In the late fourth and early fifth centuries we are informed of the activities of Cassian by Palladius in his defence of John Chrysostom and by Innocent i, both with regard to the exile of John Chrysostom in 404 and with regard to the reconciliation between the churches of Rome and Antioch in 414. Do these three instances refer to the same person and is that person John Cassian? In this paper it is argued that Palladius does indeed refer to John Cassian and so does Innocent i in his comments about the exile of John Chrysostom. However, the individual involved in the reconciliation between Antioch and Rome is to be seen as a different person, contrary to the opinion of several scholars. This becomes evident through a close reading of Innocent i’s Epistulae 19 and 20.
Tertullian's de Virginibus Velandis is not simply a somewhat neglected ascetic treatise but a rhetorical treatise about asceticism. The use of classical rhetoric as a modern interpretative tool for early Christian literature is common, although, as witnessed in an article recentlyin this journal, not without its critics. In this deliberative treatise Tertullian argued from Scripture (3.5c-6.3), natural law (7.1-8.4) and Christian discipline (9.1-15.3) that from puberty Christian female virgins ought to be veiled when in public. The custom of some Carthaginian virginsnot being veiled when the church gathered was attacked as being contrary to the truth. What we find is Tertullian's overwhelming concern for fidelity to the regula fidei. The presence of a well-developed rhetorical structure in de Virginibus Velandis is an argument for datingit after de Oratione, where Tertullian made some similar points, though in a less cohesive and more rudimentary manner.