{"collection":"Gnosticism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/gno/th3/th339.htm","path":"gno/th3/th339.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/gno/th3/th339.htm","text":"Thrice-Greatest Hermes, Vol. 3, by G.R.S. Mead, [1906]\ni. Contra Julianum, i. 30; Migne, col. 548 A. 2\n(Cyril, after claiming that Pythagoras and Plato obtained their wisdom in Egypt from what, he professes, they had heard of Moses there, proceeds:)\nAnd I think the Egyptian Hermes also should be considered worthy of mention and recollection\u2014he who, they say, bears the title of Thrice-greatest because of the honour paid him by his contemporaries, and, as some think, in comparison with Hermes the fabled son of Zeus and Maia.\nThis Hermes of Egypt, then, although an initiator into mysteries, 3 and though he never ceased to cleave to the shrines of idols, is [nevertheless] found to have grasped the doctrines of Moses, if not with entire correctness, and beyond all cavil, yet still in part.\nFor both [Hermes] himself has been benefitted [by Moses], and reminder of this [fact] has also been made in his own writings by [the editor] at Athens who put together the fifteen books entitled \u201cHerma\u00efca.\u201d [This editor] writes concerning him [Hermes] in the first book, putting the words into the mouth of one of the priests of the sacred rites:\n\u201cIn order then that we may come to things of a like nature (?),\u2014have you not heard that our Hermes divided the whole of Egypt into allotments and portions, measuring off the acres with the chain, 1 and cut canals for irrigation purposes, and made nomes, 2 and named the lands [comprised in them] after them, and established the interchange of contracts, and drew up a list of the risings of the stars, and [the proper times 3] to cut plants; and beyond all this he discovered and bequeathed to posterity numbers, and calculations, and geometry, and astronomy, and astrology, and music, and the whole of grammar?\u201d\nThis Corpus of XV. Books is evidently the source of Cyril\u2019s information, and he takes the above quotation from the Introduction, which purported to be written by an Egyptian priest (as is also the case in the treatise De Mysteriis, traditionally ascribed to Jamblichus), but which Cyril says was written at Athens, by presumably some Greek editor. 4\nii. Ibid., i. 31; Migne col. 549 B.\nThrice-greatest Hermes says somewhat as follows:\n(Cyril then quotes, with four slight verbal variants, the first four paragraphs of the passage excerpted by Stob\u00e6us, Ex. ii., and then proceeds without a break:)\nIf, then, there be an incorporeal eye,\u00a01 let it go forth from body unto the Vision of the Beautiful; let it fly up and soar aloft, seeking to see not form, nor body, nor [even] types\u00a02 [of things], but rather That which is the Maker of [all] these,\u2014the Quiet and Serene, the Stable and the Changeless One, the Self, the All, the One, the Self of self, the Self in self, the Like to Self [alone], That which is neither like to other, nor [yet] unlike to self, and [yet] again Himself.\u00a03\nThough Cyril runs this passage on to the four paragraphs which in the Stob\u00e6an Extract are continued by three other paragraphs, I am quite persuaded that the Archbishop of Alexandria took the above from the same \u201cSermon to Tat\u201d 4 as the Anthologist. 5\niii. Ibid., i. 33; Migne, col. 552 D.\nAnd Thrice-greatest Hermes thus delivers himself concerning God:\nFor that His Word (Logos) proceeding forth,\u00a01\u2014all-perfect as he was, and fecund, and creative in fecund Nature, falling on fecund\u00a02 Water, made Water pregnant.\u00a03\nAnd the same again [declares]:\nThe Pyramid, then, is below [both] Nature and the Intellectual World.\u00a04 For that it\u00a05 hath above it ruling it the Creator-Word\u00a06 of the Lord of all,\u2014who, being the First Power after\n[paragraph continues] Him, [both] increate [and] infinite, leaned forth\u00a01 from Him, and has his seat above, and rule o\u2019er all that have been made through him. He is the First-born of the All-perfection, His perfect, fecund and true Son.\u00a02\nAnd again the same [Hermes], when one of the Temple-folk 3 in Egypt questions him and says:\nBut why, O most mighty Good Daimon, was he\u00a04 called by this name\u00a05 by the Lord of all?\u2014replies:\nYea, have I told thee in what has gone before, but thou hast not perceived it.\nThe nature of His Intellectual Word (Logos) is a productive and creative Nature. This is as though it were His Power-of-giving-birth,\u00a06 or [His] Nature, or [His] Mode of being, or call it\nwhat you will,\u2014only remembering this: that He is Perfect in the Perfect, and from the Perfect makes, and creates, and makes to live, perfect good things.\nSince, then, He hath this nature, rightly is He thus named.\u00a01\nAnd the same [Hermes], in the First Sermon of the \u201cExpository [Sermons] to Tat,\u201d 2 speaks thus about God:\nThe Word (Logos) of the Creator, O [my] son, transcends all sight; He [is] self-moved; He cannot be increased, nor [yet] diminished; Alone is He, and like unto Himself [Alone], equal, identical, perfect in His stability, perfect in order; for that He is the One, after the God alone beyond all knowing.\nThe first two Fragments (xi. and xii.) seem to be taken from the same sermon, the contents of which resembled the first part of the \u201cShepherd of Men\u201d treatise; it has all the appearance of a discourse addressed to Tat, and probably came in \u201cThe Expository Sermons.\u201d\nThe third Fragment (xiii.) belongs to the more frankly Egyptian type, the Agathodaimon literature, in which Hermes, as the Good Spirit, figures as the teacher of the Mystery-god Osiris. 1\nThe last Fragment (xv.) is so similar in its phrasing to Fragment xi., already given by Cyril (i. 31), that I am strongly inclined to think the Archbishop took both from the same source. If so, we can reconstruct part of \u201cThe First Sermon of the Expository [Sermons] to Tat,\u201d the beginning of which (see Lact., Ep., 4) is also given by Stob\u00e6us, Ex. ii., with the heading from \u201cThe [Book] to Tat,\u201d while he heads other extracts \u201cFrom the [pl.] to Tat.\u201d 2\nv. Ibid., ii. 35; Migne, col. 556 A.\nAnd Hermes also says in the Third Sermon of those to Asclepius:\nIt is not possible such mysteries [as these] should be declared to those who are without initiation in the sacred rites. But ye, lend [me] your ears, [ears] of your mind!\nThere was One Intellectual Light alone,\u2014nay, Light transcending Intellectual Light. He is for ever Mind of mind\u00a03 who makes [that] Light to shine.\nThere was no other; [naught] save the Oneness of Himself [alone]. For ever in Himself [alone], for ever doth He compass all in His own Mind,\u2014His Light and Spirit.\u00a01\nAnd after some other things he says:\nWithout Him\u00a02 [is] neither god, nor angel, nor daimon, nor any other being. For He is Lord of all, [their] Father, and [their] God, and Source, and Life, and Power, and Light, and Mind, and Spirit. For all things are in Him and for His sake.\u00a03\nAnd again, in the same Third Sermon of those to Asclepius, in reply to one who questions [him] concerning the Divine Spirit, the same [Hermes] says as follows:\nHad there not been some Purpose\u00a04 of the Lord of all, so that I should disclose this word\n[paragraph continues] (logos), ye would not have been filled with so great love\u00a01 to question me about it. Now give ye ear unto the rest of the discourse (logos).\nOf this same Spirit, of which I have already spoken many times, all things have need; for that it raises up all things, each in its own degree, and makes them live, and gives them nourishment, and [finally] removes them from its holy source,\u00a02 aiding the spirit,\u00a03 and for ever giving life to all, the [one] productive One.\u201d\nFrom the above statements of Cyril we learn that in addition to \u201cThe Expository Sermons to Tat,\u201d he had also before him a collection of \u201cSermons to Asclepius\u201d; of these there were at least three. Was \u201cThe Perfect Sermon\u201d one of this collection? It may have been; for the style of it is cast in the same mould as that of these Fragments in Cyril.\nHermes, in the Third Sermon of Cyril\u2019s collection, is addressing several hearers, for he uses the plural; so also in P. S. A., i. 2. Hermes addresses Asclepius, Tat, and Ammon.\nIn the Third Sermon, Hermes also says: \u201cIt is not possible such mysteries should be declared to those\nwho are without initiation in the sacred rites\u201d; in P. S. A., i. 2, Hermes declares: \u201cIt is a mark of an impious mind to publish to the knowledge of the crowd 1 a tractate 2 brimming o\u2019er with the full grandeur of divinity.\u201d The numinis majestas (grandeur of divinity) is precisely the same idea as the Spirit, the \u201cDivine supremacy and power,\u201d as Cyril says referring to Hermes.\nFinally, in the Third Sermon, Hermes makes the striking remark that the Love (\u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2) of the Gnosis which urges on the disciples, is inspired by the Providence or Foresight of God\u2014that is, by His Spirit; P. S. A., i. 28, ends with the words: \u201cTo them, sunk in fit silence reverently, their souls and minds pendent on Hermes\u2019 lips, thus Love (\u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2) Divine 3 began to speak.\u201d\nThe setting of the mode of exposition is then identical in the two Sermons, and we may thus very well refer them to the same collection.\nv. Ibid., ii. 52; Migne, col. 580 B.\nTo this I will add what Thrice-greatest Hermes wrote \u201cTo his own Mind,\u201d\u2014for thus the Book is called.\n(Cyril then quotes, with very slight verbal variants, the last question and answer in C. H., xi. (xii.) 22.)\nIn our Corpus the treatise is not written by Hermes to the Mind, but, on the contrary, it is cast in the mould of a revelation of \u201cThe Mind to Hermes,\u201d and is so\nentitled. Cyril thus seems to have been mistaken. 1 It may, then, have been that in the copy which lay before the Church Father, the title read simply: \u201cThe Mind.\u201d\nvi. Ibid., ii. 55; Migne, col. 586 D. 2\nBut I will call to mind the words of Hermes the Thrice-greatest; in \u201cThe Asclepius\u201d 3 he says:\nOsiris said: How, then, O thou Thrice-greatest, [thou] Good Spirit,\u00a04 did Earth in its entirety appear?\nThe Great Good Spirit made reply:\nBy gradual drying up, as I have said; and when the many Waters got commandment\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a05 to go into themselves again, the Earth in its entirety appeared, muddy and shaking.\nThen, when the Sun shone forth, and without ceasing burned and dried it up, the Earth stood compact in the Waters, with Water all around.\u00a06\nFurther, in yet another place [he writes]:\nThe Maker and the Lord of all thus spake: Let there be Earth, and let the Firmament appear\u00a01!\nAnd forthwith the beginning of the [whole] creation, Earth, was brought into existence.\u00a02\nSo much about the Earth; as to the Sun, he again says as follows:\nThen said Osiris: O thou Thrice-greatest, [thou] Good Spirit, whence came this mighty one?\nWould\u2019st thou, Osiris, that we tell to thee the generation of the Sun, whence he appeared?\nHe came from out the Foresight of the Lord of all; yea, the Sun\u2019s birth proceedeth from\nthe Lord of all, through His Creative Holy Word.\u00a01\nIn like manner also in the \u201cFirst Expository Sermon to Tat,\u201d he says:\nStraightway the Lord of all spake unto His own Holy and Intelligible\u2014to His Creative Word (Logos): Let the Sun be!\nAnd straightway with His word (logos), the Fire that hath its nature tending upward,\u00a02\u2014I mean pure [Fire], that which gives greatest light, has the most energy, and fecundates the most,\u2014Nature embraced\u00a03 with her own Spirit, and raised it up aloft out of the Water.\u00a04\n(After referring to Genesis i. 6: \u201cAnd God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters,\u201d\u2014Cyril proceeds:)\nvii. Ibid., ii. 57; Migne, col. 588 C.\nMoreover the Hermes who is with them 5 Thrice-\ngreatest mentions this [that is, the firmament] again. For he describes God as saying to His creations:\nI will encompass you with this Necessity, you who are disobedient to me,\u00a01 which hath been laid on you as a Command through My own Word (Logos); for him ye have as Law.\nThis quotation also is probably taken from the same source as the previous passage\u2014that is, from the \u201cFirst Expository Sermon to Tat.\u201d The idea and setting, however, should also be compared with the parallel in the K. K. Excerpt (Stob., Phys., xli. 44; Gaisf., p. 408): \u201cO Souls, Love and Necessity shall be your lords, they who are lords and marshals after me of all,\u201d\u2014where the \u201cafter me\u201d (\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03ad) might perhaps confirm the \u201cup to me\u201d in the preceding note as the more correct rendering.\nviii. Ibid., ii. 64; Migne, col. 598 D.\nFor Hermes, who is called Thrice-greatest, writes thus to Asclepius about the nature of the universe:\n(Here follows with a few slight verbal variants the text of C. H., xiv. (xv.) 6, 7, beginning: \u201cIf, then, all things have been admitted to be two.\u201d)\nAnd some lines after he proceeds in warmer language, setting forth a striking argument, and says:\n(Then follows \u00a7\u00a7 8, 9 of the same sermon, except the third sentence, and \u00a7 10 omitting the last sentence.) 1\nThe same treatise must have lain before Cyril as that contained in our Corpus in the form of a letter with the heading, \u201cUnto Asclepius good health of soul!\u201d\u2014for the Archbishop says that Hermes \u201cwrites thus to Asclepius.\u201d 2\nix. Ibid., iv. 130; Migne, col. 702.\n(After quoting Porphyry as warning against participation in blood-rites for fear of contamination from evil daimons, Cyril proceeds:)\nAnd their Thrice-greatest Hermes seems also to be of the same opinion; for he, too, writes as follows, in the [sermon] \u201cTo Asclepius,\u201d concerning those unholy daimons against whom we ought to protect ourselves, and flee from them with all the speed we can:\n\u201cThe sole protection\u2014and this we must have\u2014is piety. For neither evil daimon, yea nor Fate, can ever overcome or dominate a man who pious is, and pure, and holy. For God doth save the truly pious man from every ill.\u201d 3\nx. Ibid., viii. 274; Migne, col. 920 D.\nMoreover, their Thrice-greatest Hermes has said somewhere about God, the Supreme Artist 1 of all things:\nMoreover, as perfectly wise He established Order and its opposite\u00a02; in order that things intellectual, as being older and better, might have the government of things and the chief place, and that things sensible, as being second, might be subject to these.\nAccordingly that which tends downward, and is heavier than the intellectual, has in itself the wise Creative Word (Logos).\u00a03\nxi. Ibid. (?).\n(Chambers (p. 154) gives the following, \u201cCyrill. Contra Julian., citing Hermes\u201d but without any reference, and I can find it nowhere in the text:)\nIf thou understandest that One and Sole God, thou wilt find nothing impossible; for It is all virtue.\nThink not that It may be in some one; say not that it is out of some one.\nIt is without termination; it is the termination of all.\nNothing contains It; for It contains all in Itself.\nWhat difference is there then between the body and the Incorporeal, the created and the Uncreated; that which is subject to necessity, and what is Free; between the things terrestrial and things Celestial, the things corruptible and things Eternal?\nIs it not that the One exists freely and that the others are subject to necessity?\n251:1 The date of Cyril\u2019s patriarchate is 412-444 A.D.\n251:2 Migne (J. P.), Patrologi\u00e6 Cursus Completus, Series Gr\u00e6ca, tom. lxxvi. (Paris, 1859). S. P. N. Cyrilli . . . Pro Christiana Religione adversus Julianum Imperatorem Libri Decem. The text is also given R. 211, n. 1.\n251:3 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2.\n252:1 \u201cAcres,\u201d lit. = areas 100 Egyptian cubits square; and \u201cchain,\u201d lit. = measuring cord.\n252:2 Or provinces; Migne\u2019s Latin translator gives this as \u201claws\u201d!\n252:3 Sc. of the moon.\n252:4 \u1f51 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u1f7c\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9,\u2014a phrase which Chambers (p. 149) erroneously translates by \u201cwhich he [Hermes] having composed for Athenians\u201d! R. (p. 211, n. 1) thinks this redactor was some Neoplatonist.\n253:1 Sc. the soul.\n253:2 Sc. ideas.\n253:3 Masc., not neut., as are all the preceding \u201cself\u2019s.\u201d There is also throughout a play on \u201cself\u201d and \u201csame\u201d which is unreproducible in English.\n253:4 That is, presumably, the \u201cFirst Sermon of the Expository [Sermons] to Tat\u201d (see Comment to the Stob\u00e6an Excerpt).\n253:5 See also Fragg. xii., xiii., xv., xx., xxii., xxiii., xxiv. (?).\n254:1 R. (p. 43) glosses this with \u201cout of the month of God,\u201d but I see no necessity for introducing this symbolism.\n254:2 The adjective \u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 (\u201cfecund\u201d) is applied to both Logos and Physis (Nature); it might thus be varied as seedful and fruitful, or spermal and productive. Cf. Frag. xiii. Text reproduced R. 43.\n254:3 Compare C. H., i. 8, 14, 15. This Fragment is also quoted, but plainly reproduced from Cyril, by Suidas (q.v.).\n254:4 That is, the Logos.\n254:5 Sc. the Pyramid, in physics the symbol of fire. See Frag. xxii.\n254:6 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd. Compare Lact., D. I., iv. 6, 9.\n255:1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03cd\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u2014is, projected, presumably with the idea of emanation. Compare the hymn: \u201cO Heavenly Word proceeding forth, Yet leaving not the Father\u2019s side.\u201d Compare the \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03ba\u03c5\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd of C. H., i. 14, and note.\n255:2 Compare C. H., i. 6, 9, 10; xiii. (xiv.) 3; xiv. (xv.) 3. For slightly revised text, see R. 243, n. 3. Reitzenstein thinks that the image which the writer had in his mind was the pyramid, or obelisk, with the sun-disk on the top.\n255:3 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd. The questioner was undoubtedly Osiris (see Frag. xix. below). Cyril then knows that \u201cOsiris\u201d was understood to stand for a grade of Egyptian priests. Cf. R. 131.\n255:4 Presumably the Logos.\n255:5 Presumably \u201cSoul\u201d (Psyche).\n255:6 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2.\n256:1 This passage seems to refer to the identity of Soul and Logos. For revised text see R. 131, and the reference there to Plato, Cratylus, 400 B, where \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae, soul, is explained by the word-play \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c7\u03b7, that is, that which has physis, or nature, or the power of production.\n256:2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03a4\u1f70\u03c4 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03be\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd.\n257:1 See Frag. xix. below, where Cyril (ii. 56) says that this type was found in the \u201cSermon to Asclepius,\u201d that is, was put with the Asclepius-books in the collection which lay before him.\n257:2 See also Fragg. xi., xii., xiii., xx., xxii., xxiii., xxiv. (?).\n257:3 Cf. K. K., 16.\n258:1 That is, Light and Life. See C. H., i. 9: \u201cGod, the Mind, . . . being Life and Light.\u201d\n258:2 Lit. outside of Him.\n258:3 For a fuller statement of the idea in this paragraph, see C. H., ii. (iii.) 14. Cyril thinks that the above two Fragments refer to the Father, Son (Mind of mind and Light of light) and Holy Ghost (the Divine supremacy and power), and is thus the source of the statement in Suidas (s.v. \u201cHermes\u201d) that Trismegistus spoke concerning the Trinity.\n258:4 Or Providence, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1. R. (203, n. 2) refers this to a belief that only when some internal prompting gave permission to the master to expand the teaching, could he do so. Cf. Appul., Metam., xi. 21, 22; P. S. A., i.\n259:1 \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n259:2 That is, presumably, causing their seeming death.\n259:3 That is, the individual life-breath, unless the reading \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 is corrupt. The Latin translator in Migne goes hopelessly wrong, as, indeed, is frequently the case. Cf. C. H., x. (xi.) 13, Comment; P. S. A., vi. 4; Exx. iv. 2, xv. 2, xix. 3.\n260:1 That is, the uninitiated, the profanum vulgus.\n260:2 Tractatus; presumably logos in the original Greek.\n260:3 Cf. also P. S. A., xx. 2 and xxi. 1, 3.\n261:1 Cf. R. 128, n. 1.\n261:2 Texts of quotations reproduced in R. 127, n. 1.\n261:3 From the quotations we can see that this could not have been the special heading of the treatise from which Cyril quotes, and which plainly belongs to the Agathodaimon type. Cyril probably means that the treatise, in his collection, came under the general title, \u201cThe Asclepius.\u201d\n261:4 \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd.\n261:5 The reading is an untranslatable \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, where the lacuna is probably to be completed with \u201cfrom the Lord of all.\u201d\n261:6 A distinction is evidently drawn between the (heavenly) Water and water (the companion element of earth). The text is immediately continued in Frag. xxi. below.\n262:1 See C. H., i. 18, Commentary.\n262:2 This seems to be taken not from a different place in the \u201cTo Asclepius,\u201d but from another sermon, or group of sermons, most probably from the \u201cFirst Expository Sermon to Tat\u201d\u2014as may be seen by comparing its phrasing with Frag. xxii. See also Fragg. xi., xii, xiii., xv., xxii., xxiii., xxiv. (?).\n263:1 This is evidently an immediate continuation of Frag. xix. above. Cf. R. 126, n. 1, where the texts are reproduced.\n263:2 See Frag. xiii. below, concerning the pyramid.\n263:3 Embraced the Fire.\n263:4 Sc. the Water-Earth, one element, not yet separated, according to C. H., i. 5. For other probable quotations from this \u201cFirst Expository Sermon to Tat,\u201d see Fragg. xi., xii., xiii., xv., xx., xxiii., xxiv. (?).\n263:5 Sc. the philosophers.\n264:1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03b5,\u2014lit. \u201cagainst me,\u201d or it may perhaps be \u201cup to me.\u201d Migne\u2019s Latin translator gives \u201cqui in mea potestatis estis,\u201d and Chambers (p. 153), \u201cthose from me\u201d; neither of which can be correct.\n265:1 Cyril also twice omits the words \u201cignorance and jealousy\u201d after \u201carrogance and impotence\u201d in 8, and also the words \u201cand yet the other things\u201d in 9.\n265:2 Cf. Frag. iv., Comment.\n265:3 Cf. P. S. A., xxix. 1. A comparison of this with Frag. iv., quoted by Lactantius (ii. 15), and the Commentary thereon, shows clearly that Cyril has strengthened the original text by interpolations. Cyril\u2019s quotation (v. 176) from Julian, in which the Emperor refers to Hermes, is given under \u201cJulian.\u201d\n266:1 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6,\u2014an epithet applied by Pindar (Fr. 29) to Zeus.\n266:2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03bd.\n266:3 This seems somewhat of a piece with the contents of the \u201cFirst Expository Sermon to Tat.\u201d See Fragg. xi., xii., xiii., xv , xx., xxii., xxiii.","title":"Thrice-Greatest Hermes, Vol. 3: II. References and Fragments in the Fathers: IX. Cyril of Alexandria","type":"page"}