Justin Martyr, First Apology

(25) ‹anchor: Λουκίῳ φιλοσόφῳ› · call in col 327

Φιλοσόφῳ. Legitur φιλοσόφου apud Eusebium, Hist. lib. IV, c. 12, ubi hoc exordium Apologiae S. Justini refertur. Sed vitium videtur haec apud Eusebium scriptura. 1° Etsi legitur φιλοσόφου in multis codicibus, non desunt alii in quibus habemus φιλοσόφῳ. Quatuor ejusmodi citantur a Valesio, quibus alius ex Colbertinis adjungendus. 2° De eodem Lucio legimus in Apol. 2, n. 2, φιλοσόφῳ Καίσαρος παιδί, sicque habent non solum codices quibus usus est Valesius, sed etiam multi alii quos consului; uno tantum excepto. 3° Verisimilius multo est hunc philosophi titulum Lucio Vero viventi, laudandi causa, quam veluti quoddam cognomen ipsius patri mortuo tributum fuisse.

Φιλοσόφῳ ("the philosopher", dative). Eusebius, Hist. book IV, ch. 12, where this opening of St Justin's Apology is quoted, reads φιλοσόφου (genitive). But this reading in Eusebius seems to be a corruption. 1. Though φιλοσόφου is read in many manuscripts, there is no lack of others in which we have φιλοσόφῳ. Valesius cites four of this kind, and one more from the Colbert manuscripts should be added to them. 2. Of this same Lucius we read in Apol. 2, n. 2, φιλοσόφῳ Καίσαρος παιδί ("to the philosopher, son of Caesar"), and so read not only the manuscripts Valesius used but also many others I have consulted, with a single exception. 3. It is much more likely that this title of philosopher was given to Lucius Verus while living, by way of praise, than to his dead father as a kind of surname.

(printed under page 176)

(26) ‹anchor: ἐραστῇ παιδείας› · call in col 327

Παιδείας. Valesius in contextu apud Eusebium loco mox citato vertit, doctrinae amatori. At in adnotationibus reddendum putat, litterarum studioso. Unde concludit legendum esse φιλοσόφου, non φιλοσόφῳ, quia cum Lucius vocetur litterarum studiosus, quod de philosopho dici non solet, philosophi nomen ipsius patri potius tribuendum. Ipse Grabius, etsi legit φιλοσόφου, fatetur tamen παιδείας nomine rhetoricen et poeticen, non philosophiam, designari. Sed eruditis illis viris non favent antiqui scriptores. Nam Plato in Sophista, p. 229, edit. H. St., παιδείαν opponit ignorationi. In Gorgia (continues)

Παιδείας ("of learning"). Valesius, in his text of Eusebius at the place just cited, translates "a lover of learning". But in his annotations he thinks it should be rendered "a student of letters". From this he concludes that φιλοσόφου should be read, not φιλοσόφῳ, because since Lucius is called a student of letters, which is not usually said of a philosopher, the name of philosopher should rather be given to his father. Grabe himself, though he reads φιλοσόφου, nevertheless admits that by the word παιδεία rhetoric and poetry, not philosophy, are meant. But the ancient writers do not support these learned men. For Plato in the Sophist, p. 229, ed. H. Stephanus, sets παιδεία against ignorance. In the Gorgias (continues)

(printed under page 176)

(27) ‹anchor: τοῦ Βακχείου› · call in col 330

Τοῦ Βακχείου. Hieronymus Justini patrem hoc habuisse cognomen existimavit, idemque error illusit Christophorsono et Justini interpretibus. Ruffinus probe vidit avum Justini sic appellatum; unde sic reddit: Justinus Prisci filius Bacchiadis. Ruffinum secuti sunt Valesius et Grabius.

Τοῦ Βακχείου ("of Bacchius"). Jerome thought that Justin's father bore this surname, and the same error deceived Christopherson and Justin's translators. Rufinus rightly saw that Justin's grandfather was so called; hence he renders: "Justin, son of Priscus, son of Bacchius". Valesius and Grabe have followed Rufinus.

(printed under page 177)

(28) ‹anchor: Νέας πόλεως› · call in col 330

Νέας πόλεως. Legitur apud Eusebium νέας πόλεως Συρίας τῆς Παλαιστίνης. Mox idem habet εἷς αὐτῶν ὤν... ποιοῦμαι. Vid. n. 68. Citat sequentia Joan. Damas., Paral. p. 753.

Νέας πόλεως ("of Neapolis"). Eusebius reads "of Neapolis in Syria Palaestina". Shortly after, he has εἷς αὐτῶν ὤν... ποιοῦμαι ("being one of them... I make"). See n. 68. John Damascene, Parallels, p. 753, quotes what follows.

(printed under page 177)

(29) ‹anchor: Ὅτι λέγεσθε› · call in col 330

Ὅτι λέγεσθε. Conjicit Henricus Stephanus haec Justini non esse, sed ad marginem apposita ad explicandum illud ἀκούετε, inde in textum obrepsisse. Sed illud ὅτι λέγεσθε satis commode titulos et veluti cognomina, ἀκούετε autem laudes significat, quas hominum fama tribuebat. Vocabantur pii et philosophi, audiebant justitiae custodes et doctrinae amatores. Particula δὲ ante καὶ ὑπάρχετε redundat, ut paucis post lineis ante κολάζειν et saepe alias apud Justinum. Vid. n. 35.

Ὅτι λέγεσθε ("that you are called"). Henri Estienne conjectures that these words are not Justin's but were set in the margin to explain ἀκούετε ("you are spoken of") and from there crept into the text. But ὅτι λέγεσθε fittingly denotes titles and, as it were, surnames, while ἀκούετε denotes the praises that men's report bestowed. They were called pious and philosophers; they were spoken of as guardians of justice and lovers of learning. The particle δὲ before καὶ ὑπάρχετε is redundant, as it is a few lines later before κολάζειν, and often elsewhere in Justin. See n. 35.

(printed under page 177)

(30) ‹anchor: δειχθήσεται› · call in col 330

Δειχθήσεται. Frustra H. Steph. legendum putat δείξετε.

Δειχθήσεται ("it will be shown"). H. Stephanus needlessly thinks δείξετε ("you will show") should be read.

(printed under page 177)

(31) ‹anchor: γραμμάτων› · call in col 330

Γραμμάτων. In utroque codice Regio et Clarom. legitur ad marginem πραγμάτων. Mox recte observavit Sylburgius legi convenientius προσεληλύθαμεν.

Γραμμάτων ("of writings"). In both manuscripts, the Royal and the Claromontanus, πραγμάτων ("of matters") is read in the margin. Shortly after, Sylburg rightly observed that προσεληλύθαμεν ("we have come forward") is the more fitting reading.

(printed under page 177)

(32) ‹anchor: ὑμεῖς› · call in col 330

Ὑμεῖς. Simile Socratis dictum: Ἐμὲ δὲ Ἄνυτος καὶ Μέλιτος ἀποκτεῖναι μὲν δύνανται, βλάψαι δὲ οὔ, apud Clementem Alex. Strom. IV, p. 505 et Origen. VIII contra Celsum. Vide Socrat. Apol. p. 23, apud Plat.

Ὑμεῖς ("you"). A similar saying of Socrates: "Anytus and Meletus can kill me, but they cannot harm me", in Clement of Alexandria, Stromata IV, p. 505, and Origen, Against Celsus VIII. See the Apology of Socrates, p. 23, in Plato.

(printed under page 177)

(33) ‹anchor: μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν› · call in col 330

Μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν. Ex levissima immutatione exstitit sententia Justini proposito haerens aptissime. Pro ὡς πρέπον ἐστὶ, μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν, lego ὡς πρέπον ἐστὶν, ἄλλον δὲ κολάζειν, ut quemlibet alium punire decet, ita puniantur. Postulat Justinus, ut Christiani eodem jure sint ac alii rei, nec nomen crimini vertatur, sed, ut ait infra n. 7, si quis ex illis arguatur, puniatur ut improbus, non ut Christianus. Probabiles non videntur conjecturae tum Sylburgii qui πικρότερον addendum putat adductus hac Langi interpretatione: seu potius ut acrius puniantur; tum etiam Grabii, qui sic interpretatur, seu potius ipsi puniatis. — Κολάζεσθαι, ὡς πρέπον ἐστί. His verbis vulgo additur μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν. Sed ita locum corruptum esse, omnes editores viderunt. Quare Sylburgius, Langi versione (seu potius ut acrius puniantur) ductus, legi vult μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζεσθαι πικρότερον (ac sic fere habet Athenagor. Legat p. Christ. c. 2, p. 3. A. ed. Colon.). Grabius vero additione illa rejecta reddit: Si crimina Christianis objecta fuerint probata, puniantur, quin (vel seu) potius vos ipsi puniatis. Porro Fabricius (Biblioth. Gr. ed. Harl., vol. VII, p. 59, sq.) Grabium corrigens ita interpretatur: Volumus in crimina Christianis objecta inquiri, atque si ita se habere probata (continues)

Μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν ("or rather to punish"). By a very slight change a sense has emerged that fits Justin's purpose most aptly. For ὡς πρέπον ἐστὶ, μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν I read ὡς πρέπον ἐστὶν, ἄλλον δὲ κολάζειν: "let them be punished as it is fitting to punish anyone else". Justin asks that Christians be under the same law as other defendants, and that the name not be made a crime; but, as he says below in n. 7, if any of them is convicted, let him be punished as a wrongdoer, not as a Christian. Neither conjecture seems probable: Sylburg's, who thinks πικρότερον ("more severely") should be added, led by Lange's translation "or rather that they be punished more severely"; nor Grabe's, who translates "or rather that you yourselves punish". — Κολάζεσθαι, ὡς πρέπον ἐστί ("to be punished, as is fitting"). To these words μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζειν is commonly added. But all the editors have seen that the passage is thus corrupt. So Sylburg, led by Lange's version ("or rather that they be punished more severely"), would read μᾶλλον δὲ κολάζεσθαι πικρότερον (and Athenagoras has almost this, Embassy for the Christians, ch. 2, p. 3 A, Cologne ed.). Grabe, rejecting that addition, renders: "If the crimes laid against the Christians are proved, let them be punished, or (or rather) let you yourselves punish." Fabricius, further (Bibliotheca Graeca, Harles ed., vol. VII, p. 59 f.), correcting Grabe, translates thus: "We wish an inquiry to be made into the crimes laid against the Christians, and if they are proved to be so (continues)

(printed under page 177)

(34) ‹anchor: Τὰ πράγματα ἐπάγειν› · call in col 331

Τὰ πράγματα ἐπάγειν. Billius legendum putat, ἐτάζειν, examinare, lib. II Observat. sacr. cap. 6; sed necessaria non videtur haec emendatio.

Τὰ πράγματα ἐπάγειν ("to bring forward the facts"). Billy thinks ἐτάζειν, "to examine", should be read (Sacred Observations, book II, ch. 6); but this emendation does not seem necessary.

(printed under page 178)

(35) ‹anchor: Πρόκλησιν› · call in col 331

Πρόκλησιν. Conditionem reddidi: neque enim hac voce designatur provocatio in jus, sed potius, ut saepe alias, lata ad componendam aut avertendam discordiam conditio. Pyrrhus apud Plutarchum, p. 389, accepit τὴν πρόκλησιν conditionem Lysimachi postulantis ut Macedoniam inter se partirentur. Sylla apud eumdem, p. 466, accepit conditionem Archelai pacem postulantis. In lib. De consuetud. Rom. Aedituus Herculis προκλήσεσιν ἐμμένων, stans conditionibus, Larentiam convivio exceptam Herculi tradidit. Ex his illustrari potest Philostorgii locus lib. IX, p. 519, non belle a Valesio redditus. Demophilus et qui cum eo Cyzicum ordinandi episcopi causa venerant, dicuntur accepisse τὴν πρόκλησιν conditionem a Cyzicenis latam, et Aetium ac Eunomium anathemate damnasse, τοῦτο γὰρ ἡ πρόκλησις, haec enim erat conditio.

Πρόκλησιν. I have rendered it "condition"; for this word does not denote a summons to court, but rather, as often elsewhere, a condition put forward to settle or avert a quarrel. Pyrrhus, in Plutarch, p. 389, accepted the condition of Lysimachus, who asked that they divide Macedonia between them. Sulla, in the same author, p. 466, accepted the condition of Archelaus, who asked for peace. In the book On Roman Customs, the temple-keeper of Hercules, "abiding by the conditions", handed Larentia over to Hercules after entertaining her at a banquet. From these the passage of Philostorgius, book IX, p. 519, not well rendered by Valesius, can be explained. Demophilus and those who had come with him to Cyzicus to ordain a bishop are said to have accepted the condition put forward by the people of Cyzicus, and to have condemned Aetius and Eunomius with anathema, "for this was the condition".

(printed under page 178)

(36) ‹anchor: Τις τῶν παλαιῶν› · call in col 331

Τις τῶν παλαιῶν. Dictum est Platonis, lib. V De rep., quod a Philone quoque refertur p. 445 et a Cicerone ep. ad Q. fratrem. Idem et Marco Antonino semper in ore fuisse adnotatum a Julio Capitolino in Vita ejus cap. 27. SYLBURG.

Τις τῶν παλαιῶν ("one of the ancients"). It is a saying of Plato, Republic book V, which is also quoted by Philo, p. 445, and by Cicero in a letter to his brother Quintus. Julius Capitolinus, in his Life of Marcus Antoninus, ch. 27, notes that it was always on that emperor's lips too. SYLBURG.

(printed under page 178)

(37) ‹anchor: Ὅπως ὑπὲρ τῶν› · call in col 331

Ὅπως ὑπὲρ τῶν. Recte admonuit Billius, lib. II Observat. sacr. cap. 6, legendum esse ὅπως μὴ ὑπὲρ τῶν. Idem existimat delendum esse αὐτῶν post τυφλώττοντες. Sed tamen fieri potest haec scriptura, ut Justini stylo non aliena. Idem enim valet ac οἱ τυφλώττοντες αὐτῶν, qui ex eis sive inter illos caecutiunt. Ibidem legendum videtur αὐτοὶ ὀφλήσωμεν. Non belle Grabius legit αὐτὰ ὀφλήσωμεν.

Ὅπως ὑπὲρ τῶν ("that for those"). Billy rightly advised (Sacred Observations, book II, ch. 6) that ὅπως μὴ ὑπὲρ τῶν ("that not for those") should be read. He also thinks αὐτῶν should be deleted after τυφλώττοντες. But this reading can stand, as not foreign to Justin's style; for it means the same as οἱ τυφλώττοντες αὐτῶν, "those of them, or among them, who are blind". In the same place αὐτοὶ ὀφλήσωμεν ("we ourselves incur") seems to be the reading. Grabe's reading αὐτὰ ὀφλήσωμεν is not good.

(printed under page 178)

(38) ‹anchor: τοῦ κατηγορουμένου› · call in col 331

Κατηγορουμένου. Nomen, quod crimini datur, nequaquam significatur hac voce, sed ipsum nomen quo appellantur Christiani. Sic infra n. 7, τὸ ἐπικατηγορούμενον ὄνομα aliam interpretationem non patitur. Et n. 27: τὸ ἐπικατηγορούμενον ὄνομα τῆς φιλοσοφίας.

Κατηγορουμένου. This word by no means signifies a name charged as a crime, but simply the name by which Christians are called. So below, in n. 7, τὸ ἐπικατηγορούμενον ὄνομα ("the name predicated") admits no other interpretation. And in n. 27: "the name of philosophy predicated of them".

(printed under page 178)

(39) ‹anchor: Ἐφ' ὑμῶν πάντας› · call in col 334

Ἐφ' ὑμῶν πάντας. Ita R. Steph. et codex Clarom. Male in editionibus Paris. et German. ἐφ' ὑμῶν πάντων.

Ἐφ' ὑμῶν πάντας ("all, before you"). So R. Estienne and the Claromontanus manuscript. The Paris and German editions wrongly read ἐφ' ὑμῶν πάντων.

(printed under page 179)

(40) ‹anchor: Χριστιανοί› · call in col 334

Χριστιανοί. Sylburgius, Langus et Grabius legendum putant hoc in loco et in alio simili n. 7, χρηστιανοί; propterea quod Justinus hanc vocem idem esse putat ac τὸ χρηστόν, unde etiam supra, quantum ad ipsum nomen χρηστότατοι sumus. In quo quidem S. martyrem respicere putant ad usitatam, ut eruditorum non pauci opinati sunt, Chresti per ridiculum pronuntiandi rationem. Sed haec sententia parum mihi, fateor, arridet. Nam 1° Justinus Christi nomen deducit ab ungendo in Apol. 2, n. 5. 2° Cum ait hoc loco Christianos, quantum ad nomen attinet, esse optimos, atque hoc nomen odio haberi non debere, quia τὸ χρηστόν odisse injustum est; minime derivat hanc vocem ἀπὸ τοῦ χρηστοῦ, sive a bonitate, sed ab unctione, quam rem utilem et optimam judicat. Hoc nomen si deduxisset ἀπὸ τοῦ χρηστοῦ, non dixisset, χρηστότατοι, optimi sumus, nec superlativo usus fuisset, qui satis commode apponi potuit, si Christianorum nomen ex re optima derivetur: at perabsurde adhiberetur, si ἀπὸ τοῦ χρηστοῦ deducatur. 3° Justini sententiam illustrat Theophilus Antiochenus, qui in lib. I, n. 1, ait: «Fateor me esse Christianum, ac fero hoc nomen Deo acceptum, sperans me utilem esse Deo, ἐλπίζων εὔχρηστος εἶναι τῷ Θεῷ.» Quibus verbis designat necessitudinem intercedentem inter Christianos et τὸ χρηστόν, non quod prima vox ab altera derivetur, sed quia, ut ipse ait n. 12, τὸ Χριστὸν ἡδὺ καὶ εὔχρηστόν ἐστι, id quod unctum est, suave et bonum est.

Χριστιανοί ("Christians"). Sylburg, Lange and Grabe think that here and in a similar place, n. 7, χρηστιανοί should be read, because Justin takes this word to be the same as τὸ χρηστόν ("the good"); whence also above, "as to the name itself we are most excellent (χρηστότατοι)". In this they think the holy martyr is alluding to the mocking pronunciation "Chrestus", which, as not a few scholars have supposed, was in common use. But I confess this view hardly pleases me. For 1. Justin derives the name of Christ from anointing, in Apol. 2, n. 5. 2. When he says here that Christians, as far as the name goes, are most excellent, and that this name ought not to be hated because it is unjust to hate what is good, he by no means derives the word from χρηστός, that is, from goodness, but from anointing, which he judges a useful and most excellent thing. Had he derived the name from χρηστός, he would not have said χρηστότατοι, "we are most excellent", nor used the superlative, which could fittingly be applied if the Christians' name is derived from a most excellent thing, but would be quite absurd if it were derived from χρηστός. 3. Theophilus of Antioch illustrates Justin's meaning when he says in book I, n. 1: "I confess that I am a Christian, and I bear this name beloved of God, hoping to be useful to God (ἐλπίζων εὔχρηστος εἶναι τῷ Θεῷ)." By these words he points to the bond between Christians and what is good, not because the one word is derived from the other, but because, as he himself says in n. 12, "what is anointed is sweet and useful", that is, sweet and good.

(printed under page 179)

(41) ‹anchor: Τὸ δὲ χρηστόν› · call in col 334

Τὸ δὲ χρηστόν. Chresti pronuntiandi ratio non tam pervulgata fuit apud ethnicos, quam existimarunt eruditi viri. Nam si perpauca excipias, ut dialogum, qui Philopatris inscribitur apud Lucianum, ubi Chrestus legitur, et Suetonium qui Judaeos, «impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes» Roma a Claudio expulsos narrat, ubique pronuntiatur Christus et Christiani, in epistola Plinii ad Trajanum, atque etiam Adriani apud Vopisc. in Saturn. p. 245; apud Cornelium Tacitum Annal. lib. XV, apud Lucianum in Proteo et Alexandro, et in libris Celsi, cujus tam multa in Christum et Christianos contumeliose dicta referuntur ab Origene. Hinc illa ethnicorum dicta: «Christianos ad leonem.» Tert., De spectac.: «Bonus vir Caius Seius tantum quod Christianus.» Apol. c. 3. Quamobrem vitiosa pronuntiatio apud paucos obrepserat, neque id contumeliae causa, ut viri docti existimarunt, sed errore, ut patet ex Tertulliano et Lactantio. «Etiam cum corrupte a vobis, inquit Tertullianus, I ad Nat. cap. 3, Chrestiani pronuntiamur (nam ne nominis quidem ipsius liquido certi estis), sic quoque de suavitate vel bonitate modulatum est.» Et Lactantius lib. IV, cap. 7: «Sed exponenda hujus nominis ratio propter ignorantium errorem, qui eum immutata littera Christum (lege Chrestum) solent dicere.» — Τὸ δὲ χρηστόν. Non ignorat S. Martyr veram nominis Christiani originem, ut apparet ex Apol. I, c. 12, p. 60 A. et II, c. 6, p. 44. E.; nec ideo cum Sylburgio, Lango et Grabio legendum Χρηστιανοί. Vehementer vero antiqui tum sacri tum profani scriptores, Attici imprimis, Plato et Demosthenes in ejusmodi lusibus etymologicis et quidem in hac ipsa voce χρηστός elaborarunt. Cf. Grotius ad Matth. I, 21, et Dionys. Petav. in Epiph., tom. II, p. 53. BRAUNIUS. Cf. et Wolf. ad Theoph. 1, 2 p. 7.

Τὸ δὲ χρηστόν ("but what is good"). The pronunciation "Chrestus" was not so widespread among the pagans as learned men have thought. For if you except a very few cases, such as the dialogue in Lucian entitled Philopatris, where "Chrestus" is read, and Suetonius, who relates that the Jews, "constantly rioting at the instigation of Chrestus", were expelled from Rome by Claudius, everywhere the pronunciation is "Christus" and "Christiani": in Pliny's letter to Trajan, and also in Hadrian's, in Vopiscus, Saturninus, p. 245; in Cornelius Tacitus, Annals book XV; in Lucian, in the Proteus and the Alexander; and in the books of Celsus, so many of whose insults against Christ and the Christians are reported by Origen. Hence those sayings of the pagans: "The Christians to the lion!" (Tertullian, On the Shows); "Gaius Seius is a good man, only he is a Christian" (Apology, ch. 3). The faulty pronunciation, then, had crept in among a few, and not by way of insult, as learned men have thought, but by mistake, as is clear from Tertullian and Lactantius. "Even when you mispronounce us as 'Chrestians'," says Tertullian, To the Nations I, ch. 3, "(for you are not even clearly sure of the name itself), even so it is formed from sweetness or goodness." And Lactantius, book IV, ch. 7: "But the meaning of this name must be explained because of the error of the ignorant, who by changing a letter commonly call him Christus (read: Chrestus)." — Τὸ δὲ χρηστόν. The holy martyr is not unaware of the true origin of the Christian name, as appears from Apol. I, ch. 12, p. 60 A, and II, ch. 6, p. 44 E; and so Χρηστιανοί should not be read with Sylburg, Lange and Grabe. But the ancient writers, sacred and profane, the Attic ones above all, Plato and Demosthenes, worked hard at etymological plays of this kind, and indeed on this very word χρηστός. Compare Grotius on Matthew 1:21, and Dionysius Petavius on Epiphanius, vol. II, p. 53. BRAUN. Compare also Wolf on Theophilus 1, 2, p. 7.

(printed under page 179)

(42) ‹anchor: ὁμολογήσῃ› · call in col 334

Ὁμολογήσῃ. Judiciorum iniquitatem non omittunt caeteri religionis defensores, in primis Tertullianus, qui Apologeticum ab hoc exorditur argumento, ac praesides, cum Christianos negare cogerent, sic loqui solitos refert: «Sic autem soletis, inquit, dicere homicidae: Nega, laniari jubete sacrilegum, si confiteri perseveraverit.» Corruptus locus sic videtur emendari posse: «Sic enim soletis dicere: Homicida, nega: laniari jubeo te sacrilegum, si confiteri perseveraveris.»

Ὁμολογήσῃ ("confesses"). The other defenders of religion do not pass over the injustice of the trials, Tertullian above all, who opens his Apologeticum with this argument and reports that governors, when they were forcing Christians to deny, used to speak thus: "This is how you are wont to speak," he says, "to the murderer: Deny it; order the sacrilegious man to be torn, if he persists in confessing." The corrupt passage seems capable of emendation thus: "For this is how you are wont to speak: Murderer, deny it; I order you, sacrilegious man, to be torn if you persist in confessing."

(printed under page 179)

(43) ‹anchor: παρακελεύονται› · call in col 334

Παρακελεύονται. Sic Tertullianus sub finem Apologetici: «Illa ipsa obstinatio, quam exprobratis, magistra est.» Unde etiam martyres vocantur a Gregorio Nazianzeno σιγῶντα κηρύγματα, orat. 20, p. 319. Vid. Clem. Strom. IV, p. 503.

Παρακελεύονται ("they exhort"). So Tertullian near the end of the Apologeticum: "That very obstinacy which you reproach is a teacher." Hence too martyrs are called by Gregory Nazianzen "silent preachings", oration 20, p. 319. See Clement, Stromata IV, p. 503.

(printed under page 179)

(44) ‹anchor: τοῖς ἄλλως› · call in col 334

Τοῖς ἄλλως. Ita H. Steph. et mss. Male in editionibus τοῖς ἄλλοις, quae scriptura placuit Grabio, quia non vidit hanc esse debere horum verborum constructionem, τοῖς ἄλλως αἱρουμένοις καταλέγειν ἀσέβειαν καὶ ἀδικίαν τῶν πάντων Χριστιανῶν. Thirlbius non plus vidit quam Grabius. Legendum enim putat ἄλλοις et ὡς addendum ante ἀσέβειαν.

Τοῖς ἄλλως ("to those who otherwise"). So H. Stephanus and the manuscripts. The editions wrongly read τοῖς ἄλλοις ("to the others"), a reading Grabe liked, because he did not see that the construction of these words must be: "to those who otherwise choose, to charge all Christians with impiety and injustice". Thirlby saw no more than Grabe; for he thinks ἄλλοις should be read and ὡς added before ἀσέβειαν.

(printed under page 179)

(45) ‹anchor: Τῶν παλαιῶν› · call in col 334

Τῶν παλαιῶν. Sic construenda haec verba, οἱ τῶν παλαιῶν, nec vertendum, qui contraria veteribus senserunt. Vide infra n. 7; Athenagoram, n. 2; Tertull., I ad Nat., ubi sic loquitur: «Quot denique (continues)

Τῶν παλαιῶν ("of the ancients"). These words are to be construed thus: οἱ τῶν παλαιῶν ("those of the ancients"), and not translated "those who thought contrary to the ancients". See below, n. 7; Athenagoras, n. 2; Tertullian, To the Nations I, where he speaks thus: "How many, finally, (continues)

(printed under page 179)

(46) ‹anchor: Ὑβρίζουσι τούτους› · call in col 335

Ὑβρίζουσι τούτους. Ita codex Regius et Clarom. Editi ὑβρίζουσι τούτοις, quam scripturam vitio non carere animadverterant Billius, Sylburg. et Grab. Hic tria testimonia satis similia citat Thirlbius ex lib. III Theophili Antioch. et aliud ex Lactantio lib. V, c. 20.

Ὑβρίζουσι τούτους ("they insult these"). So the Royal and Claromontanus manuscripts. The printed editions have ὑβρίζουσι τούτοις, a reading which Billy, Sylburg and Grabe had noticed is not free of fault. Here Thirlby cites three fairly similar testimonies from book III of Theophilus of Antioch and another from Lactantius, book V, ch. 20.

(printed under page 180)

(47) ‹anchor: Οὐ κρίσεις› · call in col 335

Οὐ κρίσεις. Grabius legit οὐ κρίσει. Totum hunc locum illustravimus mutata interpunctione. Sic enim antea legebatur: τί δὴ οὖν τοῦτ' ἂν εἴη ἐφ' ἡμῶν... δοξάζειν. Paulo ante, illud ἐφ' ἡμῶν eodem modo usurpatur.

Οὐ κρίσεις ("not judgements"). Grabe reads οὐ κρίσει. We have cleared up this whole passage by changing the punctuation; for it was previously read thus: τί δὴ οὖν τοῦτ' ἂν εἴη ἐφ' ἡμῶν... δοξάζειν ("what then would this be in our case... to think"). A little before, ἐφ' ἡμῶν is used in the same way.

(printed under page 180)

(48) ‹anchor: Εἰρήσεται γὰρ τἀληθές› · call in col 335

Εἰρήσεται γὰρ τἀληθές. Quod palam et aperte declarat Justinus, daemonum flagellis incitari qui ita judicant, id Tertullianus lenius et obscurius insinuat: «Suspecta sit vobis ista perversitas, inquit, Apol. c. 2, ne qua vis lateat in occulto, quae vos adversus formam, adversus naturam judicandi, contra ipsas quoque leges ministret.» Quod quidem verbum positum videtur pro administret, sive regat et incitet. De daemonibus eadem habes in Apol. 2, n. 4.

Εἰρήσεται γὰρ τἀληθές ("for the truth shall be told"). What Justin declares openly and plainly, that those who judge in this way are driven by the scourges of demons, Tertullian hints more gently and obscurely: "Let this perversity be suspect to you," he says (Apol. ch. 2), "lest some force lie hidden in secret that directs you against the form, against the nature of judging, and even against the laws themselves." This word ministret seems to be put for administret, that is, "governs and drives". You have the same about demons in Apol. 2, n. 4.

(printed under page 180)

(49) ‹anchor: Καὶ αὐτοί› · call in col 335

Καὶ αὐτοί. Legendum pronuntiat καὶ αὐτόν Thirlbius, et paulo post μὴ θεούς, pro μὴ ὀρθούς. Huic postremae emendationi tantum tribuit, ut «rem tam claram exemplis aut rationibus confirmare nihil aliud esse dicat nisi lectoribus convicium facere.» Nihil sane incommodi esset, si scripsisset Justinus καὶ αὐτόν, et μὴ θεούς; sed cum aliter scriptum habeamus, et utraque scriptura apte et commode posita sit, quid opus est sana ac minime corrupta emendare? — Καινὰ δαιμόνια. Cf. Xenoph. Memorabil., c. 1, et Platonis Apol. Socr. OTTO.

Καὶ αὐτοί ("they too"). Thirlby declares that καὶ αὐτόν ("him too") should be read, and a little after μὴ θεούς ("not gods") for μὴ ὀρθούς ("not upright"). He sets such store by this last emendation that he says "to confirm so clear a matter with examples or reasons is nothing else than to insult the readers". Certainly there would be no difficulty if Justin had written καὶ αὐτόν and μὴ θεούς; but since we have it written otherwise, and both readings stand aptly and fittingly, what need is there to emend what is sound and not at all corrupt? — Καινὰ δαιμόνια ("new divinities"). Compare Xenophon, Memorabilia, ch. 1, and Plato's Apology of Socrates. OTTO.

(printed under page 180)

(50) ‹anchor: Ἕλλησι› · call in col 335

Ἕλλησι. Legendum ἐν Ἕλλησι jam multi post Perionium observarunt.

Ἕλλησι ("to the Greeks"). Many after Périon have already observed that ἐν Ἕλλησι ("among the Greeks") should be read.

(printed under page 180)

(51) ‹anchor: Καὶ διδάξαντα ἡμᾶς ταῦτα› · call in col 335

Καὶ διδάξαντα ἡμᾶς ταῦτα. Cum magna exstiterit protestantium de hoc Justini testimonio adversus catholicos dimicatio, interpretationis meae defensionem, quae satis commode finibus notae includi non poterat, in Praefationem conjeci.

Καὶ διδάξαντα ἡμᾶς ταῦτα ("and who taught us these things"). Since there has been a great contest by Protestants against Catholics over this testimony of Justin, I have put the defence of my interpretation, which could not conveniently be confined within the limits of a note, into the Preface.

(printed under page 180)

(52) ‹anchor: Καὶ γὰρ πολλοὺς πολλάκις› · call in col 338

Καὶ γὰρ πολλοὺς πολλάκις. Subintelligit Grabius ἐλέγχετε, sed prorsus immerito. Nam clara est verborum constructio, πολλοὺς πολλάκις... καταδικάζετε. Quod autem Justinus multos saepe condemnari ait, id de Christianis accipi non potest (quomodo enim multos ex illis convictos fuisse fateretur, cum paucos tantum objicerent adversarii?); sed generatim docet quanti intersit in reorum vitam inquirere, ut idem jus impetret Christianis.

Καὶ γὰρ πολλοὺς πολλάκις ("for often many"). Grabe understands ἐλέγχετε ("you convict"), but quite wrongly; for the construction of the words is clear: πολλοὺς πολλάκις... καταδικάζετε ("often you condemn many"). That Justin says many are often condemned cannot be taken of Christians (for how would he admit that many of them had been convicted, when their opponents brought up only a few?); rather, he teaches in general how much it matters to inquire into the life of the accused, so as to obtain the same right for the Christians.

(printed under page 181)

(53) ‹anchor: Διὰ τοὺς προλεχθέντας› · call in col 338

Διὰ τοὺς προλεχθέντας. Legit Grabius διὰ τοῦτο προλεχθέντας, sed inutilis prorsus haec conjectura. Multo aptius et commodius Perionius et Billius legunt διὰ τοὺς προελεγχθέντας. Multos sane condemnatis, cum de cujusque vita inquiritis, sed eos non condemnatis propter eos qui jam convicti fuere. Quare etiamsi nonnulli ex Christianis convicti fuerint, non idcirco caeteri condemnandi.

Διὰ τοὺς προλεχθέντας ("because of those spoken of before"). Grabe reads διὰ τοῦτο προλεχθέντας, but this conjecture is wholly useless. Much more aptly and fittingly Périon and Billy read διὰ τοὺς προελεγχθέντας ("because of those convicted before"). You do indeed condemn many, when you inquire into each one's life, but you do not condemn them because of those who have already been convicted. So even if some Christians have been convicted, the rest are not on that account to be condemned.

(printed under page 181)

(54) ‹anchor: Καὶ δοξάντων› · call in col 338

Καὶ δοξάντων. Illud καί idem valet hoc loco ac ἤ. Declarat enim commune esse Christianorum nomen iis qui re aut nomine sunt Christiani.

Καὶ δοξάντων ("and of those who seemed"). Here καί means the same as ἤ ("or"). For he declares that the name of Christians is common to those who are Christians in reality or in name.

(printed under page 181)

(55) ‹anchor: Πλάτων› · call in col 338

Πλάτων. Observat Grabius his de rebus agere Platonem in Gorg. tom. I edit. Serrani, p. 524, et in Apologia Socratis, et de suppliciis mille annorum in Timaeo, p. 42. Addit eruditus Thirlbius lib. X De rep., p. 761, et in Gorg., p. 357, et in Phaedr., p. 1223.

Πλάτων ("Plato"). Grabe observes that Plato treats of these matters in the Gorgias, vol. I of Serranus's edition, p. 524, and in the Apology of Socrates, and of the punishments of a thousand years in the Timaeus, p. 42. The learned Thirlby adds Republic book X, p. 761, the Gorgias, p. 357, and the Phaedrus, p. 1223.

(printed under page 181)

(56) ‹anchor: γινομένων› · call in col 338

Γινομένων. Supple αὐτῶν vel ἀνθρώπων γινομένων αὐτοῖς σώμασι vel ἐν αὐτοῖς σώμασι μετὰ τῶν ψυχῶν. Necesse non est cum Thirlbio legere γινομένοις et κολασθησομένοις.

Γινομένων ("being"). Supply αὐτῶν or ἀνθρώπων: "they (or men) being in the same bodies", or "in their bodies, with their souls". There is no need to read γινομένοις and κολασθησομένοις with Thirlby.

(printed under page 181)

(57) ‹anchor: ἡ δὲ πλάνη› · call in col 338

Ἡ δὲ πλάνη. Corruptum putat hunc locum Grabius. Langus et Perionius sic interpretantur ut dicant eos, qui judicium negant, ex uno errore in alium delabi, donec tandem hoc judicio peracto nihil mali a Christianis fieri pateat. At nihil aliud sibi vult Justinus, nisi hunc errorem de judicio, si modo error sit, levissimi esse momenti, quandiu opere et factis nihil deliquisse arguentur Christiani. Voces illae, ἤδε ἡ πλάνη ἐστὶν ἄλλου πρὸς ἕτερον, idem sonant ac πλάνη ἀλλοπρόσαλλος, error communis et quotidianus, quem si quis nobis objiciat, facile sit in ipso censore simile aliquod vitium (continues)

Ἡ δὲ πλάνη ("but the error"). Grabe thinks this passage corrupt. Lange and Périon interpret it as saying that those who deny the judgement slip from one error into another, until at last, once this judgement is held, it becomes clear that no evil is done by the Christians. But Justin means nothing else than that this error about the judgement, if indeed it be an error, is of very slight weight, so long as the Christians are not convicted of having done wrong in deed and act. Those words, ἤδε ἡ πλάνη ἐστὶν ἄλλου πρὸς ἕτερον ("this error is one man's against another's"), mean the same as πλάνη ἀλλοπρόσαλλος, a common and everyday error, which, if anyone should cast it at us, it would be easy to find some similar fault in the critic himself (continues)

(printed under page 181)

(58) ‹anchor: Τιμῶμεν οὕς› · call in col 339

Τιμῶμεν οὕς. Ita Clarom. codex. Editi τιμωμένους.

Τιμῶμεν οὕς ("we honour those whom"). So the Claromontanus manuscript. The printed editions have τιμωμένους ("those honoured").

(printed under page 182)

(59) ‹anchor: Μορφοποιήσαντες› · call in col 339

Μορφοποιήσαντες. Frustra H. Steph. addit ante hanc vocem ἀνθρώπους vel ἀνθρώπων εἰκόνας. Sic enim paulo ante legimus οὓς ἄνθρωποι μορφώσαντες, et n. 6 λόγου μορφωθέντος.

Μορφοποιήσαντες ("having given them shape"). H. Stephanus needlessly adds before this word ἀνθρώπους ("men") or ἀνθρώπων εἰκόνας ("images of men"). For a little before we read οὓς ἄνθρωποι μορφώσαντες ("which men having shaped"), and in n. 6 λόγου μορφωθέντος ("the Word having taken form").

(printed under page 182)

(60) ‹anchor: λέγεσθαι› · call in col 339

Λέγεσθαι. Legitur in codicibus mss. et R. Steph. λέγεσθε. Sed recte emendatus hic naevus in edit. Paris. Homines deorum custodes, ut observat Grabius, irrident Baruch. VI, 17, Pseudoclemens, Recogn. lib. VI, Arnobius lib. VI, Cyprianus contra Demetrianum. Vide Epist. ad Diognetum, et Tertull. Apol. 29 et I ad Nat., c. 10.

Λέγεσθαι ("to be said"). The manuscripts and R. Estienne read λέγεσθε ("you are said"). But this blemish was rightly corrected in the Paris edition. Men as guardians of gods, as Grabe observes, are mocked by Baruch 6:17, the Pseudo-Clement, Recognitions book VI, Arnobius book VI, and Cyprian, Against Demetrianus. See the Epistle to Diognetus, and Tertullian, Apology 29 and To the Nations I, ch. 10.

(printed under page 182)

(61) ‹anchor: προσειλήφαμεν› · call in col 339

Προσειλήφαμεν. Grabius post H. Steph. et Sylburgium legit προειλήφαμεν tum hoc in loco, tum in alio qui paulo post occurrit. Sed Justinus vix ullam vocem frequentius usurpat, cum acceptam a Christo et apostolis traditionem commemorat. Huc accedit, quod sua sponte minime vitiosa est, vel potius longe alteri praeferenda, ad ea significanda quae a Christo et apostolis edocti sumus.

Προσειλήφαμεν ("we have received"). Grabe, after H. Stephanus and Sylburg, reads προειλήφαμεν ("we have learned beforehand"), both here and in another place that occurs a little later. But Justin uses hardly any word more often when he recalls the tradition received from Christ and the apostles. Add that the word is in itself not at all faulty, or rather is far to be preferred to the other for signifying what we have been taught by Christ and the apostles.

(printed under page 182)

(62) ‹anchor: Ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης› · call in col 339

Ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης. Haec verba Halloixius Vit. S. Just. p. 329, e S. martyris contextu recidit, ut plane subdita et materiae aeternitatem, praeter Justini sententiam, affingentia. Aliter emendavit Langus; vertit enim: ex nihilo et non ex informi materia. Sed nihil corruptum aut interpolatum, nihil quod Justinum in erroris suspicionem possit adducere, ut in Praefatione ostendimus.

Ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης ("out of formless matter"). Halloix, Life of St Justin, p. 329, cut these words out of the holy martyr's text as plainly spurious and as ascribing to him, against Justin's mind, the eternity of matter. Lange emended otherwise, for he translates: "out of nothing and not out of formless matter". But there is nothing corrupt or interpolated here, nothing that could bring Justin under suspicion of error, as we have shown in the Preface.

(printed under page 182)

(63) ‹anchor: βουλεύματι› · call in col 339

Βουλεύματι. Sine ratione Sylburgius legit βουλήματι, et paulo post συμβασιλεύσοντας.

Βουλεύματι ("counsel"). Sylburg without reason reads βουλήματι ("will"), and a little after συμβασιλεύσοντας ("who will reign with").

(printed under page 182)

(64) ‹anchor: Τῷ μὴ εἴργεσθαι› · call in col 342

Τῷ μὴ εἴργεσθαι. Frustra hic nonnulli legunt τὸ μὴ εἴργεσθαι. Sic reddimus hunc locum, ut nulla supersit difficultas. Confirmat hunc sensum Justinus, dum ait Evangelium latius manaturum fuisse, nisi falsa crimina obstitissent.

Τῷ μὴ εἴργεσθαι ("by not being hindered"). Some here needlessly read τὸ μὴ εἴργεσθαι. We render this passage so that no difficulty remains. Justin confirms this sense when he says that the Gospel would have spread more widely had false charges not stood in the way.

(printed under page 183)

(65) ‹anchor: Ἅπερ› · call in col 342

Ἅπερ. Hoc pro vulg. ὅπερ legendum probe Davisius notavit, astipulantibus Gallandio et Braunio; ergo recepi. OTTO.

Ἅπερ ("which things"). Davies rightly noted that this should be read for the common ὅπερ ("which thing"), with Galland and Braun agreeing; so I have adopted it. OTTO.

(printed under page 183)

(66) ‹anchor: Ταῦτα ὁ Λόγος› · call in col 342

Ταῦτα ὁ Λόγος. Legit Perionius τοῦτο ὁ λόγος θεῖος ἂν εἰργάσατο, et infra γινώσκοντας τῷ ὁμολογοῦντι. Sed ejus emendatio, si prima vox excipiatur, aliis non probatur. Libenter legerem ὁ Λόγος Θεὸς ὤν, Verbum, cum Deus sit, haec praestitisset. Sic etiam legit Thirlbius. Quod spectat ad illud γινώσκοντες, similia passim apud Justinum exempla occurrunt.

Ταῦτα ὁ Λόγος ("these things the Word"). Périon reads τοῦτο ὁ λόγος θεῖος ἂν εἰργάσατο ("this the divine Word would have done"), and below γινώσκοντας τῷ ὁμολογοῦντι. But apart from the first word his emendation does not commend itself to others. I would gladly read ὁ Λόγος Θεὸς ὤν, "the Word, since he is God, would have accomplished this". Thirlby reads so too. As for γινώσκοντες ("knowing"), similar examples occur throughout Justin.

(printed under page 183)

(67) ‹anchor: τοῦ καὶ πάντως› · call in col 342

Τοῦ καὶ πάντως. H. Steph. legendum putat τοῦ σώματος καὶ πάντως. Sed haec absurda emendatio loci integri et sani. Infra eadem occurrit loquendi ratio n. 53. Grabius putat excidisse ex utroque loco vocem παντός ob proximum illud πάντως. Sed si quid addendum esset huic loco, qui profecto mendosus non est, addendum esset παντί ut in Apol. II, n. 11, non vero παντός. Nihil etiam mutat eruditus editor Londinensis, qui Justini vulgatam lectionem firmat hoc versu Euripidis, βροτοῖς ἅπασι κατθανεῖν ὀφείλεται.

Τοῦ καὶ πάντως ("since in any case [death]"). H. Stephanus thinks τοῦ σώματος καὶ πάντως ("since the body in any case") should be read. But this is an absurd emendation of a whole and sound passage. The same turn of speech occurs below, n. 53. Grabe thinks the word παντός ("of everyone") has dropped out of both places because of the nearby πάντως. But if anything were to be added to this passage, which is certainly not faulty, it would be παντί, as in Apol. II, n. 11, not παντός. The learned London editor changes nothing either, confirming Justin's common reading by this line of Euripides: "To all mortals it is owed to die."

(printed under page 183)

(68) ‹anchor: κειμένους νόμους› · call in col 342

Κειμένους νόμους. Satis praeclare Tertullianus S. Martyris vestigiis, «Sed quanta auctoritas, inquit, legum humanarum, cum illas et evadere homini contingat plerumque in admissis delitescenti, et aliquando contemnere ex involuntate vel necessitate delinquenti.... enimvero nos, qui sub Deo omnium speculatore dispungimur, quique aeternam ab eo poenam providemus, merito soli innocentiae occurrimus, et pro scientiae plenitudine et pro latebrarum difficultate et pro magnitudine cruciatus, non diuturni, verum sempiterni, eum timentes quem timere debebit et ipse qui timentes judicat, Deum non proconsulem timentes.» Apol. c. 45. Similia apud Origenem leguntur, lib. IV contra Cels., p. 200, et apud Euseb. Praep. lib. XV, c. 5.

Κειμένους νόμους ("the laws laid down"). Tertullian, in the holy martyr's footsteps, puts it finely: "But how great is the authority of human laws, when a man often manages to escape them by hiding in his misdeeds, and sometimes to despise them when he offends unwillingly or of necessity.... We, however, who are assessed under God, the watcher of all, and who foresee eternal punishment from him, rightly alone attain to innocence, on account of the fullness of knowledge, the difficulty of hiding, and the greatness of the torment, not lasting but everlasting, fearing him whom even he who judges those who fear must fear: fearing God, not the proconsul." Apol. ch. 45. Similar things are read in Origen, Against Celsus book IV, p. 200, and in Eusebius, Preparation book XV, ch. 5.

(printed under page 183)

(69) ‹anchor: Εἰ ἔμαθον› · call in col 343

Εἰ ἔμαθον. Legit Sylburgius εἰ δ' ἔμαθον. Nihil addit Thirlbius, sed legit οἱ γὰρ διὰ τοὺς, etc. «Qui enim propter leges et poenas a vobis constitutas contendunt latere injuste agentes (quoniam vero sciunt fieri posse ut vos, utpote qui homines estis, lateant, injuste agunt), si edocti essent,» etc. Haec legendi ratio prima specie arridere possit, sed prorsus rejicietur, si expendatur attentius. Hic enim Justinus quam potentior sit humanis legibus Christiana doctrina demonstrat hoc argumento, quod spem fallendi ista praeripiat, hae vero relinquant. Statuit itaque latendi studio in hominibus improbis non auctoritatem legum commendari, sed infirmitatem argui, nec legum metu ac reverentia latebras ad facinus quaeri, sed spe facinoris abscondendi, quae si tollatur, non jam facinus committetur. Utrum haec inepta et falsa videri debent ac foeda depravatio, an peracuta sententia, in qua pervertenda vir doctissimus desudavit?

Εἰ ἔμαθον ("if they had learned"). Sylburg reads εἰ δ' ἔμαθον. Thirlby adds nothing, but reads οἱ γὰρ διὰ τοὺς, etc.: "For those who, because of the laws and penalties you have established, strive to escape notice while doing wrong (but since they know that they can escape your notice, you being men, they do wrong), if they had been taught," etc. This reading might please at first sight, but it will be rejected outright if it is weighed more carefully. For here Justin shows how much more powerful than human laws Christian teaching is, by this argument: that it snatches away the hope of deceiving, which those laws leave. He holds, then, that the eagerness of wicked men to escape notice does not commend the authority of the laws but proves their weakness, and that hiding-places for a crime are sought not from fear and reverence for the laws but from the hope of concealing the crime; take that hope away, and the crime will no longer be committed. Should this seem foolish and false and a foul corruption, or a very sharp thought, which a most learned man has toiled to pervert?

(printed under page 184)

(70) ‹anchor: Διὰ τὰ ἐπικείμενα› · call in col 343

Διὰ τὰ ἐπικείμενα. Impendentia videlicet a Deo supplicia.

Διὰ τὰ ἐπικείμενα ("because of what lies ahead"). That is, the punishments that hang over them from God.

(printed under page 184)

(71) ‹anchor: Κολάζετε› · call in col 343

Κολάζετε. Legendum videtur κολάζητε, vel, ut Sylburgius posuit, κολάσετε. — [Ut hanc libertatem dicendi leniamus eamque cum debita regiae majestati reverentia, quantum fieri potest, conciliemus, observandum est Justinum imperatori ejusque filiis quos alloquebatur, nequaquam attribuere tam perversum consilium, ut eos metuere suspicetur ne omnes aequa faciant. Hanc cogitationem improbis hominibus injici a daemonibus declarat: imperatores nihil praeter rationem facturos confidit. Non suam ergo propriam opinionem aut suspicionem profert, sed id objicit, quod nonnulli ex imperatorum agendi ratione colligere possent; quasi diceret: Christianos persequi, quorum tam utilis ad vitium exstirpandum doctrina, hominum videtur esse metuentium, ne omnes aequa faciant. In his quae sequuntur, Carnificum sane id foret, non bonorum principum, fidenter hujus vitii turpitudinem declarat, ut illud in imperatorem ejusque filios minime cadere demonstret.] Ex Addendis et Emendandis.

Κολάζετε ("you punish"). It seems κολάζητε should be read, or, as Sylburg has it, κολάσετε ("you will punish"). — [To soften this boldness of speech and reconcile it, as far as possible, with the reverence due to royal majesty, it should be observed that Justin by no means attributes to the emperor and his sons, whom he was addressing, so perverse a purpose as to suspect them of fearing that all might act justly. He declares that this thought is put into wicked men by the demons; he trusts that the emperors will do nothing contrary to reason. So he does not put forward his own opinion or suspicion, but raises what some might infer from the emperors' way of acting; as if to say: to persecute the Christians, whose teaching is so useful for rooting out vice, seems the act of men who fear that all may act justly. In what follows, "That would indeed be the part of executioners, not of good princes", he confidently declares the baseness of this vice, so as to show that it in no way applies to the emperor and his sons.] From the Addenda and Corrigenda.

(printed under page 184)

(72) ‹anchor: Καὶ ταῦτα› · call in col 343

Καὶ ταῦτα. Nempe absurdissimam illam cogitationem et metum ne omnes aequa faciant.

Καὶ ταῦτα ("and these things"). That is, that most absurd thought and fear that all might act justly.

(printed under page 184)

(73) ‹anchor: Πρᾶξαι› · call in col 343

Πρᾶξαι. H. Steph. mallet πράξειν, sed nihil videtur mutandum.

Πρᾶξαι ("to do"). H. Stephanus would prefer πράξειν ("will do"), but nothing seems to need changing.

(printed under page 184)

(74) ‹anchor: Τοσοῦτον› · call in col 343

Τοσοῦτον. Haec citata a Joan. Damasc., I Paral., cap. 58, ut monet Grabius.

Τοσοῦτον ("so much"). These words are quoted by John Damascene, Parallels I, ch. 58, as Grabe points out.

(printed under page 184)

(75) ‹anchor: Οὐ καλλιερήσετε› · call in col 343

Οὐ καλλιερήσετε. Hanc vocem Langus et alii sic accipiunt, quasi S. Martyr imperatores litaturos (h. e. prosperos successus habituros) neget, si daemones colere, ac victimas illis offerre pergant. At perspicuum est Justinum de injusta Christianorum nece expostulare, ac imperatores litaturos negare, si veritatem consuetudini posthabeant, et, ut solent latrones in solitudine, Christianos furori suo immolent. Simili sensu, sed non sine ironia Demonax, teste Luciano in ejus Vita, p. 549: Ἄνδρες γὰρ Ἀθηναῖοι, inquit, ἐμὲ μὲν ὁρῶντες ἐστεφανωμένον, ὑμεῖς ἤδη κἀμὲ καταθύσατε. Τὸ γὰρ πρότερον οὐ καλλιερήσατε. Cum me coronatum, Athenienses, videatis, mactate me. Hactenus enim non litastis. Provocat ergo Athenienses Demonax, ut se coronatum mactent, si litare velint. Contra imperatoribus denuntiat Justinus eos non litaturos, si Christianos immolent: idque ab ipso Verbo demonstratum esse declarat.

Οὐ καλλιερήσετε ("you will not obtain favourable omens"). Lange and others take this word as if the holy martyr denied that the emperors would obtain good omens (that is, have prosperous outcomes) if they went on worshipping demons and offering them victims. But it is plain that Justin is protesting against the unjust killing of the Christians, and denying that the emperors will obtain good omens if they put custom before truth and, as robbers do in a lonely place, sacrifice the Christians to their fury. In a similar sense, but not without irony, Demonax, as Lucian reports in his Life, p. 549: "Men of Athens," he says, "seeing me crowned, sacrifice me now too; for so far you have not obtained good omens." "Since you see me crowned, Athenians, slaughter me; for so far your sacrifices have not been accepted." So Demonax challenges the Athenians to slaughter him, crowned, if they want favourable omens. Justin, on the contrary, warns the emperors that they will not obtain favourable omens if they sacrifice the Christians; and he declares that this has been shown by the Word himself.

(printed under page 184)

(76) ‹anchor: Οὗ βασιλικώτατον› · call in col 343

Οὗ βασιλικώτατον. Verbi omnipotentiam hic praedicat Justinus, ut ostendat nunquam defuturos, qui ab eo adjuti praecepta ejus sequi malint, quam patrias superstitiones.

Οὗ βασιλικώτατον ("than whom none is more kingly"). Here Justin proclaims the almighty power of the Word, to show that there will never be lacking those who, helped by him, would rather follow his precepts than their ancestral superstitions.

(printed under page 184)

(77) ‹anchor: οὐχ αἱρήσεται› · call in col 343

Οὐχ αἱρήσεται. Non male Grabius subintelligendum putat, etiamsi patrio more sint recepta, ut accurata sit comparatio inter ea quae a Verbo prohibita vir prudens non eliget, et ea quae quisque a patribus haereditate accipere reformidat.

Οὐχ αἱρήσεται ("will not choose"). Grabe not unreasonably thinks "even if they are received by ancestral custom" should be understood, so that the comparison is exact between the things forbidden by the Word, which a prudent man will not choose, and the things each man shrinks from receiving as an inheritance from his fathers.

(printed under page 184)

(78) ‹anchor: φημί› · call in col 343

Φημί. Refertur hoc verbum ad ea quae paulo ante dixit Justinus, nempe imperatores non litaturos, si Christianos mactent, idque a Verbo demonstrari et doceri. Quare non incommode illud, inquam, usurpat, ubi explicare instituit quomodo Verbum docuerit inanes fore persecutorum conatus. Duplici enim rationis momento veritatem Christi praedictionis demonstrat. Ac primum quidem repetit ex ipsius Christi majestate, qui, cum summum exerceat cum Patre imperium, Christianos suos ita roborabit, ut quaecunque fugere praeceperit, ab iis refugiant, ut alii homines a paupertate et morbis et ignominia refugere solent. Sed quia de Christi di- (continues)

Φημί ("I say"). This word refers to what Justin said a little before, namely that the emperors will not obtain favourable omens if they slaughter the Christians, and that this is shown and taught by the Word. So he fittingly uses "I say" where he sets out to explain how the Word taught that the persecutors' efforts would be vain. For he demonstrates the truth of Christ's prediction by a twofold argument. The first he draws from the majesty of Christ himself, who, since he exercises supreme rule with the Father, will so strengthen his Christians that they will shun whatever he has commanded them to flee, as other men are wont to shun poverty and disease and disgrace. But since of Christ's di- (continues)

(printed under page 184)

(79) ‹anchor: Εἶπε› · call in col 346

Εἶπε. Legendum εἰπεῖν.

Εἶπε ("he said"). Read εἰπεῖν ("to say").

(printed under page 185)

(80) ‹anchor: Οὐ ῥᾷον› · call in col 346

Οὐ ῥᾷον. Haec Irenaeus pene ad verbum describit lib. III, cap. 2, ut ante observavit Grabius. «Si non facile est ab errore apprehensam resipiscere animam, sed non omnino impossibile est errorem effugere apposita veritate.»

Οὐ ῥᾷον ("it is not easier"). Irenaeus copies these words almost word for word, book III, ch. 2, as Grabe observed before: "If it is not easy for a soul seized by error to come to its senses, yet it is not altogether impossible to escape error when the truth is set before it."

(printed under page 185)

(81) ‹anchor: Ἐφ' οἷς προσφερόμεθα πᾶσιν› · call in col 346

Ἐφ' οἷς προσφερόμεθα πᾶσιν. In his omnibus quae offerimus, id est, in omnibus sacrificiis nostris, sive quoties sacrificamus. Neque enim apud Christianos varia erant, ut apud Judaeos atque ethnicos, sacrificiorum genera.

Ἐφ' οἷς προσφερόμεθα πᾶσιν. "In all these things that we offer", that is, in all our sacrifices, or whenever we sacrifice. For among Christians there were not various kinds of sacrifice, as among the Jews and the pagans.

(printed under page 185)

(82) ‹anchor: Προσφέρειν› · call in col 346

Προσφέρειν. Ad nostros et pauperum usus offerre, quia scilicet eorum, quae oblata fuerant a fidelibus, pars in pauperum usus servabatur.

Προσφέρειν. "To offer for our own use and that of the poor", because, that is, part of what the faithful had offered was kept for the use of the poor.

(printed under page 185)

(83) ‹anchor: Πομπὰς καὶ ὕμνους› · call in col 346

Πομπὰς καὶ ὕμνους. Satis perspicitur hymnos hic vocari tum Psalmos Davidis, tum a Christianis ipsis composita carmina, quae in ecclesia cantari solebant. Pompae autem nihil aliud videntur esse, quam ritus et caeremoniae in administrandis sacramentis, eucharistiae praesertim et baptismi, solitae observari. Pompae autem vocari non solent mysteria religionis Christianae. Quid enim aliud sunt pompae, nisi «theatrorum insania, ut ait Cyrillus Hierosolym., catech. mystagog. 1, equorum cursus in hippodromiis, venationes in circo, et reliqua hujuscemodi vanitas?» Sed quia haec in honorem deorum fiebant, et Christiani qui has fugiebant superstitiones, nullum numinis cultum retinere videbantur, docet Justinus suas illos pompas celebrare, sed cum ratione et veritate. Non absimili sensu Tertullianus mysteria religionis Christianae comparat cum spectaculis gentilium. «Hae voluptates, inquit, haec spectacula Christianorum, sancta, perpetua, gratuita,» etc., lib. De spectac., c. 29. Et auctor libri De spectaculis, apud Cyprianum: «Habet, inquit, Christianus spectacula meliora, si velit.» — [Infra Justinus, nempe n. 65, declarat Christianos per nomen Filii et Spiritus sancti, et n. 67, in omnibus oblationibus Deum per Filium ejus Jesum Christum et per Spiritum sanctum laudari. Sed hoc loco illud διὰ λόγου non videtur idem valere ac per Verbum, sed rationalem cultum designare, ut apud Athenagoram Legat. n. 13, ubi laudatur Christianorum victima incruenta et cultus rationalis, δέον ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν καὶ τὴν λογικὴν προσάγειν λατρείαν. Interdum διὰ λόγου apud Justinum idem est ac verbis, ut n. 55. Is qui praeest dicitur n. 67, admonitionem et adhortationem διὰ λόγου suscipere. Quod si διὰ λόγου πομπὰς καὶ ὕμνους πέμπειν idem esse velimus, ac verbis pompas et hymnos mittere, quem sensum Perionius et Gelenius secuti sunt; pompae illae idem erunt ac preces, quod quidem fateor mihi non multum arridere.] — Ex Addendis et Emendandis.

Πομπὰς καὶ ὕμνους ("processions and hymns"). It is clear enough that "hymns" here means both the Psalms of David and songs composed by the Christians themselves, which used to be sung in church. The "processions" seem to be nothing other than the rites and ceremonies customarily observed in administering the sacraments, especially the eucharist and baptism. Yet the mysteries of the Christian religion are not usually called pompae. For what else are pompae but "the madness of the theatres", as Cyril of Jerusalem says, Mystagogical Catechesis 1, "the horse races in the hippodromes, the hunts in the circus, and the rest of such vanity"? But since these were done in honour of the gods, and the Christians, who shunned these superstitions, seemed to keep no worship of a deity, Justin teaches that they celebrate their own processions, but with reason and truth. In a not dissimilar sense Tertullian compares the mysteries of the Christian religion with the shows of the gentiles: "These are the pleasures," he says, "these the shows of the Christians, holy, perpetual, free," etc., On the Shows, ch. 29. And the author of the book On the Shows, among Cyprian's works: "The Christian," he says, "has better shows, if he wishes." — [Below, in n. 65, Justin declares that the Christians praise God through the name of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and in n. 67 that "in all offerings God is praised through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit". But here διὰ λόγου does not seem to mean "through the Word", but to denote rational worship, as in Athenagoras, Embassy n. 13, where the Christians' bloodless victim and rational worship are praised: "one must offer a bloodless sacrifice and rational service". Sometimes διὰ λόγου in Justin is the same as "in words", as in n. 55. He who presides is said in n. 67 to give admonition and exhortation διὰ λόγου. But if we take διὰ λόγου πομπὰς καὶ ὕμνους πέμπειν to mean "to send up processions and hymns in words", the sense Périon and Gelenius followed, those processions will be the same as prayers, which I confess does not much please me.] — From the Addenda and Corrigenda.

(printed under page 185)

(84) ‹anchor: Ὑπέρ τε τοῦ γεγονέναι› · call in col 346

Ὑπέρ τε τοῦ γεγονέναι. Parenthesis, quam apposui, satis idonea videtur ad Graecam orationem illustrandum. Sed quia eumdem usum in Latina interpretatione praebere non poterat, mutandus fuit ordo verborum, et quae media erant, postrema feci.

Ὑπέρ τε τοῦ γεγονέναι ("both for our having been made"). The parenthesis I have added seems suitable enough for clarifying the Greek sentence. But since it could not serve the same purpose in the Latin translation, the order of the words had to be changed, and I put last what stood in the middle.

(printed under page 185)

(85) ‹anchor: Προδιαβεβλημένοι› · call in col 347

Προδιαβεβλημένοι. Ad ea respicit quae antea in daemones dixit; quo sensu dicebat Tertullianus in libro Ad Scapulam, cap. 2: «Daemones autem non tantum respuimus, verum et revincimus, et quotidie traducimus, et de hominibus expellimus, sicut plurimis notum est.»

Προδιαβεβλημένοι ("having been warned beforehand"). He looks back to what he said earlier against the demons; in which sense Tertullian said in the book To Scapula, ch. 2: "But the demons we not only spurn, we also refute them, expose them daily, and drive them out of men, as is known to very many."

(printed under page 186)

(86) ‹anchor: Ὃν τρόπον› · call in col 347

Ὃν τρόπον. Haec referenda sunt ad cautionem adversus daemonum insidias. Ethnicos monet Justinus, ut caveant ne decipiantur a daemonibus et a Christiana religione abducantur: tum ait Christianos ad hunc modum, id est, dum fraudes daemonum perspiciunt, et Christianae doctrinae assentiuntur, a daemonibus discessisse.

Ὃν τρόπον ("in the way that"). These words are to be referred to the warning against the snares of the demons. Justin warns the pagans to beware of being deceived by the demons and drawn away from the Christian religion; then he says that the Christians departed from the demons in this way, that is, by seeing through the demons' frauds and assenting to Christian teaching.

(printed under page 186)

(87) ‹anchor: διὰ τὰ ἔθη› · call in col 347

Διὰ τὰ ἔθη. Tangit S. Martyr argumentum longe praeclarissimum, caeteris religionis defensoribus frequentatum, conversionem totius orbis ex omni vitiorum ac superstitionum genere ad veri Dei cultum, ex perpetuis internecionibus ad conspirantem in omnibus rebus consensum. Illa autem institutorum varietas, quae ne focum quidem inter eos qui ejusdem tribus non essent, communem esse sinebat, cum ad legum in reipublicae administratione, tum etiam ad religionum dissimilitudinem videtur pertinere. Primum dissensionis genus depingit Eusebius in orat. De laud. Const., p. 647. Summam etiam distractionem pariebat varietas religionum, cum alii alios deos colerent, et eadem res alibi Deus, alibi victima esset. Hujus rei apud Eusebium Praepar. Evangel. lib. III, cap. 1, insigne testimonium habemus ex libro Plutarchi De Daedalis Plataeensibus, corruptum illud quidem, sed tamen quod facile emendetur: Οὐ νομίζουσιν οὐδὲ ἀξιοῦσι κοινωνίαν εἶναι πρὸς Διόνυσον Ἥρᾳ· φυλάσσονται δὲ συμμιγνύναι τὰ ἱερὰ, καὶ τὰς Ἀθήνησιν ἱερείας ἀπαντώσας φασὶν ἀλλήλαις προσαγορεύειν, μηδὲ ὅλως κιττὸν εἰς τὸ τῆς Ἥρας κομίζεσθαι τέμενος. Legendum putat Vigerus προαγορεύειν; at soluta omnia si legatur οὐ προσαγορεύειν. Nullam prorsus Junoni cum Baccho societatem et communionem esse pronuntiant, eoque diligenter cavent ne amborum sacra misceantur; ac sacerdotes narrant Athenis, si sibi invicem occurrant, inter se non salutare, nec omnino hederam in templum Junonis inferri. Ex religionum varietate bella, seditiones ac caedes exoriri observat Athanasius in Orat. contra gentes, n. 23.

Διὰ τὰ ἔθη ("because of their customs"). The holy martyr touches on a far most splendid argument, much used by the other defenders of religion: the conversion of the whole world from every kind of vice and superstition to the worship of the true God, and from endless mutual slaughter to a concord agreeing in all things. That diversity of institutions, which did not allow even a hearth to be shared among those who were not of the same tribe, seems to concern both the difference of laws in the administration of the state and the difference of religions. Eusebius depicts the first kind of discord in his oration In Praise of Constantine, p. 647. The diversity of religions too bred the greatest division, since some worshipped some gods and others others, and the same thing was in one place a god, in another a victim. Of this we have a remarkable testimony in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel book III, ch. 1, from Plutarch's book On the Daedala at Plataea, corrupt indeed, but easily emended: "They do not think or hold that Hera has any fellowship with Dionysus; they take care not to mix their rites, and they say that the priestesses at Athens, when they meet, address one another, and that ivy is not brought at all into the precinct of Hera." Viger thinks προαγορεύειν should be read; but everything is solved if we read οὐ προσαγορεύειν ("do not address"). "They declare that Juno has no fellowship or communion whatever with Bacchus, and therefore they take care that the rites of the two are not mixed; and they relate that at Athens the priestesses, if they meet one another, do not greet each other, and that ivy is not brought at all into the temple of Juno." Athanasius observes, in the Oration against the Gentiles, n. 23, that wars, seditions and slaughter arise from the diversity of religions.

(printed under page 186)

(88) ‹anchor: οἱ κατὰ τὰς τοῦ Χριστοῦ› · call in col 347

Οἱ κατὰ τὰς τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Quamvis illud οἱ non repugnet, commode tamen posset expungi, isque sensus exstaret: Eos suadendo flectere conamur, ut secundum praeclara Christi praecepta viventes, bonam spem habeant, etc.

Οἱ κατὰ τὰς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ("those who according to Christ's"). Though οἱ is not out of place, it could fittingly be struck out, and this sense would result: "We try by persuasion to turn them, so that, living according to Christ's excellent precepts, they may have good hope," etc.

(printed under page 186)

Scripture references (superscript calls, one line across the page): (printed under page 187)

(36) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 350

Matth. V, 28, 29, 32.

Matthew 5:28, 29, 32.

(printed under page 187)

(37) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 350

Matth. XIX, 12.

Matthew 19:12.

(printed under page 187)

(38) ‹anchor: peccatores ad poenitentiam› · call in col 350

Matth. IX, 13.

Matthew 9:13.

Editor's notes: (printed under page 187)

(89) ‹anchor: Ὡς δυνατῶν› · call in col 350

Ὡς δυνατῶν. Legendum putavit H. Stephanus ὡς δὴ συνετῶν, quia ad ejusmodi rerum considerationem non potentia opus est, sed sapientia. Sed quo major erat imperatorum potestas, eo magis illos decebat veritatis inquisitio, praesertim in his rebus ob quas homines innocentes damnabantur. Hinc Justinus Apol. 2, n. 3, paratum se esse demonstrans coram imperatoribus Crescentem refellere, ait: Regium sane hoc opus fuerit.

Ὡς δυνατῶν ("as being powerful"). H. Stephanus thought ὡς δὴ συνετῶν ("as being wise") should be read, because the consideration of such matters needs not power but wisdom. But the greater the emperors' power, the more it befitted them to inquire into the truth, especially in the matters for which innocent men were being condemned. Hence Justin, Apol. 2, n. 3, showing that he is ready to refute Crescens before the emperors, says: "This would indeed be a royal task."

(printed under page 187)

(90) ‹anchor: εἰ ἀληθῶς› · call in col 350

Ambigua videri possent haec Justini verba, εἰ ἀληθῶς, etc. Is enim sensus esse possit: Utrum haec, quae didicimus et docemus, vera sint. Sed Justinus Christi praecepta in medio ponere statuit, ne verba dare videatur, dum tantam esse Christianorum sanctitatem asseverat. Itaque non dubitat quin Christianorum innocentia in tuto futura sit, si haec illos a Christo accepisse et docere constet: atque id unum ad expendendum et examinandum proponit.

These words of Justin, εἰ ἀληθῶς ("whether truly"), etc., might seem ambiguous. For the sense could be: "whether these things that we have learned and teach are true". But Justin decided to set Christ's precepts before them, so as not to seem to deceive while asserting that the holiness of the Christians is so great. So he does not doubt that the Christians' innocence will be safe if it is established that they received these things from Christ and teach them; and that alone he puts forward to be weighed and examined.

(printed under page 187)

(91) ‹anchor: Ἀλλὰ δύναμις› · call in col 350

Ἀλλὰ δύναμις. Langus et Grabius sic reddunt: Virtus Dei et Verbum ejus fuit. Est sane Christus Dei virtus et Verbum; sed Justinus id hoc loco non tangit; de adhibito a Christo disserendi genere loquitur. Quamobrem multo aptius et commodius reddideris: Neque enim erat sophista, sed ipsius sermo virtus Dei erat, quia videlicet Christi sermo cum rebus inanimis imperabat, tum etiam, ut ait Origenes lib. I contr. Cels., p. 55, «occultam quamdam in audientium animis persuasionem efficiebat.»

Ἀλλὰ δύναμις ("but power"). Lange and Grabe render thus: "He was the power of God and his Word." Christ is indeed the power and Word of God; but Justin does not touch on that here; he is speaking of the kind of discourse Christ used. So you would render much more aptly and fittingly: "For he was no sophist, but his word was the power of God", because Christ's word both gave commands to lifeless things and also, as Origen says, Against Celsus book I, p. 55, "worked a certain hidden persuasion in the souls of those who heard".

(printed under page 187)

(92) ‹anchor: Διγαμίας› · call in col 350

Διγαμίας. Non secundae nuptiae hic a Justino vituperantur, sed quae non soluto priore vinculo contrahuntur. Illius enim mens ex testimoniis, quae ab eo referuntur, existimanda; et cum in testimoniis citatis nihil sit de secundis nuptiis, probabile non est illum ea de re loqui voluisse. Posset etiam διγαμίας nomine adulterium intelligi, quasi scriptum esset: Ὥσπερ νόμῳ ἀνθρωπίνῳ οἱ διγαμίας ποιούμενοι, etc. Quemadmodum apud leges humanas peccatores sunt, qui duplex matrimonium ineunt, ita, etc. Sed sensus, quem in interpretando secutus sum, magis mihi arridet.

Διγαμίας ("double marriage"). It is not second marriages that Justin censures here, but those contracted while the former bond is not dissolved. For his meaning must be judged from the testimonies he cites; and since there is nothing in the cited testimonies about second marriages, it is not likely that he meant to speak of that matter. By the word διγαμία adultery might also be understood, as if it were written: "As by human law those who make double marriages," etc., "As under human laws those who enter a double marriage are sinners, so," etc. But the sense I followed in translating pleases me more.

(printed under page 187)

(93) ‹anchor: Οὐ γὰρ... βουλόμενος› · call in col 350

Οὐ γὰρ... βουλόμενος. Irenaeus quoque Adv. haeres., II, 32, § 1, p. 165, ed. Massuet, S. Martyris vestigiis: Apud quem, inquit, non solum qui moechatur expellitur, sed et qui moechari vult. OTTO.

Οὐ γὰρ... βουλόμενος ("for not only... but he who wishes"). Irenaeus too, Against Heresies II, 32, § 1, p. 165, Massuet's edition, in the holy martyr's footsteps: "With whom," he says, "not only he who commits adultery is cast out, but also he who wishes to commit adultery." OTTO.

(printed under page 187)

Scripture references (superscript calls, three lines across the page): (printed under page 188)

(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Matth. V, 46, 44.

Matthew 5:46, 44.

(printed under page 188)

(40) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Luc. VI, 28.

Luke 6:28.

(printed under page 188)

(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Ibid., 30.

Ibid., 6:30.

(printed under page 188)

(42) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Ibid., 34.

Ibid., 6:34.

(printed under page 188)

(43) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Matth. VI, 19.

Matthew 6:19.

(printed under page 188)

(44) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Matth. XVI, 26.

Matthew 16:26.

(printed under page 188)

(45) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Matth. VI, 20.

Matthew 6:20.

(printed under page 188)

(46) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Luc. VI, 36.

Luke 6:36.

(printed under page 188)

(47) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351

Matth. V, 45.

Matthew 5:45.

(printed under page 188)

(48) ‹anchor: adjicientur vobis› · call in col 351

Matth. VI, 25, 26, 33.

Matthew 6:25, 26, 33.

(printed under page 188)

(49) ‹anchor: mens hominis est› · call in col 351

Ibid., 21.

Ibid., 6:21.

(printed under page 188)

(50) ‹anchor: in coelis est› · call in col 351

Ibid., 1.

Ibid., 6:1.

(printed under page 188)

(51) ‹anchor: noli prohibere› · call in col 351

Luc. VI, 29.

Luke 6:29.

(printed under page 188)

(52) ‹anchor: obnoxius fuerit› · call in col 351

Matth. V, 22.

Matthew 5:22.

(printed under page 188)

(53) ‹anchor: illum comitare› · call in col 351

Ibid., 41.

Ibid., 5:41.

(printed under page 188)

(54) ‹anchor: in coelis est› · call in col 351

Ibid., 16.

Ibid., 5:16.

Editor's notes: (printed under page 188)

(94) ‹anchor: ἢ τὸ ἱμάτιον› · call in col 351

Ἢ τὸ ἱμάτιον. Legit Thirlbius καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον, ut sit sensus, nec pallium prohibueris. Sed haec memoriter videtur referre Justinus, ac proinde non accuratissime. Si quis tamen emendare velit, legendum potius esset, αἴροντά σου τὸ ἱμάτιον, καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα μὴ κωλύσῃς.

Ἢ τὸ ἱμάτιον ("or the cloak"). Thirlby reads καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον ("and the cloak"), so that the sense is "do not withhold the cloak either". But Justin seems to quote these words from memory, and so not with perfect exactness. If anyone wished to emend, however, it would rather have to read: "from him who takes your cloak, do not withhold your tunic as well."

(printed under page 188)

(95) ‹anchor: Ὃ γὰρ καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῶν› · call in col 351

Ὃ γὰρ καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῶν. Melius ὅ γε καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῶν.

Ὃ γὰρ καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῶν ("for this, in the case of many too"). Better: ὅ γε καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῶν ("this indeed, in the case of many too").

(printed under page 188)

(96) ‹anchor: τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν› · call in col 351

Τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν. Vel legendum τῶν παρ' ὑμῖν, id quod secutus sum in interpretando, vel παρ' ἡμῖν γεγενημένων, quod quidem pluribus nostrorum evenisse possumus demonstrare. Ibidem non dubium quin legendum sit οἱ ἐκ βιαίου. Legit Thirlbius, ὅγε καὶ... γεγενημένων.

Τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν ("of those among us"). Either τῶν παρ' ὑμῖν ("among you") should be read, which I followed in translating, or παρ' ἡμῖν γεγενημένων, "which indeed we can show has happened to many of our people". In the same place there is no doubt that οἱ ἐκ βιαίου ("those who from being violent") should be read. Thirlby reads ὅγε καὶ... γεγενημένων.

(printed under page 188)

Scripture references (superscript calls, two lines across the page): (printed under page 189)

(55) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 354

Matth. V, 34, 37.

Matthew 5:34, 37.

(printed under page 189)

(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 354

Marc. XII, 30.

Mark 12:30.

(printed under page 189)

(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 354

Matth. XIX, 6, 17.

Matthew 19:6, 17.

(printed under page 189)

(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 354

Matth. VII, 21.

Matthew 7:21.

([59]: call numeral blotted in the scan, printed as a dot) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 354 Ib., 24.

Ibid., 7:24.

(printed under page 189)

(60) ‹anchor: virtutes praestitimus› · call in col 354

ib 21.

Ibid., 21.

(printed under page 189)

(61) ‹anchor: operamini iniquitatem› · call in col 354

Luc. XIII, 26.

Luke 13:26.

(printed under page 189)

(62) ‹anchor: ignem sempiternum› · call in col 354

Matth. XIII, 42.

Matthew 13:42.

(printed under page 189)

(63) ‹anchor: in ignem conjicitur› · call in col 354

Matth. VII, 15, 16, 19.

Matthew 7:15, 16, 19.

(printed under page 189)

(64) ‹anchor: quae Dei, Deo› · call in col 354

Matth. XXII, 17, 19, 20, 21.

Matthew 22:17, 19, 20, 21.

Editor's notes: (96*) ‹anchor: πέκπωνται› · call in col 354 Πέμψωνται conj. Davis., sed pessime.

Πέμψωνται ("will be sent") is Davies's conjecture, but a very bad one.

(printed under page 189)

Scripture reference (superscript call): (printed under page 190)

(65) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 355

Luc. XII, 48.

Luke 12:48.

Editor's notes: (printed under page 190)

(97) ‹anchor: Ὅπερ› · call in col 355

Ὅπερ. Legendum censet Stephanus ὥσπερ et ἀπογενομένοις, pro γενομένοις, ut de mortuis Justinum loqui clarius pateat. Deinde ante μὴ ἀμελήσητε addendum putat καί, vel δέ post eamdem vocem. Sed haec prorsus inutilia. Non animadvertit vir longe doctissimus hac voce, γενομένοις, non tam mortuos designari, quam generatim omnes quicunque ante exstiterunt. Eodem sensu Justinus dicebat supra, n. 4, οἱ γενόμενοι ποιηταί. Hinc eadem vox designat posteros, sive eos qui deinceps fuerunt in his Juliani verbis apud Cyrillum lib. VII, p. 238: «Cum legislator vetuisset ne diis servirent... et addidisset: Non maledices diis; ἡ τῶν γινομένων βδελυρία τε καὶ τόλμα, posterorum scelus et audacia volens religionem omnem multitudini adimere, statuit ex eo quod non sit diis serviendum, consequens esse ut iis maledicendum sit.»

Ὅπερ ("which"). Stephanus thinks ὥσπερ ("just as") should be read, and ἀπογενομένοις ("the departed") for γενομένοις, so that it may be clearer that Justin is speaking of the dead. Then he thinks καί should be added before μὴ ἀμελήσητε, or δέ after that word. But these are wholly useless. That most learned man did not notice that by this word, γενομένοις, not so much the dead are meant as, in general, all who have lived before. In the same sense Justin said above, n. 4, οἱ γενόμενοι ποιηταί ("the poets who have been"). Hence the same word denotes posterity, those who came afterwards, in these words of Julian in Cyril, book VII, p. 238: "When the lawgiver had forbidden them to serve the gods... and had added: You shall not curse the gods, the wickedness and audacity of those who came after, wishing to take all religion from the multitude, decided that, since the gods are not to be served, it follows that they are to be cursed."

(printed under page 190)

(98) ‹anchor: Νεκυομαντεῖαι› · call in col 355

Νεκυομαντεῖαι. Omnes, quas Justinus enumerat, inquit Grabius, magicarum praestigiarum species, junctim quoque memorat Tertullianus in Apologet. c. 23: «Si et magi phantasmata edunt, et jam defunctorum inclamant animas, si pueros in eloquium oraculi eliciunt, si multa miracula circulatoriis praestigiis ludunt, si et somnia immittunt, habentes semel invitatorum angelorum et daemonum assistentem sibi potestatem,» etc.

Νεκυομαντεῖαι ("necromancies"). All the kinds of magical trickery Justin lists, says Grabe, Tertullian also names together in the Apologeticum, ch. 23: "If magicians too produce phantoms and call up the souls of the dead, if they draw boys out to utter oracles, if they perform many marvels with mountebank tricks, if they also send dreams, having once the power of invoked angels and demons at their side," etc.

(printed under page 190)

(99) ‹anchor: Ὀνειροπομποὶ καὶ πάρεδροι› · call in col 355

Ὀνειροπομποὶ καὶ πάρεδροι. Valesio ad Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV, c. 7, recte notante, paredros dixere spiritus magis assistentes, vel etiam quos magi aliis immittebant ut perpetuo eis ad tutelam assisterent; oniropompos vero istos qui somnia hominibus injiciebant ut de eventibus edocerentur futuris. OTTO.

Ὀνειροπομποὶ καὶ πάρεδροι ("dream-senders and familiars"). As Valesius rightly notes on Eusebius, Church History IV, ch. 7, they called paredri the spirits attending magicians, or also those that magicians sent to others to attend them constantly as guardians; and oniropompi those that cast dreams into men so that they might be told of future events. OTTO.

(printed under page 190)

(1) ‹anchor: Ψυχαῖς ἀποθανόντων λαμβανόμενοι› · call in col 355

Ψυχαῖς ἀποθανόντων λαμβανόμενοι. Negat Tatianus Justini discipulus effectus ejusmodi in animas defunctorum conferri debere. Sed Justinus hoc loco argumenta colligit non ex suis, sed ex ethnicorum principiis. Hinc fossam homericam citat ex Odyss. λ, v. 93 et philosophos metempsychosis defensores. Hinc etiam sumit argumenti loco inspectiones illas puerorum incorruptorum, quia scilicet ethnici existimabant eos, qui violentam et immaturam mortem obierant, ad ipsum corpus mortuum detineri. Vide adnotationes ad n. 17 Tatiani.

Ψυχαῖς ἀποθανόντων λαμβανόμενοι ("seized by the souls of the dead"). Tatian, Justin's disciple, denies that effects of this kind should be attributed to the souls of the dead. But Justin here gathers his arguments not from his own principles but from those of the pagans. Hence he cites the Homeric pit from Odyssey λ, line 93, and the philosophers who defended metempsychosis. Hence too he takes as an argument those inspections of uncorrupted boys, because the pagans believed that those who had met a violent and untimely death were held back at the dead body itself. See the annotations on n. 17 of Tatian.

(printed under page 190)

(2) ‹anchor: Καὶ κατανοοῦντι› · call in col 355

Κατανοοῦντι. Post hanc vocem excidit aliud τί, quod quidem restituendum esse monuit Grabius. Citatur a Thirlbio similis sententia Irenaei ex pag. 295, edit. Massuet.

Κατανοοῦντι ("to one who considers"). After this word another τί ("what") has dropped out, which Grabe advised should be restored. Thirlby cites a similar thought of Irenaeus, from p. 295 of Massuet's edition.

(printed under page 190)

Scripture references (superscript calls): (printed under page 191)

(66) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 358

Matth. XIX, 26.

Matthew 19:26.

(printed under page 191)

(67) ‹anchor: conjicere in gehennam› · call in col 358

Matth. X, 28.

Matthew 10:28.

Editor's notes: (printed under page 191)

(3) ‹anchor: διαλυθέντα› · call in col 358

Διαλυθέντα. In codice Claromontano legitur ad marg. ἀναλυθέντα. Satius videtur ita legere quam διαλαθέντα cum Grabio.

Διαλυθέντα ("dissolved"). In the Claromontanus manuscript ἀναλυθέντα ("released") is read in the margin. It seems better to read so than διαλαθέντα with Grabe.

(printed under page 191)

(4) ‹anchor: Ὑστάσπις› · call in col 358

Ὑστάσπις. Legendum esse Ὑστάσπης, ut infra et apud Lactantium lib. VII, cap. 15, Sylburgius et Grabius admonuerunt. Vide infra De Sibylla quaest. et resp. 74 ad orthodoxos.

Ὑστάσπις ("Hystaspes"). Sylburg and Grabe advised that Ὑστάσπης should be read, as below and in Lactantius, book VII, ch. 15. See below, on the Sibyl, Questions and Answers to the Orthodox, 74.

(printed under page 191)

(5) ‹anchor: Καὶ θείως› · call in col 358

Καὶ θείως. Legendum θειοτέρως jam multi monuerunt.

Καὶ θείως ("and divinely"). Many have already advised that θειοτέρως ("more divinely") should be read.

(printed under page 191)

(6) ‹anchor: χειρῶν ἀνθρώποις› · call in col 358

Χειρῶν ἀνθρώποις. Hunc locum emendat H. Stephanus legendo χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους. Sed legendum potius χείρονι ἀνθρώπους. Cum enim levior erit mutatio, tum etiam sententiae Justini aptior. Cur enim ait ex Menandro et aliis poetis opificem esse majorem opere, nisi ut probet deos qui ab hominibus fabricantur, pejores esse hominibus ac proinde ab iis coli non debere? Vide supra versus Menandri, lib. De monarchia. — Χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους. Vulgo vitiose χειρῶν ἀνθρώποις. Wolfius conjicit ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπου; H. Stephan. (in edit. Epist. ad Diogn. p. 44), χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους, vel ἔργοις χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων aut ἀνθρωπίνων; Davis., χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων ἔργοις; Maran, χείρονι ἀνθρώπους. Sylburg. et Braun. probant χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἔργοις, sed vulgatae lectioni propius est haud dubie χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους, id quod prae caeteris etiam H. Stephano, Grabio et Thalemanno placet. Egregie facit ad nostram seri (continues)

Χειρῶν ἀνθρώποις ("of hands, to men"). H. Stephanus emends this passage by reading χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους ("that men [should not worship] works of hands"). But χείρονι ἀνθρώπους ("men, [should not worship] what is worse") should rather be read. For the change will be lighter, and it also suits Justin's thought better. For why does he say, from Menander and other poets, that the craftsman is greater than the work, unless to prove that gods made by men are worse than men and therefore should not be worshipped by them? See above the verses of Menander, in the book On the Sole Government of God. — Χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους. Commonly, and faultily, χειρῶν ἀνθρώποις. Wolf conjectures ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπου; H. Stephanus (in his edition of the Epistle to Diognetus, p. 44) χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους, or ἔργοις χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων or ἀνθρωπίνων; Davies χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων ἔργοις; Maran χείρονι ἀνθρώπους. Sylburg and Braun approve χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἔργοις, but without doubt nearer the common reading is χειρῶν ἔργοις ἀνθρώπους, which above the others pleases H. Stephanus, Grabe and Thalemann as well. Admirably suited to our (continues)

(printed under page 191)

(7) ‹anchor: Γεγενῆσθαι› · call in col 359

Γεγενῆσθαι. Miror cur haec Grabius de generatione ex Maria intelligenda pronuntiet. Hic profecto agitur de generatione Verbi, quatenus Verbum est. Hanc enim doctrinam comparat Justinus cum fabulis ethnicorum de Jovis filiis ac praesertim de Mercurio quem sermonem interpretem, et n. 22 sermonem a Deo internuntium vocabant. At Christi ex Maria generationem comparat Justinus n. 22 cum fabulosa Persei generatione.

Γεγενῆσθαι ("to have been begotten"). I wonder why Grabe declares that these words are to be understood of the birth from Mary. Here it is surely the begetting of the Word as Word that is in question. For Justin compares this teaching with the pagans' fables about the sons of Jupiter, and especially about Mercury, whom they called the interpreting word, and (n. 22) the word sent as messenger from God. Christ's birth from Mary, on the other hand, Justin compares in n. 22 with the fabled birth of Perseus.

(printed under page 192)

(8) ‹anchor: Λόγον τὸν ἑρμηνευτικόν› · call in col 359

Λόγον τὸν ἑρμηνευτικόν. Sic etiam Clemens Alexandrinus testatur Strom. VI, p. 979, Mercurium apud Graecos vocari Λόγον. Non tamen probabile est ethnicos credidisse Λόγον esse Personam a Deo Patre distinctam. Quinetiam tunc Mercurium dicebant esse Λόγον, cum fabulosum illum deum ad physiologiam, id est ad res inanimas, revocarent. Hinc Porphyrius apud Eusebium Praep. evang. l. III, c. 11, dum absurdas de diis fabulas lenire conatur, Mercurium ait esse symbolum Λόγου omnium efficientis et interpretis, statimque addit eum Λόγον, qui est in sole, Mercurium dici; eum qui est in luna, Hecaten; eum qui in universo, Hermopan. Sic etiam Eustathius in Iliad. lib. I, p. 10, docet in veterum fabulis Jovem esse mentem, Musas scientiam, Mercurium Λόγον. Ammianus Marcellinus ait lib. XVI Mercurium mundi «velociorem sensum esse,» et idcirco Julianum illi occulte supplicasse.

Λόγον τὸν ἑρμηνευτικόν ("the interpreting Word"). So too Clement of Alexandria attests, Stromata VI, p. 979, that Mercury was called Logos among the Greeks. Yet it is not likely that the pagans believed the Logos to be a Person distinct from God the Father. Indeed, they called Mercury the Logos precisely when they reduced that fabled god to natural philosophy, that is, to lifeless things. Hence Porphyry, in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel book III, ch. 11, while trying to soften the absurd fables about the gods, says Mercury is the symbol of the Logos that makes and interprets all things, and at once adds that the Logos in the sun is called Mercury; that in the moon, Hecate; that in the universe, Hermopan. So too Eustathius on the Iliad, book I, p. 10, teaches that in the fables of the ancients Jupiter is mind, the Muses knowledge, Mercury the Logos. Ammianus Marcellinus says, book XVI, that Mercury is "the swifter sense of the world", and that for this reason Julian secretly made supplication to him.

(printed under page 192)

(9) ‹anchor: Τὸν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων› · call in col 359

Τὸν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων. Opinati sunt eruditi homines post has voces subaudiendum esse ἀνηρπασμένον vel aliquid simile, quasi dicat Justinus eum ex hominum conspectu sublatum. Sed quod semel de Aesculapio dixit Justinus, eum in coelum ascendisse, id ad eos, qui deinceps recensentur, et proinde ad ipsum etiam Bellerophontem referendum est. Illud autem ἐξ ἀνθρώπων non significat Bellerophontem ex hominibus sublatum esse, sed ex hominibus genitum, ita ut aliis opponatur, qui ex Jove geniti in coelum ascenderant. Sic enim infra n. 54 Bellerophontem ait Justinus ἄνθρωπον ἐξ ἀνθρώπου γενόμενον.

Τὸν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ("him from among men"). Learned men have thought that after these words ἀνηρπασμένον ("snatched away") or something similar is to be understood, as if Justin were saying that he was taken from men's sight. But what Justin said once of Aesculapius, that he ascended into heaven, is to be referred to those listed after him, and so to Bellerophon himself too. And ἐξ ἀνθρώπων does not mean that Bellerophon was taken from among men, but that he was born of men, so that he is set against the others who, born of Jupiter, had ascended into heaven. For so below, in n. 54, Justin says that Bellerophon was "a man born of a man".

(printed under page 192)

(10) ‹anchor: Ὑφ' ἵππου› · call in col 359

Ὑφ' ἵππου. Infra n. 54, ἐφ' ἵππου.

Ὑφ' ἵππου ("by a horse"). Below, n. 54: ἐφ' ἵππου ("on a horse").

(printed under page 192)

(11) ‹anchor: Καὶ τί γάρ› · call in col 359

Καὶ τί γάρ. Legendum καίτοι γάρ. Is enim est sensus: Quid necesse est antiqua recensere, cum quotidie ejusmodi consecrationes apud vos celebrentur?

Καὶ τί γάρ ("and why, for"). Read καίτοι γάρ. For this is the sense: why must ancient things be recounted, when consecrations of this kind are celebrated among you every day?

(printed under page 192)

(12) ‹anchor: Καὶ ὀμνύντα τινὰ προάγετε› · call in col 359

Καὶ ὀμνύντα τινὰ προάγετε. Sylburgius et Grabius Justini diligentiam hoc loco desiderant, quasi latius extendat, quod de Romulo et de Julio Caesare narratur, nec animadvertat in aliorum imperatorum exsequiis non ejusmodi jusjurandum dari, sed aquilam e rogo emitti solitam esse, quae defuncti animam in coelum efferre putaretur. Non viderunt eruditi viri utramque consuetudinem usurpatam fuisse. Sic loquitur Suetonius in Augusti Vita: «Non defuit, inquit, vir praetorius, qui se effigiem cremati euntem in coelum vidisse juraret.» Sic jocatur in hanc consuetudinem Seneca in Colocyntosi, sive ludo de Claudii Apotheosi: «Quaerite, inquit, ab eo qui Drusillam in coelum euntem vidit. Idem Claudium vidisse se dicet iter facientem non passibus aequis. Velit nolit, necesse est illi omnia videre quae in coelo agantur. Appiae viae curator est: qua scis et divum Augustum et Tiberium Caesarem ad deos iisse. Hunc si interrogaveris, soli narrabit: coram pluribus nunquam verbum faciet. Nam ex quo in senatu juravit se Drusillam vidisse coelum ascendentem, et illi pro tam bono nuntio nemo credidit quod viderit, verbis conceptis affirmavit se non indicaturum etiamsi in medio foro hominem vidisset occisum.» Justini testimonium confirmat Tatianus n. 10. Tertullianus idem perjurium exagitat, I ad Nat., c. 10 et lib. II, c. 7.

Καὶ ὀμνύντα τινὰ προάγετε ("and you bring forward someone who swears"). Sylburg and Grabe find Justin wanting in care here, as if he extended too widely what is told of Romulus and Julius Caesar, and did not notice that at the funerals of other emperors no such oath was given, but an eagle was customarily released from the pyre, believed to carry the soul of the deceased up to heaven. Those learned men did not see that both customs were in use. So Suetonius in the Life of Augustus: "There was not lacking," he says, "a man of praetorian rank who swore that he had seen the likeness of the cremated emperor going up to heaven." So Seneca jests at this custom in the Colocyntosis, the skit on the Apotheosis of Claudius: "Ask him," he says, "who saw Drusilla going up to heaven. He will say he saw Claudius making the journey with unequal steps. Willy-nilly, he must see everything done in heaven. He is curator of the Appian Way, by which, as you know, both the deified Augustus and Tiberius Caesar went to the gods. If you question him, he will tell it to you alone; before several he will never say a word. For ever since he swore in the senate that he had seen Drusilla ascending to heaven, and for such good news no one believed what he had seen, he declared in set words that he would not report it even if he had seen a man murdered in the middle of the forum." Tatian confirms Justin's testimony, n. 10. Tertullian assails the same perjury, To the Nations I, ch. 10, and book II, ch. 7.

(printed under page 192)

(13) ‹anchor: εἰς διαφοράν› · call in col 359

Εἰς διαφοράν. Legendum esse διαφθορὰν καὶ παρατροπὴν jam multi observarunt. — At ironia usus est Justinus.

Εἰς διαφοράν ("for difference"). Many have already observed that διαφθορὰν καὶ παρατροπὴν ("corruption and perversion") should be read. — But Justin used irony.

(printed under page 192)

(14) ‹anchor: Παραδέξασθαι› · call in col 362

Παραδέξασθαι. Illud verbum non idem valet ac filios suscipere, ut interpretes existimarunt, sed idem ac credere et assentiri. Ex hoc enim verbo pendet tota verborum complexio.

Παραδέξασθαι ("to accept"). This word does not mean "to beget sons", as the translators thought, but "to believe and assent". For the whole period depends on this word.

(printed under page 193)

(15) ‹anchor: Υἱὸς δὲ Θεοῦ› · call in col 362

Υἱὸς δὲ Θεοῦ. Similis prorsus apud Arnobium sententia lib. I Adversus Gentes: «Sed concedamus, inquit, interdum manum vestris opinationibus dantes, unum Christum fuisse de nobis, mentis, animae, corporis fragilitatis et conditionis unius; nonne dignus a nobis est tantorum ob munerum gratiam Deus dici, Deusque sentiri?»

Υἱὸς δὲ Θεοῦ ("but Son of God"). Quite the same thought is in Arnobius, Against the Gentiles book I: "But let us grant," he says, "yielding for a while to your opinions, that Christ was one of us, of one frailty and condition of mind, soul and body; is he not worthy to be called God by us, and held to be God, for the sake of such great gifts?"

(printed under page 193)

(16) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 362

Prae caeteris Homerus. Vide Cohort. ad Graec., c. 2. OTTO.

Homer above the rest. See the Exhortation to the Greeks, ch. 2. OTTO.

(printed under page 193)

(17) ‹anchor: Εἰ δὲ καὶ ἰδίως› · call in col 362

Εἰ δὲ καὶ ἰδίως. Hujus loci ea videtur esse sententia: Ne mirum vobis videatur, si Verbum Dei non sonum vocalem, non rem inanimam, sed verum Filium, veramque personam dicimus, non factam, sed genitam. Commune id esse ducite cum iis, qui ipsum etiam Mercurium, sermonem a Deo internuntium appellant. Vide dialog. n. 61 et 128.

Εἰ δὲ καὶ ἰδίως ("and if in a special way"). The sense of this passage seems to be: Do not be surprised if we call the Word of God not a vocal sound, not a lifeless thing, but a true Son and a true person, not made but begotten. Count this as held in common with those who call Mercury himself the word, God's messenger. See the Dialogue, n. 61 and 128.

(printed under page 193)

(18) ‹anchor: Ὁ γὰρ κρείττων› · call in col 362

Ὁ γὰρ κρείττων. Haec Irenaeus imitatur libr. II, c. 3, n. 5, ut a Grabio observatum est: «Qui enim melior est, inquit, ex operibus ostenditur.» Similem sententiam, ut ex profano aliquo scriptore, citat Isidorus Pelusiota epist. 158, lib. III: Τὰ ἔργα δείξει τῶν λόγων σαφέστερον. Opera probabunt clarius sermonibus.

Ὁ γὰρ κρείττων ("for the better"). Irenaeus imitates these words, book II, ch. 3, n. 5, as Grabe observed: "For he who is better," he says, "is shown by his works." Isidore of Pelusium, letter 158, book III, cites a similar maxim as from some profane writer: "Deeds will show more clearly than words." "Works will prove more clearly than speeches."

(printed under page 193)

(19) ‹anchor: διὰ παρθένου γεγεννῆσθαι› · call in col 362

Διὰ παρθένου γεγεννῆσθαι. Molesta fuit Lango haec ratio loquendi, ut ad Valentinianorum errores accommodata: eam exagitat Tertullianus in libro De carne Christi, cap. 20, et in Scripturis inveniri negat. Displicet etiam Hieronymo, qui in Comment. in epist. ad Galat. p. 267, sic loquitur: «Diligenter attendite, inquit, quod non dixerit, factum per mulierem, quod Marcion et caeterae haereses volunt, quae putativam Christi carnem simulant, sed ex muliere, ut non per illam, sed ex illa natus esse credatur.» Sed, quod pace S. Hieronymi dixerim, nec Marcion dicebat Jesum per Virginem natum esse, is enim Christum subito Capharnaum e coelo venisse fingebat; nec merito negetur hanc loquendi rationem in Scriptura exstare. Demonstrat enim Basilius in libro De Spiritu sancto, cap. 5, utramque praepositionem διά et ἐξ idem sonare, et argumenti loco sumit quod Paulus, qui in epist. ad Galatas dixit: Γενόμενος ἐκ γυναικός, factus ex muliere, idem in epist. ad Cor. dixerit: Ἀνὴρ διὰ τῆς γυναικός, vir per mulierem. Hinc idem Basilius in orat. 25, p. 538: Ἐγεννήθη διὰ γυναικὸς, ἵνα τοὺς γεννηθέντας ἀναγεννήσῃ. Genitus est per mulierem, ut eos qui nati erant regeneraret. Multa occurrunt ejusmodi exempla apud sanctos Patres. Justinus non eo solum in loco, qui nunc in manibus est, sed etiam in multis aliis ita loquitur. Sic etiam apud Eusebium lib. I contra Marcel. cap. 35: Πρὸ μὲν τοῦ κατελθεῖν καὶ διὰ τῆς παρθένου τεχθῆναι, Λόγος ἦν μόνον. Vide p. 40 Julius Firmicus De profan. relig.: «Per virginem Mariam ac Spiritum sanctum Christus natus.» Hilarius lib. IV De Trin. n. 42: «Per virginem natus ex Spiritu sancto.» Augustinus in lib. I De anima n. 27: «Mulier ex viro facta est, ut postea vir per mulierem nasceretur.» Eamdem vocem usurpat Cyrillus Alexandrinus Thesaur. p. 96. In hymno, quem canimus in honorem B. V. Mariae: Beata coeli nuntio, / Fecunda sancto Spiritu, / Desideratus gentibus / Cujus per alvum fusus est. Non ergo in eo, si proprie loquamur, Valentiniani peccabant, quod Filium per Mariam genitum dicerent; sed quod ex Maria genitum negarent, atque, ut ait Tertullianus, c. 27 contra Valentinianos, «delatum in Virginem transmeatorio potius quam generatorio more processisse; per ipsam, non ex ipsa; non matrem eam, sed viam passum» docerent.

Διὰ παρθένου γεγεννῆσθαι ("to have been born through a virgin"). This way of speaking troubled Lange, as being suited to the errors of the Valentinians: Tertullian assails it in the book On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 20, and denies that it is found in the Scriptures. It displeases Jerome too, who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, p. 267, speaks thus: "Note carefully," he says, "that he did not say 'made through a woman', as Marcion and the other heresies would have it, which feign that Christ's flesh was only apparent, but 'of a woman', so that he may be believed to have been born not through her but of her." But, by St Jerome's leave, Marcion did not say that Jesus was born through the Virgin, for he imagined that Christ came suddenly from heaven to Capernaum; nor can it rightly be denied that this way of speaking occurs in Scripture. For Basil shows in the book On the Holy Spirit, ch. 5, that the two prepositions διά and ἐξ mean the same, and takes as proof that Paul, who said in the Epistle to the Galatians "made of a woman", said in the Epistle to the Corinthians "man through woman". Hence the same Basil, oration 25, p. 538: "He was born through a woman, that he might regenerate those who had been born." Many examples of this kind occur in the holy Fathers. Justin speaks so not only in the passage now in hand, but in many others as well. So too in Eusebius, Against Marcellus book I, ch. 35: "Before he came down and was born through the virgin, he was only the Word." See p. 40, Julius Firmicus, On the Error of Profane Religions: "Christ born through the Virgin Mary and the Holy Spirit." Hilary, On the Trinity book IV, n. 42: "Born through a virgin, of the Holy Spirit." Augustine, On the Soul book I, n. 27: "Woman was made from man, so that afterwards man might be born through woman." Cyril of Alexandria uses the same word, Thesaurus, p. 96. In the hymn we sing in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary: "Blessed by the message from heaven, / made fruitful by the Holy Spirit, / the Desired of the nations / through whose womb he was poured forth." So, strictly speaking, the Valentinians did not err in saying that the Son was born through Mary, but in denying that he was born of Mary and in teaching, as Tertullian says (ch. 27, Against the Valentinians), that "brought into the Virgin, he passed through her in the manner of a transit rather than of generation; through her, not of her; experiencing her not as a mother but as a way".

(printed under page 193)

(20) ‹anchor: Πονηρούς› · call in col 363

Πονηρούς. Legendum πηρούς admonuit R. Stephanus, idque confirmat Grabius ex simili loco dialogi n. 69; πηρούς autem idem esse ac caecos contendit Thirlbius ex eodem dialogi loco, et alio hujus Apol. n. 60.

Πονηρούς ("wicked"). R. Estienne advised that πηρούς ("maimed") should be read, and Grabe confirms it from a similar passage of the Dialogue, n. 69; and Thirlby contends that πηρούς means the same as "blind", from the same passage of the Dialogue and another of this Apology, n. 60.

(printed under page 194)

(21) ‹anchor: Ἵνα δὲ ἤδη› · call in col 363

Ἵνα δὲ ἤδη, etc. Observat Ritterus (Animadvv. in primam S. Just. apolog., p. 19 sq.): «Restat ut scriptor, si ultra progressurus sit, demonstret, quae Christiani profiteantur non solum verisimilia et aeque vera ac fabulas Graecorum, sed omnino reapse vera esse et testimoniis confirmari, quorum fides in dubium vocari non possit. Et hoc quidem praestitit a capite 30-65; sed quae a capite 23-30 tractantur, plane nobis abundare videntur. — Itaque fortasse sic series membrorum restitui possit: Primum ejice primam partem capitis 23 usque ad verba καὶ Ἰησοῦς Χριστός; hac enim ratione doctrina de persona Jesu Christi, quae cap. 21 incipit, continuatur et absolvitur. Tum transpone ejectam partem capitis 23 ad finem capitis 30, ita ut rerum argumenti tractandarum partem secundam efficiat, hoc est scriptorem cogita se demonstraturum polliceri, doctrinam Christianam non tantum veram esse, sed solam esse veram (μόνα ἀληθῆ). Et quae cap. 24 et seqq. dicuntur, non male quadrant in extremam partem cap. 24.» Sed Justinus tam raro certum quemdam ordinem et methodum servat (coll. Semisch. Justin. d. Märt. p. I, p. 208 sq.), ut confusionem istam absque codicis manu exarati auctoritate librarius imputandam esse non censeam. OTTO.

Ἵνα δὲ ἤδη ("but so that now"), etc. Ritter observes (Animadversions on the First Apology of St Justin, p. 19 f.): "It remains for the writer, if he is to go further, to show that what the Christians profess is not only probable and as true as the fables of the Greeks, but altogether and in fact true and confirmed by testimonies whose credibility cannot be called into doubt. And this he has done from chapter 30 to 65; but what is treated from chapter 23 to 30 seems to us plainly superfluous. — So perhaps the order of the members could be restored thus: first, remove the first part of chapter 23 up to the words καὶ Ἰησοῦς Χριστός; for in this way the teaching on the person of Jesus Christ, which begins in ch. 21, is continued and completed. Then transpose the removed part of chapter 23 to the end of chapter 30, so that it forms the second part of the matters to be treated; that is, think of the writer as promising to show that Christian teaching is not only true but alone true (μόνα ἀληθῆ). And what is said in ch. 24 and following fits not badly with the last part of ch. 24." But Justin so seldom keeps any fixed order and method (compare Semisch, Justin der Märtyrer, pt. I, p. 208 f.) that, without the authority of a manuscript, I do not think this confusion should be laid to a copyist. OTTO.

(printed under page 194)

(22) ‹anchor: Πρὶν ἢ ἐν ἀνθρώποις› · call in col 363

Πρὶν ἢ ἐν ἀνθρώποις. Praemittenda his verbis conjunctio καί aut legendum πρὶν δὲ ἢ ἐν ἀνθρώποις. Si quis tamen legendum esse velit, καὶ ὅτι πρίν et antea καὶ ὅτι Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, nihil id contextui nocebit. Sed nihil amplius requiri debet ad intelligentiam hujus loci, in quo interpretando non plurimum viderunt interpretes. Longam hanc verborum complexionem existimavit Grabius, nec cum iis quae praecedunt, nec cum iis quae sequuntur, connecti posse, et idcirco ad contextus corruptelam et ad lacunas confugit. Facilis tamen et aperta sententiarum junctura. Tria pollicetur Justinus sese demonstraturum. 1° Quae a Christianis docentur, sola vera esse, quod quidem aptum et nexum est ex iis, quae proxime dicebat, nempe ex illa similitudine, quae Christianae doctrinae videtur inesse cum nonnullis philosophorum et poetarum placitis. 2° Promittit se probaturum Filium Dei incarnatum esse. 3° Daemones ante illius incarnationem multa per poetas finxisse, ut homines ab hoc mysterio credendo averterent. In his tribus argumentis deinceps versatur Justinus. Probat 1°, n. 24, Christianos solos esse qui veritatem defendant. Deinde num. 30, Filium Dei incarnatum esse. Tum n. 53 venit ad fabulas poetarum, quas daemonum fraude ad hominum perniciem inventas fuisse docet

Πρὶν ἢ ἐν ἀνθρώποις ("before among men"). The conjunction καί must be put before these words, or πρὶν δὲ ἢ ἐν ἀνθρώποις read. If anyone should wish to read καὶ ὅτι πρίν, and before it καὶ ὅτι Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, that will do the context no harm. But nothing more need be sought to understand this passage, in the interpretation of which the translators did not see very far. Grabe thought this long period could be connected neither with what precedes nor with what follows, and so took refuge in a corruption of the text and in lacunae. Yet the linking of the thoughts is easy and plain. Justin promises to demonstrate three things. 1. That what the Christians teach is alone true; and this follows aptly and closely from what he was just saying, namely from the likeness which Christian teaching seems to have with some tenets of the philosophers and poets. 2. He promises to prove that the Son of God became incarnate. 3. That before his incarnation the demons invented many things through the poets, to turn men away from believing this mystery. Justin then deals with these three arguments in turn. He proves the first, n. 24: that the Christians alone are the defenders of truth. Then, num. 30, that the Son of God became incarnate. Then, n. 53, he comes to the fables of the poets, which he teaches were invented by the demons' deceit for men's ruin

(printed under page 194)

(23) ‹anchor: Διὰ τοὺς προειρημένους› · call in col 363

Διὰ τοὺς προειρημένους. Hic profecto aliquid emendandum. Quinam enim illi sunt qui propter daemones, sive impulsu daemonum per poetas haec finxerunt? Nemo sane divinare possit. At si legamus λέγω δὲ τούς, etc., nihil supererit difficultatis, idque ex Latina interpretatione perspici potest.

Διὰ τοὺς προειρημένους ("because of those mentioned before"). Here surely something must be emended. For who are those who, because of the demons, or at the demons' prompting, invented these things through the poets? No one could possibly guess. But if we read λέγω δὲ τούς ("I mean those"), etc., no difficulty will remain, and this can be seen from the Latin translation.

(printed under page 194)

(24) ‹anchor: Ἐνήργησαν› · call in col 363

Ἐνήργησαν. Necesse non est cum Sylburgio subintelligere διαθρυλλεῖσθαι.

Ἐνήργησαν ("they brought about"). There is no need to understand διαθρυλλεῖσθαι ("to be noised abroad") with Sylburg.

(printed under page 194)

(25) ‹anchor: Πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι› · call in col 363

Πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι. Ut probet veritatem penes solos esse Christianos (hoc enim ex tripartita divisione primum erat) hoc utitur argumento, quod cum alii summam habeant suae religionis colendae licentiam, solis Christianis eodem jure esse non liceat.

Πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι ("first, that"). To prove that the truth lies with the Christians alone (for this was the first point of the threefold division), he uses this argument: that while others have the fullest freedom to practise their religion, the Christians alone are not allowed to enjoy the same right.

(printed under page 194)

(26) ‹anchor: Καὶ ἐν γραφαῖς στεφάνους› · call in col 366

Καὶ ἐν γραφαῖς στεφάνους. Meursius, Clericus et Fabricius legunt ἐν ταφαῖς, in sepulcris, cui conjecturae favet illud ex dialogo Minuc. Fel.: «Coronas etiam sepulcris denegatis.» Salmasius aliter emendat in notis ad Vitam M. Anton. ac legendum putat ἐν ῥαφαῖς στεφάνους pro ῥαπτούς, sutiles coronas, quemadmodum dicuntur marmora in exemplis, figuris ornata; pocilla in gemmis, id est gemmata, ἄρτοι ἐν τύποις, panes figuris vel formis expressi. At eruditae et acutae hominum doctissimorum emendationes non videntur necessariae. Loquitur Justinus de coronis quae mortuorum statuis apponi solebant. Vox illa γραφαί non picturas solum, ut videtur eruditis illis viris, designat, sed etiam statuas, ut multis exemplis demonstrari potest. Himerius apud Photium cod. 243, pag. 1127, Lysippi insignis statuarii ingenium ex eo commendat, quod Occasionem pereleganter finxerit. Utitur autem his vocibus: Ἐγγράφει τοῖς θεοῖς τὸν Καιρόν, diis Occasionem effinxit. Basilius seu quivis alius in lib. De bapt. c. 2, n. 23, ut probet baptizatum, sive liber, sive servus sit, modo veterem hominem exuerit, Deo acceptum esse, utitur hoc exemplo: Ἡ σανὶς ἐξ ὁποίας δήποτε ὕλης οὖσα, ἀποθεμένη τὸ ἀνώμαλον καὶ ἀποξυσθεῖσα τὸ τραχὺ, οὕτως ἐνδύεται τὴν γραφὴν τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ βασιλέως· καὶ τότε οὐκ ἐν τῇ τοῦ ξύλου, ἢ χρυσοῦ ἢ ἀργύρου διαφορᾷ γνωρίζεταί τις διαφορὰ τῆς εἰκόνος, etc. Liquet in hoc exemplo γραφήν vocari statuam auream aut argenteam aut ligneam. Tam fictae quam pictae imagines vocantur γραφαί apud Gregorium Naz. orat. 3, p. 83. Loquens enim de imaginibus imperatorum ἐν πλάσμασί τε καὶ χρώμασι, id est tum fictis tum pictis, ait imperatores ejusmodi imaginibus solere aliud alios προσπαραγράφεσθαι; Julianus vero ut Christianis insidias strueret, ταῖς εἰκόσι συμπαραγράφων τοὺς δαίμονας, ὡς δή τινας ἄλλας ἐξ ἔθους γραφὰς, προυτίθει δήμοις καὶ πόλεσι.

Καὶ ἐν γραφαῖς στεφάνους ("and wreaths on images"). Meursius, Le Clerc and Fabricius read ἐν ταφαῖς, "on tombs", a conjecture favoured by the line in Minucius Felix's dialogue: "You deny wreaths even to tombs." Salmasius, in his notes on the Life of Marcus Antoninus, emends otherwise and thinks ἐν ῥαφαῖς στεφάνους should be read for ῥαπτούς, "sewn wreaths", just as marbles "in patterns" are said for marbles adorned with figures; cups "in gems", that is, jewelled; and ἄρτοι ἐν τύποις, loaves stamped with figures or shapes. But the learned and acute emendations of these most learned men do not seem necessary. Justin is speaking of the wreaths customarily placed on the statues of the dead. The word γραφαί does not denote only paintings, as those learned men seem to think, but also statues, as can be shown by many examples. Himerius, in Photius, codex 243, p. 1127, praises the genius of Lysippus, the famous sculptor, for having fashioned Opportunity most elegantly; and he uses these words: Ἐγγράφει τοῖς θεοῖς τὸν Καιρόν, "he fashioned Opportunity among the gods". Basil, or whoever else wrote the book On Baptism, ch. 2, n. 23, to prove that the baptized, free or slave, is acceptable to God provided he has put off the old man, uses this example: "A board, of whatever material it may be, once it has put away its unevenness and been planed of its roughness, thus takes on the image of the king; and then no difference in the image is recognized from the difference of wood, or gold, or silver," etc. It is clear that in this example a gold, silver or wooden statue is called γραφή. Both sculpted and painted images are called γραφαί in Gregory Nazianzen, oration 3, p. 83. For speaking of the images of the emperors "in moulded figures and in colours", that is, both sculpted and painted, he says that emperors were wont to have different things depicted alongside them in such images; but Julian, to lay a snare for the Christians, "depicting the demons alongside his images, as though they were some other customary representations, set them before the peoples and cities".

(printed under page 195)

(27) ‹anchor: Οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ παρ' οἷς μὲν θεοί› · call in col 366

Οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ παρ' οἷς μὲν θεοί. Frustra Grabius retinendum esse contendit illud οὐ. Tollendum omnino si quid sententiae velis ex hoc loco eruere; vel legendum ὅτι γὰρ οὖν. Solent enim alii scriptores id exprobrare gentilibus, quod eadem res nunc victima sit, nunc Deus. Hoc argumento utitur Athanasius orat. in gentes, n. 23. Vide Tatianum n. 10 et Athenagoram. Apol. n. 14. His adjungere libet Anaxandridis versus, quos refert Athenaeus lib. VII, p. 299: Βοῦν προσκυνεῖς, ἐγὼ δὲ θύω τοῖς θεοῖς· / Τὴν ἔγχελυν μέγιστον ἡγῇ δαίμονα, / Ἡμεῖς δὲ τῶν ὄψων μέγιστον παραπολύ. / Bovem colis tu, dis ego hostiam immolo. / Anguillam adoptas maximos inter deos, / Obsoniorum ducimus nos maximum.

Οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ παρ' οἷς μὲν θεοί ("not the same things, among some gods"). Grabe needlessly contends that οὐ should be kept. It must be removed altogether if you want to get any sense out of this passage; or ὅτι γὰρ οὖν should be read. For other writers commonly reproach the gentiles with this, that the same thing is now a victim, now a god. Athanasius uses this argument, Oration against the Gentiles, n. 23. See Tatian, n. 10, and Athenagoras, Apology n. 14. I may add to these the verses of Anaxandrides that Athenaeus quotes, book VII, p. 299: "You worship the ox; I sacrifice it to the gods. / You hold the eel the greatest deity; / we hold it by far the greatest of dainties." "You worship the ox, I offer a victim to the gods. / You adopt the eel among the greatest gods; / we count it the greatest of delicacies."

(printed under page 195)

(28) ‹anchor: Δεύτερον› · call in col 366

Δεύτερον. Secundum argumentum, cur veritas solis Christianis nota sit, inde deducit Justinus, quod a cultu deorum, qui flagitia patrasse narrantur, ad purissimum unius Dei cultum, quamvis morte proposita, conversi fuerint.

Δεύτερον ("second"). Justin draws the second argument for why the truth is known to the Christians alone from this: that they turned from the worship of gods who are said to have committed shameful deeds to the most pure worship of the one God, even with death set before them.

(printed under page 195)

(29) ‹anchor: Οἱ παλαιοί› · call in col 366

Οἱ παλαιοί. Liquet legendum esse οἱ πάλαι, ut antea n. 14, idque jam multi observaverunt.

Οἱ παλαιοί ("the ancients"). It is clear that οἱ πάλαι ("those of old") should be read, as earlier in n. 14, and many have already observed this.

(printed under page 195)

(30) ‹anchor: Οἰστρηθείσας› · call in col 366

Οἰστρηθείσας. Scribit Apollodorus lib. III, inquit illustrissimus Huetius Demonstr. evang. p. 58, in Adonidis etiamnum infantis forma commotam Venerem, clam diis omnibus eum occuluisse in arca, et Proserpinae tradidisse; hanc pupum tam bellum conspicatam retinuisse, atque ea re excitatam inter deas contentionem Jovem sedasse, hac lege atque omine, ut tertiam anni partem penes se maneret Adonis, tertiam penes Venerem, penes Proserpinam tertiam. Itaque illud verbum οἰστρηθείσας de contentionis oestro simul et libidinis accipi debet. Legitur in utroque cod. ms. ad marg. et apud R. Stephanum ad calcem κόρην καὶ Ἀφροδίτην τὰς διὰ τὸν Ἄδωνιν ἐρηθείσας. Legendum ἐρισθείσας, Puellam et Venerem, quae de Adonide inter se contenderunt. Frustra ergo Sylburgius et Grabius legunt: Τὴν μὲν διὰ τὸν Ἄδωνιν, τὴν δὲ διὰ τὸν Ἀϊδωνέα οἰστρηθεῖσαν.

Οἰστρηθείσας ("stung to frenzy"). Apollodorus writes, book III, says the most illustrious Huet, Evangelical Demonstration p. 58, that Venus, moved by the beauty of Adonis while he was still an infant, hid him in a chest without the knowledge of all the gods and entrusted him to Proserpina; that she, seeing so pretty a child, kept him; and that Jupiter settled the quarrel this stirred up among the goddesses with this condition and decree, that Adonis should stay a third part of the year by himself, a third with Venus, and a third with Proserpina. So the word οἰστρηθείσας must be taken of the frenzy of rivalry and of lust together. In both manuscripts, in the margin, and in R. Estienne at the end, is read κόρην καὶ Ἀφροδίτην τὰς διὰ τὸν Ἄδωνιν ἐρηθείσας. Read ἐρισθείσας: "the Maiden and Venus, who quarrelled with each other over Adonis". So Sylburg and Grabe needlessly read: "the one stung to frenzy over Adonis, the other over Aidoneus."

(printed under page 195)

(31) ‹anchor: Διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ› · call in col 366

Διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Eadem loquendi ratio occurrit n. 49 et n. 61. Quare frustra Sylburgius et Grabius non minus apte legi posse existimant, διὰ Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, propter Jesum Christum.

Διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ("through Jesus Christ"). The same turn of speech occurs in n. 49 and n. 61. So Sylburg and Grabe are wrong to think that διὰ Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, "because of Jesus Christ", could be read just as aptly.

(printed under page 195)

(**) · call in col 367 Iliad. VI.

Iliad 6.

(printed under page 196)

(32) · call in col 367

Τρίτον δ' ὅτι. Tertium hoc argumentum, ut veritatem in Christianis solam odio haberi constet. Si quis a daemonibus immissus Christianam religionem erroribus corrumpat, hunc persecutio non attingit. Inde manifesta conclusio persecutionum auctores esse daemones, ac solam illos veritatem insectari.

"And third, that." This is the third argument, to establish that it is the truth alone in the Christians that is hated. If anyone sent in by the demons corrupts the Christian religion with errors, persecution does not touch him. Hence the plain conclusion that the demons are the authors of the persecutions, and that it is the truth alone that they hunt down.

(printed under page 196)

(33) · call in col 367

Μετὰ τὴν ἀνέλευσιν. Legitur ἀνάληψιν τοῦ Κυρίου apud Eusebium, qui totum hunc de Simone locum inseruit lib. II Hist., cap. 13. Habent etiam ἀνάληψιν τοῦ Κυρίου Syncellus Chronograph. p. 333 et Zonoras Annal. tom. II, p. 187, ut observat Thirlbius, qui ἀνέλευσιν aut ἄνοδον a Justino usurpari solere ait, non vero ἀνάληψιν, ac exempla repetit ex dialog. n. 39, 82, 87.

"After the ascent." Eusebius reads "the taking-up (ἀνάληψιν) of the Lord"; he inserted this whole passage on Simon in Book II of the History, chapter 13. Syncellus (Chronography, p. 333) and Zonaras (Annals, vol. II, p. 187) also have "the taking-up of the Lord", as Thirlby observes; he says Justin habitually uses ἀνέλευσις or ἄνοδος, not ἀνάληψις, and draws examples from the Dialogue, nos. 39, 82, 87.

(printed under page 196)

(34) · call in col 367

Προεβάλλοντο. Ita ex Eusebio posui. Editi nostri προσεβάλλοντο.

"Were put forward." So I have set it, from Eusebius. Our printed editions have προσεβάλλοντο.

(printed under page 196)

(35) · call in col 367

Γίττων. Ita Eusebius. At R. Stephanus et uterque codex ms. τρίτον.

"Gitta." So Eusebius. But R. Estienne and both manuscripts have τρίτον ("third").

(printed under page 196)

(36) · call in col 367

Ἐν τῇ πόλει. Euseb. ἐπὶ τῇ πόλει ὑμῶν τῇ.

"In the city." Eusebius has "at your city, the".

(printed under page 196)

(37) · call in col 367

Ὃς ἀνδριὰς ἀνεγήγερται. Haec desunt apud Eusebium; vitiosam esse Eusebii scripturam adversus Antonium Van Dale probat Thirlbius ex verborum constructione absurda admodum, si haec verba desint, futura, ἀνδριάντι ὡς θεὸς τετίμηται μεταξὺ τῶν δύο γεφυρῶν ἔχων ἐπιγραφήν, etc. Equidem verba haec non delebo, sed his textum carere posse fateor.

"Which statue has been set up." These words are missing in Eusebius. Against Anton van Dale, Thirlby proves Eusebius's reading faulty from the construction, which would be quite absurd if these words were missing: "honoured with a statue as a god, between the two bridges, bearing the inscription", etc. For my part I will not delete these words, though I admit the text could do without them.

(printed under page 196)

(38) · call in col 367

Σίμωνι δέῳ σάγκτῳ. Vide Praefationis tertiam partem, ubi de hac Justini narratione disseruimus.

"To Simon the holy god" (Simoni deo sancto). See the third part of the Preface, where we have discussed this account of Justin's.

(printed under page 196)

(39) · call in col 367

Προσκυνοῦσι. Male in editionibus Justini legebatur, ἐκεῖνον καὶ προσκυνοῦσι. Melius Eusebius quem secuti sumus.

"They worship." The editions of Justin wrongly read "and they worship him". Eusebius is better, and we have followed him.

(printed under page 196)

(40) · call in col 367

Σταθεῖσαν. Addit Eusebius ἐν Τύρῳ τῆς Φοινίκης. Paulo ante translata ex Eusebio in editiones Graeco-Latinas vox συμπερινοστήσασαν, cum R. Stephanus et mss. habeant περινοστήσασαν.

"Who had stood." Eusebius adds "at Tyre in Phoenicia". A little before, the word συμπερινοστήσασαν ("who went about with him") was carried over from Eusebius into the Greek-Latin editions, though R. Estienne and the manuscripts have περινοστήσασαν ("who went about").

(printed under page 196)

(41) · call in col 367

Τὴν ἀπ' αὐτοῦ. Sic emendavi Eusebio auctore Ire[nae?]us, pro ὑπ' αὐτοῦ. Tertullianus ἔννοιαν reddidit injectionem. « Et se quidem, inquit, lib. De anima, cap. 34, finxit summum patrem, illam vero injectionem suam primam, qua injecerat angelos et archangelos condere. » Injectio aliis in locis apud Tertullianum eodem sensu usurpatur velut cum in lib. De pudic. c. 13, citat illud ex secunda ad Cor. Non ignoramus injectiones ejus. Corrupta sunt quae de Simone apud eumdem leguntur in appendice ad librum De praescript. « Hic ausus est summam se dicere virtutem, id est, summum Deum, mundum autem ab angelis suis institutum. A daemone se oberrante, qui esset sapientia, descendisse quaerendum apud Judaeos. » Liquet legendum, « ad Aeonem se oberrantem, » etc. Docebant Gnostici, quorum parens erat Simon magus, unum ex Aeonibus, quem vocabant Achamoth, id est sapientiam, a summo Deo in inferiora decidisse. Haec autem erat Helena Simonis, quam quidem, velut ovem perditam, Simon a se quaesitam esse, seque eo consilio descendisse dicebat, ut post Irenaeum testatur Tertullianus De anima cap. 34. Mox Euseb. οἰστρηθέντα καὶ αὐτὸν ὑπό.

"The [first thought] from him." So I have corrected it on the authority of Eusebius [and Irenaeus? word damaged in the scan], for "by him". Tertullian rendered ἔννοια as injectio: "He imagined himself," he says in On the Soul, ch. 34, "the supreme Father, and her his first injectio, by which he had prompted the making of angels and archangels." Injectio is used in the same sense in other places in Tertullian, as when in On Modesty, ch. 13, he quotes from Second Corinthians: "We are not ignorant of his injectiones." What is read about Simon in the appendix to the book On Prescription is corrupt: "He dared to call himself the supreme Power, that is, the supreme God, and the world founded by his angels; that he had come down from a wandering demon, who was wisdom, to seek her among the Jews." Plainly one should read "to an Aeon wandering", etc. The Gnostics, whose father was Simon Magus, taught that one of the Aeons, whom they called Achamoth, that is, Wisdom, fell from the supreme God into the lower regions. And this was Simon's Helena, whom, like the lost sheep, Simon said he had sought, and that he had come down for that purpose, as Tertullian attests after Irenaeus, On the Soul, ch. 34. Just after, Eusebius has "he too, goaded by".

(printed under page 196)

(42) ‹anchor: ἄλλον τινὰ νομίζειν› · call in col 367

Μείζονα. Euseb. εἶναι νομίζειν μείζω, Hist. lib. IV, c. 11.

"Greater." Eusebius has "to think that there is a greater", History, Book IV, ch. 11.

(printed under page 196)

(43) · call in col 370

Ὃς κατὰ πᾶν, etc. Euseb. ὃς καὶ κατὰ πᾶν... πέπεικε βλάσφημα λέγειν καὶ ἀρνεῖσθαι τὸν ποιητὴν τοῦδε τοῦ παντὸς Πατέρα εἶναι τοῦ Χριστοῦ. — Duos Marcion inducebat deos, alterum opificem, qui mundum fabricavit, alterum majorem, qui praestantiora condidit; illum negandum docebat, hunc confitendum. OTTO.

"Who [has persuaded many] in every [race]", etc. Eusebius: "who also in every [race]... has persuaded [many] to speak blasphemies and to deny that the maker of this universe is the Father of Christ." — Marcion brought in two gods: one the craftsman, who built the world; the other greater, who founded better things. The first, he taught, must be denied; the second confessed. OTTO.

(printed under page 197)

(44) · call in col 370

Τὰ μείζονα. Haec desunt apud Eusebium; unde magnum in Valesii interpretatione erratum. Sic enim reddit: Alium vero quemdam longe illo praestantiorem hoc universum condidisse affirmarent. Nihil magis pugnat cum principiis Marcionis, qui mundum a summo illo Christi Patre conditum negabat. Ipse Valesius in notis agnoscit legendum esse τὰ μείζονα ut apud Justinum. Cum Marcion hunc mundum a vero Deo creatum negaret, dicebat esse et illi conditionem suam et suum mundum et suum coelum; Tertull. I, Marc., c. 15. Itaque « Deo suo invisibilia » tribuebat, ibid. c. 16. Sed cum probarent catholici absurdum dictu esse; « ejus esse invisibilia, qui nihil visibile praemiserit » magisque congruere, « ejus esse majora, cujus et magna; » respondebant Marcionitae: « Sufficit unicum hoc opus Deo nostro, quod hominem liberavit summa et praecipua bonitate sua, et omnibus locustis anteponenda. »

"The greater things." These words are missing in Eusebius, whence a great error in Valesius's version, for he renders: "and should affirm that another, far more excellent than he, founded this universe." Nothing conflicts more with Marcion's principles, for he denied that the world was founded by that supreme Father of Christ. Valesius himself acknowledges in his notes that τὰ μείζονα should be read, as in Justin. Since Marcion denied that this world was created by the true God, he said that that God too had his own creation, his own world and his own heaven (Tertullian, Against Marcion I, ch. 15). So he ascribed "invisible things to his God" (ibid., ch. 16). But when the Catholics showed that it was absurd to say "that the invisible things belong to one who had first put forth nothing visible", and that it fitted better "that the greater things belong to him whose the great things are also", the Marcionites replied: "This single work is enough for our God, that he set man free by his supreme and surpassing goodness, which is to be preferred to all the locusts."

(printed under page 197)

(45) · call in col 370

Πάντες οἱ ἀπὸ τούτων. Eusebius καὶ πάντες.

"All who [start] from these." Eusebius has "and all".

(printed under page 197)

(46) · call in col 370

Ὡς ἔφημεν. Euseb. ὡς ἔφαμεν, et mox: Καὶ ὡς κοινῶν ὄντων δογμάτων τοῖς φιλοσόφοις, τὸ ἐπικαλούμενον, etc.

"As I said." Eusebius has "as we said", and just after: "And as the doctrines being common to the philosophers, the name invoked", etc.

(printed under page 197)

(47) · call in col 370

Λυχνίας... βοράς. De horrendis istis criminibus, quae Christianis gentiles (coll. Apol. II, c. 12) et Judaei (Dial. Tr. c. 10, 17, c. 108) affingere solebant, nempe Θυέστεια δεῖπνα et Οἰδιποδείους μίξεις (Athenag. Legat. p. Chr., c. 3. Hist. eccl. et Epist. Eccl. Vien. et Lugdun. ap. Euseb. V, c. 1. [Tom. II.] p. 11.) audias Caecilium paganum in Minuc. Felic. Octavio c. 9 et c. 30. OTTO.

"Lamp ... feasting on flesh." On those horrible crimes which the gentiles (compare Apology II, ch. 12) and the Jews (Dialogue with Trypho, chs. 10, 17, 108) used to fasten on the Christians, namely Thyestean banquets and Oedipodean unions (Athenagoras, Plea for the Christians, ch. 3; the Ecclesiastical History and the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons in Eusebius V, ch. 1 [vol. II], p. 11), you may hear the pagan Caecilius in Minucius Felix, Octavius, chs. 9 and 30. OTTO.

(printed under page 197)

(48) · call in col 370

Κἂν διὰ τὰ δόγματα. Duo docet S. Martyr: primo, haereticos a persecutione tutos et immunes esse. Deinde, si qui ex illis occidantur, saltem non occidi ob ipsorum opiniones, sed quia (sic enim intelligendum videtur) facinus aliquod commisere. Quo autem argumento utitur S. Justinus, ut probet solam in Christianis veritatem puniri et damnari, eodem alii Patres usi sunt, ut veritatem in sola reperiri catholica Ecclesia probarent. Ait Cyprianus ep. 58, omnem saecularem potestatem adversus Ecclesiam Christi subito prorupisse, « ut... ostenderet Dominus quae esset Ecclesia... qui essent quos inimicus lacesseret, quibus ut suis parceret. Neque enim persequitur et impugnat Christi adversarius nisi castra et milites Christi. Haereticos prostratos semel et suos factos contemnit et praeterit. » Vide ep. 57 et S. Iren. lib. IV, c. 33, n. 9 et Acta S. Montani martyris et sociorum n. 14.

"Even on account of their doctrines." The holy Martyr teaches two things: first, that the heretics are safe and exempt from persecution; next, that if any of them are put to death, at least they are not killed for their opinions but because (for so it seems it should be understood) they have committed some crime. The argument St Justin uses to prove that the truth alone is punished and condemned in the Christians, other Fathers used to prove that the truth is found in the Catholic Church alone. Cyprian says, Letter 58, that the whole secular power broke out suddenly against the Church of Christ, "so that ... the Lord might show which was the Church ... who they were whom the enemy would provoke, whom he would spare as his own. For Christ's adversary persecutes and attacks only the camp and the soldiers of Christ. The heretics, once laid low and made his own, he despises and passes by." See Letter 57, St Irenaeus Book IV, ch. 33, no. 9, and the Acts of St Montanus the martyr and his companions, no. 14.

(printed under page 197)

(49) · call in col 370

Συντεταγμένον. Deest apud Eusebium.

"Composed." Missing in Eusebius.

(printed under page 197)

(50) · call in col 370

Διώκωμεν. H. Steph. et Grabius legendum esse contendunt μηδὲν ἀδικῶμεν. Legit etiam ἀδικῶμεν Billius approbante Thirlbio. Sed cur emendemus quod minime mendosum est? Imo illud verbum, διώκωμεν, aptius mihi videtur ad significandum homicidium. Haec enim est S. Justini sententia. Nata occasione ex haereticis, de quibus nescire se dixerat, utrum nefanda illa committerent necne, asseverat de Christianis, eos ita ab his sceleribus remotos esse, ut etiam pueros exponere nefas ducant, ne aut aliquem vexent et opprimant, committendo ut puer non susceptus intereat aut impietatis rei fiant; si susceptus ad nefanda et impia, ut ipse appellat, flagitia educetur. Haec enim duo gravissima mala ex puerorum exponendorum more consequi docet. Adducti sunt viri doctissimi, ut ἀδικῶμεν huc intruderent, quia infra n. 28, Justinus injustitiam cum impietate conjungit. Sed ibi alia de re loquitur.

"We persecute." H. Estienne and Grabe contend that μηδὲν ἀδικῶμεν ("we do no wrong") should be read. Billius also reads ἀδικῶμεν, with Thirlby's approval. But why emend what is not faulty at all? Indeed the verb διώκωμεν seems to me better suited to signify homicide. For this is St Justin's meaning: taking occasion from the heretics, of whom he had said he did not know whether they committed those abominations or not, he affirms of the Christians that they are so far from these crimes that they count it wicked even to expose children, lest they either harass and crush someone, by bringing it about that a child not taken up perishes, or become guilty of impiety, if a child taken up is reared for abominable and impious crimes, as he calls them. For he teaches that these two most grievous evils follow from the custom of exposing children. Very learned men were led to thrust ἀδικῶμεν in here because below, no. 28, Justin joins injustice with impiety. But there he is speaking of another matter.

(printed under page 197)

(51) · call in col 370

Καὶ τὰ γεννώμενα. Mallet Thirlbius καὶ ἐκτιθέναι τὰ γεννώμενα. Piget referre alias conjecturas, tum H. Stephani qui legendum putat ἐκτιθέναι παραιτούμεθα ὅτε, tum Perionii et Grabii, quorum primus legit γενόμενα, alter πονηρόν.

"And the newborn." Thirlby would prefer "and to expose the newborn". It is tiresome to report other conjectures: H. Estienne's, who thinks one should read "we refuse to expose, since", and those of Périon and Grabe, the first of whom reads γενόμενα, the other πονηρόν.

(printed under page 197)

(52) ‹anchor: οὕτω νῦν καὶ› · call in col 370

Καὶ παῖδας. Legendum putat Grabius παῖδες vel παίδων. Sed necesse non est quidquam mutare, idque ex interpungendi ratione a nobis adhibita satis perspicitur. De his gregibus citantur a Grabio Tatianus n. 26 et Clemens Alex. II, Paedag., c. 4, de vectigalibus, quae ad imperatores redibant, vide Sueton. in Calig. et Lamprid. in Alex. Sever. Abrogatum hoc vectigal lege ult. tit. XI, lib. XI, cod. Just. Ita Thirlbius qui et de incestis flagitiis inde consequentibus citat Clem. Alex. Paedag. lib. III, p. 265; Lactantium lib. VI, c. 20; Minucium c. 21 Tertull. Apol. cap. 9 et 1 ad Nat. cap. 16.

"And children." Grabe thinks one should read παῖδες or παίδων. But there is no need to change anything, as is clear enough from the punctuation we have adopted. On these herds Grabe cites Tatian no. 26 and Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus II, ch. 4; on the taxes that went to the emperors, see Suetonius, Caligula, and Lampridius, Alexander Severus. This tax was abolished by the last law of title XI, book XI, of the Code of Justinian. So Thirlby, who on the incestuous crimes that follow from it also cites Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus Book III, p. 265; Lactantius Book VI, ch. 20; Minucius ch. 21; Tertullian, Apology ch. 9, and To the Nations I, ch. 16.

(printed under page 197)

(53) · call in col 371

Vide initium Apol. Athenagorae.

See the beginning of Athenagoras's Apology.

(printed under page 198)

(54) · call in col 371

Θεῷ. Legi posset θεῶν. Sylburgius.

"To God." One could read "of the gods". Sylburg.

(printed under page 198)

(55) · call in col 371

Ὡς ἀνατετραμμένου. Huc redit tota sententia: Quae palam et aperte facitis, ea a nobis in tenebris fieri dictitatis. Sic interpretari malui, quam cum aliis interpretibus haec ad ipsos ethnicos referre, quasi divinum lumen sive ratio inversa in illis esset, dum haec agunt. Videtur Justinus ethnicorum mores cum afflictis nomini Christiano criminibus sic comparare, ut etiamsi ea Christiani admitterent, ethnicis tamen palam et aperte perpetrantibus concederent. Iniquitatem ethnicorum eodem modo castigat Tertullianus I ad Nat., cap. 16. « Verum jam laudate, inquit, consilium incesti verecundi, quod adulteram noctem commenti sumus, ne aut lucem aut veram noctem contaminaremus, quod etiam luminibus terrenis parcendum existimavimus, quod nostram quoque conscientiam ludimus: quodcunque enim facimus, si volumus (leg. si velamus) suspicamur. Caeterum incesta vestra pro sua libertate et luce omni et nocte omni et tota coeli conscientia fruuntur, quodque felicius proveniat cum palam misceatis incesta toto conscio coelo, soli ipsi ignoratis: nos vero etiam in tenebris scelera nostra recognoscere possumus. » Vide Apol. 2, n. 11. Item Athenag. Apol. n. 34.

"As if overturned." The whole sense comes to this: what you do openly and publicly, you keep saying is done by us in the dark. I have preferred to interpret it so, rather than refer it, with other interpreters, to the heathen themselves, "as if the divine light, or reason, were overturned in them while they do these things." Justin seems to compare the morals of the heathen with the crimes fastened on the Christian name in such a way that, even if the Christians committed them, they would still yield to the heathen, who perpetrate them openly and publicly. Tertullian rebukes the injustice of the heathen in the same way, To the Nations I, ch. 16: "But now praise," he says, "the design of a bashful incest, in that we have devised an adulterous night, so as to defile neither the light nor true night; in that we have thought even earthly lights must be spared; in that we even play tricks on our own conscience: for whatever we do, if we will it (read: if we veil it), we suspect. But your incests enjoy, as befits their freedom, every daylight and every night and the whole knowledge of heaven; and, what turns out more fortunately, since you commit your incests openly with all heaven aware, you alone do not know them: we, however, can recognise our crimes even in the dark." See Apology 2, no. 11; likewise Athenagoras, Apology, no. 34.

(printed under page 198)

(56) · call in col 371

Φωτὸς θείου. Lumen illud Dei non rationem hoc loco, sed lucem oculis corporis affulgentem designat. Sic Clemens Paedag. lib. III, cap. XI, praecipit vetulis ut canos non inficiant, sed in lucem Dei efferant, id quod maxime venerandum est, ἀναδεικτέον ὑπ' αὐγὰς τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸ τίμημα. Essaei, teste Josepho II, Bel. Jud. cap. 7, cum naturae darent operam, diligenter sese veste contegebant ne αὐγὰς Θεοῦ lucem divinam contaminarent. Observat Eustathius in Iliad. p. 832. Diem ab Homero sacram vocari, ac ipsam noctem apud Hesiodum eodem modo appellari. Hinc etiam terram sacram, muros sacros dici solere idem scriptor docet, pag. 789, in Iliad.

"Of the divine light." That light of God here means not reason but the light that shines on the eyes of the body. So Clement, Paedagogus Book III, ch. 11, bids old women not to dye their grey hair but to bring into the light of God what is most worthy of reverence: "the honour is to be displayed under the rays of God." The Essenes, as Josephus attests, Jewish War II, ch. 7, when relieving nature, carefully covered themselves with a garment so as not to defile "the rays of God", the divine light. Eustathius observes, on the Iliad, p. 832, that the day is called sacred by Homer, and night itself is so called in Hesiod. The same writer teaches, p. 789 on the Iliad, that hence earth too is commonly called sacred, and walls sacred.

(printed under page 198)

(57) ‹anchor: αὐτὸν διὰ τέχνης› · call in col 371

Διὰ τέχνης. Legendum putat Billius διακενῆς vel ἀτεχνῶς lib. II Observ. sacr., cap. 6. Reddit Grabius: Non confitebitur ex arte sive opificio Dei eum exsistere. At διὰ τέχνης aliquid asserere, idem est ac non palam et aperte illud statuere, sed cum artificio quodam. Nam qui Deum humana non (continues)

"By art." Billius thinks one should read διακενῆς ("emptily") or ἀτεχνῶς ("simply"), Sacred Observations Book II, ch. 6. Grabe renders: "He will not confess that he exists by the art or workmanship of God." But to assert something "by art" is the same as to lay it down not openly and plainly but with a certain artifice. For he who [does not ...] God human (continues)

(printed under page 198)

(58) · call in col 374

Καὶ πάλιν. Aliam affert rationem cur Christiani ab exponendis liberis abhorreant.

"And again." He gives another reason why Christians shrink from exposing their children.

(printed under page 199)

(59) · call in col 374

Φίληκι. Ita R. Stephanus et mss. Sylburgius posuit Φήλικι et mox Φήλικος. Qui praeerat Aegypto vocabatur praefectus Augustalis, ejusque sedes erat Alexandriae, ut patet ex cod. Theod. tom. V, p. 270.

"To Felix" (Φίληκι). So R. Estienne and the manuscripts. Sylburg set Φήλικι, and just after Φήλικος. The governor of Egypt was called the Augustal prefect, and his seat was at Alexandria, as is clear from the Theodosian Code, vol. V, p. 270.

(printed under page 199)

(60) · call in col 374

Ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ μείνας. His verbis indicat Justinus adolescentem in virginitatis proposito perseverasse, et cum hujus laudis testimonium ab ipsis ethnicis impetrare non posset, sua et aliorum idem sentientium conscientia contentum fuisse. Propositum continentiae sic designant antiqui. Mos est Christianis, inquit Athenagoras Legat. n. 33: ἢ οἷος τις ἐτέχθη μένειν, ἢ ἐφ' ἑνὶ γάμῳ, vel qualis quisque natus est permanere, vel semel nubere. Clemens Alex. Strom. III, p. 461, de eo qui secundis nuptiis abstinet: Δόξαν δὲ αὐτῷ οὐράνιον περιποιεῖ μείνας ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ, Gloriam sibi coelestem conciliat in seipso manens. In libro III Constitut. apost., cap. 1, de juniore vidua sic statuitur: « Si manserit in se singularis (εἰ μείνῃ ἐφ' ἑαυτῆς) donum habens viduitatis, beata reperietur. » Hinc etiam in libr. II Hermae mandat. 4: « Qui nubit non peccat: sed si per se manserit, magnum sibi conquirit honorem apud Dominum. » Forte legendum « si super se manserit; » sic enim legitur in eodem capite n. 1: « Praeceptum est vobis ut coelibes maneatis; » pro quibus verbis legitur ad marginem, « super vos manere. » S. Methodius orat. 3 apud Combefis. p. 85, ait Paulum hortari μένειν ἐφ' ἑαυτῷ, unicis nuptiis contentum. Eodem modo loquitur S. Basilius ep. 217, can. 60. Gregorius Nyssenus in Vita S. Macrinae p. 180, testatur eam, defuncto adolescente cui destinata erat, statuisse perpetuam virginitatem servare, μένειν ἐφ' ἑαυτῆς τὸ λοιπὸν ἠξίου.

"Remaining by himself." With these words Justin shows that the young man persevered in his resolve of virginity, and, since he could not obtain testimony to this merit from the heathen themselves, was content with his own conscience and that of others of the same mind. The ancients describe the resolve of continence in this way. It is the custom of Christians, says Athenagoras, Plea, no. 33, "either to remain as one was born, or [to stay] with one marriage". Clement of Alexandria, Stromata III, p. 461, of one who abstains from a second marriage: "He wins heavenly glory for himself by remaining by himself." In Book III of the Apostolic Constitutions, ch. 1, it is laid down of a younger widow: "If she remains single by herself, having the gift of widowhood, she will be found blessed." Hence too in Book II of Hermas, Mandate 4: "He who marries does not sin; but if he remains by himself, he wins great honour for himself with the Lord." Perhaps read "if he remains upon himself", for so it reads in the same chapter, no. 1: "You are commanded to remain unmarried", for which words the margin reads "to remain upon yourselves". St Methodius, Oration 3 in Combefis, p. 85, says that Paul urges a man "to remain by himself", content with a single marriage. St Basil speaks the same way, Letter 217, canon 60. Gregory of Nyssa, in the Life of St Macrina, p. 180, attests that when the young man to whom she was betrothed died she resolved to keep perpetual virginity: "she thought it right to remain by herself for the rest of her life."

(printed under page 199)

(61) · call in col 374

Διὰ φόβου. Putarunt interpretes ipsius Adriani metu adductos esse homines, ut Antinoum colerent. Atque ita quidem statuendum esset, si legeremus ut apud Eusebium διὰ φόβον, per vim et metum, ut interpretatur Valesius. Sed longe praeclarior ac verior erit sententia, si legamus διὰ φόβου, ac ita reddamus: Tanquam Deum cum metu colere coeperunt, vel ut Deum metuere et colere coeperunt. Non enim ipse Adrianus imperii sui auctoritate homines terruit, sed ipsius Antinoi, tanquam magni cujusdam Dei, metus animis incussus. Huic enim attributa, teste Spartiano in Adriani Vita, urbs de ejusdem dicta nomine, templa in illius honorem, sacri ludi, sacerdotes et prophetae. Haec hominibus timorem incusserunt. At vim non intulit, qui id humanitate sua consecutus est, ut testatur Athenagoras n. 30 Apol. Nititur Thirlbius testimonio S. Athanasii, qui in orat. contra Gentes, p. 9, ait Antinoum adorari διὰ φόβον τοῦ προστάξαντος, ob metum illius qui id jusserat. Maxima sane auctoritas S. Athanasii, sed eum cum Athenagora conciliabimus in adnotatione ad hunc locum Athenagorae. At Justinus conciliari non posset, si legamus διὰ φόβον nihil aliud addendo; tunc enim terror intelligi hac voce deberet.

"With fear." The interpreters thought that men were driven by fear of Hadrian himself to worship Antinous. And that is indeed what one would have to conclude if we read, as in Eusebius, διὰ φόβον, "through force and fear", as Valesius translates. But the sense will be far finer and truer if we read διὰ φόβου and render: "They began to worship him as a god with fear", or "they began to fear and worship him as a god." For it was not Hadrian who terrified men by the authority of his rule, but the fear of Antinous himself, as of some great god, struck into their minds. For to him, as Spartianus attests in the Life of Hadrian, were assigned a city called by his name, temples in his honour, sacred games, priests and prophets. These things struck fear into men. But he used no force who obtained this by his own kindness, as Athenagoras attests, Apology no. 30. Thirlby relies on the testimony of St Athanasius, who in the oration Against the Gentiles, p. 9, says that Antinous was adored "through fear of him who had ordered it". The authority of St Athanasius is very great indeed, but we shall reconcile him with Athenagoras in the annotation on this passage of Athenagoras. Justin, however, could not be reconciled if we read διὰ φόβον with nothing added; for then terror would have to be understood by the word.

(printed under page 199)

(62) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀπόδειξιν› · call in col 374

Τὴν ἀπόδειξιν. Exsequitur quod secundo loco promiserat sese probaturum, nempe Filium Dei hominem factum fuisse. Paulo ante legendum ἀντιθείη, idque vidit Thirlbius qui eidem objectioni observat Irenaeum eodem modo occurrere lib. II, c. 57 et Lactantium lib. V, c. 3.

"The demonstration." He carries out what he had promised in the second place to prove, namely that the Son of God became man. A little before, read ἀντιθείη ("should object"); Thirlby saw this, and observes that Irenaeus meets the same objection in the same way, Book II, ch. 57, and Lactantius, Book V, ch. 3.

(printed under page 199)

(63) ‹anchor: τοῖς προφητεύουσι› · call in col 374

Τοῖς προφητεύουσι. Clarom. Τοῖς προφητεύσασι, sed tamen ad marg. apposita lectio vulgata.

"To those who prophesy." The Clermont manuscript has "to those who prophesied", but the common reading is nevertheless set in the margin.

(printed under page 199)

(64) · call in col 375

Κατεσκεύαζε. Ita R. Stephanus et mss. Sylburg. κατεσκεύασε.

"He was furnishing." So R. Estienne and the manuscripts. Sylburg has κατεσκεύασε ("he furnished").

(printed under page 200)

(65) · call in col 375

Ἡρώδῃ. Manifestus naevus; sed qui imperitis potius librariis, quam Justino tribui debeat. Certe redundat illud vocabulum, saltem post has voces ὁ βασιλεύς. Videtur ergo ex margine in contextum irrepsisse. Grabius legendum putat βασιλεύοντι ἱερεῖ, et paulo post βασιλεύων ἱερεύς pro βασιλεὺς Ἡρώδης. Firmat hanc legendi rationem Philonis testimonio, qui pontificem, ad quem legatos misit Ptolemaeus, regnum cum sacerdotio obtinuisse scribit lib. II De vit. Moys., p. 658: Πρέσβεις εὐθὺς ἔπεμψε πρὸς τὸν τῆς Ἰουδαίας ἀρχιερέα καὶ βασιλέα· ὁ γὰρ αὐτὸς ἦν. Legatos confestim misit ad Judaeorum pontificem et regem: idem enim tunc erat. Aliam init viam Usserius dissert. 2, in LXX interpr., p. 31. Nihil prorsus emendat, sed ex dictis Justini conjicit Cleopatram, quae priore bibliotheca in cineres redacta novam in Serapeo constituit, ab Herode idem fere beneficium, ac olim a summo sacerdote Ptolemaeum, impetrasse, ut codices Hebraeos ac Graecam interpretationem eruditis manibus castigatam ad se mitteret; quamobrem Justinum temporibus quidem graviter errasse, sed tamen aliquam veri umbram assecutum esse.—Τῷ τῶν Ἰουδ. τότε βασιλεύοντι Ἡρώδῃ, κ.τ.λ. Manifestus anachronismus, cum certum sit Ptolemaeum (Philadelphum) multum tempore Herodem praecessisse. Langus igitur Sylburgio astipulante Justinum notavit pro βασιλ. Ἡρ. scribere debuisse ἀρχιερεύοντι Ἐλεαζάρῳ itemque paulo post ἀρχιερεὺς Ἐλεάζαρος pro βασιλεὺς Ἡρώδης. Grabius, omnem culpam illius erroris transferens in scribam aliquem « reipublicae Judaicae minus gnarum, » conjicit Martyrem non Ἡρώδῃ, sed ἱερεῖ scripsisse et mox βασιλεύων ἱερεύς, id quod firmare studet Philonis testimonio (vid. Cohort. ad Gr. n. 13, ubi etiam Alexandrinae versionis origo narratur), qui pontificem, ad quem legatos misit Ptolemaeus, regnum cum sacerdotio obtinuisse scribit. Thalemannus vocem Ἡρώδης opinatur ex margine irrepsisse, cui ascripsisset imperitus quidam nesciens, pontificem quoque regem dici posse; idem jam Pearsonus et Maranus statuerant. Fabricius (Biblioth. gr. ed. Harl. vol. VII, p. 60) Usserio assentitur existimanti (De Graeca LXX interpretum versione synt. Lond. 1655, 4, p. 31), Justinum mira quadam ἀβλεψίᾳ Philadelphi et Cleopatrae bibliothecarum historiam commiscuisse. Istarum quaepiam conjecturarum si cui placuerit, ego non invidebo; scilicet naevus videtur potius Justino quam librariis attribuendus esse. OTTO.

"To Herod." An obvious blemish, but one to be blamed on ignorant copyists rather than on Justin. Certainly the word is redundant, at least after the words "the king". It seems therefore to have crept from the margin into the text. Grabe thinks one should read "to the reigning priest", and a little after "the reigning priest" for "King Herod". He supports this reading with the testimony of Philo, who writes (On the Life of Moses II, p. 658) that the high priest to whom Ptolemy sent envoys held the kingship together with the priesthood: "He at once sent envoys to the high priest and king of Judaea, for he was the same man." Ussher takes another road, Dissertation 2 on the Septuagint, p. 31. He emends nothing at all, but conjectures from Justin's words that Cleopatra, who set up a new library in the Serapeum after the earlier one had been burned to ashes, obtained from Herod almost the same favour Ptolemy once obtained from the high priest, that he should send her the Hebrew books and the Greek version corrected by learned hands; so that Justin erred badly as to the times, yet caught some shadow of the truth. — "To Herod, then king of the Jews", etc. An obvious anachronism, since it is certain that Ptolemy (Philadelphus) long preceded Herod. So Lange, with Sylburg's agreement, remarked that instead of "King Herod" Justin ought to have written "to Eleazar the high priest", and likewise a little after "Eleazar the high priest" for "King Herod". Grabe, shifting all the blame for the error onto some scribe "little acquainted with the Jewish commonwealth", conjectures that the Martyr wrote not "to Herod" but "to the priest", and just after "the reigning priest"; this he tries to support with the testimony of Philo (see the Exhortation to the Greeks, no. 13, where the origin of the Alexandrian version is also told), who writes that the high priest to whom Ptolemy sent envoys held the kingship together with the priesthood. Thalemann thinks the word "Herod" crept in from the margin, where some ignorant person who did not know that a high priest could also be called king had written it; Pearson and Maran had already concluded the same. Fabricius (Bibliotheca Graeca, Harles ed., vol. VII, p. 60) agrees with Ussher, who holds (Syntagma on the Greek Septuagint version, London 1655, 4to, p. 31) that Justin, by some strange oversight, confused the history of the libraries of Philadelphus and Cleopatra. If any of these conjectures pleases anyone, I shall not begrudge it; plainly the blemish seems to belong to Justin rather than to the copyists. OTTO.

(printed under page 200)

(66) ‹anchor: τῷ νῦν γεγενημένῳ› · call in col 375

Γεγενημένῳ. Euseb. loco mox citato habet γενομένῳ et Βαρχωχέβας et ἐκέλευεν ἄγεσθαι.

"Which has taken place." Eusebius, in the passage cited shortly, has γενομένῳ and Βαρχωχέβας, and "he ordered them to be led away".

(printed under page 200)

(67) ‹anchor: εἰς τιμωρίας δεινάς› · call in col 375

Μόνους εἰς τιμωρίας δεινάς. Hanc narrationem non docte interpretatus Banagius ac narratorem haud liberaliter refellit. « Queritur Justinus martyr, inquit Hist. Jud. lib. VI, part. 1, cap. 9, n. 21, quod Barchochebas solos impugnaret Christianos, solosque illos trucidaret, quia religionem suam ejurare nolebant.... sed quis credat ethnicos, quibus bellum intulerat, ab ejus crudelitate tutos fuisse? » Levis animadversio Banagium errore exsolvere poterat. Non enim negat Justinus crudelem in ipsos etiam ethnicos fuisse Barchochebam, sed barbarum in solos Christianos fuisse tortorem, iisque solis horrenda supplicia, nisi religionem suam ejurarent, parasse testatur.

"Them alone to terrible punishments." Basnage interpreted this account unlearnedly and refuted its narrator ungenerously. "Justin Martyr complains," he says, History of the Jews Book VI, part 1, ch. 9, no. 21, "that Bar Kochba attacked the Christians alone, and slaughtered them alone, because they would not abjure their religion... but who would believe that the heathen, on whom he had made war, were safe from his cruelty?" A little attention could have freed Basnage from his error. For Justin does not deny that Bar Kochba was cruel to the heathen as well; he attests that he was a barbarous torturer of the Christians alone, and prepared horrible punishments for them alone unless they abjured their religion.

(printed under page 200)

(**) ‹anchor: suam› · call in col 378 Gen. XLIX, 10.

Genesis 49:10.

(printed under page 201)

(68) · call in col 378

Πεντακισχιλίοις. Demonstrat Martianaeus noster in defensione text. Hebr. tom. II, cap. 1, primum illum prophetam, qui Christi adventum quinque annorum millibus praecessit, non Henochum esse, ut placebat Perionio, sed Adamum, cujus prophetia sacris et ecclesiasticis scriptoribus laudata. Quod autem idem Martianaeus ex verbis Justini colligit, eum non amplius quam quinque annorum millia a mundi creatione ad Christi ortum numerasse, id vereor ut certum et exploratum sit. Neque enim in ejusmodi numeris accuratissime versatur Justinus, qui etiam infra n. 42. Davidem annis mille et quingentis ante Christum collocat.

"Five thousand." Our Martianay shows, in his Defence of the Hebrew Text, vol. II, ch. 1, that that first prophet, who preceded the coming of Christ by five thousand years, is not Enoch, as Périon held, but Adam, whose prophecy is praised by sacred and ecclesiastical writers. But as for what the same Martianay infers from Justin's words, that he counted no more than five thousand years from the creation of the world to the birth of Christ, I doubt that it is certain and established. For Justin is not very exact in numbers of this kind; below, no. 42, he even places David fifteen hundred years before Christ.

(printed under page 201)

(69) · call in col 378

Χιλίοις. Post Adamum, Noe et Moysem, proprius Davidi locus videtur assignari. Sed cum ab eo usque ad Christum annos mille et quingentos infra numeret Justinus, nihil certi videtur statui posse.

"A thousand." After Adam, Noah and Moses, a place of his own seems to be assigned to David. But since below Justin counts fifteen hundred years from him to Christ, it seems nothing certain can be settled.

(printed under page 201)

(70) · call in col 378

Γενῶν. Legit γενεῶν eruditus Londinensis editor. Sed nihil prorsus mutandum. Sic enim infra κατὰ γένους διαδοχήν. Sic etiam Africanus apud Euseb. Hist. lib. I, c. 7: τὴν ἐπαλλαγὴν τῶν γενῶν διηγήσομαι.

"Of the races." The learned London editor reads γενεῶν ("generations"). But nothing at all should be changed. For so below, "by succession of race". So also Africanus in Eusebius, History Book I, ch. 7: "I will relate the interchange of the races."

(printed under page 201)

(71) · call in col 378

Πρῶτος τῶν προφητῶν. Non video cur Moysen Grabius contendat dignitate, non tempore, primum prophetarum dici. Quem enim Justinus in Cohort. ut scriptorum omnium antiquissimum citat, quid mirum est, si eum hoc loco inter sacros scriptores primum recenset?

"First of the prophets." I do not see why Grabe contends that Moses is called first of the prophets in rank, not in time. For since Justin, in the Exhortation, cites him as the most ancient of all writers, what wonder is it if he counts him here first among the sacred writers?

(printed under page 201)

(72) · call in col 378

Ὧ ἀπόκειται. Regius codex et R. Stephanus habent ὃ ἀπόκειται, Clarom. τὸ ἀπόκειται. Legitur in nostris editionibus LXX interpretum τὰ ἀποκείμενα αὐτῷ. Magna est hac in re apud scriptores ecclesiasticos varietas, sed non dubium est quin legerit Justinus ᾧ ἀπόκειται, tum quia paulo post addit post has voces τὸ βασίλειον, tum quia in Dialogo n. 120, contendit ita reddidisse Septuaginta interpretes, ac Judaeos aliam lectionem excogitasse, nempe τὰ ἀποκείμενα αὐτῷ. Lectionem, quam tuetur Justinus, magis usitatam apud Christianos fuisse colligimus ex testimonio Juliani, qui eos accusat apud Cyrill. Alex. lib. VIII, p. 253, quod Scripturam depravaverint, inducenda hac lectione ᾧ ἀπόκειται. Sic interpretatus est Symmachus, teste Eusebio Demonstr. Evang. p. 372. Interdum eadem lectio occurrit apud Eusebium, ut lib. VII Demonstr. cap. ult. Sed ipse lib. VIII, cap. 1, sic explicat τὰ ἀποκείμενα Christo, ut aliter legisse non videatur. Legimus apud Archelaum p. 78: Donec veniat cujus est. Quod quidem librariorum erratum videtur esse, pro cui jus est. Longius foret in aliis scriptoribus recensendis immorari.

"For whom it is laid up." The Royal manuscript and R. Estienne have "which is laid up", the Clermont "the [thing] is laid up". Our editions of the Septuagint read "the things laid up for him". There is great variety on this point among the ecclesiastical writers, but there is no doubt that Justin read "for whom it is laid up", both because a little after he adds "the kingdom" after these words, and because in the Dialogue, no. 120, he contends that the Seventy translated it so and that the Jews devised another reading, namely "the things laid up for him". That the reading Justin defends was the more usual among Christians we gather from the testimony of Julian, who in Cyril of Alexandria, Book VIII, p. 253, accuses them of corrupting Scripture by bringing in this reading, "for whom it is laid up". So Symmachus translated, as Eusebius attests, Demonstration of the Gospel, p. 372. The same reading sometimes occurs in Eusebius, as in Book VII of the Demonstration, last chapter. But he himself, in Book VIII, ch. 1, explains "the things laid up" for Christ in such a way that he does not seem to have read otherwise. We read in Archelaus, p. 78: "Until he comes whose it is." That seems to be a copyists' error for "to whom the right belongs". It would be too long to dwell on other writers.

(printed under page 201)

(**) ‹anchor: gentes sperabunt› · call in col 379 Isa. XI, 1.

Isaiah 11:1.

(printed under page 202)

(73) · call in col 379

Πρὸς ἄμπελον. Hunc pullum ad vitem alligatum fuisse nec Evangelistae narrant, nec ipse Justinus in Dialogo n. 75, ubi hanc prophetiam uberius explicat.

"To a vine." That this foal was tied to a vine neither the Evangelists relate nor Justin himself in the Dialogue, no. 75, where he explains this prophecy more fully.

(printed under page 202)

(74) · call in col 379

Τὸ παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ σπέρμα, ὁ Λόγος. Legendum existimat Grabius τὸ πνεῦμα, tum quia Spiritui melius convenit, ut in fidelibus dicatur habitare; tum quia non multo post, nempe n. 33, Verbum vocatur Spiritus. Scio equidem Verbo interdum a Justino Spiritus nomen attribui; at hoc loco non incommode vocatur semen. Sic in Apol. 2, n. 6: Ἔμφυτον παντὶ γένει ἀνθρώπων σπέρμα τοῦ Λόγου, et n. 7: κατὰ σπερματικοῦ Λόγου μέρος.

"The seed from God, the Word." Grabe thinks one should read "the Spirit", both because it better suits the Spirit to be said to dwell in the faithful, and because not much later, namely no. 33, the Word is called Spirit. I know indeed that Justin sometimes gives the Word the name of Spirit; but here he is not unfittingly called seed. So in Apology 2, no. 6: "the seed of the Word implanted in every race of men", and no. 7: "according to a part of the seminal Word".

(printed under page 202)

(75) ‹anchor: Ἡ δὲ πρώτη δύναμις› · call in col 379

Ἡ δὲ πρώτη δύναμις. Quod ait Justinus Verbum esse virtutem illam, quae obumbravit Virgini; quodque illud num. sequenti vocat Spiritum sanctum, id novum videri non debet, sed usitatum fuit apud sanctos Patres ante et post Justinum, ut pluribus demonstrat doctissimus S. Hilarii Operum editor, Praefat. n. 2.

"And the first power." That Justin says the Word is the power that overshadowed the Virgin, and in the next number calls it the Holy Spirit, should not seem new; it was usual among the holy Fathers before and after Justin, as the very learned editor of St Hilary's Works shows at length, Preface, no. 2.

(printed under page 202)

(76) ‹anchor: τοῦτο ἐμηνύετο› · call in col 379

Τοῦτο ἐμηνύετο. Legit τούτου Thirlbius, quae quidem emendatio satis apta videtur, sed minime necessaria.

"This was signified." Thirlby reads τούτου ("of this"), an emendation that seems apt enough but is not at all necessary.

(printed under page 202)

(77) ‹anchor: Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον› · call in col 379

Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον. Observat Grabius hoc Balaami oraculum, Orietur stella ex Jacob, apud Irenaeum citari lib. III, c. 9, et Isaiae in antiquissimo Vossii codice attribui, ut eidem prophetae a Justino tribuitur. Sed haec ratio non me deterret quominus credam Justinum, dum Scripturam memoriter citat, ex duobus oraculis, Balaam et Isaiae, unum fecisse.

"A star shall rise." Grabe observes that this oracle of Balaam, "A star shall rise out of Jacob", is cited in Irenaeus, Book III, ch. 9, and in Vossius's very ancient manuscript is attributed to Isaiah, as it is attributed to the same prophet by Justin. But this argument does not deter me from believing that Justin, citing Scripture from memory, made one oracle out of two, Balaam's and Isaiah's.

(printed under page 202)

(**) · call in col 382 Isa. VII, 14.

Isaiah 7:14.

(**) · call in col 382 Luc. I, 3, 32; Matth. I, 21.

Luke 1:3[1], 32; Matthew 1:21.

(printed under page 203)

(78) · call in col 382

Ὅπως δέ τινες. Legendum monet Thirlbius ὅπως δὲ μή τινες.

"But so that some." Thirlby advises reading "but so that some ... not".

(printed under page 203)

(79) ‹anchor: ὡς προεμηνύομεν› · call in col 382

Ὡς προεμηνύομεν. Clarom. προσμηνύομεν.

"As we indicated before." The Clermont manuscript has προσμηνύομεν.

(printed under page 203)

(80) ‹anchor: τῷ Θεῷ ἐστι› · call in col 382

Μωσῆς. Nemo est, qui non advertat legendum esse ὡς Μωσῆς. Sed Grabius longe diversam emendandi hujus loci rationem sequitur. Legendum enim putat, ὡς Ἡσαΐας, atque errorem inde ortum putat quod scriptum fuisset brevitatis causa ὡς Ἡσ. unde factum Μωσῆς. Necesse non est commentum hominis eruditi pluribus refellere. Liquet enim Justinum, qui hoc loco Verbum ante incarnationem primogenitum esse docet, minime respexisse ad Isaiae de Filio incarnato et Virgine Deum pariente oracula. At Moysis auctoritate Justinus utitur dialog. n. 50, ut probet Verbum esse primogenitum. Quare non debet Isaias in Moysis locum huc intrudi. Vide hunc Dialogi locum.

"Moses." There is no one who does not notice that "as Moses" should be read. But Grabe follows a very different way of emending this passage. He thinks one should read "as Isaiah", and that the error arose because "as Is." had been written for brevity, which became "Moses". There is no need to refute the learned man's invention at length. For it is plain that Justin, who here teaches that the Word was first-begotten before the incarnation, was not at all looking to Isaiah's oracles about the incarnate Son and the Virgin bearing God. But Justin uses the authority of Moses in the Dialogue, no. 50, to prove that the Word is first-begotten. So Isaiah ought not to be thrust in here in place of Moses. See that passage of the Dialogue.

(printed under page 203)

(81) ‹anchor: εἰ μὴ λόγῳ θείῳ› · call in col 382

Λόγῳ θείῳ. Nequaquam haec de Verbo Dei Filio, ut existimarunt interpretes Justini, accipienda sunt, sed de eloquiis Dei, quae inflammant prophetas, ut de Josepho dictum est in psalmo CIV: τὸ λόγιον τοῦ Κυρίου ἐπύρωσεν αὐτόν. Quanquam Verbum aspirat prophetis per Spiritum sanctum; non tamen quadrabat, ut Justinus, qui tertiam Trinitatis Personam appellare solet Spiritum propheticum (ut num. 6, 13 et 33), prophetas ab alia, quam Verbo, Persona negaret afflari. Praeterea haec verba, vos quoque, arbitror, dicetis, Justinum probant de re facili et pervulgata loqui. Porro Trinitatis mysterium ethnicis notum non erat, vel potius invisum erat et stultum videbatur, ut observat Justinus num. 13. At vates eloquiis divinis inflammari et efferri, res erat ad omnium intelligentiam accommodata.

"By a divine word." These words are by no means to be taken of the Word, the Son of God, as Justin's interpreters supposed, but of the utterances of God, which set the prophets on fire, as is said of Joseph in Psalm 104: "the word of the Lord tried him in the fire." Although the Word breathes on the prophets through the Holy Spirit, it would not fit for Justin, who usually calls the third Person of the Trinity the prophetic Spirit (as in nos. 6, 13 and 33), to deny that the prophets are inspired by any Person other than the Word. Besides, the words "you too, I think, will say so" show that Justin is speaking of an easy and commonly known matter. Moreover the mystery of the Trinity was not known to the heathen, or rather was hated and seemed foolish, as Justin observes, no. 13. But that seers are set on fire and carried away by divine utterances was a thing within everyone's understanding.

(printed under page 203)

(**) · call in col 383 Mich. V, 2.

Micah 5:2.

(**) · call in col 383 Isa. IX, 6.

Isaiah 9:6.

(**) · call in col 383 Isa. LXV, 2; LVIII, 2.

Isaiah 65:2; 58:2.

(**) ‹anchor: super vestimentum meum› · call in col 383 Psal. XXI, 18.

Psalm 21 (22):18.

(printed under page 204)

(82) · call in col 383

Ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθη. Vide Dialog. n. 77.

"In which he was born." See the Dialogue, no. 77.

(printed under page 204)

(83) · call in col 383

Ἐπιτρόπου. Negat Grabius hac voce significari procuratorem, sed praefectum; hujusque observationis auctorem citat Grotium. Sed tamen accuratius mihi videtur rectorem aut praesidem Judaeae aut Syriae attribuere, quam praefectum. De hoc Cyrenio, sive Quirinio, vide Vales. in Euseb. V, 5.

"Procurator." Grabe denies that this word means a procurator; it means a prefect, and he cites Grotius as the author of this observation. Yet it seems to me more accurate to assign a governor or president of Judaea or Syria than a prefect. On this Cyrenius, or Quirinius, see Valesius on Eusebius V, 5.

(printed under page 204)

(84) · call in col 383

Ἄχρις ἀνδρωθῇ. Non hic agitur de Christi silentio et vita obscuriore usque ad baptismum, sed de Judaeorum erga illum animo, qui eum regem et Deum suum esse non cognoverunt. Dixerat enim antea Justinus, nempe n. 31, Christum a prophetis, ut « invisum et ignotum et crucifixum » praenuntiari. Probat hoc loco Christum ignotum fuisse Judaeis, quia principatum ex ipsa cruce adeptus est, in quam scilicet Judaei illum ignorantes egerunt. Et n. 49: « Christum non modo non cognoverunt, sed etiam crucifixerunt. » Quare cum ignoratio et invidia et crux simul conjuncta sint, illud ἄχρις ἀνδρωθῇ virilem aetatem non excludit, sed potius includit, ac Christum ab ipso ortu usque ad aetatem virilem et extremum vitae tempus Judaeis invisum et ignotum fuisse demonstrat.

"Until he reached manhood." The subject here is not Christ's silence and more hidden life until his baptism, but the Jews' attitude towards him: they did not recognise him as their king and God. For Justin had said earlier, at no. 31, that Christ was foretold by the prophets as "hated and unknown and crucified". Here he proves that Christ was unknown to the Jews because he gained his rule from the cross itself, to which the Jews, not knowing him, drove him. And no. 49: "They not only did not know Christ, but even crucified him." So, since ignorance, hatred and the cross are joined together, "until he reached manhood" does not exclude his adult age but rather includes it, and shows that Christ was hated and unknown to the Jews from his very birth to his manhood and the last period of his life.

(printed under page 204)

(85) · call in col 383

Ἔστι δὲ ταῦτα. Longam huc inducit lacunam Grabius et non solum cum Lango aliquod de obscura Christi vita testimonium, sed etiam promissa n. 31, de Christi miraculis et de invidia Judaeorum oracula excidisse ex hoc loco pronuntiat; sed prorsus immerito. Nam ex his quae promisit Justinus, duo exsequitur hoc loco, nempe Christum singulos aetatum gradus peracturum, et invisum ac ignotum ac crucifixum iri. Id autem optime probat ex testimonio, in quo et varii gradus aetatis Christi commemorantur, et imperium illius ex ipsa cruce repetitur. Quid ergo huic orationi deesse possit? De miraculis aget n. 48, de invidia Judaeorum agit hoc ipso in loco, ut per se patet.

"And these are." Grabe brings in a long lacuna here and declares that not only (with Lange) some testimony about Christ's obscure life has dropped out of this passage, but also the oracles promised at no. 31 about Christ's miracles and the hatred of the Jews; but quite without reason. For of what Justin promised he carries out two things here: that Christ would pass through each stage of life, and that he would be hated, unknown and crucified. And he proves this excellently from a testimony in which the various stages of Christ's age are recalled and his rule is traced from the cross itself. What then could be lacking in this discourse? He will treat the miracles at no. 48; the hatred of the Jews he treats in this very place, as is self-evident.

(printed under page 204)

(86) ‹anchor: Κρῖνον ἡμῖν› · call in col 383

Κρῖνον ἡμῖν. Sententiae, non verborum allegatio Matth. XXVII, inquit Langus.

"Judge for us." A citation of the sense, not the words, of Matthew 27, says Lange.

(86*) ‹anchor: Ἱεροσόλυμα προεφήτευτο› · call in col 383 Legendum προεπεφήτευτο.

Read προεπεφήτευτο ("had been foretold").

(printed under page 204)

(87) ‹anchor: προφήτου τοῦ Σοφονίου› · call in col 383

Τοῦ Σοφονίου. Μνημονικὸν ἁμάρτημα. Sunt enim haec Zachariae, non Sophoniae verba, inquit R. Stephanus. Zachariae tribuuntur in Dialogo n. 53, ut observat Grabius.

"Of Zephaniah." A slip of memory. For these are the words of Zechariah, not Zephaniah, says R. Estienne. They are attributed to Zechariah in the Dialogue, no. 53, as Grabe observes.

(printed under page 204)

(**) · call in col 386 Zach. IX, 9.

Zechariah 9:9.

(**) ‹anchor: deseruistis Dominum› · call in col 386 Isa. I, 3.

Isaiah 1:3.

(**) ‹anchor: scabellum pedum meorum› · call in col 386 Isa. LXVI, 1.

Isaiah 66:1.

(**) ‹anchor: de manibus vestris› · call in col 386 Isa. I, 14.

Isaiah 1:14.

(**) ‹anchor: esurienti panem tuum› · call in col 386 Isa. XVIII, 6.

Isaiah 18:6 [as printed; the passage is Isaiah 58:6–7].

(printed under page 205)

(88) · call in col 386

Κινοῦντος αὐτοὺς θείου Λόγου. Divinum verbum prophetas movere dicitur, quia quidquid verborum proferebant, id eis inspirabatur. Dicuntur n. 13 nulla alia re efferri quam verbo divino. Ea loquebantur quae ipsis inspirabantur, inquit Athenagoras Legat. n. 8, ἃ ἐνηργοῦντο ἐξεφώνησαν.

"The divine Word moving them." The divine word is said to move the prophets because whatever words they uttered were inspired in them. At no. 13 they are said to be carried away by nothing other than the divine word. "They spoke what was inspired in them," says Athenagoras, Plea, no. 8: "they uttered what they were moved to."

(printed under page 205)

(89) · call in col 386

Παραφέροντα. Non male legeretur διαφέροντα, personae colloquentes diversae. Atque ita videtur legisse Langus. Sed tamen nihil mutandum duxi, quia verbum παραφέρειν nonnunquam apud Justinum idem valet ac inducere. Vide Dialog., n. 69. Illud ergo παραφέροντα refertur ad τὸν συγγράφοντα.

"Bringing forward." διαφέροντα, "different persons speaking", would not be a bad reading, and Lange seems to have read so. But I have thought nothing should be changed, because the verb παραφέρειν in Justin sometimes means the same as "to introduce". See the Dialogue, no. 69. So παραφέροντα refers to "the writer".

(printed under page 205)

(90) ‹anchor: προσώπου τοῦ Πατρός› · call in col 386

Τοῦ Πατρός. Miror unde in mentem venerit Lango et Sylburgio nomen Filii hic Patris nomini substituere. Utrumque merito reprehendit Grabius.

"Of the Father." I wonder how it occurred to Lange and Sylburg to put the name of the Son here in place of the Father's. Grabe rightly censures them both.

(printed under page 205)

(91) ‹anchor: ὁ λαός μου› · call in col 386

Λαός μου. Legendum esse λαός με monet Grabius, atque ita legi infra n. 59.

"My people." Grabe advises reading "the people [does not understand] me", and says it reads so below, no. 59.

(printed under page 205)

(92) ‹anchor: ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ› · call in col 386

Ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Non dicit ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ, sed ita accipienda haec verba quasi scriptum esset ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ Θεοῦ, Patris videlicet. Ita haec verba intellexit Thirlbius. Vide infra n. 44.

"From God." He does not say "by God"; these words are to be taken as if it were written "from the person of God", that is, of the Father. Thirlby understood them so. See below, no. 44.

(printed under page 205)

(**) · call in col 387 Isa. LXV, 2.

Isaiah 65:2.

(**) · call in col 387 Isa. L, 6.

Isaiah 50:6.

(**) · call in col 387 Psal. XXI, 19.

Psalm 21 (22):19.

(**) · call in col 387 Psal. III, 6.

Psalm 3:6.

(**) · call in col 387 Psal. XXI, 8.

Psalm 21 (22):8.

(**) · call in col 387 Matth. XXVII, 39.

Matthew 27:39.

(**) ‹anchor: amplius belligerare› · call in col 387 Isa. II, 3.

Isaiah 2:3.

(printed under page 206)

(93) · call in col 387

Γέγονεν. Vel praemittendum ὡς alterutri verbo γέγονεν aut μαθεῖν, ut placet Sylburgio, vel potius cum Grabio legendum γεγονέναι.

"Has happened." Either ὡς should be put before one of the two verbs, γέγονεν or μαθεῖν, as Sylburg prefers, or rather, with Grabe, one should read γεγονέναι.

(printed under page 206)

(94) ‹anchor: Ἡ γλῶσσ'› · call in col 387

Ἡ γλῶσσα. Monet Grabius post Halloixium haec desumpta esse ex medio Euripidis Hippolyto, et a Cicerone sic reddi sub finem lib. III Offic.: « Jurata lingua, animum injuratum gero. »

"The tongue." Grabe, following Halloix, notes that this is taken from the middle of Euripides' Hippolytus, and is rendered thus by Cicero towards the end of On Duties, Book III: "With a sworn tongue, I bear an unsworn mind."

(printed under page 206)

(95) ‹anchor: Γελοῖον ἤδη› · call in col 387

Γελοῖον ἤδη. Billius legit δέ, Sylburg. δ' ἦν vel δ' εἴη, Thirlb. ἢ δέ vel εἴη δέ. Ex levissima mutatione Otto post Grabium edidit ἢ δή. EDIT. PATROL.

"Already absurd." Billius reads δέ; Sylburg δ' ἦν or δ' εἴη; Thirlby ἢ δέ or εἴη δέ. By a very slight change Otto, after Grabe, printed ἢ δή. EDITOR OF THE PATROLOGIA.

(printed under page 206)

(96) ‹anchor: περὶ τῶν κηρυξάντων› · call in col 387

Περὶ τῶν κηρυξάντων. De SS. apostolis haec Davidis verba in mystico sensu accepit Justinus, praeeunte ipso S. Paulo Rom. X, 18. Ita Grabius, cujus nota a Thirlbio adoptata.

"About those who proclaimed." Justin took these words of David in a mystical sense of the holy apostles, with St Paul himself leading the way, Romans 10:18. So Grabe, whose note Thirlby adopted.

(printed under page 206)

(**) · call in col 390 Psal. XVIII, 2.

Psalm 18 (19):2.

(**) ‹anchor: qui confidunt in eo› · call in col 390 Psal. I et II, per totum.

Psalms 1 and 2, throughout.

(printed under page 207)

(97) · call in col 390

Συνέλευσιν. Hic quoque apostolorum vestigiis in Scriptura interpretanda insistit Justinus. Vide Act. IV, 27. GRABIUS et THIRLBIUS.

"Gathering." Here too Justin follows in the apostles' footsteps in interpreting Scripture. See Acts 4:27. GRABE and THIRLBY.

(printed under page 207)

(98) · call in col 390

Καὶ πῶς οἱ δαίμονες. Daemones ergo existimabat in hoc psalmo, quem mox referet, dicere, dirumpamus vincula eorum. Quare videtur principes illos, qui initio psalmi memorantur, daemones intellexisse.

"And how the demons." So he thought it was the demons who say, in this psalm which he will quote shortly, "Let us break their bonds." It seems therefore that he understood the rulers mentioned at the beginning of the psalm to be demons.

(printed under page 207)

(99) ‹anchor: ἐμελέτησαν καινά› · call in col 390

Καινά. Manifestum librariorum erratum pro κενά.— Καινά. Omnes editores legi volunt κενά. Cum vero etiam octo versionis Alexandrinae (ed. Holm.) codd. mss. nostram exhibeant lectionem, prorsus non est mutanda. OTTO.

"New things." An obvious copyists' error for κενά ("vain things"). — "New things." All the editors want κενά read. But since eight manuscripts of the Alexandrian version (Holmes's edition) also show our reading, it should not be changed at all. OTTO.

(printed under page 207)

(**) · call in col 391 Psal. XCV, 1-10.

Psalm 95 (96):1–10.

(printed under page 208)

(1) · call in col 391

Πᾶσα ἡ γῆ. Desunt hic nonnulla, quae cum legantur in Dialogo c. 73, a librariis omissa putat Thirlbius.

"All the earth." Some words are missing here which, since they are read in the Dialogue, ch. 73, Thirlby thinks were left out by the copyists.

(printed under page 208)

(2) · call in col 391

Τῷ Πατρὶ τῶν αἰώνων. Legit Thirlbius [et reponendum putat Gallandius], αἱ πατριαὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν, quia ita habemus in Dialogo n. 73. Quasi vero non potuerit Justinus Scripturam aliter in aliis locis citare.

"To the Father of the ages." Thirlby reads [and Gallandi thinks it should be restored] "the families of the nations", because we have it so in the Dialogue, no. 73. As if Justin could not have cited Scripture differently in different places.

(printed under page 208)

(3) · call in col 391

Ἀπολογίαν. Langus et Gelenius videntur legisse ἀπορίαν. Primus enim vertit dubitationem, alter, ne facessat negotium. Grabio probatur Sylburgii conjectura a Wolfio accepta, ἀντιλογίαν, occasionem contradicendi. Sed non videntur eruditi viri ingenium S. Justini et illius consuetudinem disputandi satis perspexisse. Nam cum impositum sibi esse duceret, quamplurimos ad veritatis cognitionem adducere, operam dabat exemplo Pauli, ut mundus esset a sanguine omnium, nec dubitabat quin, si quid subtraheret utilium rerum, relicta audientibus excusatio in suum ipsius caput resiliret. Vide infra n. 55 et 61, et Dialog. n. 38, 44, 58 et 82. Nihil igitur omnino mutandum, nec probabilior conjectura Thirlbii qui reponit ἀλογίαν.

"Excuse." Lange and Gelenius seem to have read ἀπορίαν. For the first translated "doubt", the other "lest it cause trouble". Grabe approves Sylburg's conjecture, taken over from Wolf, ἀντιλογίαν, "occasion for contradicting". But these learned men do not seem to have grasped well enough St Justin's mind and his habit of argument. For since he held it his charge to bring as many as possible to the knowledge of the truth, he took care, after Paul's example, to be clean of the blood of all, and he did not doubt that if he withheld anything useful, the excuse left to his hearers would rebound on his own head. See below, nos. 55 and 61, and the Dialogue, nos. 38, 44, 58 and 82. So nothing at all should be changed, nor is Thirlby's conjecture, who restores ἀλογίαν, any more probable.

(printed under page 208)

(4) ‹anchor: Τὰ πάντως ἐγνωσμένα› · call in col 391

Ἐγνωσμένα. Reddit Langus, Quae omnino futura decreta sunt. Recte quoad sententiam; sed verbum verbo reddere malui, atque hoc verbum eodem modo interpretari hoc in loco ac in aliis sequentibus. Nec tamen inde sequitur Justinum non ea etiam decreta credidisse, quae dicit fuisse praecognita. Quomodo enim Christi Incarnationem et resurrectionem et alia ejusmodi, de quibus hic agitur, decreta et constituta ab aeterno non credidisset?

"Known." Lange renders "the things decreed to come about without fail". Right as to the sense; but I preferred to render word for word, and to translate this word the same way here and in the places that follow. Yet it does not follow that Justin did not believe that what he says was foreknown was also decreed. For how could he not have believed that Christ's Incarnation and resurrection and the like, which are treated here, were decreed and settled from eternity?

(printed under page 208)

(5) ‹anchor: Δαβὶδ ἔτεσι› · call in col 391

Ἔτεσι. Grabius putat hunc errorem esse librariorum, non Justini.

"Years." Grabe thinks this error is the copyists', not Justin's.

(printed under page 208)

(6) ‹anchor: προειπεῖν προεγνωσμένα› · call in col 391

Ἐκ τοῦ προειπεῖν προεγνωσμένα. Grabius, Langi interpretatione leviter mutata, sic reddit: Nec aliqui colligant nos dicere... eo quod praedicta sint, praedeterminata esse. Sed cum ubique fateatur Justinus omnia a Deo προεγνωσμένα, ut infra n. 44 et 45, non videtur id negasse hoc loco, sed potius occurrere voluisse iniquis consecutionibus, quae ex ea re jam saepe asseverata deduci potuissent. Ita hunc locum intellexit Thirlbius.

"From our having foretold things foreknown." Grabe, slightly altering Lange's version, renders: "Nor let any infer that we say ... that because they were foretold, they were predetermined." But since Justin everywhere acknowledges that all things were foreknown by God, as below, nos. 44 and 45, he does not seem to have denied it here, but rather to have wished to forestall the unfair inferences that could have been drawn from a point he had already often affirmed. So Thirlby understood this passage.

(printed under page 208)

(7) ‹anchor: καὶ τοῦτο διαλύομεν› · call in col 391

Διαλύομεν. Inutilis conjectura Sylburgii legentis διαλύσομεν.

"We resolve." A useless conjecture of Sylburg's, who reads "we shall resolve".

(printed under page 208)

(**) · call in col 394 Supra n. 8.

Above, no. 8.

(**) ‹anchor: elige bonum› · call in col 394 Deut. XXX, 15 et 19.

Deuteronomy 30:15 and 19.

(**) ‹anchor: locutum est haec› · call in col 394 Isa. I, 16-20.

Isaiah 1:16–20.

(printed under page 209)

(8) · call in col 394

Εἰ γὰρ εἵμαρται. Nescio cur legere velit εἰ δὲ Thirlbius. Mox H. Stephanus levissima conjectura legendum putat ἀποδεκτέος, vel μεμπτός.

"For if it is fated." I do not know why Thirlby wants to read "but if". Just after, H. Estienne, by a very slight conjecture, thinks one should read ἀποδεκτέος ("to be approved") or μεμπτός ("blameworthy").

(printed under page 209)

(9) · call in col 394

Ἀποφαινόμεθα. Melius visum nonnullis ἀποφαινοίμεθα.

"We declare." Some have thought ἀποφαινοίμεθα ("we would declare") better.

(printed under page 209)

(10) · call in col 394

Ἀλλ' εἱμαρμένην. Similiter Clemens Alexandrinus de bonorum et malorum praemiis Strom. VII, pag. 710: αὐτή που ἡ Ἀδράστεια, καθ' ἣν οὐκ ἔστι διαδρᾶναι τὸν Θεόν. Haec est Adrastia, secundum quam Deum effugere non licet. Sic etiam Hierocles in libro De Providentia et Fato apud Photium, cod. 214, statuebat τὴν μέντοιγε τῇ προνοίᾳ συνεπομένην δίκην εἱμαρμένην καλεῖσθαι, justitiam quae ex providentia consequitur, fatum vocari.

"But [we say] fate." Similarly Clement of Alexandria, on the rewards of the good and the wicked, Stromata VII, p. 710: "This, I suppose, is Adrasteia, by which it is not possible to escape God." So too Hierocles, in his book On Providence and Fate, in Photius, codex 214, held that "the justice that follows on providence is called fate".

(printed under page 209)

(11) ‹anchor: τῷ πρώτῳ πλασθέντι› · call in col 394

Τῷ πρώτῳ πλασθέντι. Si verba spectentur, non primo homini dicta sunt; sed, ut observat Grabius, ex XV Ecclesiastici et XXX Deuteronomii sunt petita. Sed tamen si sensus consideretur, satis haec congruunt cum iis quae Deus Adamo dixit.

"To the first-formed." If one looks at the words, they were not said to the first man; as Grabe observes, they are taken from Ecclesiasticus 15 and Deuteronomy 30. Yet if one considers the sense, they agree well enough with what God said to Adam.

(printed under page 209)

(12) · call in col 395

Ἡ μάχαιρα... τὸ πῦρ. Haec imitatur Clemens Alexandrinus Protrept., p. 60, qui verba Isaiae sic citat: Μάχαιρα ὑμᾶς καὶ πῦρ κατέδεται. GRABIUS.

"The sword ... the fire." Clement of Alexandria imitates this, Protrepticus, p. 60, who cites Isaiah's words thus: "The sword and fire shall devour you." GRABE.

(printed under page 210)

(13) · call in col 395

Αἰτία ἑλομένου. Haec e libro decimo De republ., desumpta sunt, et citantur a Clem. Alexand. Strom. V, p. 613 et Theodoreto lib. II adversus Graecos. IDEM.

"The blame is the chooser's." These words are taken from the tenth book of the Republic, and are cited by Clement of Alexandria, Stromata V, p. 613, and by Theodoret, Book II against the Greeks. THE SAME.

(printed under page 210)

(14) ‹anchor: ὄντος παρ' αὐτῶν› · call in col 395

Παρ' αὐτῶν. Legendum videtur παρ' αὐτόν vel παρ' αὐτῷ et μέλλοντι. Ut intelligatur S. martyris sententia, in memoriam revocandum est quod paulo ante dicebat n. 43, fatum ineluctabile in eo positum esse, ut bonis et malis praemia rependantur; non vero ut hic bonus sit, iste malus. Sic igitur hoc loco judicium, quod de singulis hominibus instituendum est, distinguitur ab ea lege, et veluti ineluctabili, ut ipse appellat, fato, quo bonis et malis aequa merces solvenda. Atque huc redit tota sententia: Statutum apud Deum, ut cum singuli homines ab eo judicandi sint, justa virtuti et vitio remuneratio tribuatur.

"From them." It seems one should read "beside him" or "with him", and μέλλοντι. To understand the holy martyr's meaning, recall what he said a little before, no. 43: that inescapable fate consists in this, that rewards are paid back to the good and the wicked; not that this man is good and that one wicked. So here the judgement to be held on each man is distinguished from that law and, as he calls it, quasi-inescapable fate, by which a fair wage is to be paid to the good and the wicked. And the whole sense comes to this: it is decreed with God that, since each man is to be judged by Him, a just recompense will be given to virtue and to vice.

(printed under page 210)

(15) ‹anchor: θάνατος ὡρίσθη› · call in col 395

Θάνατος ὡρίσθη. De hac lege cum plura occurrant dicenda, quam ut his notae angustiis contineantur, hujus rei examen visum est rejiciendum in Praefat. part. III.

"Death was decreed." Since there is more to say about this law than can be contained in the narrow bounds of this note, it seemed best to put off the examination of it to the Preface, part III.

(printed under page 210)

(**) · call in col 398 Psal. CIX, 1-3.

Psalm 109 (110):1–3.

(**) · call in col 398 num. 2 et 12.

Nos. 2 and 12.

(printed under page 211)

(16) · call in col 398

Τὴν ἐπικύρωσιν. Legendum esse ἐπιπύρωσιν observavit Billius lib. II Observ. sacr., cap. 6, idque probat ex aliis locis, in quibus Justinus hanc vocem usurpat, nempe hujus Apol. n. 57 et 60, et Apol. 2, n. 6.

"The ratification." Billius observed, Sacred Observations Book II, ch. 6, that ἐπιπύρωσιν ("the burning") should be read, and proves it from other places where Justin uses this word, namely this Apology, nos. 57 and 60, and Apology 2, no. 6.

(printed under page 211)

(17) · call in col 398

Καίπερ θανάτου. Praemittit καί ante haec verba Thirlbius, vel paulo post ante ἡμεῖς.

"Although death." Thirlby puts καί ("and") before these words, or a little after, before "we".

(printed under page 211)

(18) · call in col 398

Ἀποτροπήν. Idem legit ἀνατροπήν, sed prorsus mendose. His enim occurrit Justinus, quae ad detorquenda illius dicta magis quam ad refellenda spectabant.

"Turning away." The same reads ἀνατροπήν ("overthrow"), but quite wrongly. For Justin is meeting things aimed at twisting his words rather than refuting them.

(printed under page 211)

(19) ‹anchor: πρὸ ἐτῶν ἑκατὸν πεντήκοντα› · call in col 398

Numerus rotundus. Similiter alii Patres, ut Tertullianus ad nationes I, c. 7: Igitur aetati nostrae nondum anni CCL; sed paulo post, c. 9: Ut supra, inquit, edidimus, aetatis nostrae nondum anni CCC. OTTO.

A round number. So other Fathers likewise, as Tertullian, To the Nations I, ch. 7: "So our age is not yet 250 years old"; but a little after, ch. 9: "As we set out above," he says, "our age is not yet 300 years." OTTO.

(printed under page 211)

(20) ‹anchor: καὶ ἐπικαλῶσιν› · call in col 398

Ἐπικαλῶσιν. R. Steph. ad calcem et codex Claromontanus ad marginem ἐπικλῶσιν. Non magis necessaria Langi emendatio, qui legi posse existimat, ἐγκαλῶσι incusent, objiciant.

"And allege." R. Estienne at the end of his volume, and the Clermont manuscript in its margin, have ἐπικλῶσιν. No more necessary is Lange's emendation, who thinks one could read ἐγκαλῶσι, "accuse, object".

(printed under page 211)

(21) ‹anchor: λόγον ὄντα› · call in col 398

Προεμηνύσαμεν λόγον ὄντα. Jam saepe Justinus de Verbo locutus est; praecipue vero n. 5, 10, 12, 23, 32. Sed Christum esse rationem illam, cujus omnes homines sunt participes praecipue docet in Apologia secunda n. 7 et 9.

"We indicated before that he is the Word." Justin has already often spoken of the Word, but especially at nos. 5, 10, 12, 23, 32. But that Christ is that reason in which all men share he teaches chiefly in the second Apology, nos. 7 and 9.

(printed under page 211)

(22) ‹anchor: βιοῦντες Χριστιανοί› · call in col 398

Χριστιανοί εἰσι. Non obscura est S. martyris sententia, sed quia illam obscurare nonnulli tentarunt, eorum commenta refelluntur in Praefatione. Quod autem nonnulli legendum putant hoc etiam loco Χρηστιανοί, id supra explosimus n. 4.

"Are Christians." The holy martyr's meaning is not obscure; but because some have tried to obscure it, their inventions are refuted in the Preface. As for some thinking that here too one should read Χρηστιανοί, we rejected that above, no. 4.

(printed under page 211)

(**) · call in col 399 Isa. LXIV, 10-12.

Isaiah 64:10–12.

(**) · call in col 399 Isa. I, 7.

Isaiah 1:7.

(**) ‹anchor: resurgent et ambulabunt› · call in col 399 Isa. XXXV, 6.

Isaiah 35:6.

(**) ‹anchor: sublatus est e medio› · call in col 399 Isa. LVII, 1.

Isaiah 57:1.

(printed under page 212)

(23) · call in col 399

Ἠρήμωτο. Nonnulli malunt ἠρήμωται. Sed convenientius mihi videtur ἠρήμωτο, in solitudinem redacta fuerat. Ibidem Sylburgius mallet γενέσθαι vel γενήσεσθαι. Sed mihi videtur Justinus praeteritum tempus usurpare, quia in ipsa prophetia idem tempus usurpatur.

"Had been laid waste." Some prefer ἠρήμωται ("has been laid waste"). But ἠρήμωτο, "had been reduced to a wilderness", seems to me more fitting. In the same place Sylburg would prefer γενέσθαι or γενήσεσθαι. But Justin seems to me to use the past tense because the same tense is used in the prophecy itself.

(printed under page 212)

(24) · call in col 399

Καὶ οὐκ ἔσται. Observat Thirlbius haec a Jeremia dicta esse de Babylone cap. L, v. 3. Vide Jerem. II, v. 15.

"And there shall not be." Thirlby observes that these words were said by Jeremiah of Babylon, ch. 50, v. 3. See Jeremiah 2:15.

(printed under page 212)

(25) ‹anchor: καὶ θάνατος› · call in col 399

Καὶ θάνατος. De hac lege vide Not. ad Dialogi n. 16.

"And death." On this law see the note on the Dialogue, no. 16.

(printed under page 212)

(26) ‹anchor: ἀκριβῶς ἐπίστασθε› · call in col 399

Ejusdem interdicti meminit in Dialogo, c. 16. Vide Valesium ad Euseb. Hist. eccl., IV, 6. OTTO.

He mentions the same prohibition in the Dialogue, ch. 16. See Valesius on Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History IV, 6. OTTO.

(printed under page 212)

(27) ‹anchor: γενομένων αὐτῷ› · call in col 399

Γενομένων αὐτῷ. Legendum esse ἄκτων, ut supra n. 33, Casaubonus admonuit exercit. ult., p. 554.

"Done by him." Casaubon advised (last Exercitation, p. 554) that ἄκτων ("Acts") should be read, as above, no. 33.

(printed under page 212)

(28) ‹anchor: ἐκ τοῦ μέσου› · call in col 399

Ἦρται ἐκ τοῦ μέσου. Legitur in Dialogo n. 37, ἡ ταφὴ αὐτοῦ ἦρται ἐκ τοῦ μέσου, ut Thirlbius observavit.

"Has been taken from the midst." The Dialogue, no. 37, reads "his burial has been taken from the midst", as Thirlby observed.

(printed under page 212)

(**) · call in col 402 Isa. LXV, 1-3.

Isaiah 65:1–3.

(**) · call in col 402 Isa. V, 20.

Isaiah 5:20.

(**) ‹anchor: iniquis propitius erit› · call in col 402 Isa. LIII, 12.

Isaiah 53:12.

(**) ‹anchor: qui non audierunt, intelligent› · call in col 402 Isa. LII, 13-15.

Isaiah 52:13–15.

(printed under page 213)

(29) · call in col 402

Παραγενησόμενον. Mallet παραγενόμενον Sylburgius, aut saltem hoc verbum addendum putat ante ἠγνόησαν.

"Who would come." Sylburg would prefer παραγενόμενον ("who came"), or at least thinks this word should be added before ἠγνόησαν ("they did not know").

(printed under page 213)

(30) · call in col 402

Τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ Θεῷ διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Notatu dignum est hanc ipsam fuisse formulam, qua olim catechumeni, post aliquod tempus baptizandi, ex Ecclesia dimissi sunt, diacono inter alia proclamante: Ἑαυτοὺς τῷ μόνῳ ἀγεννήτῳ Θεῷ διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ παράθεσθε. Vosipsos soli ingenito Deo per Christum ejus dedicate, uti legitur lib. VIII Constit. apostol., cap. 6. Ad quam Justinus non hic solum allusit, sed et supra n. 14 et 25, et infra n. 61. GRABIUS.

"To the unbegotten God through Christ." It is worth noting that this was the very formula with which the catechumens, who were to be baptised after some time, were once dismissed from the church, the deacon proclaiming among other things: "Commend yourselves to the only unbegotten God through his Christ", as is read in Book VIII of the Apostolic Constitutions, ch. 6. Justin alludes to it not only here but also above, nos. 14 and 25, and below, no. 61. GRABE.

(printed under page 213)

(31) ‹anchor: περὶ αὐτοῦ› · call in col 402

Περὶ αὐτοῦ. Observant Sylburgius et Thirlbius legi ὄψονται apud Septuaginta. Addit Thirlbius idem verbum non omitti Dialog. n. 13 et 118.

"About him." Sylburg and Thirlby observe that the Septuagint reads ὄψονται ("they shall see"). Thirlby adds that the same word is not omitted in the Dialogue, nos. 13 and 118.

(printed under page 213)

(32) ‹anchor: tanquam puerulum› · call in col 402

Vertendum est, tanquam puerulus, quia Justinus in Dialogo, n. 42, ex hoc loco concludit Christianos omnes instar unius hominis esse ob arctissimam animorum conjunctionem.

It should be translated "as a little child" [nominative], because in the Dialogue, no. 42, Justin concludes from this passage that all Christians are like one man because of the very close union of their souls.

(printed under page 213)

(33) ‹anchor: Παιδεία εἰρήνης› · call in col 402

Εἰρήνης. Addunt ἡμῶν Septuaginta et Justinus Dialog., 13. THIRLB.

"Of peace." The Septuagint and Justin, Dialogue 13, add "our". THIRLBY.

(printed under page 213)

(**) · call in col 403 Isa. LIII, 1-8.

Isaiah 53:1–8.

(**) ‹anchor: eorum traditus est› · call in col 403 Ibid., 8-12.

Ibid., 8–12.

(**) ‹anchor: Dominus potens› · call in col 403 Psal. XXIII, 7.

Psalm 23 (24):7.

(**) ‹anchor: angeli ejus cum eo› · call in col 403 Dan. VII, 13.

Daniel 7:13.

(printed under page 214)

(34) ‹anchor: διὰ Ἱερεμίου› · call in col 403

Διὰ Ἱερεμίου. Non Jeremiae esse hunc locum, sed Danielis, jam multi observarunt.

"Through Jeremiah." Many have already observed that this passage is not Jeremiah's but Daniel's.

(printed under page 214)

(35) ‹anchor: καὶ ἀπιστῆται› · call in col 403

Καὶ ἀπιστῆται. Ita Clarom. Editi ἀπιστεῖται.

"And be disbelieved." So the Clermont manuscript. The printed editions have ἀπιστεῖται.

(printed under page 214)

(**) · call in col 406 Ezech. XXXVII, 7, 8.

Ezekiel 37:7, 8.

(**) · call in col 406 Isa. XLV, 24.

Isaiah 45:24.

(**) · call in col 406 Isa. LXVI, 24.

Isaiah 66:24.

( ) ‹anchor: nobis est in ignominiam› · call in col 406 Zach. XII, 3-14; Isa. LXIII, 17 et LXIV, 11.

Zechariah 12:3–14; Isaiah 63:17 and 64:11.

(printed under page 215)

(36) · call in col 406

Ἐν αἰσθήσει. Eadem loquendi ratio paulo post occurrit et antea n. 20 et Judith XVI, 17. THIRLBIUS. Ibid. leg. ἐνδύσει.

"In perception." The same manner of speaking occurs a little after, and earlier at no. 20, and in Judith 16:17. THIRLBY. In the same place read ἐνδύσει ("in clothing").

(printed under page 215)

(37) · call in col 406

Παυθήσεται. LXX τελευτήσει, atque ita noster Dialog., n. 54, παύσεται, n. 148. THIRLBIUS.

"Shall cease." The Septuagint has τελευτήσει ("shall die"), and so our author in the Dialogue, no. 54; παύσεται ("shall cease"), no. 148. THIRLBY.

(printed under page 215)

(38) · call in col 406

Ζαχαρίου. Haec omnia tanquam Zachariae citantur: sunt autem partim Isaiae, partim ipsius Justini. THIRLBIUS.

"Of Zechariah." All these words are cited as Zechariah's, but they are partly Isaiah's, partly Justin's own. THIRLBY.

(printed under page 215)

(39) ‹anchor: εἰπεῖν, ἐπαυσάμεθα› · call in col 406

Ἐπαυσάμεθα. Reg. et Claromont. habent ad maginem παυόμεθα. Sic etiam R. Stephanus, ad calcem.

"We have stopped." The Royal and Clermont manuscripts have παυόμεθα ("we stop") in the margin. So too R. Estienne, at the end of his volume.

(printed under page 215)

(40) ‹anchor: ἀνεστράφησαν, ἔθη› · call in col 406

Ἔθη. Legitur ἔθνη in codice Claromontano.

"Customs." The Clermont manuscript reads ἔθνη ("nations").

(printed under page 215)

(16) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 407

Isa. LIV, 1.

Isaiah 54:1.

(printed under page 216)

(17) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 407

Isa. I, 9.

Isaiah 1:9.

(printed under page 216)

(18) ‹anchor: gentes autem praeputio› · call in col 407

Jer. IX, 26.

Jeremiah 9:26.

(printed under page 216)

(41) ‹anchor: τῶν ἐθνῶν› · call in col 407

Ἀληθέστεροι οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν. Videtur prima specie cum Justino pugnare Irenaeus, qui plus negotii in ethnicis, quam in Judaeis ad Christum convertendis fuisse docet. « Quapropter plus laborabat, inquit lib. IV, c. 24, qui in gentes apostolatum acceperat, quam qui in circumcisione praeconabantur Filium Dei. Illos enim adjuvabant Scripturae quas confirmavit Dominus et adimplevit talis veniens, qualis et praedicatur. Hic vero peregrina quaedam eruditio et nova doctrina deos gentium non solum non esse deos, sed et idola esse daemoniorum; esse autem unum Deum....... et hujus Verbum naturaliter quidem invisibilem, palpabilem et visibilem in hominibus factum. » Sed observandum est Irenaeum in hoc Judaeos cum ethnicis comparare, quod in istis Moyses quoddam veluti fundamentum jecisset, cui facilius deinceps superstruerent apostoli; in ethnicis autem docendis initium praedicandi ab ipsis elementis, ab ipsa Dei singularitate faciendum esset. Sed libentius et generosius ethnicos credidisse assentitur Irenaeus, qui sic ibidem loquitur: « Generosior autem rursus fides ostenditur, sermonem Dei assequentium sine instructione litterarum. »

"Truer, those from the nations." At first sight Irenaeus seems to conflict with Justin, for he teaches that there was more work in converting the heathen to Christ than the Jews. "Therefore," he says (Book IV, ch. 24), "he who had received the apostolate to the Gentiles laboured more than those who preached the Son of God among the circumcision. For the Scriptures helped them, which the Lord confirmed and fulfilled by coming such as he is also preached. But here there was a strange learning and a new doctrine: that the gods of the nations are not only not gods, but are idols of demons; and that there is one God ....... and that his Word, invisible indeed by nature, was made palpable and visible among men." But it must be observed that Irenaeus compares the Jews with the heathen in this respect, that among the former Moses had laid a kind of foundation on which the apostles could then more easily build, whereas in teaching the heathen the preaching had to begin from the very elements, from the very oneness of God. But Irenaeus agrees that the heathen believed more willingly and more generously, for he speaks thus in the same place: "Yet the faith of those who follow the word of God without instruction in letters is shown to be the nobler."

(printed under page 216)

(42) ‹anchor: καὶ ἐπὶ ἀπάτῃ› · call in col 407

Καὶ ἐπὶ ἀπάτῃ. Ex tribus, quae supra Justinus n. 23, probaturum se promiserat, hoc erat tertium, quod nunc de fabulis poetarum ad homines a fide avertendos excogitatis aggreditur.

"And for deception." Of the three things which Justin above, at no. 23, had promised to prove, this was the third, which he now takes up: that the poets' fables were devised to turn men away from the faith.

(printed under page 216)

(43) ‹anchor: πολλοὺς λεχθῆναι› · call in col 407

Λεχθῆναι. Prima specie convenientius videri possit τεχθῆναι, nempe eos qui geniti ex Jove dicuntur. Sed cum non multo post dicat Justinus τὸν Περσέα λεχθῆναι προεβάλλοντο, nihil mutandum. Non enim dicit Justinus perfecisse daemones, ut gigneretur Perseus, sed ut genitus diceretur. Frustra ergo legendum τεχθῆναι contendit Clericus, tom. III Biblioth. select. Legendo γενομένους υἱούς, sana erunt omnia. Mox Thirlbius legendum conjicit καὶ ὅμοια.

"To be said." At first sight τεχθῆναι ("to be born") might seem more fitting, namely of those who are said to have been begotten of Jupiter. But since Justin says a little later "they put it about that Perseus was said …," nothing should be changed. For Justin does not say that the demons brought it about that Perseus was begotten, but that he was said to have been begotten. In vain, then, does Le Clerc (Bibliothèque choisie, vol. III) contend that τεχθῆναι should be read. By reading γενομένους υἱούς ("sons born"), all will be sound. Just after, Thirlby conjectures that καὶ ὅμοια should be read.

(printed under page 216)

(19) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

supra n. 44.

Above, no. 44.

(printed under page 217)

(20) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

n. 32.

No. 32.

(printed under page 217)

(21) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

Gen. XLIX, 10.

Genesis 49:10.

(printed under page 217)

(22) ‹anchor: ut Perseus diceretur› · call in col 410

supra n. 4.

Above, no. 4.

(printed under page 217)

(23) ‹anchor: ad currendam viam› · call in col 410

Psal. XVIII, 6.

Psalm 18:6 (Vulgate numbering; Hebrew 19:5).

(printed under page 217)

(44) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

Τὸν πῶλον αὐτοῦ. Inter haec verba et ea quae sequuntur, habemus in sacro contextu, καὶ τῇ ἕλικι τὸν πῶλον τῆς ὄνου αὐτοῦ. Haec interjecta verba Justinus aut non legebat in suo codice, aut certe non meminerat se legere. Nam paulo post ait pulli nomen, quod hoc in loco memoratur, atque asini ac equi pullo congruere. Nihil ergo de pullo asinae in hoc testimonio legisse se tunc putabat. Vide Dialog. n. 62.

"His foal." Between these words and those that follow, the sacred text has "and to the vine-tendril the foal of his ass." Either Justin did not read these interposed words in his copy, or at least did not remember reading them. For a little later he says that the name "foal," which is mentioned in this place, fits both the foal of an ass and that of a horse. So he then thought he had read nothing about the foal of an ass in this testimony. See the Dialogue, no. 62.

(printed under page 217)

(45) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

Καὶ οἶνον. Sic editio R. Steph. et codices mss. At editiones Graeco-Latinae Parisienses habent ὄνον; quam quidem lectionem defendit Grabius, ac asinum mysteriis Bacchi consecratum fuisse pertendit. Sed retinendum est οἶνον. Nam 1° asinum Baccho consecratum fuisse non potuit ex hoc testimonio colligere Justinus, in quo nullam, ut modo vidimus, asini mentionem fieri putabat; 2° etsi Plinius, lib. XXIV, c. 1, ut observat Grabius, asinum Libero patri assignari testatur; multo solemnius fuit eidem Baccho vinum, ut vitis inventori, acceptum referre. — Καὶ ὄνον. Codd. mss. et editi οἶνον. Solus Morellus edidit ὄνον, quam quidem lectionem Grabius, Thirlbius, Gallandius et Braunius maxime eapropter probant, quod mox sequatur: Καὶ τὸ τοῦ πώλου ὄνομα καὶ ὄνου πῶλον καὶ ἵππου σημαίνειν ἐδύνατο. Ita enim Justinus judicat: « Cum, ut Braunii verbis utar, non satis exploratum haberent mali daemones, qui verus sit sensus verborum propheticorum quo certius quod volebant assequerentur, eos duplici ratione hominum animos fallere studuisse, atque ita et Bacchum, Jovis filium, et Bellerophontem, natum ex hominibus, ascendisse in coelum finxisse, et quod ambigua esset vox pulli, alteri asinum attribuisse, alterum equo vehentem induxisse. Ad quod cum librarii non attenderent, ὄνον mutarunt in οἶνον, quod est vulgare Bacchi attributum. » OTTO.

"And wine." So the edition of Robert Estienne and the manuscripts. But the Graeco-Latin Paris editions have ὄνον ("ass"); Grabe defends that reading and maintains that the ass was consecrated to the mysteries of Bacchus. But οἶνον must be kept. For, first, Justin could not have gathered that the ass was consecrated to Bacchus from this testimony, in which, as we have just seen, he thought no ass was mentioned; second, although Pliny (Book XXIV, ch. 1), as Grabe observes, attests that the ass was assigned to Father Liber, it was far more customary to credit the same Bacchus with wine, as the discoverer of the vine. — "And an ass." The manuscripts and editions have οἶνον. Morel alone printed ὄνον, a reading that Grabe, Thirlby, Galland and Braun approve chiefly because there follows soon after: "and the name 'foal' could signify both the foal of an ass and that of a horse." For Justin judges thus: "Since," to use Braun's words, "the evil demons had not ascertained clearly enough what the true sense of the prophetic words was, they strove to deceive men's minds in two ways, so as to attain more surely what they wanted; and so they feigned that both Bacchus, son of Jupiter, and Bellerophon, born of men, ascended into heaven, and, since the word 'foal' was ambiguous, they assigned the ass to the one and brought in the other riding a horse. Because the copyists did not notice this, they changed ὄνον into οἶνον, which is the common attribute of Bacchus." OTTO.

(printed under page 217)

(46) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

Ἀναγράφουσι. Similiter de serpente num. 27: Apud unumquemque eorum, quos existimatis, deorum, magnum serpens symbolum recensetur, ἀναγράφεται, id est inter ea recensetur sive exhibetur, quae ad mysterii celebrationem maxime necessaria videntur. In Dialogo num. 69: Οἶνον ἐν τοῖς μυστηρίοις αὐτοῦ παραφέρωσιν.

"They record." Similarly of the serpent at no. 27: "Among each of those you consider gods the serpent is reckoned a great symbol" — ἀναγράφεται, that is, it is reckoned or displayed among the things that seem most necessary to the celebration of the mystery. In the Dialogue, no. 69: "they bring in wine in his mysteries."

(printed under page 217)

(47) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 410

Ἐπὶ γῆς μενεῖ. Horum verborum is videtur esse sensus: Cum nescirent utrum hoc pullo is, qui praenuntiabatur, in terris usurus esset, an in coelum ascendendo; aberraverunt ab oraculi sententia, et quod propheta de Christo adhuc in terris manente praedixerat, id Bellerophonti in coelum ascendenti tribuerunt.

"Will remain on earth." The sense of these words seems to be this: since they did not know whether he who was foretold would use this foal on earth or in ascending into heaven, they strayed from the meaning of the oracle, and what the prophet had foretold of Christ while still remaining on earth they attributed to Bellerophon ascending into heaven.

(printed under page 217)

(48) ‹anchor: ἔσται σύμβολον› · call in col 410

Ἔσται σύμβολον. Legit eruditus Londinensis editor ἕξει σύμβολον; sed inutili labore. Quod enim ait Justinus Christum, dum ita vehitur, fuisse adventus sui symbolum, non ita difficile est ad intelligendum.

"Will be a symbol." The learned London editor reads ἕξει σύμβολον ("will have a symbol"), but to no purpose. For what Justin says, that Christ, while carried thus, was the symbol of his own coming, is not so hard to understand.

(printed under page 217)

(49) ‹anchor: καὶ ὅτε ἔγνωσαν› · call in col 410

Καὶ ὅτε ἔγνωσαν. Ut de Justini sententia, ut par est, judicetur, nonnulla sunt distinguenda. (continues)

"And when they learned." That Justin's opinion may be judged fairly, some distinctions must be made. (continues)

(printed under page 217)

(24) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 411

supra n. 35.

Above, no. 35.

(printed under page 218)

(25) ‹anchor: Christus Dominus› · call in col 411

Thren. IV, 20.

Lamentations 4:20.

(printed under page 218)

(49) (continued) · call in col 411

1° Non immerito daemonibus acceptum refert quidquid poetae de filiis Jovis finxerunt. 2° Neque etiam illud dubitari possit, quod S. martyr usu et experientia videtur perspexisse, fabulas poetarum ethnicis permultis ansam attulisse Christianorum doctrinae rejiciendae. Trypho Judaeus Dialog. n. 70, rejicit, ut poetarum de Perseo fabulam, quod Justinus de Filio Dei ex Virgine genito docebat. Sed quod Bacchi fabulam ex prophetia Jacob, Herculis ex psalmi verbis deductam fuisse putat, id profecto longius tractum videtur. Julius Firmicus multas similiter fabulas, ex iis quae de Christo praedicta erant, imitatione a daemonibus expressas putat lib. De prof. relig.

First, not without reason does he credit to the demons whatever the poets invented about the sons of Jupiter. Second, nor can it be doubted — what the holy martyr seems to have perceived from use and experience — that the poets' fables gave very many heathen a handle for rejecting the doctrine of the Christians. Trypho the Jew (Dialogue, no. 70) rejects what Justin taught about the Son of God born of a Virgin as being like the poets' fable of Perseus. But his view that the fable of Bacchus was drawn from the prophecy of Jacob, and that of Hercules from the words of the psalm, certainly seems far-fetched. Julius Firmicus likewise holds that many fables were fashioned by the demons in imitation of what had been foretold of Christ (book On the Error of Profane Religions).

(printed under page 218)

(50) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 411

Θάλασσα μὲν γάρ. Carpit hanc ratiocinationem Clericus, ut « declamatoriam rationem. » Sed tamen etsi ejusmodi argumenta non multum habent per seipsa ponderis, inepta tamen videri non debent in disputatione adversus ethnicos, qui nihil cruce magis ignominiosum ducebant. Non insulsa visa sunt acutissimo scriptori Tertulliano, qui Justinum, ut modo videbimus, imitatus est. Quae autem de crucis similitudine, cum navis antennis et jugo et hominis figura, dicit Justinus, ea sic exprimit imitando Minucius Felix p. 286. Edit. Lugd. Batav.: « Signum crucis naturaliter visimus in navi, cum velis tumentibus vehitur, cum expansis palmulis vehitur, et cum erigitur jugum, crucis signum est, et cum homo porrectis manibus Deum pura mente veneratur. » Vid. Hieron. epist. ad Heliod.

"For the sea …" Le Clerc carps at this reasoning as "a declaimer's argument." Yet although arguments of this kind carry little weight in themselves, they ought not to seem foolish in a dispute against the heathen, who held nothing more shameful than the cross. They did not seem silly to that most acute writer Tertullian, who, as we shall see shortly, imitated Justin. What Justin says of the likeness of the cross to a ship's yards, to the yoke and to the human figure, Minucius Felix expresses thus in imitation (p. 286, Leiden edition): "We see the sign of the cross naturally in a ship, when it is carried along with swelling sails, when it glides with its oars spread out; and when the yoke is raised, it is the sign of a cross; and when a man worships God with a pure mind and hands outstretched." See Jerome's letter to Heliodorus.

(printed under page 218)

(51) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 411

Τὸ δὲ ἀνθρώπειον σχῆμα. Ipsi quoque corpori nostro, inquit Tertullianus I ad Nat. c. 12, tacita et secreta linea crucis situs est.

"But the human figure." "In our very body too," says Tertullian (To the Nations I, ch. 12), "the form of the cross is drawn in a silent and hidden line."

(printed under page 218)

(52) ‹anchor: Πνεῦμα πρὸ προσώπου› · call in col 411

Πνεῦμα πρὸ προσώπου. Deest praepositio in vulgata LXX interpretum editione, et apud Irenaeum lib. III, cap. 10, n. 4, et apud Tertullianum Adv. Praxeam c. 14, ubi legitur, Spiritus personae ejus, Christus Dominus. Cum Justino consentiunt Constitutiones apostolicae lib. V, c. 20. GRABIUS.

"The Spirit before the face." The preposition is lacking in the common edition of the Seventy translators, and in Irenaeus (Book III, ch. 10, no. 4), and in Tertullian (Against Praxeas, ch. 14), where one reads: "The Spirit of his person, Christ the Lord." The Apostolic Constitutions (Book V, ch. 20) agree with Justin. GRABE.

(printed under page 218)

(53) ‹anchor: * λλωμεν› · call in col 411

* λλωμεν. Hujus lacunae reparandae copiam praebet codex Claromontanus, in quo secunda manu ante illud λλωμεν additur βιξι, ex quo intelligitur legendum esse βιξιλλῶν; nec mirum si vocem Latinam Graeci librarii deformarunt. In codice ms. tantum spatii ad hunc hiatum explendum relictum est, quantum quatuor aut quinque syllabis satis fuisset. Forte ergo legendum τῶν βιξιλλῶν vel τῶν καλουμένων βιξιλλῶν. Plura addit Thirlbius qui hunc locum in codice Claromontano consulendum curavit. Legendum enim putat λέγω δὲ τὰ τῶν καλουμένων παρ' ὑμῖν βιξιλλῶν. Eadem sententia occurrit apud Tertullianum Apol. cap. 16, et Minucium Felicem pag. 286.

"* llomen." The Clermont manuscript provides the means of repairing this gap: in it a second hand has added βιξι before λλωμεν, from which it is understood that βιξιλλῶν (vexilla, "standards") is to be read; nor is it surprising if Greek copyists disfigured a Latin word. In the manuscript as much space was left to fill this gap as would have sufficed for four or five syllables. Perhaps, then, τῶν βιξιλλῶν or τῶν καλουμένων βιξιλλῶν ("of the so-called vexilla") should be read. Thirlby, who had this place consulted in the Clermont manuscript, adds more: he thinks one should read λέγω δὲ τὰ τῶν καλουμένων παρ' ὑμῖν βιξιλλῶν ("I mean those of what you call vexilla"). The same thought occurs in Tertullian (Apology, ch. 16) and Minucius Felix (p. 286).

(printed under page 218)

(54) ‹anchor: τὰς εἰκόνας› · call in col 411

Αὐτοκρατόρων τὰς εἰκόνας. De his imaginibus loqui videtur Tertullianus, cum ait: « Omnes illi imaginum suggestus monilia crucum sunt. » Apologet. 16. Vide I ad Nat., 12.

"The images of the emperors." Tertullian seems to speak of these images when he says: "All those mountings of images are necklaces of crosses" (Apology 16). See To the Nations I, 12.

(printed under page 218)

(55) ‹anchor: διὰ γραμμάτων› · call in col 411

Διὰ γραμμάτων. Sylburgius legendum putat δι' ἐπιγραμμάτων. Mallet Grabius διὰ διαγραμ- (continues)

"Through letters." Sylburg thinks δι' ἐπιγραμμάτων ("through inscriptions") should be read. Grabe would prefer διὰ διαγραμ- (continues)

(printed under page 218)

(26) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 414

supra n. 16.

Above, no. 16.

(printed under page 219)

(27) ‹anchor: Christi adventus lateret› · call in col 414

supra n. 20.

Above, no. 20.

(printed under page 219)

(55) (continued) · call in col 414

ματων, sed nihil mutandum fatetur. Vertit Halloixius Vit. Justin. p. 242, per decreta. Notissima est et Graecis et Latinis haec loquendi ratio. Populus hortabatur Tiberium Gracchum διὰ γραμμάτων ἐν στοαῖς καὶ τοίχοις καὶ μνήμασι γραφομένων, per litteras in porticibus, in muris et monumentis inscriptas, Plut. in Gracch. p. 828. Hinc etiam apud Ciceronem, « incisae aut inscriptae litterae » in orat. pro Domo. « Incisae litterae, divinae virtutis testes sempiternae, » 14. Philip. Et IV Verr. « Et Romae vidimus in basi statuarum maximis litteris incisum, a communi Siciliae datas. »

-ματων ("diagrams"), but admits that nothing should be changed. Halloix (Life of Justin, p. 242) translates it "by decrees." This manner of speaking is very well known to both Greeks and Latins. The people urged on Tiberius Gracchus "by letters written on porticoes, walls and monuments" (Plutarch, Gracchi, p. 828). Hence also in Cicero, "letters cut or inscribed" (speech On His House); "letters cut, everlasting witnesses of godlike virtue" (Philippic 14); and in Verrines IV: "And at Rome we have seen it cut in very large letters on the base of the statues, that they were given by the community of Sicily."

(printed under page 219)

(56) ‹anchor: μὴ γενέσθαι› · call in col 414

Οὐ γὰρ μὴ γενέσθαι. De conflagratione loquendi, id est de extremo judicio, occasionem sumit Justinus ex his quae paulo ante dixerat. Modo enim optabat senatum et populum Romanum una cum imperatore de Christianorum causa cognoscere; ut si quis Simonis doctrinae implicatus sit, cognita veritate errorem effugere possit. Tum addit: Neque enim nullam esse ad impiorum supplicium conflagrationem pravi daemones persuadere possunt; id est, cum homines liberi sint, ac sua bonis et malis servetur merces, boni ex malis possunt fieri, et ab errore ad veritatem converti. Summam necessitudinem statuere solet Justinus, ut videri potest num. 28 et 43, inter libertatem hominis et futurum judicium.

"For [they cannot persuade] that there will not be." Justin takes occasion to speak of the conflagration, that is, of the last judgement, from what he had said a little before. For he had just been wishing that the senate and Roman people, together with the emperor, would examine the Christians' case, "so that if anyone is entangled in Simon's doctrine, he may escape the error once the truth is known." Then he adds: "For the wicked demons cannot persuade us that there will be no conflagration for the punishment of the impious"; that is, since men are free, and their reward is kept for good and bad alike, men can become good from bad and be converted from error to truth. Justin regularly lays down the closest connection, as can be seen at nos. 28 and 43, between man's freedom and the judgement to come.

(printed under page 219)

(57) ‹anchor: καὶ φιλοδοξοῦντας› · call in col 414

Φιλοδοξοῦντας. Sic etiam paulo post φιλοδόξους reddidi opinionum amatores. Nam δόξα in ejusmodi locis opponitur veritati. Vide num. 2, 12 et 53 et Apol. 2, n. 3.

"Lovers of opinion." So also a little further on I rendered φιλοδόξους as "lovers of opinions." For δόξα in passages of this kind is opposed to truth. See nos. 2, 12 and 53, and the Second Apology, no. 3.

(printed under page 219)

(58) ‹anchor: μὴ κόρος› · call in col 414

Ὧν εἰ μὴ κόρος. Legendum esse ὧν εἰ μὲν κόρος fatebitur, quisquis sensum, quem in interpretatione expressimus, cum eo conferet, qui ex apposita negatione consequeretur. Ita etiam Thirlbius.

"Of which if not satiety." Anyone who compares the sense we have expressed in the translation with the sense that would follow from the negative as printed will admit that ὧν εἰ μὲν κόρος ("of which if satiety") should be read. So also Thirlby.

(printed under page 219)

(28) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 415

supra n. 26.

Above, no. 26.

(printed under page 220)

(29) ‹anchor: ut supra demonstravimus› · call in col 415

num. 44 et 54.

Nos. 44 and 54.

(printed under page 220)

(59) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 415

Ἑαυτοὺς δὲ φαύλους. Similem sententiam profert Thirlbius ex Apologia Socratis apud Platonem p. 41.

"But themselves wicked." Thirlby cites a similar thought from the Apology of Socrates in Plato, p. 41.

(printed under page 220)

(60) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 415

Ἕτερον υἱόν. Duos filios non eodem sensu admittebat Marcion, quo alii nonnulli, qui Christum a Jesu dividebant. Ipse enim Jesum sine carne, ac totum Deum esse fingebat. Sed cum eum contenderet, non Creatoris, sed Dei praestantioris esse filium et Christum; suum Creatori Filium et Christum relinquebat, ac fatebatur « Filium et Spiritum et substantiam Creatoris esse Christum ejus. » Tertul., lib. III, c. 7.

"Another son." Marcion did not admit two sons in the same sense as certain others who divided Christ from Jesus. For he imagined Jesus to be without flesh and wholly God. But since he maintained that Jesus was the son and Christ, not of the Creator, but of a superior God, he left the Creator his own Son and Christ, and admitted that "the Son and Spirit and substance of the Creator is his Christ" (Tertullian, Book III, ch. 7).

(printed under page 220)

(61) ‹anchor: διὰ τῶν προφητῶν› · call in col 415

Διὰ τῶν προφητῶν. Supple κηρυχθέντος, non autem, ut Grabius et Thirlbius post Sylburgium, λαλήσαντος. Quinetiam Thirlbius legendum conjicit παρὰ τοῦ ἡμετέρου διδασκάλου.

"Through the prophets." Supply κηρυχθέντος ("proclaimed"), not λαλήσαντος ("having spoken"), as Grabe and Thirlby following Sylburg do. Thirlby even conjectures that παρὰ τοῦ ἡμετέρου διδασκάλου ("from our teacher") should be read.

(printed under page 220)

(62) ‹anchor: στρέψαντα› · call in col 415

Στρέψαντα. Legi posse τρέψαντα existimat Sylburgius; sic enim infra loquitur Justinus. Illud autem observandum est Platonis de mundi creatione sententiam non sine exceptione a sancto martyre laudari. Nam dum solam materiae dispositionem considerat, non immerito Platonem laudat, qui tam multa praeclare ea de re scripsit; sed suam ab eo dissensionem declarat, dum universum mundum ex subjectis rebus et a Moyse demonstratis, id est ex coelo et terra, quae Deus in principio creavit, perfectum esse pronuntiat. Platonis sententiam simili modo laudant Clemens Strom. V, pag. 591, et Theodoretus initio lib. IV adv. Graecos.

"Having turned." Sylburg thinks τρέψαντα can be read, for so Justin speaks below. But it should be observed that Plato's opinion on the creation of the world is not praised by the holy martyr without reservation. For when he considers only the ordering of matter, he rightly praises Plato, who wrote so much so excellently on the subject; but he declares his disagreement with him when he pronounces that the whole world was made from the things underlying it and shown by Moses, that is, from the heaven and the earth which God created in the beginning. Clement (Stromata V, p. 591) and Theodoret (at the beginning of Book IV Against the Greeks) praise Plato's opinion in a similar way.

(printed under page 220)

[Image note: the foot images begin inside the notes; the opening of note (63) and one line of the right-hand note column are cut off at the top of the images and are not set here.] (printed under page 221)

(63) (continued; opening cut off at the image top) · call in col 418

[…] ex numero 62, ubi legitur εἰς αὐτούς, et ex pluribus aliis locis.

[…] from no. 62, where εἰς αὐτούς ("into them") is read, and from several other places.

(printed under page 221)

(64) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 418

Ἔχιασεν αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ παντί. Nonnulla hic observanda. 1° Non de Filio Dei haec dixit Plato, qui nulla prorsus Verbi cognitione afflatus fuit, sed de anima mundi. Neque etiam hanc sententiam Plato ex Moysis fontibus derivavit. 2° Si Platonis sententiam minus accurate exponit S. Justinus, suam ipse non obscure declarat, nempe Verbum instar crucis in mundo extensum esse. Nam in Platone, quem de Verbo locutum putabat, hoc tantum reprehendit, quod Verbum decussatum, non instar crucis extensum dixerit. Non solus ita sensit Justinus. Ait sanctus Basilius in caput XI Isaiae n. 249: « Mortem crucis praecipue honoratam fuisse, sive ut singulae mundi partes ad salutem perducerentur per crucis partes; sive quod ante ligneam intelligibilis quaedam crux in universo descripta esset, ἢ ὅτι πρὸ τοῦ ξυλίνου σταυροῦ νοητός τις τῷ κόσμῳ παντὶ συνεσταύρωται. » Hinc Valentiniani Verbum in mundi creatione Hori et crucis partes sustinuisse dicebant. Atque illud quidem crucem vocabant « quatenus firmat et stabilit, Horon vero quatenus dividit et distinguit, » Iren. lib. I, c. 3, n. 5. Videtur Justinus Verbum instar crucis ad mundi creationem extensum dixisse, quia crux ad omnes mundi partes extenditur, ut observant Julius Firmicus, lib. De profan. relig. et Hieronymus in Ep. ad Ephes., p. 318. Videtur auctor epistolae, quae S. Barnabae nomen praefert, idem ac Justinus sentire, nempe Verbum Dei in universo instar crucis extensum fuisse. Postquam enim crucem a Moyse erectam fuisse narravit, haec addit n. 12: Ἔχεις καὶ ἐν τούτῳ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ πάντα καὶ εἰς αὐτόν. Habes et in hoc gloriam Jesu, quia in ipso omnia et per ipsum. His enim verbis universi creatio significatur. — Ex Addendis et Emendandis.

"He set him crosswise in the universe." Several points are to be observed here. First, Plato did not say this of the Son of God, for he was inspired with no knowledge whatever of the Word, but of the world-soul. Nor did Plato draw this opinion from the springs of Moses. Second, if Saint Justin sets out Plato's opinion less than accurately, he declares his own plainly enough: namely, that the Word is stretched out in the world in the manner of a cross. For in Plato, whom he thought had spoken of the Word, he faults only this, that he said the Word was set crosswise like the letter X, not stretched out like a cross. Justin was not alone in thinking so. Saint Basil says on Isaiah ch. 11 (no. 249): "The death of the cross was especially honoured, either so that the several parts of the world might be brought to salvation through the parts of the cross, or because before the wooden cross a certain intelligible cross had been traced in the universe" — "or because before the wooden cross a certain intelligible one was crucified together with the whole world." Hence the Valentinians said that the Word at the creation of the world played the parts of Horos and of the cross; they called it a cross "inasmuch as it strengthens and makes firm, and Horos inasmuch as it divides and distinguishes" (Irenaeus, Book I, ch. 3, no. 5). Justin seems to have said that the Word was stretched out like a cross for the creation of the world because the cross extends to all parts of the world, as Julius Firmicus observes (book On the Error of Profane Religions) and Jerome on the Epistle to the Ephesians, p. 318. The author of the epistle which bears the name of Saint Barnabas seems to think the same as Justin, namely that the Word of God was stretched out in the universe like a cross. For after he has related that the cross was raised up by Moses, he adds at no. 12: "You have in this too the glory of Jesus, that all things are in him and for him." For by these words the creation of the universe is signified. — From the Addenda and Corrigenda.

(printed under page 221)

(65) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 418

Τύπον σταυροῦ. Duo reprehendit Clericus hoc in loco, et quod Justinus crucem a Moyse factam, et quod aeream crucem dicat. Crucem aeream fuisse videtur existimasse Justinus, sed quod ait Moysem, accepto aere, figuram crucis fecisse, intelligere debemus conflatum fuisse serpentem et cruci impositum, ut perspicitur ex Dialogo n. 94, ubi diserte docet serpentem aeneum signo, sive cruci impositum fuisse. Quod autem ait Clericus Justinum, dum crucem a Moyse factam existimat, memoriae suae nimis credidisse, nec Moysis contextum consuluisse, id nullo prorsus fundamento nititur. Ipsa Scripturae verba: Καὶ ἐποίησε Μωσῆς ὄφιν χαλκοῦν, καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ σημείου. Et fecit Moyses serpentem aeneum, et statuit illum in signo, Num. XXI, 9, Justinum in hanc opinionem induxerunt. Signi enim nomine crucem, ut multi alii, intelligebat. In testimonio Esdrae, quod Justinus a Judaeis recisum queritur Dialog. n. 72, crux vocatur signum, ut patet ex his Judaeorum verbis: Μέλλομεν αὐτὸν ταπεινοῦν ἐν σημείῳ, Humiliaturi eum sumus in signo. Videtur ad hunc locum respicere S. Barnabas, cum ait cap. 12: Καὶ πάλιν Μωσῆς ποιεῖ τύπον τοῦ Ἰησοῦ· ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν παθεῖν, καὶ αὐτὸν ζωοποιήσουσι (ζωοποιήσειν), ὃν δόξωσιν ἀπολωλεκέναι ἐν σημείῳ, πίπτοντος τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. Et iterum Moyses facit figuram Jesu (quod passurus esset et vitam praebiturus ipse quem putabunt periisse in signo) cadente Israel. Mendose Cotelerius legit ἐν σημείῳ πίπτοντος τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, et sic reddit: In signo cadentis Israel. S. Clemens Strom. VI, p. 656, crucem appellat σημεῖον. Et Strom. VII, p. 747: Τὸ σημεῖον δὲ βαστάσαι, τὸν θάνατόν ἐστιν περιφέρειν, ἔτι ζῶντα πᾶσιν ἀποταξάμενον. Signum autem portare, est mortem circumferre, vivum omnibus renuntiantem. Ibidem verba Christi Luc. XIV, 17, sic refert: Ἐὰν μὴ τὸ σημεῖον βαστάσητε. Vide lib. Quis dives salvetur, n. VIII, et in Excerpt. Theodot. p. 795, col. 2: Διὸ καὶ τὰ σπέρματα ὁ Ἰησοῦς διὰ τοῦ σημείου ἐπὶ τῶν ὤμων βαστάσας εἰσάγει εἰς τὸ πλήρωμα. Electa semina Jesus per signum humeris gestans inducit in pleroma. Paulo post eodem sensu vox illa usurpatur. Non est ergo cur miremur, quod signum Justinus idem esse ac crucem existimaverit. Vide Dialog. n. 94.

"A figure of the cross." Le Clerc faults two things in this place: that Justin says the cross was made by Moses, and that he calls it a bronze cross. Justin seems to have thought the cross was of bronze; but when he says that Moses, taking bronze, made the figure of a cross, we must understand that the serpent was cast and set upon the cross, as is seen from the Dialogue, no. 94, where he teaches expressly that the bronze serpent was set on a "sign," that is, on a cross. As for Le Clerc's claim that Justin, in thinking the cross was made by Moses, trusted his memory too much and did not consult the text of Moses, that rests on no foundation at all. The very words of Scripture, "And Moses made a serpent of bronze, and set it upon a sign" — "And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a sign" (Num. 21:9) — led Justin into this opinion. For by the word "sign," like many others, he understood the cross. In the testimony of Ezra which Justin complains was cut out by the Jews (Dialogue, no. 72), the cross is called a sign, as is clear from these words of the Jews: "We are about to humble him on a sign." Saint Barnabas seems to have this place in view when he says in ch. 12: "And again Moses makes a figure of Jesus — that he must suffer, and that he himself whom they will think they have destroyed will give life — on a sign, while Israel was falling." Cotelier wrongly reads "on the sign of Israel falling" and renders it so. Saint Clement (Stromata VI, p. 656) calls the cross σημεῖον ("sign"). And in Stromata VII, p. 747: "To bear the sign is to carry death about, renouncing all while still alive." In the same place he quotes Christ's words (Luke 14:17 [sic]) thus: "Unless you bear the sign." See the book Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved, no. 8, and the Excerpts from Theodotus, p. 795, col. 2: "Therefore Jesus, bearing the seeds on his shoulders by means of the sign, brings them into the pleroma." A little after, that word is used in the same sense. There is no reason, then, to wonder that Justin thought the sign to be the same as the cross. See the Dialogue, no. 94.

(printed under page 221)

(66) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 418

Ἐπὶ τῇ ἁγίᾳ σκηνῇ. Diligenter observanda sunt haec verba, ut ad Justini sententiam intelligendam necessaria. Putat enim tabernaculum mundi imaginem quamdam esse, ut observavimus ad Cohort. n. 29. Et cum cruci serpentem, tabernaculo crucem impositam fuisse non dubitaret, inde ortam existimabat speciem illam crucis, quam Plato in mundi creatione adhibitam fuisse pronuntiat. Non dixit Scriptura serpentem ipsi tabernaculo impositum fuisse, sed id probabile visum Justino.

"At the holy tabernacle." These words must be carefully observed, as necessary for understanding Justin's view. For he thinks the tabernacle is a kind of image of the world, as we noted on the Exhortation, no. 29. And since he did not doubt that the serpent was set on the cross and the cross on the tabernacle, he thought that from this arose that figure of a cross which Plato declares was used in the creation of the world. Scripture did not say that the serpent was set on the tabernacle itself, but this seemed probable to Justin.

(printed under page 221)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 418

Ἐὰν προσβλέπητε. Observat Grabius non verba, sed sensum reperiri num. 21, 9, ac similia loquentem induci Moysen a S. Barnaba cap. 12. Sic etiam Irenaeus lib. IV, c. 2: « Non enim lex prohibebat eos credere in Filium Dei, sed et adhortabatur, dicens, non aliter salvari homines ab antiqua serpentis plaga, nisi credant in eum, qui secundum (continues)

"If you look upon." Grabe observes that not the words but the sense is found at Numbers 21:9, and that Moses is brought in by Saint Barnabas (ch. 12) saying similar things. So also Irenaeus, Book IV, ch. 2: "For the law did not forbid them to believe in the Son of God, but even exhorted them, saying that men are not saved from the ancient wound of the serpent otherwise than by believing in him who, according to (continues)

(printed under page 221)

(32) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 419

supra n. 59.

Above, no. 59.

(printed under page 222)

(33) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 419

Deut. XXXII, 22.

Deuteronomy 32:22.

(printed under page 222)

(34) ‹anchor: in regnum coelorum› · call in col 419

Joan. III, 5.

John 3:5.

(printed under page 222)

(35) ‹anchor: ut supra scripsimus› · call in col 419

supra n. 44.

Above, no. 44.

(printed under page 222)

(67) (continued) · call in col 419

similitudinem carnis peccati in ligno martyrii exaltatur a terra et omnia trahit ad se et vivificat mortuos. » Probabilius videtur, quod ait Massuetus noster in adnotatione ad hunc locum, nequaquam haec e libris apocryphis desumpta, sed nihil aliud esse quam paraphrasim aut versionem liberiorem verborum Moysis.

the likeness of sinful flesh, is lifted up from the earth on the tree of martyrdom and draws all things to himself and gives life to the dead." More probable seems what our Massuet says in his annotation on this place: that these words were by no means taken from apocryphal books, but are nothing other than a paraphrase or freer rendering of the words of Moses.

(printed under page 222)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 419

Τὰ δὲ τρίτα περὶ τὸν τρίτον. Legitur apud Platonem τὸ τρίτον περὶ τὰ τρίτα, nempe in ep. 2. Sic etiam legunt Clemens Alex. Strom. V, p. 598; Porphyrius apud Cyrill. Alex. lib. I in Jul., p. 35; Origenes lib. VI, adv. Cels., p. 288; Eusebius lib. II Praepar. Evang. Nihil tamen mutandum in Justino nostro. Nam Proclus lib. II Theologiae Platonicae cap. 11, eodem modo legit ac S. martyr, quod argumento est non defuisse codices, in quibus haec legendi ratio occurreret.

"And the third things about the third." In Plato (Letter 2) one reads "the third about the third things." So also read Clement of Alexandria (Stromata V, p. 598), Porphyry as quoted by Cyril of Alexandria (Against Julian, Book I, p. 35), Origen (Against Celsus, Book VI, p. 288), and Eusebius (Preparation for the Gospel, Book II). Nevertheless nothing should be changed in our Justin. For Proclus (Platonic Theology, Book II, ch. 11) reads in the same way as the holy martyr, which is proof that there were manuscripts in which this reading occurred.

(printed under page 222)

(69) ‹anchor: νηστεύοντες› · call in col 419

Νηστεύοντες. Constitut. apost. lib. XII, c. 22: Πρὸ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος νηστευσάτω ὁ βαπτιζόμενος. GRABIUS.

"Fasting." Apostolic Constitutions, Book XII [as printed], ch. 22: "Before baptism let the one being baptized fast." GRABE.

(printed under page 222)

(70) ‹anchor: ἅπαξ γεννωμένους› · call in col 419

Γεννωμένους. Clarom. γενομένους, et a marg. γεννηθέντας.

"Being born." The Clermont manuscript has γενομένους ("having become"), and in the margin γεννηθέντας ("having been born").

(printed under page 222)

(none) — notes (68), (69), (70) are called in this column's Greek and in the facing Latin; they are set once under col 419 (notes/n419.md), as are the scripture notes 32–35.

(36) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 422

Isa. I, 16-20.

Isaiah 1:16–20.

(printed under page 223)

(37) ‹anchor: et accedens audi› · call in col 422

Exod. III, 5.

Exodus 3:5.

(printed under page 223)

(71) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 422

Ἐπειδὴ τὴν πρώτην. Haec mirifice consentiunt cum doctrina S. Augustini: « Natos non ex bono, quo bonae sunt nuptiae, inquit I, De peccat. merit., n. 28, sed ex malo concupiscentiae, quo bene quidem utuntur nuptiae, de quo tamen erubescunt et nuptiae, reos diabolus parvulos tenet... Ex hac concupiscentia carnis.... quaecunque nascitur proles, originali est obligata peccato, nisi in illo renascatur, quem sine ista concupiscentia Virgo concepit.

"Since the first …" These agree wonderfully with the teaching of Saint Augustine: "The devil holds little ones guilty," he says (On the Merits and Remission of Sins I, no. 28), "who are born not of the good by which marriage is good, but of the evil of concupiscence, which marriage indeed uses well, yet of which even marriage is ashamed ... From this concupiscence of the flesh .... whatever offspring is born is bound by original sin, unless it be reborn in him whom the Virgin conceived without that concupiscence.

(printed under page 223)

(72) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 422

Αὐτὸ τοῦτο μόνον ἐπιλέγοντες. Necesse non est cum Grabio legere ἐπιλέγοντες τούτῳ, λουσόμενον. Legit Thirlbius αὐτὸ τοῦτο μόνον ἐπιλέγοντος τοῦ τὸν λουσόμενον ἄγοντος, hoc tantum appellante eo, qui baptizandum ducit ad lavacrum. Hanc emendationem plurimi facio, ac si quis eam amplectatur, minime obstabo. Non tamen ei assentior, tum quia ejusmodi participia non inusitata sunt S. martyri (vide supra n. 55), tum quia supra dixit baptizandum non ab uno, sed a pluribus ad lavacrum duci.

"Pronouncing only this very thing." It is not necessary to read with Grabe ἐπιλέγοντες τούτῳ, λουσόμενον. Thirlby reads "while the one who leads him who is to be washed pronounces only this," that is, "the one who leads the candidate for baptism to the bath naming only this." I think very highly of this emendation, and if anyone adopts it I shall not object. Yet I do not agree with it, both because participles of this kind are not unusual in the holy martyr (see above, no. 55), and because he said above that the one to be baptized is led to the bath not by one person but by several.

(printed under page 223)

(73) ‹anchor: διὰ τοῦ προφήτου› · call in col 422

Διὰ τοῦ προφήτου. Isaiam intelligit, cujus paulo ante testimonium attulit.

"Through the prophet." He means Isaiah, whose testimony he quoted a little before.

(printed under page 223)

(74) ‹anchor: λούεσθαι ἀπιόντας› · call in col 422

Τέλεον δὲ καὶ λούεσθαι ἀπιόντας. Thirlbius hic multa excogitat. Legendum putat, vel ἐν τέλεσι pro τέλεον, vel ἅπαντας aut ἱερατεύοντας pro ἀπιόντας.

"And to wash completely as they go." Thirlby devises much here. He thinks one should read either ἐν τέλεσι ("in the rites") for τέλεον, or ἅπαντας ("all") or ἱερατεύοντας ("officiating as priests") for ἀπιόντας.

(printed under page 223)

(75) ‹anchor: καὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς› · call in col 422

Τοῖς αὐτοῖς. Legit τοῖς ναοῖς Sylburgius. Nihil mutat Grabius, sed subintelligit daemonibus. Satius videtur rebus subintelligere.

"To the same." Sylburg reads τοῖς ναοῖς ("to the temples"). Grabe changes nothing but understands "demons." It seems better to understand "things."

(printed under page 223)

(76) ‹anchor: μητρὸς θείου› · call in col 422

Τοῦ πρὸς μητρὸς θείου. Mirum unde haec S. martyr hauserit. Forte memoria effluente maternum avunculum pro socero sumpsit. Conjicit Thirlbius eum in Moysem transferre, quod Jacobo convenit.

"Of his maternal uncle." It is a wonder where the holy martyr drew this from. Perhaps, his memory failing, he took the maternal uncle for the father-in-law. Thirlby conjectures that he transfers to Moses what fits Jacob.

(printed under page 223)

(38) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

supra n. 37.

Above, no. 37.

(printed under page 224)

(39) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

Isa. I, 3.

Isaiah 1:3.

(printed under page 224)

(40) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

Matth. XI, 27.

Matthew 11:27.

(printed under page 224)

(41) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

vid. n. 46.

See no. 46.

(printed under page 224)

(42) ‹anchor: qui me misit audit› · call in col 423

Luc. X, 16.

Luke 10:16.

(printed under page 224)

(43) ‹anchor: educ populum meum› · call in col 423

Exod. III, 6.

Exodus 3:6.

(printed under page 224)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

Οὐδεὶς ἔγνω. Haereticos castigat Irenaeus lib. IV, cap. 5, quod Christi verba sic legerent: Nemo cognovit pro Nemo cognoscit. « Hi autem, inquit, qui peritiores apostolis volunt esse, sic describunt: Nemo cognovit Patrem nisi Filius, nec Filium nisi Pater et cui voluerit Filius revelare. » Fraudis suspicionem removere posset ab haereticis Justini exemplum, qui, ut videmus, eodem prorsus modo legit. Sed haec praesentis in praeteritum immutatio suspecta non immerito fuit in perfidis haereticis, qui, ut ait ibidem Irenaeus, ita hunc locum interpretabantur: quasi a nullo cognitus sit verus Deus ante Domini nostri adventum.

"No one knew." Irenaeus (Book IV, ch. 5) rebukes the heretics for reading Christ's words thus: "No one knew" instead of "No one knows." "But these," he says, "who wish to be more skilled than the apostles, write it thus: No one knew the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him." Justin's example, who, as we see, reads in exactly the same way, could remove the suspicion of fraud from the heretics. But this change of present into past was not without reason suspect in faithless heretics, who, as Irenaeus says in the same place, interpreted the passage thus: as though the true God had been known by no one before the coming of our Lord.

(printed under page 224)

(78) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 423

Ἀπαγγέλλει. Codices mss. habent ad marg. et R. Stephanus ad calcem παραγγέλλει. Observat Grabius Justinum, dum Christum ait vocari apostolum, respicere ad Epistolam ad Hebraeos, quam proinde in Scripturis canonicis numerabat.

"He announces." The manuscripts in the margin, and Robert Estienne at the end of his volume, have παραγγέλλει ("he commands"). Grabe observes that Justin, in saying that Christ is called apostle, has in view the Epistle to the Hebrews, which he therefore counted among the canonical Scriptures.

(printed under page 224)

(79) ‹anchor: ἐν εἰκόνι ἀσωμάτων› · call in col 423

Ἐν εἰκόνι ἀσωμάτων. Legendum ἀσωμάτῳ, ut paulo post εἰκόνος ἀσωμάτου. Imagines incorporeas videtur intelligere eas, quae oculos non feriebant, sed menti divinitus illustratae offerebantur. « Verbum, inquit Irenaeus lib. IV, cap. 20, n. 11, non in una figura, nec in uno charactere videbatur videntibus eum, sed secundum dispensationum ejus causas, sive efficaciam, sicut in Daniele scriptum est. Aliquando enim cum his qui erant circa Ananiam, Azariam, Misaelem, videbatur assistens eis in fornace ignis, et in camino, et liberans eos de igne: Et visio, inquit, quarti similis Filio Dei. Aliquando autem lapis a monte abscissus sine manibus, et percutiens temporalia regna, et ventilans ea et ipse replens universam terram. Rursum hic idem videtur quasi Filius hominis in nubibus coeli veniens, » etc.

"In an image of bodiless things." Read ἀσωμάτῳ ("in a bodiless image"), as a little later εἰκόνος ἀσωμάτου. By bodiless images he seems to mean those which did not strike the eyes but were presented to a mind divinely enlightened. "The Word," says Irenaeus (Book IV, ch. 20, no. 11), "was not seen in one figure or in one form by those who saw him, but according to the reasons, or the working, of his dispensations, as is written in Daniel. For at one time he was seen with those who were about Ananias, Azarias and Misael, standing by them in the fiery furnace, in the oven, and freeing them from the fire: And the appearance, it says, of the fourth was like the Son of God. At another time he is a stone cut from the mountain without hands, striking the kingdoms of time and winnowing them, and himself filling the whole earth. Again, this same one is seen as the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven," etc.

(printed under page 224)

(none) — notes (77), (78), (79), called in this column's Greek, are set once under col 423 (notes/n423.md), as are the scripture notes 38–43.

(80) ‹anchor: ὁ Θεὸς Ἀβραάμ› · call in col 425

Ὁ Θεὸς Ἀβραάμ. Nihil potest de Christi divinitate praeclarius dici. 1°. Docet Justinus eum dixisse, Ego sum qui sum, quibus verbis essentiam divinam exprimi declarat, Cohort. n 25. 2°. Vocatur Christus Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac et Deus Jacob. 3° Idcirco illorum Deus est, ac ipsi illius homines sunt, quia primi exstiterunt, qui in Deo inquirendo occuparentur. 4°. Illud etiam observandum, quod paulo ante dicebat, καὶ Θεὸς ὑπάρχει, et Deus est.

"The God of Abraham." Nothing more splendid can be said of Christ's divinity. First, Justin teaches that he said "I am who am," words by which, he declares, the divine essence is expressed (Exhortation, no. 25). Second, Christ is called the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Third, he is their God, and they are his men, because they were the first to arise who busied themselves with seeking God. Fourth, note also what he said a little before: "and he is God."

(printed under page 225)

(81) ‹anchor: ἐννοηθέντα› · call in col 425

Ἐννοηθέντα. Postquam cogitavit et consideravit, id est postquam mundi exemplar in Verbo suo descripsit. Quae de Minerva attribuit ethnicis Justinus, ea confirmat Themistius orat. 13, ubi ait Minervam ex patris capite prosilientem omnia ornavisse et condidisse, coelum et terras et quae in eis sunt. Cui quidem sententiae tanta est similitudo cum iis quae leguntur Proverb. VIII, ut eam merito Justinus ex Hebraeorum fontibus derivatam existimet.

"Having been conceived in thought." "After he had thought and considered," that is, after he had drawn the pattern of the world in his Word. What Justin attributes to the heathen about Minerva, Themistius confirms (Oration 13), where he says that Minerva, springing from her father's head, adorned and founded all things, heaven and earth and what is in them. This opinion bears so great a likeness to what is read in Proverbs 8 that Justin rightly considers it drawn from the springs of the Hebrews.

(printed under page 225)

(44) ‹anchor: me non intellexit› · call in col 426

Isa. I, 3.

Isaiah 1:3.

(printed under page 225)

(45) ‹anchor: Filius revelaverit› · call in col 426

Matth. XI, 27.

Matthew 11:27.

(printed under page 225)

(46) ‹anchor: et Deus patrum tuorum› · call in col 426

Exod. III, 6.

Exodus 3:6.

(printed under page 225) Editors' notes (80) and (81) are called in the Greek of col 425 only; they are set under col 425 (notes/n425.md).

(82) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 427

Φιλήματι. Quamvis S. Justinus hanc Apologiam Romae scripserit, ritus tamen Ecclesiae Orientalis in scribendo sequitur, et sancti osculi tempus, non ut in Latina Ecclesia proximo ante communionem, sed, ut est in Constitut. apost. lib. VIII et apud Cyrill. Cat. myst. 5, constituit. Ob eamdem causam diaconis, qui in Ecclesia Latina calicem tantum distribuebant, utriusque speciei distribuendae munus committit.

"With a kiss." Although Saint Justin wrote this Apology at Rome, in writing he follows the rite of the Eastern Church, and places the time of the holy kiss not, as in the Latin Church, immediately before communion, but as it is in the Apostolic Constitutions (Book VIII) and in Cyril (Mystagogical Catechesis 5). For the same reason he entrusts to the deacons, who in the Latin Church distributed only the chalice, the office of distributing both kinds.

(printed under page 226)

(83) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 427

Εὐχαριστίαν..... ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται. Sic apud Irenaeum lib. I, cap. 13, n. 2, de Marco Valentiniano: Ποτήρια οἴνῳ κεκραμένα προσποιούμενος εὐχαριστεῖν, καὶ ἐπὶ πλέον ἐκτείνων τὸν λόγον τῆς ἐπικλήσεως. « Pocula vino mista fingens se consecrare, atque invocationis verba in longius protendens. » In eamdem sententiam S. Firmilianus, ep. 75, inter Cyprianicas, de muliere quadam loquitur, quae « etiam hoc frequenter ausa est, ut et invocatione non contemptibili, sanctificare se panem et eucharistiam facere simularet et sacrificium Domino (non) sine sacramento solitae praedicationis offerret. » Invocatio illa non contemptibilis idem videtur esse ac prolixae preces eucharistiae.

"He makes thanksgiving ..... at length." So in Irenaeus (Book I, ch. 13, no. 2), of Marcus the Valentinian: "Pretending to give thanks over cups mixed with wine, and extending the word of invocation at greater length" — "feigning to consecrate cups mixed with wine, and drawing out the words of invocation to a greater length." To the same effect Saint Firmilian (Letter 75, among Cyprian's) speaks of a certain woman who "often dared this too: with an invocation not to be despised, to pretend to sanctify bread and to make the eucharist, and to offer sacrifice to the Lord (not) without the sacrament of the customary proclamation." That invocation "not to be despised" seems to be the same as the lengthy prayers of the eucharist.

(printed under page 226)

(84) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 427

Ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων. Eam indicat S. Martyr gratiarum actionem, quae Deo duplici nomine, id est ob creatum ab illo panem et vinum, et ob eadem dona in Christi corpus et sanguinem conversa offerebatur. Similiter Origenes lib. VIII contra Cels., p. 399: Τοὺς μετ' εὐχαριστίας καὶ εὐχῆς τῆς ἐπὶ τοῖς δοθεῖσι προσαγομένους ἄρτους ἐσθίομεν, σῶμα γενομένους διὰ τὴν εὐχὴν ἅγιόν τι, καὶ ἁγιάζον τοὺς μετ' ὑγιοῦς προθέσεως αὐτῷ χρωμένους. « Panes cum gratiarum actione et precatione ob data haec dona oblatos comedimus, corpus quoddam ob precem effectos sanctum, et sanctificans eos qui eo utuntur cum sano proposito. »

"For having been counted worthy of these things." The holy martyr indicates the thanksgiving which was offered to God on a double title: for the bread and wine created by him, and for the same gifts changed into the body and blood of Christ. Similarly Origen, Against Celsus VIII, p. 399: "We eat the loaves offered with thanksgiving and prayer over the gifts given, which have become through the prayer a certain holy body, sanctifying those who use it with a sound purpose."

(printed under page 226)

(85) ‹anchor: διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ› · call in col 427

Ὃν τρόπον διὰ Λόγου Θεοῦ. De tota hac Justini doctrina, vide Praefat. Illud autem, Per Verbum Dei incarnatus Jesus, et n. 46: Per virtutem Verbi homo factus, illustrari potest et explicari ex num. 33, ubi Spiritus seu Verbum dicitur in Virginem descendisse, eique obumbrasse et praegnantem virtute sua effecisse.

"Just as through the Word of God." On the whole of this teaching of Justin, see the Preface. But the phrase "Jesus made flesh through the Word of God," and at no. 46, "made man by the power of the Word," can be illustrated and explained from no. 33, where the Spirit, or the Word, is said to have come down upon the Virgin, overshadowed her, and made her pregnant by his power.

(printed under page 226)

(86) ‹anchor: λόγου τοῦ παρ' αὐτοῦ› · call in col 427

Δι' εὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ παρ' αὐτοῦ. Vox illa λόγος non Verbum hoc loco significat, sed ipsius Christi verba, ut patet ex his quae sequuntur. Refert enim Justinus Christi verba ut explicet, cur Christiani alimoniam illam, in qua gratiae δι' εὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ παρ' αὐτοῦ actae sunt, corpus et sanguinem Christi esse credant. Quemadmodum antea dicebat n. 13: Λόγῳ εὐχῆς καὶ εὐχαριστίας, verbis precem et gratiarum actionem continentibus; ita hoc loco videtur eamdem adhibere verborum constructionem, cum ait, δι' εὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ παρ' αὐτοῦ.

"Through a prayer of the word that is from him." The word λόγος here does not mean the Word, but Christ's own words, as is clear from what follows. For Justin quotes Christ's words to explain why Christians believe that food over which thanks have been given "through a prayer of the word from him" to be the body and blood of Christ. Just as he said earlier (no. 13), "by a word of prayer and thanksgiving," that is, by words containing prayer and thanksgiving, so in this place he seems to use the same construction when he says "through a prayer of the word from him."

(printed under page 226)

(47) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 430

Luc. XXII, 19.

Luke 22:19.

(printed under page 227)

(48) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 430

Matth. XXVI, 28.

Matthew 26:28.

(printed under page 227)

(87) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 430

Ἀπομνημονεύμασιν. Ἀπομνημονεύματα sunt dicta sapientium quae memoria repetuntur. Sic Eusebius lib. V Hist. eccl. cap. 8, de Irenaeo ait: Καὶ ἀπομνημονευμάτων ἀποστολικοῦ τινος πρεσβυτέρου... μνημονεύει, Dictorum apostolici cujusdam presbyteri... meminit. Hinc Xenophon scripsisse dicitur libros τῶν Σωκράτους ἀπομνημονευμάτων, Dictorum Socratis quae memoria recolebat. Eadem voce ante Justinum usus est Papias apud Eusebium lib. III, cap. 39. GRABIUS.

"In the memoirs." Ἀπομνημονεύματα are sayings of the wise recalled from memory. So Eusebius (Church History V, ch. 8) says of Irenaeus: "He mentions the memoirs of a certain apostolic presbyter." Hence Xenophon is said to have written the books of the Memoirs of Socrates, "the sayings of Socrates which he recalled from memory." Papias used the same word before Justin, in Eusebius, Book III, ch. 39. GRABE.

(printed under page 227)

(88) ‹anchor: καὶ πρόκλησιν› · call in col 430

Πρόκλησιν. Legendum Grabius existimat παράκλησιν.

"Challenge." Grabe thinks παράκλησιν ("exhortation") should be read.

(printed under page 227)

(89) ‹anchor: ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ› · call in col 430

Ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ. Non favent haec verba his qui ratas et fixas Ecclesiae preces impugnant. Neque enim eas Justinus in sacerdotis arbitrio positas fuisse dicit, sed sacerdotis orantis ardorem et intentionem animi exprimit. Nihil sibi aliud volunt haec verba, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, quantum potest, seu, ut reddidi, totis viribus. Sic paulo ante dicebat Christianos εὐτόνως, id est cum magna animi intentione preces fundere. Et supra n. 13: Ὅση δύναμις αἰνοῦντες. Ninivitae ἀνεβόησαν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ἐκτενῶς, Jonae III, v. 8. Sic etiam Origenes VI. Cels. pag. 386: Ἀλλὰ τὸν ἕνα Θεὸν, καὶ τὸν ἕνα Υἱὸν αὐτοῦ καὶ Λόγον καὶ εἰκόνα, ταῖς κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν ἡμῖν ἱκεσίαις καὶ ἀξιώσεσι σέβομεν. Unum Deum, inquit, et unicum ejus Filium et Verbum et imaginem, quantum possumus, supplicationibus et precibus, colimus.

"As much as is in his power." These words do not favour those who attack the settled and fixed prayers of the Church. For Justin does not say that the prayers were left to the priest's discretion; he expresses the ardour and intentness of mind of the priest as he prays. These words, "as much as is in his power," mean nothing else than "as much as he can," or, as I rendered it, "with all his strength." So a little before he said that Christians pour out prayers "earnestly," that is, with great intentness of mind. And above, at no. 13: "praising as much as is in our power." The Ninevites "cried out to God earnestly" (Jonah 3:8). So also Origen (Against Celsus VI, p. 386): "But the one God, and his one Son and Word and image, we worship with supplications and petitions as far as we are able." "The one God," he says, "and his only Son and Word and image, we worship, as much as we can, with supplications and prayers."

(printed under page 227)

(90) ‹anchor: ἀναπέμπει› · call in col 430

Ἀναπέμπει. Hoc verbo, quo Justinus hoc loco et antea et saepe alias utitur, clamorem quemdam, sive vocem magno conatu emissam significari observat Valesius ad cap. 15. lib. IV. Hist. eccles. Eusebii.

"He sends up." Valesius, on Eusebius's Church History, Book IV, ch. 15, observes that this verb, which Justin uses here, earlier, and often elsewhere, signifies a kind of shout, or a voice sent forth with great effort.

(printed under page 227)

(91) ‹anchor: παρὰ τῷ προεστῶτι› · call in col 430

Παρὰ τῷ προεστῶτι. Hac voce presbyterum aut episcopum designat. Utrique enim communes perfunctiones de quibus hic agitur, nempe baptizare, sacrificare et pauperum curam gerere. Atque id causae esse arbitror, cur nihil dicat Justinus de confirmatione; quia scilicet soli eam dabant episcopi.

"With the one who presides." By this word he designates a presbyter or a bishop. For the functions dealt with here — baptizing, offering sacrifice, and caring for the poor — are common to both. And I think this is the reason why Justin says nothing about confirmation: because bishops alone gave it.

(printed under page 227)

(92) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Πρὸ τῆς Κρονικῆς. Halloixius observat Vit. Justini p. 133, diem Veneris nolle appellare Justinum ob summam hujus deae turpitudinem. Ridet Halloixium Thirlbius, quod haec, ut abstrusa et difficilia, non sine magno apparatu observanda duxerit; ac joco non multum probando gratias agit « sagacissimo Halloixio, vel potius Ludovico de la Cerda a quo hoc suffuratus est. »

"Before the day of Kronos." Halloix observes (Life of Justin, p. 133) that Justin will not name the day of Venus because of the extreme foulness of that goddess. Thirlby mocks Halloix for thinking this, as something abstruse and difficult, worth remarking with great apparatus; and with a jest not much to be approved he thanks "the most sagacious Halloix, or rather Luis de la Cerda, from whom he filched it."

(printed under page 228)

(93) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Ὁ φίλον τῷ Θεῷ, τοῦτο. Legitur ad marg. in codicibus mss. et apud R. Stephanum ὡς τῷ Θεῷ φίλον, ταύτῃ γενέσθω.

"What is dear to God, this." In the margin of the manuscripts and in Robert Estienne one reads "as is dear to God, so let it be."

(printed under page 228)

(94) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Ἐπιστολῆς. Habebant editi nostri et mss. ἀποστολῆς, sed melius Eusebius qui hunc locum transtulit in l. IV Hist., c. 8.

"Of a letter." Our editions and the manuscripts had ἀποστολῆς ("of a dispatch"), but Eusebius, who carried this passage over into his History, Book IV, ch. 8, has it better.

(printed under page 228)

(95) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ κεκρίσθαι. Eusebius: τοῦτο οὐχ ὡς ὑπὸ Ἀδριανοῦ κελευσθὲν μᾶλλον ἠξιώσαμεν· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ.

"Not from its having been decided." Eusebius has: "we have made this request not rather as having been ordered by Hadrian, but also from the fact that …"

(printed under page 228)

(96) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Καὶ ἐξήγησιν πεποιήμεθα. Mendose haec desunt apud Eusebium, apud quem legitur tantum, δικαίαν ἠξίουν τὴν προσφώνησιν.

"And we have made an explanation." These words are wrongly missing in Eusebius, in whom one reads only: "they thought the address just."

(printed under page 228)

(97) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 431

Καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο. Eusebius καὶ τοῦτο.

"And according to this." Eusebius has "and this."

(printed under page 228)

(98) ‹anchor: τὸ ἀντίγραφον τοῦτο› · call in col 431

Καὶ ἔστι τὸ ἀντίγραφον τοῦτο. Legitur tantum apud Eusebium, καὶ ἔστι τόδε. — Justinus teste Eusebio (l. c.: αὐτὴν παρατέθειται [sc. Justin.] τὴν Ῥωμαϊκὴν ἀντιγραφὴν, ἡμεῖς δ' ἐπὶ τὸ Ἑλληνικὸν κατὰ δύναμιν αὐτὴν μετειλήφαμεν) genuinum Latinae epistolae exemplum apologiae ascripsit idque a Rufino servatum repetii. Jam Alex. Sym. Mazochius rescripti illius Adrianei textum, quem Aquileiensi presbytero redivivum debemus, Eusebianae interpretationis (l. c. c. 9, p. 315, sq.) loco subrogavit. Cf. Maz. Comment. in vet. marmor. 8. Neapolit. eccl. Kalendar., vol. II, p. 476, sqq. (rec. in Gallandii Biblioth., etc. t. I, p. 728, sqq.); add. Ern. Jul. Kimmel: De Rufino Eusebii interprete (Gerae 1838, 8,) p. 175, sq., Secutus autem sum eamdem Rufini editionem Basileensem recogn. per Beat. Rhenanum (Basil. ap. Jo. Froben. 1523, fol.) c. 9, p. 78, quam possedit Jo. Andr. Bosius, Jenae olim bibliothecarius; hic enim a. 1672, mstum quemdam codicem Norimbergensem ita exhausit, omnes lectiones ut margini illius editionis nunc in bibliotheca Ienensi asservatae ascriberet. OTTO.

"And this is the copy." In Eusebius one reads only "and it is this." — Justin, on the testimony of Eusebius (loc. cit.: "[Justin] has appended the Roman copy itself, and we have translated it into Greek as best we could"), attached to the Apology the genuine copy of the Latin letter, and I have restored it as preserved by Rufinus. Already Alessio Simmaco Mazzocchi substituted the text of that rescript of Hadrian, which we owe, brought back to life, to the presbyter of Aquileia, in place of Eusebius's translation (loc. cit., ch. 9, p. 315 f.). Compare Mazzocchi, Commentary on the Ancient Marble Calendar of the Church of Naples, 8, vol. II, p. 476 ff. (reprinted in Galland's Bibliotheca etc., vol. I, p. 728 ff.); add Ernst Julius Kimmel, On Rufinus as Translator of Eusebius (Gera 1838, octavo), p. 175 f. I have followed the same Basel edition of Rufinus revised by Beatus Rhenanus (Basel: Johann Froben, 1523, folio), ch. 9, p. 78, which Johann Andreas Bose, once librarian at Jena, owned; for in 1672 he so thoroughly worked through a certain Nuremberg manuscript that he wrote all its readings into the margin of that edition, now kept in the Jena library. OTTO.

(printed under page 228)

(99) ‹anchor: Ἐπιστολή› · call in col 431

Haec est rescripti interpretatio, quam postmodum librarii, primitivo exemplari spreto, Justini Apologiae ex Eusebii Hist. eccl., IV, 8, attexuerunt. OTTO.

This is the translation of the rescript which copyists later, setting aside the original copy, attached to Justin's Apology from Eusebius's Church History IV, 8. OTTO.

(printed under page 228)

(1) ‹anchor: ἀπὸ Σερηνίου› · call in col 431

Σερηνίου. Mallet Valesius cum Rufino et Hieronymo Serenianum hunc proconsulem vocare, quem quidem post litteras Adriano missas e vita vel e provincia decessisse putat, et idcirco Adrianum illius successori respondisse. Hanc autem Adriani epistolam Latino sermone huic Justini Apologiae subjectam Eusebius Graece reddidit, ut ipse testatur; et ex illius Historia lib. IV, c. 9, huc translata est.

"Serenius." Valesius would prefer, with Rufinus and Jerome, to call this proconsul Serenianus; he thinks he departed from life or from the province after sending his letter to Hadrian, and that therefore Hadrian replied to his successor. This letter of Hadrian, appended in Latin to this Apology of Justin, Eusebius rendered into Greek, as he himself attests; and it has been brought over here from his History, Book IV, ch. 9.

(printed under page 228)

(2) ‹anchor: ἂν οὖν› · call in col 431

Ἂν οὖν. Euseb. εἰ οὖν, et mox ἐπαρχιῶται δύνανται.

"If then." Eusebius has εἰ οὖν, and just after ἐπαρχιῶται δύνανται ("the provincials are able," indicative).

(printed under page 228)

(3) ‹anchor: ἀποκρίνεσθαι› · call in col 431

Ἀποκρίνεσθαι. Euseb. ἀποκρίνασθαι. Sed in nonnullis mss. codicibus legitur ut apud Justinum.

"To answer." Eusebius has ἀποκρίνασθαι (aorist). But in some manuscripts it reads as in Justin.

(printed under page 228)

(4) ‹anchor: ἀξιώσεσιν› · call in col 431

Ἀξιώσεσιν. Observat Valesius hac voce de- (continues)

"Petitions." Valesius observes that by this word (continues)

(printed under page 228)

(4) (continued) · call in col 434

signari acclamationes illas, quae a populo fieri solebant in theatris: Christianos ad leonem, ut testatur Tertullianus.

are meant those acclamations which the people used to raise in the theatres: "Christians to the lion!", as Tertullian attests.

(printed under page 229)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Διόριζε. Euseb. ὅριζε.

"Determine." Eusebius has ὅριζε ("define").

(printed under page 229)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Τοῦτο προτείνοι. Id est, si calumniae causa nomen Christianum obtendat, neque aliud crimen probare possit. Hanc esse mentem Adriani patet ex epistola sequenti, in qua Antoninus poenas intentat his qui Christianos, quatenus Christianos, deferent, seque hac in re patris sui sententiam sequi declarat.

"Should put this forward." That is, if for the sake of calumny he alleges the Christian name and can prove no other crime. That this was Hadrian's mind is clear from the following letter, in which Antoninus threatens penalties against those who denounce Christians as Christians, and declares that in this matter he follows his father's judgement.

(printed under page 229)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ. De hac epistola ejusque titulo pluribus disserimus in Praefat. part. III. Ex Eusebii Hist. lib. IV, c. 13, huc translata est. — Ἀντωνίνου, etc. Hoc edictum, si modo fuit Justino in manibus, ipse apologiae non inseruit, cui postea per alienam accessit sedulitatem. Nam nec mentionem ejus usquam fecit, neque illud omnino exstitit eo tempore, quo Apologiam suam scribebat. Quod si exstitisset, non est dubium, Justinum potius hoc usurum fuisse ad defensionem sui, quia ad Antoninum ipsum dirigitur Apologeticus, quam illo Adriani, ad quem Apologeticus non pertinet. Ita praeceptor noster Eichstadius in Exercitatione Antoniniana V, Annal. Academiae Jenens. vol. I, (Ien. 1823, 4) inserta p. 286, not. 3. Idem vir clarissimus istius decreti textum apposita versione Latina ex Justino et Eusebio (Hist. eccl. IV, c. 13, p. 326, sqq.) reddidit notis illustratum (l. c. p. 290, sqq.). Mirifice autem discrepat exemplar Eusebianum ab hoc nostro; quare de illo nihil afferemus. OTTO.

"The Emperor Caesar." We discuss this letter and its title at more length in the Preface, part III. It has been brought over here from Eusebius's History, Book IV, ch. 13. — "Of Antoninus," etc. This edict, if indeed Justin had it in hand, he did not himself insert in the Apology; it was added later through another's diligence. For he never mentions it anywhere, and it did not exist at all at the time he was writing his Apology. Had it existed, there is no doubt that Justin would rather have used it for his defence, since the Apology is addressed to Antoninus himself, than the edict of Hadrian, to whom the Apology does not pertain. So our teacher Eichstädt in the fifth Antonine Exercise, inserted in the Annals of the Academy of Jena, vol. I (Jena 1823, quarto), p. 286, note 3. The same most distinguished man edited the text of this decree from Justin and Eusebius (Church History IV, ch. 13, p. 326 ff.), with a Latin version beside it and illustrated with notes (loc. cit., p. 290 ff.). But Eusebius's copy differs remarkably from ours; we shall therefore cite nothing from it. OTTO.

(printed under page 229)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Τῷ κοινῷ τῆς Ἀσίας. Ita Cicero commune Milyadum et commune totius Siciliae in Verrinis dixit. Porro cum κοινὸν Ἀσίας dicitur, subaudiendum est συνέδριον. Habebant enim Asiani commune concilium totius gentis, quo singulae civitates legatos, seu synedros mittebant, ut docet Aristides in 4 Orat. sacrarum. VALESIUS. — Haec concilia fuere variarum in Christianos persecutionum seminaria. OTTO.

"To the common council of Asia." So Cicero in the Verrines spoke of "the commune of the Milyades" and "the commune of all Sicily." Further, when κοινὸν Ἀσίας is said, συνέδριον ("council") is to be understood. For the people of Asia had a common council of the whole nation, to which the several cities sent delegates or synedroi, as Aristides teaches in the fourth of the Sacred Orations. VALESIUS. — These councils were the seed-beds of various persecutions against the Christians. OTTO.

(printed under page 229)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Ἐγὼ ᾤμην. Habet Eusebius, ἐγὼ μὲν οἶδα, sed prorsus mendose, ut in multis aliis ejusdem epistolae locis. Perhonorifice enim de Christianis Antoninus loquitur: palam et aperte deorum in avertendis calamitatibus imbecillitatem arguit; Christianorum in veri Dei cultu constantiam praedicat. Quamobrem verisimile non est eum initio epistolae dixisse: Scio diis ipsis curae esse ne hujusmodi homines lateant.

"I thought." Eusebius has "I indeed know," but quite wrongly, as in many other places of the same letter. For Antoninus speaks most honourably of the Christians: he openly and plainly convicts the gods of weakness in averting calamities, and he proclaims the constancy of the Christians in the worship of the true God. It is therefore not likely that at the start of the letter he said: "I know that the gods themselves take care that men of this kind do not escape notice."

(printed under page 229)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Εἴπερ δύναιντο. Haec desunt apud Euseb.

"If indeed they could." These words are missing in Eusebius.

(printed under page 229)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Προσκυνεῖν. Addit Eusebius ἢ ὑμεῖς. Quae sequuntur, sic leguntur apud eumdem: Οὓς εἰς ταραχὴν ἐμβάλλετε, βεβαιοῦντες τὴν γνώμην αὐτῶν ἥνπερ ἔχουσιν, ὡς ἀθέων κατηγοροῦντες. Quos contra tumultum concitatis, sententiam eorum confirmantes, dum eos accusatis tanquam impios. Observat Valesius Nicephorum addere περὶ ἡμῶν, ac Rufinum ipsum ita legisse. Sic enim vertit: Confirmatis eorum quos persequimini, sententiam, quam de vobis habent, dicentes vos impios esse.

"To worship." Eusebius adds "than you." What follows is read thus in him: "whom you throw into turmoil, confirming the opinion they hold, by accusing them as godless" — "against whom you stir up a tumult, confirming their opinion while you accuse them as impious." Valesius observes that Nicephorus adds "about us," and that Rufinus himself read so. For he translated: "You confirm the opinion of those whom you persecute, which they hold about you, saying that you are impious."

(printed under page 229)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Καὶ ἕτερα, etc. Desunt apud Euseb.

"And other things," etc. Missing in Eusebius.

(printed under page 229)

(13) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Εἴη δ' ἄν. Sic legit Eusebius: Εἴη δ' ἂν κἀκείνοις (in 3 mss., εἴη δ' ἂν ἐκείνοις) αἱρετὸν τὸ δοκεῖν κατηγορουμένοις τεθνάναι μᾶλλον, ἢ ζῆν, ὑπὲρ οἰκείου τοῦ Θεοῦ.

"It would be." Eusebius reads thus: "And for them too it would be preferable, when accused, to be thought to die rather than to live, for their own God" (in three manuscripts, "for them" without "too").

(printed under page 229)

(14) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 434

Καὶ νικῶσιν ὑμᾶς. Legitur ὅθεν καὶ νικῶσι, sine ὑμᾶς, apud Eusebium, ex quo ibidem reposui ἤπερ pro εἴπερ.

"And they conquer you." In Eusebius one reads "whence they also conquer," without "you"; from him I have restored in the same place ἤπερ ("than") for εἴπερ ("if indeed").

(printed under page 229)

(15) ‹anchor: οὐκ εἰκός› · call in col 434

Οὐκ εἰκός. Contra Eusebius, οὐκ ἄτοπον, et paulo post ἀθυμοῦντας μὲν, παραβάλλοντας δὲ τὰ ἡμέτερα. Ex quibus solam vocem παραβάλλοντας excerpsimus, pro παραβάλλοντες quod habebat Justinus. Caetera apud S. Martyrem accuratiora, ut quisque animadvertere potest ex interpretatione, quae satis clara et perspicua est. Grabius vertit: Vestra infortunia illis imputetis; idem sensus a Rufino et Christophors. expressus, sed repugnantibus Graecis verbis, ut observat Valesius, cui probatur Langi non multo accuratior interpretatio, ὑπομνῆσαι παραβάλλοντες, admonere ut comparetis. — Ὑπομνῆσαι. Hoc verbum referendum est ad Asianos, quippe qui imperatorem de calamitatibus admonuerint per Christianos importatis. OTTO.

"It is not fitting." Eusebius on the contrary has "it is not out of place," and a little after "being disheartened, and comparing ours." From these we have taken only the word παραβάλλοντας, for the παραβάλλοντες which Justin had. The rest is more accurate in the holy martyr, as anyone can see from the translation, which is clear and plain enough. Grabe translates: "that you should charge your misfortunes to them"; Rufinus and Christophorson expressed the same sense, but against the Greek words, as Valesius observes, who approves Lang's not much more accurate rendering, "to remind, comparing," that is, "to admonish that you compare." — "To remind." This verb is to be referred to the people of Asia, since they reminded the emperor of the calamities brought on by the Christians. OTTO.

(printed under page 229)

(16) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 435

Ἀγνοεῖν δοκεῖτε... τοὺς θεούς. Quod ethnicis exprobrat ethnicus imperator, eos in adversis rebus deorum templa negligere, nec tamen veram Dei colendi rationem assequi, id satis consentaneum est his quae apud Lactantium leguntur lib. II, cap. I: « At vero, inquit, si qua necessitas gravis presserit, tunc Deum recordantur. Si belli terror infremuerit; si morborum pestifera vis incubuerit, si alimenta frugibus longa siccitas denegaverit, si saeva tempestas, si grando ingruerit: ad Deum confugiunt; a Deo petitur auxilium.... Postquam metus deseruit, et pericula recesserunt, tum vero alacres ad deorum templa concurrunt; his libant, his sacrificant, hos coronant. Deo autem quem in ipsa necessitate imploraverunt, ne verbo quidem gratias agunt. » Suetonius de morte Germanici sic loquitur in Vita Caii Caligulae: « Quo defunctus est die, inquit, lapidata sunt templa, subversae Deum arae, lares a quibusdam familiares in publicum abjecti. » Totus hic locus apud Euseb. non accuratus.

"You seem to be ignorant ... of the gods." The heathen emperor's reproach to the heathen — that in adversity they neglect the temples of the gods and yet do not attain the true way of worshipping God — agrees well enough with what is read in Lactantius, Book II, ch. 1: "But if some grave necessity presses on them," he says, "then they remember God. If the terror of war roars, if a pestilent force of disease bears down, if long drought denies food from the crops, if a savage storm or hail falls upon them, they flee to God; help is sought from God .... When fear has gone and the dangers have withdrawn, then they run eagerly to the temples of the gods; to these they pour libations, to these they sacrifice, these they crown. But to God, whom they implored in their very need, they give thanks not even with a word." Suetonius speaks thus of the death of Germanicus in the Life of Gaius Caligula: "On the day he died," he says, "the temples were stoned, the altars of the gods overturned, and some threw their household Lares into the street." This whole passage is not accurate in Eusebius.

(printed under page 230)

(17) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 435

Εἰ δέ τις ἔχει. Eusebius: Εἰ δέ τις ἐπιμένοι τινὰ τῶν τοιούτων εἰς πράγματα φέρων, ὡς δὴ τοιοῦτον.

"But if anyone has." Eusebius: "But if anyone persists in bringing any such person to trouble as being such."

(printed under page 230)

(18) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 435

Αὐτοκράτωρ Καῖσαρ. De hac epistola, quam quidam non doctissimus otii sui monumentum esse voluit, disserimus Praefat. part. 3. — Admonet Eichstadius in Exercitat. Antonin. II, l. c., p. 245, not. 4, apertum esse hanc epistolam ab ipso Justino ibi reponi non potuisse, qui diu ante, quam illa ederetur, martyrio periisset. Idem V. D. textum reddidit, Graecis apposuit Latina (l. c., p. 246, sqq.): « Ea quidem, quae tanquam ex bibliothecae Vaticanae cimeliis protracta primus in lucem edidit Angelus Roccha (De bibliotheca Vaticana p. 288), ut ipsa scilicet imperatoris manu, quam vocat, nos bearet, qui sane non alia lingua quam Romana ad senatum Romanum scribebat. Rocchae auctoritatem non tuentur caeteri, qui eamdem versionem repetiverunt. Nam Latina illa recentius esse, post Scaligeri adeo aetatem, conficta, ne ii quidem negare sunt ausi, qui epistolae ipsius vindicias egerunt. Concinnata sunt enim ad censuram Graecorum Scaligerianam (cf Jos. Scaligeri Animadvers. in Chronolog. Euseb. p. 223), ut pia scilicet fraude tollerentur dubitationes, quibus criticus primarius epistolae αὐθεντίαν impugnaret (l. c., p. 245 sq). OTTO.

"The Emperor Caesar." On this letter, which someone not very learned meant as a monument of his leisure, we discuss in the Preface, part 3. — Eichstädt points out (Antonine Exercise II, loc. cit., p. 245, note 4) that it is plain this letter could not have been placed there by Justin himself, who had died a martyr long before it was published. The same distinguished man edited the text and set the Latin beside the Greek (loc. cit., p. 246 ff.): "That Latin, indeed, which Angelo Rocca first published (On the Vatican Library, p. 288) as if drawn from the treasures of the Vatican Library, so as to delight us with the emperor's own hand, as he calls it — the emperor who surely wrote to the Roman senate in no other language than the Roman. The others who repeated the same version do not uphold Rocca's authority. For that this Latin was fabricated more recently, indeed after Scaliger's time, not even those who championed the letter itself have dared to deny. For it was composed to meet Scaliger's criticism of the Greek (compare Joseph Scaliger, Animadversions on Eusebius's Chronicle, p. 223), so that by a pious fraud, to be sure, the doubts might be removed with which the foremost critic attacked the authenticity of the letter" (loc. cit., p. 245 f.). OTTO.

(printed under page 230)

(19) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 435

Τὰ τοῦ ἐμοῦ σκοποῦ μεγέθη. Voluit enim M. Antoninus, quemadmodum Jul. Capitolinus in Vita ejus c. 24, p. 384, narrat, Marcomanniam provinciam, voluit etiam Sarmatiam facere; et fecisset, nisi Avidius Cassius sub eodem in Oriente rebellasset. EICHSTADIUS.

"The greatness of my purpose." For Marcus Antoninus wished, as Julius Capitolinus relates in his Life (ch. 24, p. 384), to make Marcomannia a province, and wished to make Sarmatia one too; and he would have done it had not Avidius Cassius rebelled against him in the East. EICHSTÄDT.

(printed under page 230)

(20) ‹anchor: χαμῶν καὶ παθῶν› · call in col 435

Καμῶν καὶ παθῶν. Vulgo σπαθῶν. Sed illud Scaliger et Eichstad. recte receperunt. Sylburg. in vulgata lectione argutius quam verius nomina invenit populorum Κοάδων καὶ Σαρματῶν. OTTO.

"Having laboured and suffered." The common text has σπαθῶν. But Scaliger and Eichstädt rightly adopted the former. Sylburg, more cleverly than truly, found in the common reading the names of the peoples, "of the Quadi and Sarmatians." OTTO.

(printed under page 230)

(21) ‹anchor: ἐν Κοτίνῳ› · call in col 435

Ἐν Κοτίνῳ. Legit Salmasius ἐν Καρνούτῳ. Ibid. leg. παθῶν. — Καρνούντῳ. Ita emendo Thirlbium secutus. Eichstadius cum Scaligero legit Καρνούτῳ; illius correctionem etiam recepit Rocchae interpres (sane dum Carnuti essem). Vulgo Κοτίνῳ. OTTO

"At Cotinum." Salmasius reads "at Carnutum." In the same place read παθῶν. — "At Carnuntum." So I emend, following Thirlby. Eichstädt with Scaliger reads "at Carnutum"; Rocca's translator also adopted that correction ("indeed, while I was at Carnutum"). The common text has "at Cotinum." OTTO

(printed under page 230)

(22) ‹anchor: ὑπὸ δρακόντων› · call in col 435

Ὑπὸ δρακόντων. Δρούγγων in locum δρακόντων substituit Scaliger; notans, vocem drungus significare cohortem, eamque a barbaris saeculo Diocletiani ad Latinos, et ab his ad Graecos transmissam esse. Sed Salmasius in Not. ad Julium Capitolinum De vita Antonini, cap. 24, retinendam docet vocem δρακόντων, utpote quae signum militare denotat, aitque dracones decem in unaquaque legione fuisse, adeo ut septuaginta dracones septem effecerint legiones: neque Romanos solum, sed et Parthos, Indos atque Scythas hoc signo usos esse probat; quanquam hoc loco de Romanis potius copiis accipiat, maxime vero ad praesentem rem faciunt verba Luciani ab eo allegata: Σημεῖον δὲ πλήθους τοῦτο αὐτοῖς. Χιλίους γὰρ οἶμαι δράκων ἄγει. GRABIUS. — Ὑπὸ δρακόντων. Non possunt haec ex contextus ratione nisi ad hostiles copias referri; ideoque Scaliger pro δρακόντων reponi jussit δρούγγων, siquidem dracones signa Romano exercitui propria, drungi autem vocatae fuerint barbarorum cohortes, quod vocabulum Diocletiani demum saeculo in Latinam linguam irrepserit. Sed ne sic quidem his congruunt sequentia, ubi barbarorum ὄχλος memoratur χιλιάδων ἐνναχοσίων ἑβδομήκοντα ἑπτά. Nec dracones prorsus ignoraverunt barbarae gentes. (continues)

"By dragons." Scaliger substituted δρούγγων for δρακόντων, noting that the word drungus means a cohort, and that it passed from the barbarians to the Latins in Diocletian's age, and from them to the Greeks. But Salmasius, in his notes on Julius Capitolinus's Life of Antoninus, ch. 24, teaches that the word δρακόντων should be kept, since it denotes a military standard, and says there were ten dragons in each legion, so that seventy dragons made seven legions; and he proves that not only the Romans but also the Parthians, Indians and Scythians used this standard — though in this place he takes it rather of Roman forces. Most to the present point are the words of Lucian which he cites: "This is a sign of their numbers to them; for a dragon, I think, leads a thousand." GRABE. — "By dragons." By the sense of the context these words can refer only to the enemy forces; therefore Scaliger ordered δρούγγων to be put for δρακόντων, since dragons were standards proper to the Roman army, whereas the barbarians' cohorts were called drungi, a word that crept into Latin only in Diocletian's age. But even so what follows does not fit, where a barbarian host of nine hundred and seventy-seven thousand is mentioned. Nor were the barbarian peoples wholly ignorant of dragons. (continues)

(printed under page 230)

[Image note: the foot images begin inside the notes; any lines of note (22) above the first visible line, and one line at the head of the right-hand note column, are cut off at the top of the images and are not set here.] (printed under page 231)

(22) (continued; earlier lines cut off at the image top) · call in col 438

[…] ad sequentia, quisquis has litteras Marco supposuit, aut interpolatoris culpa factum est, ut hoc additamentum contextum turbaret. EICHSTADIUS.

[…] to what follows, whoever foisted this letter on Marcus; or it happened through an interpolator's fault that this addition disturbed the context. EICHSTÄDT.

(printed under page 231)

(23) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Ἐξπλωράτωρες. Hanc vocem sub imperio Graecorum Constantinopolitano demum usurpari coeptam notat Scaliger loco citato. GRABIUS.

"Exploratores" (scouts). Scaliger notes, in the place cited, that this word began to be used only under the Greek empire of Constantinople. GRABE.

(printed under page 231)

(24) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Γεμιναφρεντησία. Γεμίνας, φρετηνσίας reposuit Scaliger, Salmasius φρεντησίας. Ibidem legendum videtur ἀμίκτου ὄχλου, ut antea ἐν μεγέθει ἀμίκτου πλήθους. Utrumque enim referendum ad barbaros; ad Romanos autem μίγμα κατηριθμημένον, ita ut hostium numerum et ordinem opponat suorum paucitati et confusioni. — Γεμίνας, φρεντησίας. Vulgo γεμιναφρεντησία. Legionum nomina Salmasius ad Jul. Capitol. p. 383, restituit, bene monens, Graecos ita consuesse haec nomina enuntiare: fretense, φρεντήσιον (non φρετήνσιον, quod Scaliger voluerat), castrense, καστρήσιον, etc. De legione XIV gemina cfr. Reimar. ad Dion. Cass. LV, c. 23, p. 796. Caeterum ab his criticorum correctionibus rursus profecit Rocchae interpres geminam et fretensem). — Post μίγμα excidisse videtur ἦν. Scaliger malebat ἀκατηριθμημένῳ πλήθει, quo non fit facilior junctura reliquorum. EICHSTADIUS.

"Geminafrentesia." Scaliger restored "Gemina, Fretensis," Salmasius φρεντησίας. In the same place one should apparently read "of an unmixed crowd," as earlier "in the size of an unmixed multitude." For both are to be referred to the barbarians, whereas the "counted mixture" refers to the Romans, so that he sets the number and order of the enemy against the fewness and confusion of his own men. — "Gemina, Fretensis." The common text has γεμιναφρεντησία. Salmasius restored the names of the legions (on Julius Capitolinus, p. 383), rightly pointing out that the Greeks were accustomed to render these names thus: fretense as φρεντήσιον (not φρετήνσιον, as Scaliger had wished), castrense as καστρήσιον, etc. On the Fourteenth Legion Gemina compare Reimarus on Dio Cassius LV, ch. 23, p. 796. Moreover, Rocca's translator in turn drew on these corrections of the critics ("the Gemina and the Fretensis"). — After μίγμα, ἦν ("was") seems to have dropped out. Scaliger preferred "with an uncounted multitude," which does not make the joining of the rest any easier. EICHSTÄDT.

(printed under page 231)

(25) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Πατρῴοις. In codicibus mss. legitur ad marginem πτρίοις.

"Ancestral." In the manuscripts πτρίοις is read in the margin.

(printed under page 231)

(26) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Πλῆθος καὶ μέγεθος αὐτῶν. Negat Scaliger verisimilitudinem hac in re servatam ab artifice. Sed Scaligerum refellit Tertullianus, qui ait Apol. cap. 37: « Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus, urbes, insulas, castella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, senatum, forum. »

"Their number and size." Scaliger denies that the forger kept to probability in this matter. But Tertullian refutes Scaliger when he says (Apology, ch. 37): "We are of yesterday, and we have filled everything of yours: cities, islands, forts, towns, meeting-places, the camps themselves, tribes, decuries, the palace, the senate, the forum."

(printed under page 231)

(27) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Καὶ ἐμβριμησάμενος. Sylburgius illud καὶ idem esse vult ac καίπερ, etiamsi in illos infremuissem; ut indignatio illa, qua se commotum fuisse ait Marcus, non ad hoc periculi tempus, sed ad superiores imperii annos referatur. Sed manifestum est indignationem, quae hic memoratur, non aliunde ortam esse, quam ex perspecto Christianorum magno numero. Atque hic quidem artifex epistolae satis apte mihi videtur M. Aurelii mores notasse. Is enim in summo discrimine, ubi videt deos suos merum esse somnium, advocat Christianos; sed ubi tam multos esse in suo exercitu perspicit, infremit et indignatur. Mirifice haec quadrant in Marcum, qui odium religionis Christianae medullis conceperat, et tanto beneficio provocatus, a Christia- […line cut at the image top…] imperator et Christianos increpuit, quasi isti essent causa praesentium malorum. — Sic terrae motus, eodem saeculo in Asia exorti, ad Christianos referebantur tanquam publicae calamitatis auctores, qui iram deorum concitavissent. Sic multa ejusdem generis tradit illorum temporum historia. Itaque assentiri non possumus Marano, qui indignationem imperatoris non aliunde ortam esse ait, quam ex perspecto Christianorum magno numero. EICHSTADIUS.

"And having raged." Sylburg holds that this καί is the same as καίπερ, "even though I had raged against them," so that the indignation by which Marcus says he was moved refers not to this time of danger but to the earlier years of his reign. But it is plain that the indignation mentioned here arose from nothing else than his having perceived the great number of Christians. And here the author of the letter seems to me to have marked the character of Marcus Aurelius aptly enough. For in the utmost danger, when he sees that his gods are a mere dream, he calls on the Christians; but when he perceives that there are so many of them in his army, he rages and is indignant. This fits Marcus wonderfully, who had conceived a hatred of the Christian religion in his very marrow, and, though challenged by so great a benefit, from the Christia- […line cut at the image top…] emperor also rebuked the Christians, as though they were the cause of the present evils. — So the earthquakes that arose in Asia in the same age were attributed to the Christians as authors of the public calamity, who had stirred up the anger of the gods. The history of those times reports many things of the same kind. We cannot therefore agree with Maran, who says that the emperor's indignation arose from nothing else than his having perceived the great number of Christians. EICHSTÄDT.

(printed under page 231)

(28) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Ὅθεν ἀρξάμενοι, οὐ βελῶν παράρτησιν. Scaliger legit οἱ οἴκοθεν ἀρξάμενοι, ac commentum militum sine armis et telis merito ridet, sed immerito affingit epistolae auctori. Vix autem dubium est, quin hoc loco institutum aliquod indicetur, quod omnino a Christianis moribus abhorreret. Quare ferre non possum illam παράρτησιν, expeditionem, ut reddit Langus, armorum et telorum et tubarum. Neque enim parare arma res erat invisa Christianis propter Deum, quem in conscientia gestabant. Sed si legamus παρατήρησιν, id est contemplationem sive observationem, habebimus superstitiosam Romanorum caerimoniam, qui pugnae auspicia ab ejusmodi nugis sumebant. Hinc illud Ciceronis lib. II De divin. « Nam ex acuminibus quidem, quod totum auspicium militare est, jam M. Marcellus, ille quinquies consul, totum omisit, idem imperator, idem augur optimus. » Et Arnobius lib. II adv. gentes: « Cum paratis bella, signum monstratis ex arce? aut fecialia jura tractatis? Per clarigationem repetitis res raptas? aut Martium discrimen obeuntes, spem praelii sumitis et ex acuminibus auspicatis? » Ejusmodi aliqua videtur hoc loco designari consuetudo; quae quidem fortasse jam tum erat obsoleta Marci tempore; sed non mirum, si illam adhuc viguisse parens epistolae suppositiliae aut finxit aut credidit.

"Whence beginning, not the equipping of missiles." Scaliger reads "who, beginning from home," and rightly laughs at the fiction of soldiers without arms and weapons, but wrongly attributes it to the author of the letter. There is scarcely any doubt, however, that some practice is indicated here which was wholly abhorrent to Christian ways. So I cannot accept that παράρτησιν, "the equipping," as Lang renders it, "of arms and weapons and trumpets." For preparing arms was not a thing hateful to Christians on account of the God they bore in their conscience. But if we read παρατήρησιν, that is, "watching" or "observation," we shall have a superstitious ceremony of the Romans, who took the auspices for battle from trifles of this kind. Hence Cicero's remark (On Divination II): "For the auspices from spear-points, which is the whole of military augury, Marcus Marcellus, five times consul, gave up entirely, though he was both a general and a most excellent augur." And Arnobius (Against the Nations II): "When you prepare for war, do you show the signal from the citadel? Do you handle the fetial law? Do you demand back seized property by formal declaration? Or, entering the crisis of Mars, do you take hope of battle and take auspices from spear-points?" Some custom of this kind seems to be meant in this place; perhaps it was already obsolete in Marcus's time, but it is no wonder if the father of the spurious letter either invented or believed that it was still in force.

(printed under page 231)

(29) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Ὃν φοροῦσι κατὰ συνείδησιν. In Martyrio S. Ignatii tom. I Spicileg. Patrum saeculi II, p. 11, Trajanus imp. Ignatium interrogasse fertur: Σὺ οὖν ἐν ἑαυτῷ φέρεις τὸν σταυρωθέντα; Tu ergo in teipso crucifixum geris? Ignatius vero respondisse: Ναί. Γέγραπται γάρ· Ἐνοικήσω ἐν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἐμπεριπατήσω. Omnino. Scriptum est enim: « Inhabitabo in ipsis, et ambulabo in eis. » GRABIUS.

"Whom they bear in their conscience." In the Martyrdom of Saint Ignatius (Spicilegium of the Fathers of the Second Century, vol. I, p. 11), the emperor Trajan is said to have asked Ignatius: "Do you then carry the Crucified within yourself?" And Ignatius replied: "Yes. For it is written: I will dwell in them and walk among them." GRABE.

(printed under page 231)

(30) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Εἰκὸς οὖν ἐστιν. Haec a Scaligero reciduntur, sed immerito.

"It is fitting, then." Scaliger cuts these words out, but wrongly.

(printed under page 231)

(31) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 438

Θεὸν ἔχουσι. Sylburgius praemittit ὅτι, et mox legit ὑπὲρ τοῦ παντός.

"They have God." Sylburg puts ὅτι ("that") before it, and just after reads "for the whole."

(printed under page 231)

[Below the notes the page begins the editors' full-width "ANALYSIS APOLOGIAE SECUNDAE"; that is editors' matter, not footnotes, and is not set here.] (printed under page 232)

(32) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 439

Παρήγοροι. Scaliger legit παρήγορον, referendo ad Deum.

"Comforters." Scaliger reads παρήγορον ("comforter," singular), referring it to God.

(printed under page 232)

(33) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 439

Ἐπιβούλους. Haec vox optime respondet textui Julii Capitolini in Vita M. Antonini cap. 24, scribentis: « Fulmen de coelo precibus suis contra hostium machinamentum extorsit. » Ubi Salmasius in Notis Hostium machinamentum, cum ἐπιβούλοις confert, ac primum quidem, quale illud machinamentum fuerit, se ignorare profitetur; postea vero id ex Dionis Epitome expiscatur, nempe quod barbari pugnam detrectantes, Romanos aestu sitique interituros speraverint, locis omnibus, unde aquam consequi possent, occupatis. GRABIUS.

"Plotters." This word corresponds very well to the text of Julius Capitolinus in the Life of Marcus Antoninus, ch. 24, who writes: "By his prayers he wrung a thunderbolt from heaven against the enemy's contrivance." There Salmasius, in his Notes, compares "the enemy's contrivance" with ἐπιβούλοις, and at first admits he does not know what that contrivance was; but afterwards he fishes it out of Dio's Epitome: namely, that the barbarians, avoiding battle, hoped the Romans would perish of heat and thirst, having seized every place from which they could get water. GRABE.

(printed under page 232)

(34) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 439

Θεοῦ παρουσίαν. Supplendum est verbum aliquod ac forte verbum ἐγνωκέναι, quod supra occurrit, quanquam nimis remotum videri potest.

"The presence of God." Some verb must be supplied, perhaps the verb ἐγνωκέναι ("to have known"), which occurs above, although it may seem too far away.

(printed under page 232)

(35) ‹anchor: not visible on this foot› · call in col 439

Γίνεσθαι. Rejicit hoc verbum Sylburgius ut redundans. Infra nonnulli legunt Βιτράσιος Πολλίων.

"To become." Sylburg rejects this word as redundant. Below, some read "Vitrasius Pollio."

(printed under page 232)

(36) ‹anchor: Βηράσιος / Verasius› · call in col 439

Βιτράσιος. Vulgo Βηράσιος. Nomen praefecti jam Brissonius (De Formulis, p. R. III, 234) restituit eumque Eichstadius est secutus. OTTO

"Vitrasius." The common text has "Verasius." Brisson already restored the prefect's name (On Formulas, p. R. III, 234), and Eichstädt followed him. OTTO

(printed under page 232)