11
perhaps a little later. This would be consistent with its being "known to almost all" by Gennadius' time,
which is late fifth century. This is also in keeping with its internal style and theology. Its provenance is in
the West, probably Gaul, which is consistent with its Latin text and also with its attribution to Evagrius, if
indeed his province was Gaul.
Mention has already been made of Harnack's suggestion that ST is a Latin reworking of the lost
second century Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus.
23
Harnack's view was refined by Corrsen, Zahn and
Marmorstein.
24
In his unpublished thesis, Lahey has a thorough discussion of this issue and those
authors' contributions to the question. While not agreeing with Harnack in all of his details, Lahey does
conclude that "divergent lines point to the Altercatio as a source for the recovery of Aristo's dialogue."
25
In the brief introductory lines of ST, Evagrius claims that his work is a report of an actual
altercatio which had recently taken place and which he had personally witnessed. He addresses it to an
otherwise unknown Valerius (I, 1). He believes that hearing of it will be met with rejoicing on Valerius'
part, because the confrontation had led to the conversion and baptism of Zacchaeus described at the end
of the altercatio (VIII, 30). The Christian interlocutor, Theophilus, is not identified further by any other
title except as a "Christian."
Like AZ, ST has a simple, straightforward style. The Jewish, interlocutor, Simon, is not allowed
to say much beyond the standard Jewish response and objections. Horbury, however, has taken note of
some interesting ironical comments by Simon.
Christian sources of the fifth century also depict Jews as speaking freely on Christ and the church.
An instance is offered by the remarks of the Jew Simon in Altercatio Simonis, for example at vi,
22: Erubescere poteris, Theophile, si hoc dictum (sc. potuisse Christum tam maledictam et
ludibriosam sustinere passionem) minime comprobaveris. Nam scriptum est in Deuteronomio,
Maledictus omnis qui pendet in ligno; or at vi,25, in the innocent query Ergo ecclesia fornicaria
est?
Horbury's translation of the passage is:
23
See footnote 7.
24
Varner, 7.
25
Lahey, "A Translation", 87.