dream may have been subsidiary to his openly joining the ranks of its persecuted followers.

With respect to the time when Arnobius wrote his "Disputations," we should be led into an error by implicitly following his own statement (lib. ii. c. 71), that Rome had then been built 1050 years. This, according to the Varronian æra, would give the year A.D. 297. But they could not possibly have been written at this early period, because in the course of the work he combats the accusation brought against the Christians as the ostensible ground of their persecution under the emperor Diocletian. It had been alleged that the calamities of the empire were owing to the universal neglect of the heathen deities, consequent upon the spread of the Christian religion. Arnobius replies: "If men, instead of trusting to their own wisdom, and following their own opinion, would only endeavour to follow the doctrines of Christ, which bring salvation and peace, how soon would the form of the world be changed, and iron, instead of being required for war, would be employed in the works of peace" (lib. i. c. 6). Now the Diocletian persecution commenced A.D. 302, and it is highly probable | that this and similar passages were written not long afterwards. Elsewhere (lib. i. c. 13), | Arnobius says: "Nearly three hundred years have elapsed since our Christian community began to exist-perhaps somewhat more or less." Arnobius here evidently uses a round number, as also, perhaps, in the date A.U.C. 1050, unless we should suppose that he used a different computation from that of Varro, then commonly in vogue. The supposition that he wrote it at different times is by no means probable, because there is a certain unity apparent throughout which could not

obtain in such a work if it had been written at long intervals. Upon the whole, we shall not err in referring its publication to the year A.D. 303 or 304.

Arnobius is generally supposed to have written his "Disputations" while still a catechumen. They are evidently the work of a recent convert, although by no means of a novice. He shows himself well acquainted with the New Testament, more particularly with the Gospels; but he nowhere alludes to the Old Testament, neither, indeed, does he expressly quote from the New, as perhaps not deeming it necessary, since the Pagans, against whom he wrote, could not possibly have an intimate acquaintance with the contents of the sacred volume. As an advocate and apologist for Christianity, he shows less ability than when he attacks the absurdities of its heathen persecutors. Here he is the fiery Numidian, the recent convert, and the skilful rhetorician. He scrutinizes the whole heathen mythology; the generation of their deities, male and female, their loves and their hates, their follies and their crimes. His

sarcasm is tremendous, and only equalled by his just indignation at the immoralities and obscenities of the Pagan worship. He draws a masterly comparison between these and the simple worship of the one God of the Christians, and adroitly inquires, "Why should our books be cast into the fire, and our places of assembly destroyed, in which the highest God is adored, and implored to give grace and peace to magistrates, armies, kings, friends, enemies, the living and the dead ?-places in which nothing is heard but what is calculated to make men humane, mild, modest, chaste, liberal of their property, and akin to all those whom the one bond of brotherhood embraces ?" (lib. iv. cap. 38.)

Arnobius is not an orthodox writer in the strict ecclesiastial sense of the word. He entertains vague and unsatisfactory notions upon many important points of belief, as on the nature of the soul and some others. Dom Ceillier (Histoire Générale des Auteurs Sacrés) accounts for these errors by the fact that Arnobius had not received the grace of baptism when he wrote, and St. Jerome (Epist. 62 ad Tranquillinum) classes him with Origen, Tertullian, Novatus, Apollinaris, and other ecclesiastical writers, whose works must be read with caution. Lardner (Credibility of the Gospel History) claims Arnobius as a Socinian, but with very little show of reason; indeed the quotations on which he rests go far to prove the exact contrary. But whatever different opinions may be entertained by ecclesiastical writers as to the merits or demerits of this work of Arnobius in certain matters of doctrine, all unite in considering it one of the most brilliant apologies ever penned in favour of Christianity against the Paganism of the Roman empire.

The style of Arnobius is vigorous and energetic; he is frequently eloquent, in the highest sense of the word; but he wants elegance and precision, and his phraseology is often barbarous. He has been styled the Varro, as Lactantius, his disciple, is called the Cicero, of ecclesiastical writers.

The first edition of Arnobius appeared at Rome in the year 1543, fol., under the title of "Arnobii Disputationum adversus Gentes libri octo:" it was edited by Faustus Sabæus, and is a transcript from a MS. in the Vatican. There are in reality only seven books, and the eighth book in this edition (“Liber Octavus ") is in fact the "Octavius" of Minutius Felix. The other editions are Basil, 1546, 8vo., and 1560, 8vo.; Paris, 1580, fol.; Antwerp, 1582, 8vo.; Rome, 1583, 4to.; Antwerp, 1586, 8vo.; Geneva, 1597 (doubtful); Leiden, 1598; Hanau, 1603, 8vo.; Paris, 1603, 8vo.; Antwerp, 1604, 8vo.; Paris, 1C05, 8vo.; Hamburg, 1610, fol.; Toulouse, 1612, 8vo.; Douay, 1634, 8vo.; Leiden, 1651, 4to.; Paris, 1666, fol.; Lyon, 1677, fol.; Paris, 1715, fol.; Venice, 1768, fol.; Würzburg,

66

1783, 8vo. The latest and best edition is that of J. C. Orellius, with a "Notitia Literaria," by C. T. G. Schoenemann, prefixed, 2 pts., Leipzig, 1816, 8vo., with an appendix, which appeared the following year. The Disputations" of Arnobius are also inserted in the different editions of La Bigne's "Bibliotheca Patrum," also in the "Bibliotheca Patrum" of Gallandi. A Dutch translation of Arnobius, by Joachim Oudaen, appeared at Harlingen in the year 1677, 8vo. There is no other version in a modern language. Only one MS. is known to exist: this is now at Paris, and is the same that was used in the first and all the subsequent editions. A commentary on the Psalms has been attributed to the elder Arnobius, but it is now generally agreed to have been the production of a later Arnobius. (Moreri, Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique, article Arnobius; Bayle, Dictionnaire Historique et Critique, art. Arnobius; Cave, Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria, vol. i. p. 161; Dupin, Nouvelle Bibliothèque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiques, edition of 1698 and following years, vol. i. 603–610; Ceillier, Histoire Générale des Auteurs Sacrés et Ecclésiastiques, vol. iii. 373–387; Lardner, Credibility of the Gospel History, chap. lxiv.; Neander, History of the Christian Religion and Church during the three first centuries, translated by Rose, vol. ii. 368-371; Schoenemann, Notitia Literaria de Arnobio Afro, prefixed to the Leipzig edition of Arnobius by J. C. Orellius.) G. B. ARNO BIUS the YOUNGER lived about A.D. 460. He was an ecclesiastic, but whether a presbyter or bishop is uncertain, at Lérins in Gaul, or, according to some writers, at Marseille. He wrote a commentary on the Psalms, which has frequently been attributed to the elder Arnobius. The first edition of this commentary appeared at Basil, by Erasmus, 1522, fol., and since even Erasmus published it as the work of Arnobius Afer, it is not surprising that others were led into the same error. But the work itself presents abundant evidence that it was not written by the elder Arnobius. The dissimilarity of style would prove that it was not written by the author of the " Disputationes contra Gentes." But, waiving this, there is the fact of its being dedicated to Laurentius, or rather Leontius, and Rusticus, two bishops who lived about the year 460. Besides, it contains allusions to the heresy of Photinus, who lived in the latter half of the fourth century, and also to the controversy respecting predestination, which was not agitated before the latter end of the life of Saint Augustine.

The commentary of Arnobius is short: he affixes a mystical and allegorical sense to almost every passage, and refers nearly the whole of the Psalms to the person of Jesus Christ. Arnobius was a Semipelagian, in

VOL. III.

common with a large portion of the clergy of Gaul, and takes frequent opportunity of showing his dislike to the doctrines of Saint Augustine, more particularly on the subject of predestination.

Besides the edition of the Commentary by Erasmus, there is said to have been an edition at Strassburg, the same year, in 4to. There were also editions at Cologne, 1532, 8vo.; Basil, 1537, 8vo., and 1560, 8vo. This last edition contains also the "Disputationes contra Gentes" of Arnobius Afer. The Commentary of Arnobius is also inserted in the different editions of La Bigne's "Bibliotheca Patrum ;" it was also published in an edition of Tertullian by R. L. de la Barre, Paris, 1580, fol. A short work entitled 66 Annotationes in locos Evangelistarum," was also, perhaps, written by Arnobius: it is in the edition of Tertullian just mentioned, and in the fifteenth volume of the "Magna Bibliotheca" of La Bigne. A work entitled "Altercatio, seu Conflictus Arnobii Catholici cum Serapione Ægyptio de Deo trino et uno, de duabus in Christo substantiis et unica persona, et de gratiæ ac liberi arbitrii concordia," also passes under the name of Arnobius; but it is very unlikely that it was written by him, on account of the admiration expressed in it for the works of Saint Augustine. Casimir Oudin attributes it to Vigilius Tapsensis. It was published in the before-mentioned edition of Tertullian; also in an edition of the works of Irenæus, Cologne, 1596, fol.; and in the different editions of the "Bibliotheca Patrum" of La Bigne. (Oudinus, Commentarius de Scriptoribus Ecclesiæ Antiquis, vol. i. 1283-1288; Cave, Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria, vol. i. 449; Moreri, Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique, article " Arnobius;" Bayle, Dictionnaire Historique et Critique, article "Arnobius;" Histoire Littéraire de la France, vol. ii. 342-351.)

G. B.

ARNOLD. There have been several German artists of this name, but of little repute. The oldest was a Saxon painter, who lived at Dresden about the end of the 15th century.

FRIEDERICH ARNOLD was an engraver of Berlin, where he was born about 1780. He was the pupil of D. Berger, and he engraved both landscape and figures with great taste. There is a portrait of Marshal Blücher by him, after a picture by Dähling. He died at Berlin, in 1809.

GEORG ADAM ARNOLD, was an historical painter of some ability, of Bamberg in Bavaria, in the latter half of the 17th century.

JONAS ARNOLD was a clever portraitpainter of Ulm, where he was living in the middle of the seventeenth century. He made likewise drawings in pen and ink of various subjects; and he painted on parchment a collection of 200 different kinds of tulips from the garden of Ch. Weikmann at Ulm.

2 Q

commander-in-chief, a proceeding which caused the resignation of Arnold. He was tried by a court-martial, and sentenced, on the 20th of January, 1779, to be reprimanded by the commander-in-chief, a duty which Washington performed with great delicacy. Soured and disappointed, Arnold entered into privateering partnerships, which were attended with loss, and followed by quarrels with his partners and expensive law-suits. He had also claims on Congress for stores supplied to the troops in Canada, which he now pressed with vigour. The amount which he claimed was greatly reduced by the commissioners, against whose decision Arnold appealed to Congress, who confirmed their award. From that time he determined to do his utmost for the ruin of the cause which he had hitherto supported.

Accordingly Arnold made secret overtures to the British authorities, through Colonel Beverley Robinson, a well-known American loyalist, who placed him in correspondence with Sir Henry Clinton, at New York. By the interference of powerful friends, and the favour in which he stood with Washington, he had contrived to obtain the command of West Point, on the Hudson river; and this important post he proposed to betray into the hands of the British. What he was to receive for this service was never publicly known, but it is supposed he had bargained for 30,000l. in money, and the rank of brigadier-general in the British army, which he already held in the American. The plan was matured in the autumn of 1780, and intended to be executed in the September of that year. The particulars of the negociation through Major André, of the failure of the plan at the last moment, and of Andre's capture, have been given in another article. [ANDRE', JOHN]. The news of Andre's arrest, owing to the circuitous route taken by the messenger sent with the information that “John Anderson had been taken with a passport from him," did not reach Arnold until the 25th of September, two days after the capture, and a very short time before Washington was expected at West Point. Arnold had been highly exhilarated on that day,-as it was afterwards known, in anticipation of the arrival of the British troops,-but the receipt of this intelligence changed the face of affairs. He retired in confusion, and, on two officers arriving shortly after to inform him that Washington was already at Fishkill, only a few miles off, he resolved on instant flight. He took a hurried leave of his wife and child, and, exclaiming that " André was taken, and he must fly instantly to save his own life," he rushed to the Hudson, threw himself on board his barge, and gave his men orders to pull as fast as possible to the British sloop-of-war the Vulture. In the meanwhile Washington arrived, and was surprised to find the fort deserted by its com

591

mander, until the arrival of a messenger with news of the arrest of André cleared up the mystery. He remained silent and thoughtful for a minute, and then, turning to his staff, observed with emotion- "I thought that an officer of courage and ability, who had often shed his blood for his country, was entitled to confidence, and I gave him mine. I am convinced now that we should never trust those, however qualified, who are wanting in probity. Gentlemen, Arnold has betrayed us!"

All the necessary precautions were immediately taken: the commanders were put on their guard; the garrison, dispersed by Arnold's orders, recalled to their posts; expresses sent with the news all over the Union; and instant pursuit was made after Arnold. But by that time he was safe alongside the Vulture, having narrowly escaped being stopped at the fortified post of Feller's Point, the commander of which had his suspicions aroused by the haste with which the barge was proceeding. Arnold's house was entered and his papers seized, but they threw no light on the affair of West Point, although they amply confirmed the charges made against him of fraud and peculation at Philadelphia.

Arnold's futile attempts to save Andre's life, and the refusal of the British commander to exchange him for André, have been already noticed in the life of the latter. On entering the British army, Arnold issued two proclamations to his countrymen, to induce them to join him, but, although drawn up with great art, and full of brilliant promises, they did not succeed in producing a single deserter. He was employed by Sir Henry Clinton to make a diversion in Virginia, at the head of 1700 men, in January, 1781. He also served on an expedition against New London in Connecticut. He tock Fort Trumbull on September the 6th, and, the attack having also succeeded at Fort Griswold and other points, he afterwards set fire to the town. He is accused of unnecessary slaughter of the enemy after the forts were taken but some allowance must be made for the odium which his treachery had drawn upon his name, which procured a ready credence for all reports to his disadvantage. After the conclusion of the war he resided in England, but paid frequent visits to Nova Scotia and to the West Indies, where he was engaged in commercial concerns, and where, on one occasion, he was taken prisoner by the French. He died at Gloucester-place, London, on the 14th of June, 1801.

Arnold was twice married. By his first wife, whose name was Mansfield, he had three sons, one of whom held a commission in the British army; the others received grants of land in Canada, and were men of property there in 1829. His second wife, Miss Shippen, a Philadelphia lady of great accomplishments, and a friend and corre2Q 2