- cording to Hippolytus, the earliest authority on the subject, Simon was buried alive at his own request, in the confident assurance that he would rise again on the third day {ibid, vi, 20). According to another account, he attempted to fly, in proof of his supernatural power, in answer to the prayers of Peter, he fell and sustained a fracture of his thigh and ankle bones {Const. Apost. ii, 14; vi, 9); overcome with vexation, he committed suicide (Arnob. Adv. Gent, ii, 7). Whether this state- ment is confirmed, or, on the other hand, weakened, by the account of a similar attempt to fly recorded by heathen writers (Sueton. Nero, 12; Juven. Sat. iii, 79), is uncertain. Simon's attempt may have supplied the basis for this report, or this report may have been erro- neously placed to his credit. Burton {Lectures, i, 295) rather favors the former alternative. Simon is gener- ally pronounced by early writers to have been the found- er of heresy. It is difficult to understand how he was guilty of heresy in the proper sense .of the term, inas- much as he was not a Christian. Perhaps it refers to his attempt to combine Christianity with Gnosticism. He is also reported to have forged works professing to emanate from Christ and his disciples (Const. Apost. vi, 16). — Smith, See Tillemont, Memoires, i, 158 sq. ;
SIMOX
i56
SIMON"
Beansobre, flist. dii Manicheisme, vol. i; Ittisius, I/isf. J-Jccles. Stkcta Citpila, v, 10, etc.; ^losheiiii, History of the Church, cent, ii, o, 12; De Rebus Chrislianorum, clc, p. 190 sq. ; Burton, Heresies of the Apostolic Age, lect. iv ; Milman, lli^t. of Christianity, ii, 96 sq., etc.
16. A tanner ami a Christian convert living at Jop- pa at whose house Peter lodged (Acts ix, 43). A.D. 6'2. The profession of tanner was regarded with con- siderable contempt, and even as ap|)roaching to unclean- ness, by the rigid Jews. See 'I'an.nek. That I'eter selected such an abode showed tlie ilimiuished hold which Judaism had on him. The house w-as near the seaside (x, G, 32), for the convenience of the water. — Smith. The traditionary " house of Simon" is still shown at Jaffa in a not improbable position. Some time since an order was issued by the sultan for remov- ing the old walls and fortilications at .Jaffa (Joppa). In cutting a gate tlirough a water battery at an angle of the sea-wall built by Vespasian, and directly in front of the reputed house of Simon the tainier, the men came on three oval-sliaped tanners' vats, hewn out of the nat- ural rock and lined with Koman cement, down very near the sea, and similar in every respect to those in use eighteen centuries ago. There is also a fresh-water spring flowing from the cliffs close by, long known as the town spring. This discovery at least proves that the house on the rocky bluff above, and from which steps lead down to the vats, must have belonged to some tanner; and, as perhaps not more than one of that trade would be living in so small a place as Jaffa, some probability is given to the tradition that this is the identical spot where the house of Simon stood with whom Peter was sojourning when he saw his vision. See Joppa.