him up to universal execration. The incident of Simon's offering money
to Peter is admittedly taken by the fathers from this account, and
therefore their repetition in no way corroborates the story. Hence its
authenticity rests entirely with the writer of the _Acts_, for Justin,
who was a native of Samaria, does not mention it. As the _Acts_ are not
quoted from prior to A.D. 177, and their writer is only traditionally
claimed to be Luke, we may safely consider ourselves in the domain of
legend and not of history.

The same may be said of all the incidents of Simon's career; they
pertain to the region of fable and probably owe their creation to the
Patristic and Simonian controversies of later ages.

The Simon of Justin gives us the birthplace of Simon as at Gitta, and
the rest of the fathers follow suit with variation of the name. Gitta,
Gittha, Gittoi, Gitthoi, Gitto, Gitton, Gitteh, so run the variants.
This, however, is a matter of no great importance, and the little burg
is said to-day to be called Gitthoï.[78]

The statement of Justin as to the statue of Simon at Rome with the
inscription "SIMONI DEO SANCTO" has been called in question by every
scholar since the discovery in 1574 of a large marble fragment in the
island of the Tiber bearing the inscription "SEMONI SANCO DEO FIDIO," a
Sabine God. A few, however, think that Justin could not have made so
glaring a mistake in writing to the Romans, and that if it were a
mistake Irenaeus would not have copied it. The coincidence, however, is
too striking to bear any other interpretation than that perhaps some
ignorant controversialist had endeavoured to give the legend a
historical appearance, and that Justin had lent a too ready ear to him.
It is also to be noticed that Justin tells us that nearly all the