{"slug":"pta0100.pta001","id":"greek:pta:pta0100.pta001","title":"Dok. 1: Theologische Erklärung alexandrinischer Kleriker an Alexander von Alexandrien","title_source":"Dok. 1: Theologische Erklärung alexandrinischer Kleriker an Alexander von Alexandrien","author":"Dokumente zur Geschichte des arianischen Streites (Athanasius Werke III)","genre":"other","date":"0030–0800","tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T05:28:23Z","cost_usd":0.002069},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:pta:pta0100.pta001","work_id":"pta0100.pta001","edition":"pta","language":"","license":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://pta.bbaw.de/text/urn:cts:pta:pta0100.pta001.pta-grc1"},"stats":{"passages":3,"english_words":552,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":2161,"commentary_units":17,"commentary_kinds":8,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":6,"work_notes":5,"external_links":0,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"pta0100.pta001","abstract":"This work is a letter from Alexandrian clergy to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, composed in the early 320s CE, opposing the teachings of Arius. It survives only as quoted or excerpted by Athanasius in his anti-Arian writings, not as an independent manuscript. The text employs pre-Nicene theological language, rejecting Gnostic, Manichaean, Sabellian, and Hieracan views, and affirms three distinct hypostases. It presents anti-Arian doctrine as traditional, learned from Bishop Alexander, and serves as an early witness to orthodox opposition to Arianism before the Council of Nicaea (325 CE).","historical_context":"The letter was written in Alexandria, Egypt, in the early 320s CE, during the initial phase of the Arian controversy. The community was the Alexandrian church under Bishop Alexander, who opposed Arius's subordinationist Christology. The text is preserved only in Athanasius's dossier of Arian controversy documents (Athanasius Werke III), not as an independent manuscript. Its original form and completeness are uncertain, as it is reconstructed from Athanasian citations. The letter reflects pre-Nicene theological language and the early ecclesiastical response to Arius, before the Council of Nicaea (325 CE). It was cited by later Greek and Latin heresiologists but not transmitted in liturgical or canonical collections independently. The edition lacks a critical apparatus for the reconstruction, requiring consultation of Athanasius Werke III for textual variants.","significance":"This letter is an early witness to orthodox opposition to Arianism, predating the Council of Nicaea. It preserves pre-Nicene theological language and shows the Alexandrian church's strategy of presenting anti-Arian doctrine as traditional. Its use of terms like 'unbegotten' and 'three hypostases' became key in the Arian controversy, and it was cited by later heresiologists as evidence of early anti-Arian orthodoxy.","timeline":[{"date":"early 320s CE","event":"Composition of the letter from Alexandrian clergy to Bishop Alexander opposing Arius's teachings."},{"date":"325 CE","event":"Council of Nicaea, which condemned Arianism and produced the Nicene Creed."},{"date":"4th century","event":"Athanasius includes the letter in his dossier of Arian controversy documents."},{"date":"4th–5th centuries","event":"The letter is cited by Greek and Latin heresiologists as an early witness to anti-Arian orthodoxy."},{"date":"20th century","event":"Modern edition in Athanasius Werke III, reconstructing the text from Athanasian citations."}],"relations":[{"work":"Athanasius Werke III: Dokumente zur Geschichte des arianischen Streites","relation":"The letter is preserved as part of this dossier of Arian controversy documents.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Arius's Thalia","relation":"The letter opposes the teachings of Arius as expressed in his Thalia.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Nicene Creed","relation":"The letter pre-dates and anticipates the theological positions of the Nicene Creed.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Works of Athanasius (e.g., Orations against the Arians)","relation":"Athanasius quotes or excerpts the letter in his anti-Arian writings.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius of Caesarea","relation":"Eusebius provides contemporary context for the Arian controversy, though he does not cite this letter.","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The text survives only as quoted or excerpted by Athanasius; its original form and completeness are uncertain.","The edition does not provide a critical apparatus for the reconstruction; textual variants must be consulted in Athanasius Werke III.","The date is approximate (early 320s CE), based on the context of the Arian controversy before Nicaea.","The letter's authorship is not specified beyond 'Alexandrian clergy'; individual authors are unknown."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000507,"generated":"2026-11-15T04:59:35Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Patristic Text Archive","url":"https://pta.bbaw.de/text/urn:cts:pta:pta0100.pta001.pta-grc1"}],"checks":{"work":"pta0100.pta001","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":3,"translated":3,"commentary_passages":3,"commentary_units":17,"english_words":552,"source_letters":2161,"commentary_kinds":8},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The work is a letter from Alexandrian clergy to Bishop Alexander, opposing Arius’s teachings. It is preserved in Athanasius’s dossier of Arian controversy documents, not as an independent manuscript.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["pta"]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Dated to the early 320s, before the Council of Nicaea (325). The letter reflects pre-Nicene theological language and the initial ecclesiastical response to Arius’s views.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["pta"]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The text survives only as quoted or excerpted by Athanasius in his anti-Arian writings. Its original form and completeness are uncertain; the edition reconstructs it from Athanasian citations.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["pta"]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Cited by later Greek and Latin heresiologists as an early witness to orthodox opposition to Arianism. It was not transmitted in liturgical or canonical collections independently.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["pta"]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The edition does not provide a critical apparatus for the reconstruction of the letter from Athanasius’s citations. Readers must consult the apparatus of Athanasius Werke III for textual variants.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":["pta"]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 3 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: pta — CC BY 4.0"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":3},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"Μακαρίῳ πάπα καὶ ἐπισκόπῳ ἡμῶν Ἀλεξάνδρῳ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι καὶ οἱ διάκονοι ἐν κυρίῳ χαίρειν.\n\nἩ πίστις ἡμῶν ἡ ἐκ προγόνων, ἣν καὶ ἀπὸ σοῦ μεμαθήκαμεν, μακάριε πάπα, ἔστιν αὕτη. οἴδαμεν ἕνα θεόν, μόνον ἀγέννητον, μόνον ἀΐδιον, μόνον ἄναρχον, μόνον ἀληθινόν, μόνον ἀθανασίαν ἔχοντα, μόνον σοφόν, μόνον ἀγαθόν, μόνον δυνάστην, πάντων κριτήν, διοικητήν, οἰκονόμον, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον, δίκαιον καὶ ἀγαθόν, νόμου καὶ προφητῶν καὶ καινῆς διαθήκης θεόν, γεννήσαντα υἱὸν μονογενῆ πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, δι’ οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας καὶ τὰ ὅλα πεποίηκε, γεννήσαντα δὲ οὐ δοκήσει, ἀλλὰ ἀληθείᾳ, ὑποστήσαντα ἰδίῳ θελήματι, ἄτρεπτον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον, κτίσμα τοῦ θεοῦ τέλειον, ἀλλ ̓ οὐχ ὡς ἓν τῶν κτισμάτων, γέννημα, ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὡς ἓν τῶν γεγεννημένων,\n\nοὐδ’ ὡς Οὐαλεντῖνος προβολὴν τὸ γέννημα τοῦ πατρὸς ἐδογμάτισεν, οὐδ’ ὡς Μανιχαῖος μέρος ὁμοούσιον τοῦ πατρὸς τὸ γέννημα εἰσηγήσατο, οὐδ’ ὡς Σαβέλλιος τὴν μονάδα διαιρῶν υἱοπάτορα εἶπεν. οὐδ’ ὡς Ἱερακᾶς λύχνον ἀπὸ λύχνου ἢ ὡς λαμπάδα εἰς δύο, οὐδέ τὸν ὄντα πρότερον, ὕστερον γεννηθέντα ἢ ἐπικτισθέντα εἰς υἱόν, ὡς καὶ σὺ αὐτός, μακάριε πάπα, κατὰ μέσην τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ ἐν συνεδρίῳ πλειστάκις τοὺς ταῦτα εἰσηγησαμένους ἀπηγόρευσας, ἀλλ’ ὥς φαμεν, θελήματι τοῦ θεοῦ πρὸ χρόνων καὶ πρὸ αἰώνων κτισθέντα καὶ τὸ ζῆν καὶ τὸ εἶναι παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς εἰληφότα καὶ τὰς δόξας, συνυποστήσαντος αὐτῷ τοῦ πατρός.","english":"To the blessed pope and our bishop Alexander, the presbyters and deacons in the Lord send greetings.\n\nOur faith, which is from our ancestors and which we have also learned from you, blessed pope, is this. We know one God, only unbegotten, only eternal, only without beginning, only true, only possessing immortality, only wise, only good, only sovereign, judge of all, governor, steward, unchangeable and immutable, just and good, God of the law and the prophets and the new covenant, who begot a only-begotten son before eternal times, through whom he also made the ages and all things, begetting not in semblance but in truth, having subsisted by his own will, unchangeable and immutable, a perfect creation of God, but not as one of the creatures, a offspring, but not as one of the begotten,\n\nnot as Valentinus dogmatized the offspring as a projection of the father, nor as Manichaeus introduced the offspring as a consubstantial part of the father, nor as Sabellius, dividing the monad, called it a son-father, nor as Hieracas a lamp from a lamp or as a torch into two, nor that which existed previously, later begotten or created as a son, as you yourself, blessed pope, in the middle of the church and in council many times forbade those who introduced these things, but as we say, created by the will of God before times and before ages and having received life and being from the father and the glories, the father having co-subsisted with him.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀγέννητον","severity":"info","text":"The term 'unbegotten' is a key marker of anti-Arian theology, emphasizing the Father's unique status as not generated, in contrast to the Son who is 'begotten' (γέννημα).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐαλεντῖνος, Μανιχαῖος, Σαβέλλιος, Ἱερακᾶς","severity":"info","text":"The text explicitly rejects the teachings of Valentinus (Gnostic emanation), Manichaeus (dualistic consubstantiality), Sabellius (modalist monarchianism), and Hieracas (a lamp-lighting analogy), situating the confession within orthodox polemics against these heresies.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"οὐδ’ ὡς … ἀλλ’ ὥς","severity":"info","text":"The passage employs a series of negations (οὐδ’ ὡς) followed by a positive affirmation (ἀλλ’ ὥς), a rhetorical structure typical of early Christian credal statements to demarcate orthodoxy from heresy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"συνυποστήσαντος αὐτῷ τοῦ πατρός","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'the father having co-subsisted with him' is ambiguous: it may imply the Son's co-existence with the Father, but the Greek could also be read as the Father 'subsisting together with' the Son, a formulation later contested in Arian debates.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν ἡ ἐκ προγόνων","severity":"info","text":"This claim of ancestral faith, learned from Bishop Alexander, reflects the early 4th-century Alexandrian strategy of presenting anti-Arian doctrine as traditional, not innovative, a trope common in Athanasian apologetics.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'συνυποστήσαντος αὐτῷ τοῦ πατρός' is syntactically ambiguous: it could mean the Father 'co-subsisted with' the Son or that the Father 'subsisted together' with the Son, with implications for the Son's eternal co-existence.","The English draft translates 'γέννημα' as 'offspring' but the Greek term can also mean 'that which is begotten', a technical term in Trinitarian theology."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"οὐ γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ δοὺς αὐτῷ πάντων τὴν κληρονομίαν ἐστέρησεν ἑαυτὸν ὧν ἀγεννήτως ἔχει ἔν ἑαυτῷ· πηγὴ γάρ ἐστιν πάντων. ὥστε τρεῖς εἰσιν ὑποστάσεις. καὶ ὁ μὲν θεὸς αἴτιος τῶν πάντων τυγχάνων ἐστὶν ἄναρχος μονώτατος, ὁ δὲ υἱὸς ἀχρόνως γεννηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ πρὸ αἰώνων κτισθεὶς καὶ θεμελιωθεὶς οὐκ ἦν πρὸ τοῦ γεννηθῆναι, ἀλλ’ ἀχρόνως πρὸ πάντων γεννηθείς, μόνος ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑπέστη. οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστιν ἀΐδιος ἢ συναΐδιος ἢ συναγέννητος τῷ πατρί, οὐδὲ ἅμα τῷ πατρὶ τὸ εἶναι ἔχει, ὥς τινες λέγουσι τὰ πρός τι, δύο ἀγεννήτους ἀρχὰς εἰσηγούμενοι. ἀλλ’ ὡς μονὰς καὶ ἀρχὴ πάντων, οὕτως ὁ θεὸς πρὸ πάντων ἐστί. διὸ καὶ πρὸ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐστιν, ὡς καὶ παρὰ σοῦ μεμαθήκαμεν κατὰ μέσην τὴν ἐκκλησίαν κηρύξαντος.\n\nΚαθὸ οὖν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ εἶναι ἔχει καὶ τὰς δόξας καὶ τὸ ζῆν καὶ τὰ πάντα αὐτῷ παρεδόθη, κατὰ τοῦτο ἀρχὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ὁ θεός. ἄρχει γὰρ αὐτοῦ ὡς θεὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ πρὸ αὐτοῦ ὤν. εἰ δὲ τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ ἐκ γαστρός καὶ τὸ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἧκω ὡς μέρος αὐτοῦ ὁμοουσίου καὶ ὡς προβολὴ ὑπό τινων νοεῖται, σύνθετος ἔσται ὁ πατὴρ καὶ διαιρετὸς καὶ τρεπτὸς καὶ σῶμα κατ’ αὐτοὺς καὶ τὸ ὅσον ἐπ’ αὐτοῖς τὰ ἀκόλουθα σώματι πάσχων ὁ ἀσώματος θεός.","english":"For the Father, in giving him the inheritance of all things, did not deprive himself of what he possesses ungenerately in himself; for he is the source of all things. Thus there are three hypostases. And God, being the cause of all things, is without beginning and utterly alone, while the Son, having been generated timelessly by the Father and created and established before the ages, did not exist before being generated, but having been generated timelessly before all things, was subsisted alone by the Father. For he is neither eternal nor co-eternal nor co-ungenerate with the Father, nor does he have his existence simultaneously with the Father, as some say who introduce two ungenerated principles as correlatives. But just as the monad and beginning of all things, so God exists before all things. Therefore he is also before the Son, as we have learned from you when you preached in the midst of the church.\n\nInsofar, then, as he has his existence from God, and the glories and life and all things were delivered to him, to that extent God is his beginning. For God rules over him as his God and as being before him. But if \"from him\" and \"from the womb\" and \"from the Father\" are understood by some as meaning that he came forth and arrived as a part of him of the same substance and as a projection, then the Father will be composite and divisible and changeable and a body according to them, and, as far as they are concerned, the incorporeal God will suffer the consequences proper to a body.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ὑποστάσεις","severity":"info","text":"The plural 'hypostases' here asserts three distinct realities (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) against modalist or subordinationist conflation, a key term in the Arian controversy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀγεννήτως","severity":"info","text":"The adverb 'ungenertely' (ἀγεννήτως) distinguishes the Father's ungenerated state from the Son's generation, a central point in anti-Arian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"συναγέννητος","severity":"info","text":"The term 'co-ungenerate' (συναγέννητος) is a neologism or rare compound, used to reject the idea that the Son is ungenerated like the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'two ungenerated principles as correlatives' (πρός τι) alludes to Aristotelian categories, used by some to argue for two co-equal principles.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐκ γαστρός","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'from the womb' (ἐκ γαστρός) echoes LXX language (e.g., Job 38:29) and is used here to critique a crude, material understanding of the Son's origin.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἧκω","severity":"caution","text":"The verb 'ἧκω' (I have arrived) is rare and possibly a scribal error for 'ἥκω' (I have come) or a variant; the sense is clear but the form is uncertain.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'πρὸ αἰώνων κτισθεὶς' could be read as 'created before the ages' or 'created before the aeons'; the translation takes the former.","The verb 'ἧκω' is a hapax or near-hapax; the reading 'arrived' follows the context but the form is uncertain."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Ερρῶσθαί σε ἐν κυρίῳ εὔχομαι, μακάριε πάπα. Ἄρειος, Ἀειθαλῆς, Ἀχιλλεύς, Καρπώνης, Σαρμάτας, Ἄρειος πρεσβύτεροι. διάκονοι Εὐζώϊος, Λούκιος, Ἰούλιος, Μηνᾶς, Ἑλλάδιος, Γάϊος. ἐπίσκοποι Σεκοῦνδος Πενταπόλεως, Θεωνᾶς Λίβυς, Πιστός.","english":"I pray that you are well in the Lord, blessed pope. Arius, Aeithales, Achilles, Carpones, Sarmatas, Arius, presbyters. Deacons: Euzoius, Lucius, Julius, Menas, Helladius, Gaius. Bishops: Secundus of Pentapolis, Theonas the Libyan, Pistus.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Ερρῶσθαί σε ἐν κυρίῳ εὔχομαι, μακάριε πάπα","severity":"info","text":"The opening formula is a standard epistolary greeting in early Christian letters, expressing a wish for the recipient's well-being in the Lord.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"μακάριε πάπα","severity":"info","text":"The term 'πάπα' (pope) is used here as a title of respect for the bishop of Alexandria, Alexander, not yet a papal title in the later Roman sense.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄρειος, Ἀειθαλῆς, Ἀχιλλεύς, Καρπώνης, Σαρμάτας, Ἄρειος πρεσβύτεροι","severity":"info","text":"This list of presbyters, deacons, and bishops includes Arius and his supporters, who were later condemned at the First Council of Nicaea (325 CE).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"πρεσβύτεροι. διάκονοι ... ἐπίσκοποι","severity":"info","text":"The passage is structured as a formal list of signatories, grouped by clerical rank: presbyters, deacons, and bishops, typical of early church documents.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"text","lemma":"Σεκοῦνδος Πενταπόλεως, Θεωνᾶς Λίβυς, Πιστός","severity":"info","text":"Secundus of Pentapolis and Theonas of Libya were among the few bishops who supported Arius at Nicaea; Pistus later became a rival bishop of Alexandria.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄρειος (second occurrence)","severity":"caution","text":"The name 'Arius' appears twice among the presbyters; it is uncertain whether this is a scribal duplication or refers to two different individuals.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The repetition of 'Arius' among the presbyters may be a scribal error or indicate two distinct persons; the text does not clarify.","The exact identity of 'Pistus' as bishop is ambiguous; he may be the same as the later Arian bishop of Alexandria."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}