[Footnote 64: This, on the other hand, is taken almost _verbatim_ from c. 33 of Book VII (pp. 92, 93 _supra_), the few slight differences between the two chapters being not other than a careless scribe might be expected to make.] [Footnote 65: This also from Book VII, p. 93 _supra_, but slightly condensed.] [Footnote 66: This also appears to be condensed from the account of Theodotus in Book VII, pp. 93, 94 _supra_. The summarizer adds to it the alleged denial by Theodotus of Christ’s divinity, which does not appear in Book VII.] [Footnote 67: This, too, is not inconsistent with the account of “other Theodotians” in Book VII, pp 94, 95 _supra_, but omits all reference to the Nicolaitans.] [Footnote 68: Here the summarizer reverts to Book VIII, pp. 113, 114 _supra_, from which his account of the Phrygians or Montanists appears to be taken. The phrases used are not identical, and while Book VIII merely says that the Montanist heresy agrees with the Patripassianism of the Noetian, the Summary declares that the first was absolutely derived from the second.] [Footnote 69: κατὰ καιροὺς καλούμενον πρὸς τὰ συμβαίνοντα. Cf. the καλούμενον κατὰ χρόνων τροπήν, p. 434 Cr. Otherwise this chapter seems to be a condensed paraphrase rather than a series of extracts from Book IX, the summarizer having here added together the “heresies” so called of Noetus and Callistus. As mentioned in the Introduction, he is careful not to mention that Callistus was a Pope, and in the last sentence but one, he omits the name of Sabellius which is mentioned in the earlier book. Cf. p. 130 _supra_.] [Footnote 70: He now reverts to Hermogenes, against whom Tertullian wrote, and who must therefore in the time of Callistus have long been dead. The few lines given here correspond to the opening sentences of the chapter on this heretic in Book VIII, p. 112 _supra_, which see.] [Footnote 71: μεταγγιζόμενον, lit., “poured” as from one vessel into another--a considerable amplification of the statement in Book IX, p. 134 _supra_.] [Footnote 72: Water and Earth are the only two “elements” mentioned in the exorcisms attributed to the Elchesaites in Book IX, p. 135 _supra_.] [Footnote 73: The statements in this account of the Elchesaites are all to be found in the description of them in Book IX, pp. 132-138 _supra_; but the same words are not used, and there is nothing to show that the summarizer had the earlier book before him at the time of writing.] [Footnote 74: Cruice suggests that the considerable lacuna that there evidently is here was filled by a summary of the chapters on the Jewish sects with which Book IX ends (see pp. 455-472 Cr.). This hardly seems to correspond with the form of what is left; but it is not impossible that we have here excerpts from the book on chronology which we know Hippolytus to have written. Another suggestion is that what follows is from his _Commentary on Genesis_, of which a few fragments survive.]