(See note on x. 51.) The body was placed
     not only in an actual sarcophagus or stone coffin, as expressly
     mentioned in the text, but in hollow places cut out of rock or
     earth (loculus).  The sarcophagus method seems to have been the
     earlier, but was superseded by that of the loculus, except in the
     case of the very wealthy.

205 The concluding line is beautifully illustrated by the epitaph
     on the martyr Alexander, found over one of the graves in the cemetery
     of Callixtus in the Catacombs:—­

ALEXANDER MORTVVS NON EST SED VIVIT
SVPER ASTRA ET CORPVS IN HOC TVMVLO
QVIESCIT ...

“Alexander is not dead, but lives above the stars
and his body rests in this tomb.”

IV

15 Prudentius here, as again in v. 160, emphasises his belief in
     the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son.  The
     “filioque” clause was not actually added to the Nicene Creed till
     the Council of Toledo (589 A.D.), but the doctrine was expressly
     maintained by Augustine, and occurs in a Confession of Faith of an
     earlier Synod of Toledo (447 A.D.?), and in the words of Leo I.
     (Ep. ad Turib., c. 1), “de utroque processit.” The addition
     was not embodied into the Creed as used at Rome as late as the
     beginning of the ninth century. (Vid. Harnack, Hist. of Dogma,
     iv. 132.) Prudentius probably followed, as regards the Trinity,
     the doctrine generally held by the Spanish Church of his day; in
     many points it is difficult (cf. note on iii. 2), but appears to be
     derived partly from Tertullian and partly from Marcellus.

59 The identification of the Habakkuk of this legend (vid. the
     Apocryphal “Bel and the Dragon”) with the O. T. prophet is erroneous. 
     This version of the story of Daniel is sometimes represented in the
     frescoes of the Catacombs, where the subject is a very favourite
     one, as is natural in an age when the cry “Christiani ad leones”
     so often rang through the streets of Rome.

V

1 There has been much doubt as to the title and scope of this hymn. 
     Some early editors (e.g., Fabricius and Arevalus) adopt the title
     “ad incensum cerei Paschalis,” or “de novo lumine Paschalis
     Sabbati,” and confine its object to the ceremonial of Easter Eve,
     which is specially alluded to in ll. 125 et seq. Others, following
     the best MSS., give the simpler title used in this text, and regard
     it as a hymn for daily use.  This view is supported by the weight
     of evidence:  the position of the hymn among the first six (none of
     which are for special days), and the fact that the Benediction of
     the Paschal Candle was