THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
dox writers; and the Chronicon Paschale asserts that he died under Commodus.
Eusebius quotes him frequently as a witness of the true faith, and always from one work, known as U-pomnemata, and composed of five books, written at different times and fused into unity in the course of their development. A careful examination of what Eusebius tells of it and what he quotes from it leads to the conclusion that it was not a history in any strict sense of the word, but rather a historical apology, purporting to contain a true account of the traditions received from the apostles. It is evident that no regular historical order was observed from the fact that the story of the life and death of James was in the fifth book of the work, which contained plenty of material from the second century, and even past the middle of it. It is a free setting down of the writer's own reminiscences, following no definite order, though penetrated throughout by the same design and the same beliefs. The result, then, according to Eusebius, is a series of narratives and pictures from church history, reaching from the apostle James to the pontificate of Eleutherus in Rome. They include the death of James; the choice of his successor Symeon; accounts of the insurgent leader Thebuthis and of the sons of David and kinsmen of Jesus in Galilee, with their fate under Domitian; the martyrdom of Symeon under Trajan; and information about the Church of the period when Hegesippus wrote, especially in Corinth and Rome — the tradition of doctrine and the episcopate, refutation of heresies, and something about Jewish sects and Jewish-Christian literature. What he tells of his own time has historical authority in the strict sense; his relation of earlier events has conditional value as a sometimes obscure tradition, but substantive importance as reflecting the ideas entertained about that period in the middle of the second century. The purpose of his writing is clear enough. It is simply to demonstrate the unity of faith in the churches of the leading cities and their bishops, both past and present. The particular cause of his writing the work is the existence of heresy, which he reprobates not only for its contradiction of the true doctrine, but for its external and despicable origin. Its appearance on the scene seems to him so dangerous that conflict with it is not merely the purpose of his book, but the task of his life.
When it is remembered that the heresies of the time professed to be legitimate deductions from primitive Christianity, the full significance of the inquiries of Hegesippus into the state of the Church and its traditions in the different great cities is discerned. The public, secure, historical tradition of the faith in the line of episcopal succession must serve to put out of court the claims of obscure, cryptic sects; and the imposing unity of the Church's faith as handed down from generation to generation will form a striking contrast to the varied line of heretics who follow each other through the years, alike only in being different. Among the early Jewish heretics are Thebuthis, Simon and his party, Cleobius, Dositheus, Gorthaeus, and Masbotheus. These form the first generation; in the
second appear the followers of Menandrianus Marcion, Carpocrates, Valentinian, Basilides, and Saturnilus. In opposition to these stand out the person and the work of Hegesippus, important historically as a type, with the emphasis he lays upon the catholic unity of the churches, held fast by their tradition and their mutual relations, and of the episcopate, as all these things were in the middle of the second century.
(C. WEIZSACKERt.) Bibliography: A full list of literature is given by E. C Richardson, in ANF, Bibliographical Synopsis, pp. m_ 112. The fragments are collected in M. J. Routh, in Seliquice sacroz, i. 203-284, Oxford, 1846; Eng. transl. may be found in ANF, viii. 762-765; cf. also D. Boor, in TU v. 2, 1889. Consult: Jerome, De vir. ill., xxii.; Fabricius- Harles, Bibliotheca Grceca, vii. 158-160, Hamburg, 1801- J. Donaldson, History of Christian Literature, iii. 182-213' London, 1866; A. Hilgenfeld, in ZHT, xix (1876)" 177- 229; W, Sanday, The Gospels in the Second Century, pp. 138-145, London, 1876; H. Dannreuther, Du Temoignage d'Hegesippe sur I'eglise chretienne, Nantes, 1878; F. Overbeck, Ueber die Anfange der Kirchengeschichtschreibung pp. 6-13-17-22, Basel, 1892; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres i 330, 473-475, iii. 200; Kruger, History, pp. 145-146; Harnack, Litteratur, i. 144, 483 sqq., 845, II. i. 311 sqq.; Schaff, Christian Church, 742-744; DCB, ii. 875-878; KL, v. 1584-85; and in general the church histories on the period.
HEHN, hehn, JOHANN FERDINAND: German Roman Catholic; b. at Burghausen (57 m. e. of Munich) Jan. 4, 1873. He was educated at the universities of Wiirzburg (D.D., 1899) and Berlin (Ph.D., 1902), and in 1903 became privat-docent at Wiirzburg, where in the same year he was appointed associate professor of Old Testament exegesis and Biblical Oriental languages, becoming full professor in 1907. He has written: Die Einsetzung des heiligen Abendmahles als Beweis jiir die Gottheit Christi (Wtirzburg, 1899) and Siinde und Erlosung nach biblischer und babylonischer Anschauung (Leipsic, 1903).
HEIDANUS, hai'da-nus, ABRAHAM: Reformed theologian; b. at Frankenthal (15 m. n. by w. of Speyer) in the Palatinate Aug. 10, 1597; d. at Leyden Oct. 15, 1678. In 1608 his father, a clergyman, was called to Amsterdam, where Abraham studied in the school of Mattheeus Sladus. Later he was sent to Leyden to be trained as preacher of the Walloon Church. After a two years' journey in Germany, Switzerland, France, and England, he became preacher of the Netherlandish Reformed congregation in Naarden in 1623. In 11127 he was called to Leyden, and in 1648 he became professor at the University of Leyden. At that time the study of Aristotle ruled in the Dutch universities and was closely bound up with the orthodoxy of Dort. Heidanus, however, and Johannes Cocceius (q.v.) showed a predilection for the teachings of Descartes. Both had to encounter vehement opposition from the camp of the orthodox, headed by Voetius. The doctrine of Cocceius spread, in spite of the efforts of the curators of the University of Leyden to suppress it. At their instigation Friedrich Spanheim and Antonius Hulsius compiled the theses of the new doctrine which gave the most offense, and Jan. 7, 1675, it was forbidden to treat " in any manner, directly or indirectly " at the university twenty-three propositions. Heidanus.