• Key proper noun: “Ephesus” (以弗所).
  • Key concept: “Sleepers” (指七睡仙，Christian legend about seven young men who slept in a cave for centuries).
  • Key concept: “Legend” (传说).
  • Structure: It’s an inverted title format common in dictionaries (“Subject, Descriptor of the”). In Chinese, it should be naturalized to “以弗所七睡仙传说” or similar.

3. Determine Terminology:

   • “Ephesus”: 以弗所 (Yǐfúsuǒ). Rule: Chinese + (English). -> 以弗所 (Ephesus).

   • “Sleepers”: In the context of Christian hagiography, this refers to the “Seven Sleepers”. In Chinese academic/theological context, this is commonly known as “七睡仙” (Seven Sleepers) or “以弗所七睡者”. “Sleepers” here implies “those who slept”. A literal translation “睡眠者” is too generic. The specific legend is “七睡仙传说”. However, since the source says “Sleepers of Ephesus”, I should translate the meaning accurately.

   • Standard Chinese translation for “Seven Sleepers of Ephesus”: 以弗所七睡仙 (Seven Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • “Legend”: 传说 (Chuánshuō).

   • Combined: 以弗所七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Applying the proper noun rule: “以弗所 (Ephesus)”.

   • What about “Sleepers”? Is it a proper noun in this context? Yes, it refers to a specific group. Often referred to as “七睡仙”. But the text says “Sleepers”. I should translate the meaning but adhere to the proper noun rule for place names.

   • Let’s check the rule: “ALWAYS translate proper nouns into Chinese first, then include the original English in parentheses”.

   • “Ephesus” is definitely a place name. -> 以弗所 (Ephesus).

   • “Sleepers of Ephesus” is the title of the legend.

   • Common academic translation: 以弗所七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • However, sticking closer to the text “Sleepers of Ephesus”: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说？No, “七睡仙” is the established term.

   • Let’s look at the structure: “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus”.

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Seven Sleepers).

   • Wait, the source text is “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the”. This is likely a headword.

   • In Chinese dictionaries, headwords are usually natural order.

   • Proposed translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Actually, usually for “Legend of the…”, the headword might just be the subject.

   • Let’s translate the phrase as a title.

   • “以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说” or “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说”.

   • Given the specialization (Syriac/Christian theology), “七睡仙” (Seven Sleepers) is the standard term. But the text says “Sleepers”. I will use “睡者” or “七睡仙”. “七睡仙” is more recognizable. However, to be faithful to the text “Sleepers”, “睡者” is literal. But in Chinese Christian studies, “以弗所七睡仙” is the fixed term.

   • Let’s check the rule again: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So “Ephesus” must be “以弗所 (Ephesus)”.

   • “Legend of the” -> ”…传说”.

   • “Sleepers of Ephesus” -> “以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者” or “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙”.

   • I will use “七睡仙” as it is the established theological term for this specific legend, but since the source says “Sleepers”, maybe “睡者” is safer if I want to be literal, but “七睡仙” is the correct term in the field.

   • Actually, looking at similar dictionary entries (e.g., Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage), “Sleepers of Ephesus” is often translated as “以弗所七睡仙”.

   • Let’s construct the string: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, the rule says “proper nouns… include the original English in parentheses”.

   • Is “Sleepers of Ephesus” a proper noun (Title of Legend)? Yes.

   • Is “Ephesus” a place name? Yes.

   • Let’s try: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Better: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • However, I need to follow the instruction: “Translate the dictionary entry text”.

   • Source: “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the”

   • Target: “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说” (Natural order).

   • Do I need to add “(Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)” at the end? The rule says “proper nouns… include the original English in parentheses”. Usually, this applies to names within the text. For a title entry, it might be appropriate to keep the English title if it’s considered a proper noun (work/legend name).

   • Rule: “Book titles and work names → Chinese translation in《》+ (English in italics or plain)”.

   • Is this a book title? It’s a legend.

   • Let’s treat “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus” as the work/legend name.

   • Translation: 《以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说》(Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • However, dictionary headwords often don’t use book brackets unless it’s a specific book. This is a legend topic.

   • Let’s look at the rule: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So “Ephesus” -> “以弗所 (Ephesus)”.

   • “Sleepers” -> “七睡仙” (Standard term) or “睡者”. I’ll use “七睡仙” as it’s the specific theological term.

   • “Legend of the” -> ”…传说”.

   • Reordering for Chinese: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说.

   • Should I add the English title in parentheses at the end? The rule says “ALWAYS translate proper nouns into Chinese first, then include the original English in parentheses”. This legend title acts as a proper noun.

   • So: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, the source text is inverted: “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the”. This indicates the headword is “Sleepers of Ephesus” and the category is “Legend of the”. Or it’s just the full title inverted.

   • In Chinese, we don’t invert. We say “以弗所七睡仙传说”.

   • Let’s refine the “Sleepers” translation. In Syriac studies, this is often “七睡仙”.

   • Final decision: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, checking the rule “Book titles and work names → Chinese translation in《》+ (English…)”. Is a legend a work name? It’s a hagiographical topic. Usually not put in《》unless it’s a specific text like “The Legend of…”.

   • Let’s stick to the place name rule primarily and natural translation for the rest.

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Actually, looking at the source “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the”, it’s likely a headword.

   • Simplified: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • “七睡仙” is more precise. I will use “七睡仙”.

   • Do I need to put the whole thing in《》? Probably not, it’s a topic entry.

   • Do I need to append the English? The rule says “ALWAYS translate proper nouns… include the original English”. “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus” is the proper name of the legend.

   • So: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, one more check: “Sleepers of Ephesus” is the core proper noun phrase.

   • Let’s try to match the source structure slightly less inverted for clarity.

   • “以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)”

   • I think “七睡仙” is better for “Christian theology” specialization.

   • Final check on rules: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So “以弗所 (Ephesus)” is mandatory.

   • The rest is descriptive.

   • Output: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, looking at the source text again: “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the”.

   • This is likely an index entry.

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Or simply: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说

   • The rule says “ALWAYS translate proper nouns into Chinese first, then include the original English in parentheses”.

   • Is “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus” a proper noun? Yes, it’s the title of the legend.

   • So I should include the English.

   • Let’s finalize: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I should check if “Sleepers” needs transliteration. No, it’s a common noun used as a proper name here.

   • Okay, ready to generate.

   • Refinement: In Chinese academic contexts, “七睡仙” is the standard term. “以弗所” is the standard place name.

   • Structure: [Place] [Subject] [Type]

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, one detail: “target_language” is “Chinese”. The prompt asks for “Simplified Chinese”.

   • Okay.

   • Wait, I need to make sure I don’t add extra explanation.

   • Just the XML tag.

   • One more thought: Should I keep the inverted structure? No, Chinese doesn’t use inverted titles like this. Natural order is required for translation.

   • Should I use《》? The rule says “Book titles and work names”. A legend isn’t exactly a book, but it’s a named work/tradition. However, usually, dictionary entries for topics don’t use《》. I will omit《》unless it’s a specific book title like “The Legend of…”. Here it’s “Legend of the…”, which describes the topic. I will treat it as a topic entry.

   • I will add the English in parentheses at the end as per the “proper nouns” rule applied to the title of the legend.

   • Revised plan:

   • “Ephesus” -> 以弗所 (Ephesus)

   • “Sleepers” -> 七睡仙 (Standard theological term)

   • “Legend of the” -> 传说

   • Full: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, is “Sleepers of Ephesus” the proper noun? Yes.

   • So: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙 (Sleepers of Ephesus) 传说 (Legend)?

   • No, that’s clunky.

   • Best: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I should check if “Seven Sleepers” is explicitly in the text. It says “Sleepers”. But “Sleepers of Ephesus” is the “Seven Sleepers”. Translating as “七睡仙” is accurate localization.

   • Okay.

   • Wait, looking at the rule: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So “以弗所 (Ephesus)” is critical.

   • The rest of the English title in parentheses at the end covers the “proper noun” rule for the legend name.

   • Final check:

   • Source: Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I might not need to add the full English title at the end if I already translated the components with English annotations. But the rule says “ALWAYS translate proper nouns… include the original English”. The Legend Name is a proper noun.

   • Okay.

   • Wait, one more thing. The source text is likely a headword.

   • If I translate it as “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说”, does it need the English suffix?

   • Example rule: “personal names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus” -> “七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)”.

   • Combined: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • This seems redundant but follows the rule strictly for proper nouns.

   • However, usually for dictionary headwords, if the whole thing is the term, you translate it and add the original.

   • Let’s go with: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I’ll simplify. The place name rule is specific. The legend title rule is specific.

   • Let’s ensure “Ephesus” gets the treatment.

   • “以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)”

   • I think “七睡仙” is better theology.

   • Okay.

   • Wait, I notice the target_language is “Chinese”. The system instruction says “Simplified Chinese”. I will use Simplified Chinese.

   • Final decision:

   • 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I should check if I need to invert it back to “Legend of the…” structure? No, Chinese grammar requires modifier before noun.

   • Okay.

   • One more check: “Sleepers of Ephesus” is the specific entity.

   • Maybe: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • “七睡仙” adds “Seven” which isn’t in the source text “Sleepers”. Although implied.

   • To be safe and faithful: “睡者” (Sleepers). But “七睡仙” is the term.

   • In GEDSH (Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage), the entry is “Sleepers of Ephesus”. The Chinese translation in academic contexts is invariably “以弗所七睡仙”.

   • I will use “七睡仙” for professional accuracy.

   • Wait, I need to make sure I don’t over-add parentheses.

   • Rule: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • Rule: “Book titles and work names → Chinese translation in《》+ (English…)”.

   • Is this a work name? It’s a legend. I’ll treat it as a proper noun phrase.

   • Let’s just apply the place name rule strictly and translate the rest naturally, adding the full English title at the end as it functions as the entry name.

   • Actually, looking at the example “梅尔万的伊肖达德 (Ishoʿdad of Merv)”, the whole name is translated + (English).

   • So: 以弗所七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • But I must mark Ephesus separately? “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • So: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • This looks correct.

   • Wait, if I put the whole thing in parentheses at the end, do I still need (Ephesus) inside?

   • Example: “梅尔万的伊肖达德 (Ishoʿdad of Merv)”. Here “Merv” is a place. They didn’t write “梅尔万 (Merv) 的…”. They wrote the whole name + (English Name).

   • However, the rule says “place names → Chinese name + (English), e.g. ‘尼西比斯 (Nisibis)’”.

   • This implies if a place name appears, it should be marked.

   • In “Ishoʿdad of Merv”, the whole thing is a person’s designation.

   • Here “Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus” is the title.

   • If I treat it as a Title: 《以弗所七睡仙传说》(Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • But the rule for place names says “ALWAYS translate proper nouns… include original English”.

   • To be safe and compliant with both: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Actually, the example “梅尔万的伊肖达德 (Ishoʿdad of Merv)” suggests that for a composite proper noun, you translate the whole and add the whole English.

   • But the place name rule is explicit: “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • I will prioritize the place name rule within the text if it’s descriptive, but since this is a title entry, the whole title + (English) is standard for dictionary headwords.

   • However, the prompt says “Translate the dictionary entry text”.

   • Let’s look at the example: “尼西比斯 (Nisibis)”.

   • If I write “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说”, it highlights the place.

   • If I write “以弗所七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)”, it highlights the entry.

   • Given the instruction “ALWAYS translate proper nouns into Chinese first, then include the original English in parentheses”, and “place names” are listed under proper nouns.

   • I will combine them: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, that’s double marking.

   • Let’s look at “梅尔万的伊肖达德 (Ishoʿdad of Merv)”. Here “Merv” is not marked separately as “梅尔万 (Merv)”.

   • So for a composite proper noun (like a title), mark the whole thing.

   • But “Ephesus” is a place name rule specific.

   • Okay, I will mark Ephesus specifically because the rule says “place names → … e.g. ‘尼西比斯 (Nisibis)’”.

   • And “Book titles… → Chinese… + (English)”.

   • This is a Legend, not necessarily a Book.

   • I’ll stick to marking the place name and the full title.

   • Actually, to avoid clutter, standard practice for headwords is Title (Original Title).

   • But I must follow the “place names” rule.

   • Okay, I will write: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • Wait, is “Sleepers of Ephesus” the proper noun? Yes.

   • Okay, I’ll just translate it naturally and add the English at the end.

   • “以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)”

   • Wait, if I add the full English at the end, do I need (Ephesus) inside?

   • The rule says “ALWAYS… proper nouns… include original English”.

   • If I include the full English at the end, does that cover “Ephesus”?

   • The place name rule example “尼西比斯 (Nisibis)” suggests inline marking.

   • I will do inline marking for Ephesus to be safe with the specific place name rule.

   • And the full title English at the end for the entry.

   • Actually, looking at the “Ishoʿdad of Merv” example, they didn’t mark Merv inline.

   • So for a composite name, mark the whole.

   • “Sleepers of Ephesus, Legend of the” is the entry name.

   • So: 以弗所七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus).

   • But I really want to follow the place name rule “place names → Chinese name + (English)”.

   • Okay, I’ll compromise. The entry is about the Legend.

   • Translation: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • This seems most robust.

   • Wait, I’ll remove the second parentheses if it looks too redundant.

   • No, the rule says “ALWAYS… include the original English”.

   • Okay.

   • Wait, “Legend of the” is part of the title.

   • Okay.

   • Final choice: 以弗所 (Ephesus) 七睡仙传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus)

   • Wait, I’ll check if “七睡仙” is too interpretive. “睡者” is literal.

   • In Syriac studies, “Seven Sleepers” is the term. “Sleepers of Ephesus” = “Seven Sleepers”.

   • I’ll use “七睡仙”.

   • Wait, one last check on the XML format.

   • `<translated_text>…

一则关于七位年轻基督徒的传说，他们在罗马皇帝德西乌斯 (Decius) 迫害基督徒期间（249–251 年）逃离并沉睡，并于 5 世纪醒来。

该传说 (The Legend) 讲述了七名（在叙利亚语 (Syriac) 中通常为八名）年轻基督徒男子的故事，他们在罗马皇帝德西乌斯 (Decius，249–251 年) 迫害基督徒期间，拒绝向异教神灵献祭，并趁皇帝暂时离开以弗所 (Ephesus) 之际，逃至城外的山中，藏匿于洞穴并入睡。皇帝返回后，下令封死洞穴，欲使这些年轻人被活埋致死。然而，195 年后，即在基督徒皇帝狄奥多西二世 (Theodosius II，401–450 年) 统治的第 38 年（亦即 445/6 年），他们苏醒过来，由于封墙已被移除，他们离开洞穴，确信自己仅睡了一夜。当他们中受派进城的一人试图用德西乌斯 (Decius) 时代的硬币购买食物时，店主以为他们发现了一批旧钱窖藏。然而，该城主教 (bp.) 调查此事后，明白发生了伟大的神迹。随后，这些年轻人再次入睡，此次长眠不醒。文中还提到了同一时期为人所知的异端，即埃盖的狄奥多雷 (Theodore of Aegae) 主教 (bp.)，他否认死者身体复活。以弗所 (Ephesus) 的睡者 (Sleepers) 的苏醒“证明”了狄奥多雷 (Theodore) 是错误的，从而揭示了该传说 (Legend) 的功能线索。

不久，在以弗所 (Ephesus)，以弗所的沉睡者 (Sleepers of Ephesus) 的崇拜很快发展起来，并且一座奉献给他们的教堂建在那里，正如一位朝圣者的叙事所证明的那样（总执事狄奥多西 (Theodosius the Archdeacon)，《论圣地位置》(De situ terrae sanctae)，518 年至 530 年间）（它于 20 世纪 30 年代被德国考古探险队 (German archeological expedition) 发现）。

以弗所睡仙传说 (The Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus) 发展了长眠这一古老主题，该主题已见于《耶利米言语余录》(Rest of the Words of Jeremiah) 5:1（公元 2 世纪 (2nd cent. AD)），其中“埃塞俄比亚人” (Ethiopian)（即非洲人 (African)）亚比米勒 (Abimelek) 入睡，时长为犹太人 (Jews) 巴比伦之囚 (Babylonian exile) 的时期；这一主题也见于《巴比伦塔木德》(Babylonian Talmud)（Taʿanit 23；公元 2 世纪 (2nd cent. AD)），其中讲述了一位名叫霍尼·哈 - 梅格尔 (Honi Ha-Meʿaggel) 的人睡了同样的时长。

该传说最初似乎是用希腊语 (Greek) 撰写的。它很快变得相当流行，并被翻译成多种语言：拉丁语 (Latin)（最早见于图尔的格里高利 (Gregory of Tours, 538–594) 的记载），并由此译入西欧俗语 (West European vernaculars)，包括法语 (French)（夏德里 (Chardri) 所作的诗歌，13 世纪 (13th cent.)），以及在东方基督教 (Eastern Christianity) 中译入叙利亚语 (Syriac)、亚美尼亚语 (Armenian)、科普特语 (Coptic)、阿拉伯语 (Arabic)、埃塞俄比亚语 (Ethiopic) 和粟特语 (Sogdian)。它在伊斯兰教 (Islam) 领域也为人们所知，因为它出现在《古兰经》(Qurʾān)（18:8–30）中。因此出现了几个穆斯林 (Muslim) 版本，包括波斯语 (Persian)、吉尔吉斯语 (Kyrgyz) 和鞑靼语 (Tatar) 等语言的版本。所有这些版本的存在促进了以弗所七睡士 (Sleepers of Ephesus) 的民间崇拜，除了在以弗所 (Ephesus) 之外，还在多个地方，无论是在拉丁西方 (Latin West) 还是在穆斯林东方 (Muslim East)。

在叙利亚语 (Syriac) 中，以弗所睡者传说 (Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus) 或许最早见于 5 世纪 (5th cent.) 的圣彼得堡 (Saint-Petersburg) 第 4 号手稿 (ms.)，如果 M. 范·埃斯布鲁克 (M. van Esbroeck) 的断代被接受的话，其次见于萨鲁格的雅各布 (Yaʿqub of Serugh)，他在 6 世纪 (6th cent.) 初为之创作了一篇训诲诗 (memrā) (ed. Guidi, ‘Testi orientali’, two versions, 358–63, 363–9)。这其中包含了后来散文体文本中所知的所有要素。仍在 6 世纪 (6th cent.)，它进入了历史著作，例如米提利内的伪扎卡里亚 (Pseudo-Zacharias of Mitylene)（卒于 569 年后 (d. after 569)）的《教会史》(Ecclesiastical History)，米海尔·拉博 (Michael Rabo) 在其《编年史》(Chronicle)（约 1198 年 (ca. 1198)）中引用了其中的一个片段，以及以弗所的约翰 (Yuḥanon of Ephesus) 的《教会史》(Ecclesiastical History)（已不存，但由泰勒马赫雷的伪狄奥尼修斯 (Pseudo-Dionysios of Tel Maḥre) 在《祖克宁编年史》(Chronicle of Zuqnin)（约 775 年 (ca. 775)）中抄录）。然而，也存在独立的传承，例如在伦敦 (London)、巴黎 (Paris) 和柏林 (Berlin) 的手稿 (mss.) 中，由 I. 圭迪 (I. Guidi) (1884) 和 A. 阿尔盖尔 (A. Allgeier) (1916–18) 编辑。其中最早的（如果不是彼得堡手稿 (Peterburgensis) 的话）将是伦敦 (London)，大英图书馆 (Brit. Libr.) Add. 14,650，属于 6–7 世纪 (6th–7th cent.)。叙利亚语见证文献 (Syriac witnesses) 之间存在一些差异，其中之一是年轻殉道者 (young martyrs) 的人数：在最古老的见证文献（萨鲁格的雅各布 (Yaʿqub of Serugh) 和伪扎卡里亚 (Pseudo-Zacharias)）以及米海尔·拉博 (Michael Rabo) 中是七人，但在所有其他文本中是八人。

该文本的原始语言多年来一直是讨论的议题。一些学者（包括诺尔德克 (Th. Nöldeke) 1886, 453–54）认为原文是用叙利亚语 (Syriac) 撰写的。阿尔盖尔 (Allgeier) (1916–18) 也持此观点。他的主张受到了保罗·佩特斯 (Paul Peeters) (1923) 的批评，后者证明原文必定是希腊语 (Greek)。

如上所述，《以弗所睡仙传说》(Legend of the Sleepers of Ephesus) 在中世纪也为西方所知，首次出现在图尔的格里高利 (Gregory of Tours) 的《殉道者荣耀录》(Liber In Gloria martyrum) 第 38 章 (ed. B. Krusch [Monumenta Germaniae Historica, IV/A; 1885], 94) 中，他说他是从“某位叙利亚译者”(Syro quidam interpretante) 那里得知此传说的。尽管该时期叙利亚人 (Syrians) 存在于高卢 (Gaul) 是有文献记载的，但并不能确定格里高利 (Gregory) 真的是从一位叙利亚人 (Syrian) 那里听到这个传说的，因为术语 Syrus 在该时期被用于指代所有黎凡特 (Levantine) 起源的外国人，包括讲希腊语者 (Greek-speaking ones)，因此他的版本最有可能源自希腊语文本 (Greek text) (Peeters, 141–2)。

以弗所 (Ephesus) 沉睡者 (Sleepers) 之庆节日期并不固定，且根据叙利亚正教会 (Syr. Orth. Church) 的不同礼历，其庆祝日期分别为 4 月 21 日、8 月 2 日和 13 日，以及 10 月 23 日或 24 日 (ed. F. Nau, Un martyrologe et douze ménologes syriaques [PO 10.1; 1915]; ed. [with FT] P. Peeters, ‘Le Martyrologe de Rabban Sliba’, * AB * 27 [1908], 166)。