Tatianus Assyrius, Oratio adversus Graecos (Τατιανοῦ πρὸς Ἕλληνας)

(1) ‹anchor: Πρὸς Ἕλληνας (title)› · call in col 803

Πρὸς Ἕλληνας. Additur in editis: Ὅτι οὐδὲν τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων, οἷς Ἕλληνες καλλωπίζονται, Ἑλληνικόν· ἀλλ' ἐκ βαρβάρων τὴν εὕρεσιν ἐσχηκός. Quod nullum ex institutis, quibus Graeci gloriantur, Graecum est, sed a barbaris inventum. Sed haec pro titulo apponi non debent; non enim argumentum hujus orationis comprehendunt, ac instar scholii habentur in Regio primo. Legitur initio μὴ πάντως in Reg. 2.

To the Greeks. The printed editions add: "That none of the practices on which the Greeks pride themselves is Greek, but had its invention from barbarians." But this ought not to be set as a title; it does not take in the argument of this oration, and in the first Royal manuscript it stands as a scholium. At the opening, μὴ πάντως is read in the second Royal manuscript.

(printed under page 432)

(2) ‹anchor: Τελμισσέων› · call in col 803

Τελμισσέων. Uterque Regius cod. Τελμισέων. Sic etiam Clemens Strom. I, p. 307. At Eusebius Praep. lib. X, c. 5, et Gregorius Naz. or. 3, p. 101, habent ut editi nostri.

Τελμισσέων. Both Royal manuscripts have Τελμισέων. So too Clement, Stromata I, p. 307. But Eusebius, Praeparatio book X, ch. 5, and Gregory Nazianzen, oration 3, p. 101, have it as our printed editions do.

(printed under page 432)

(3) ‹anchor: Κύπριοι θυτικὴν› · call in col 803

Κύπριοι θυτικήν. Hinc forte Cyprii Jovem εἰλαπιναστὴν καὶ σπλαγχνοτόμον convivatorem et viscerum sectorem colebant, teste Eustathio p. 1413. Ex hoc autem Tatiani loco non pauca Clemens Alexandrinus in primum Stromatum librum, p. 307, et Gregorius Naz. in tertiam orationem, p. 100, transtulerunt. Illam θυτικὴν videtur Gregorius non haruspicinam, sed victimarum immolationem intelligere. Ait enim: Τὸ θύειν δὲ οὐ παρὰ Χαλδαίων εἴτ' οὖν Κυπρίων; Sacrificare autem nonne a Chaldaeis, sive a Cypriis? Sed leve est hoc discrimen; sive enim sacrificia, in quibus exta inspiciuntur, sive ipsa inspiciendorum ars extorum tribuatur Cypriis, perinde est. At illud mirum est, quod Gregorius Chaldaeos hic obtrudat. Hi enim secernuntur ab haruspicibus, ut patet ex his Plutarchi verbis in Mario, p. 430: Ὀκτάβιον δὲ Χαλδαῖοι καὶ θῦταί τινες καὶ σιβυλλισταὶ πείσαντες ἐν Ῥώμῃ κατέσχον. Octavium autem Chaldaei et haruspices quidam et Sibyllistae Romae detinuerunt. Chaldaeis praecipue astrologia tribuitur; hinc ibidem Plutarchus tabulam Chaldaicam in sinu Octavii interempti repertam fuisse narrat. Clemens nec Cypriis, nec Chaldaeis inventae haruspicinae dedecus adjudicat; sed, ut alii fere omnes scriptores, Hetruscis, qui hujus disciplinae Tagetem monstratorem ferebantur habuisse. Hinc Tagetici libri apud Ammianum lib. XVII. Ex quo emendari potest quod legitur in epistola inter Augustinianas 234, De praeceptis Orphicis, Ageticis et Trismegisticis. Legendum Tageticis.

Κύπριοι θυτικήν ("the Cyprians, the art of sacrifice"). Hence perhaps the Cyprians worshipped Jupiter as εἰλαπιναστὴς καὶ σπλαγχνοτόμος, "the feaster and cutter of entrails", as Eustathius attests, p. 1413. From this passage of Tatian, Clement of Alexandria carried a good deal into the first book of the Stromata, p. 307, and Gregory Nazianzen into his third oration, p. 100. Gregory seems to understand that θυτική not as haruspicy but as the slaughter of victims, for he says: "And sacrificing, was it not from the Chaldaeans, or else the Cyprians?" But the difference is slight: whether sacrifices in which the entrails are inspected, or the very art of inspecting entrails, be ascribed to the Cyprians comes to the same thing. What is strange is that Gregory thrusts in the Chaldaeans here. For they are distinguished from the haruspices, as is plain from these words of Plutarch in the Marius, p. 430: "Octavius, however, was kept at Rome by Chaldaeans and certain sacrificers and Sibyllists who persuaded him." Astrology is chiefly ascribed to the Chaldaeans; hence Plutarch in the same place relates that a Chaldaean chart was found in the bosom of the slain Octavius. Clement lays the discredit of inventing haruspicy neither on the Cyprians nor on the Chaldaeans, but, like nearly all other writers, on the Etruscans, who were said to have had Tages as the revealer of this discipline. Hence the Tagetic books in Ammianus, book XVII. From which may be corrected what is read in letter 234 among the Augustinian letters, On the Orphic, Agetic and Trismegistic precepts: read "Tagetic".

(printed under page 432)

(4) ‹anchor: ἀστρονομεῖν› · call in col 803

Ἀστρονομεῖν. Deest in utroque codice Regio et Anglicano. Sed necessarium est illud verbum ad sententiae seriem, atque ita legerunt Clemens et Gregorius, qui Babylonios astronomiae inventores fuisse dicunt. Iisdem astronomiam attribuit Clemens in alio opere, nempe Protrept., p. 48. Theodoretus, lib. I adv. Graec. astronomiam ascribit Aegyptiis, ἀστρολογίαν et γενεθλιαλογίαν Chaldaeis, pag. 467.

Ἀστρονομεῖν ("astronomy"). It is missing in both Royal manuscripts and in the English one. But the word is necessary to the run of the sentence, and so Clement and Gregory read it, who say the Babylonians were the inventors of astronomy. Clement assigns astronomy to the same people in another work, namely the Protrepticus, p. 48. Theodoret, book I Against the Greeks, ascribes astronomy to the Egyptians, astrology and the casting of nativities to the Chaldaeans, p. 467.

(printed under page 432)

(5) ‹anchor: Φρύγες› · call in col 803

Φρύγες. Frustra Gesnerus et Worthius ad majorem et minorem Phrygiam confugiunt, ut Tatianum explicent. Loquitur de Marsya et Olympo, ambobus Phrygibus et agrestibus. Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. I, pag. 306: Τυῤῥηνοὶ σάλπιγγα ἐπενόησαν, καὶ Φρύγες αὐλόν. Φρύγες γὰρ ἤστην Ὄλυμπός τε καὶ Μαρσύας. Tyrrheni tubam, Phryges tibiam excogitavere. Phryges enim erant Olymvus et Marsyas.

Φρύγες ("Phrygians"). Gesner and Worth take refuge in vain in Greater and Lesser Phrygia to explain Tatian. He is speaking of Marsyas and Olympus, both Phrygians and both rustics. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata I, p. 306: "The Etruscans devised the trumpet, and the Phrygians the pipe. For Olympus and Marsyas were Phrygians."

(printed under page 432)

(6) ‹anchor: ὑφ' ὑμῶν (on the previous page)› · call in col 806

Ὑφ' ὑμῶν. Sic codex Anglicanus et Fronto Ducaeus in Bibliotheca Patrum, melius quam alii codices mss. et editi ὑφ' ἡμῶν. Mox codex Joannis Frisii, qui primus Tatianum Graece edidit, ad marginem habebat κέχρησθε pro κέκτησθε.

Ὑφ' ὑμῶν ("by you"). So the English manuscript and Fronton du Duc in the Bibliotheca Patrum, better than the other manuscripts and the printed editions, which have ὑφ' ἡμῶν ("by us"). Just after, the manuscript of Johannes Frisius, who first edited Tatian in Greek, had κέχρησθε ("you have used") in the margin for κέκτησθε ("you have acquired").

(printed under page 433)

(7) ‹anchor: Συνᾴδειν τε (on the previous page)› · call in col 806

Συνᾴδειν τε. Frustra Tatiani interpretes addendum putant, τοὺς μάρτυρας; unde Gesnerus sic vertit: et testes ipsos inter se consentire. Non testium in dicendo testimonio, sed loquentium in sermonis pronuntiatione consensum requirit Tatianus. Hunc enim consensum opponit variis pronuntiandi modis inter Graecos vigentibus. Quamobrem negat eos jure sermonis elegantiam sibi vindicare; primo quidem quia aliorum exspectandum esset testimonium, deinde vero, quia eadem pronuntiandi ratio inter Graecos adhibenda esset; aliis enim aliter pronuntiantibus jam statui non posse quinam sint Graeci.

Συνᾴδειν τε ("and to agree"). Tatian's interpreters think, wrongly, that τοὺς μάρτυρας ("the witnesses") must be added; hence Gesner translates: "and that the witnesses themselves agree among themselves." What Tatian requires is not the agreement of witnesses in giving testimony, but that of speakers in the pronunciation of their speech. For he sets this agreement against the various ways of pronouncing current among the Greeks. He therefore denies that they rightly claim elegance of speech for themselves: first, because the testimony of others would have to be awaited; and secondly, because one and the same way of pronouncing would have to be used among the Greeks, since when some pronounce one way and others another, it can no longer be determined who the Greeks are.

(printed under page 433)

(8) ‹anchor: τὸ κάντων (on the previous page)› · call in col 806

Τὸ κάντων. Ita editiones Paris. ex conjectura Gesneri. Legitur τὸ πᾶν in Tigur. et tribus mss. His autem verbis insignis quaedam et absurda inconstantia notatur. Quare monuit me vir peracutus et eruditus D. D. de Monsoury, abbas Orbacensis, legendum esse ἠτιμήκατε. Dictiones vobis non affines spernitis et barbaris interdum vocibus utentes, etc. Quae quidem legendi ratio non videtur vituperari posse. Sed tamen necessariam illam esse non puto, quia jam satis Tatianus exprobravit Graecis contemptum barbarorum, ut ea res legentium menti haereat, ac Graecos absurdissime facere intelligant, qui non solum inter se variis dialectis discrepant, sed etiam a barbaris, quos spernunt, vocabula mutuantur. Illud ergo absurdissimum videtur Tatiano, quod non solum se a suis dirimant Graeci, sed etiam cum barbaris conjungant.

Τὸ κάντων. So the Paris editions, from Gesner's conjecture. In the Zurich edition and three manuscripts τὸ πᾶν is read. These words mark a notable and absurd inconsistency. For this reason a very acute and learned man, the Reverend Dom de Monsoury, abbot of Orbais, advised me that ἠτιμήκατε should be read: "You scorn expressions not akin to you, and yet at times you use barbarian words," etc. This reading does not seem open to blame. Yet I do not think it necessary, because Tatian has already reproached the Greeks enough for their contempt of the barbarians that the point stays in the reader's mind, and he understands that the Greeks act most absurdly, who not only differ among themselves in various dialects but even borrow words from the barbarians whom they scorn. What seems most absurd to Tatian, then, is that the Greeks not only cut themselves off from their own but also join themselves to the barbarians.

(printed under page 433)

(9) ‹anchor: Συμφύρδην (on the previous page)› · call in col 806

Συμφύρδην. Sic uterque codex Reg. cum Anglicano et editionibus Tigur. et Front. Duc. Aliae editiones συμφέρδην. Hanc autem vocem aptius vertere non potui, quam imitando illud Persii, sat. 1: ... Unde haec sartago loquendi / Venerit in linguas. Melius συμφυρτήν. Mox editi παρ' ἡμῖν. Reg. 2, Angl. et Ducaeus ut in textu. Ibidem recentior codex Reg. et Anglic. cum edit. Tigur. et Front. ἦν ἐν αὐτῇ. Deerat ἦν in aliis.

Συμφύρδην ("jumbled together"). So both Royal manuscripts with the English one and the Zurich and Fronton du Duc editions. Other editions have συμφέρδην. I could not translate this word more aptly than by imitating Persius, Satire 1: "... whence this frying-pan of speech has come upon our tongues." Better συμφυρτήν. Just after, the printed editions have παρ' ἡμῖν ("among us"); the second Royal, the English manuscript and du Duc have it as in the text. In the same place the more recent Royal manuscript and the English one, with the Zurich and Fronton editions, have ἦν ἐν αὐτῇ; ἦν was missing in the others.

(printed under page 433)

(10) ‹anchor: ταῦτ' ἐστὶ› · call in col 806

Ἐπιφυλλίδες. Duo primi versus desumpti sunt ex Ranis Aristophanis, act. I, scen. 2, v. 55; sequentia unde hausta sint nescio. Tatiani orationem esse, non versus, existimat eruditus editor Oxoniensis. Quod autem de absurdis poetis dicit Aristophanes, eos esse infructuosos pampinos, etc., id Tatianus de ipsa Graecorum dicendi arte usurpat, ita ut haec esse debeat illius verborum constructio: Λωβηταί εἰσι, λαρυγγιῶσί τε οἱ τέχνης ταύτης ἐφιέμενοι. — Vere editor Oxon. ED. PATR.

Ἐπιφυλλίδες ("gleanings", "useless shoots"). The first two lines are taken from Aristophanes' Frogs, act I, scene 2, line 55; where the following ones are drawn from I do not know. The learned Oxford editor thinks they are Tatian's prose, not verse. What Aristophanes says of absurd poets, that they are fruitless vine-shoots and so on, Tatian applies to the Greeks' very art of speaking, so that the construction of his words must be: "Those who aspire to this art are defilers, and they bawl." — The Oxford editor is right. EDITOR OF THE PATROLOGY.

(printed under page 433)

(11) ‹anchor: κοράκων ἀφίενται› · call in col 806

Ἀφίενται. Uterque Reg. et Angl. ἐφίενται.

Ἀφίενται ("they let loose"). Both Royal manuscripts and the English one have ἐφίενται.

(printed under page 433)

(12) ‹anchor: Τί γὰρ σεμνὸν› · call in col 806

Τί γὰρ σεμνόν. Reg. secundus, τί γὰρ σοφόν.

Τί γὰρ σεμνόν ("for what that is august"). The second Royal manuscript has τί γὰρ σοφόν ("for what that is wise").

(printed under page 433)

(13) ‹anchor: πολύποδος ὠμοβορίᾳ (text not on the foot images; Latin column inferred)› · call in col 807

Πολύποδος ὠμοβορίᾳ. De morte Diogenis, inquit Laertius lib. VI, varia feruntur. Alii eum cum polypodem crudum comedisset, bili accensa correptum interiisse; alii cum animam continuisset. Ad hanc postremam opinionem accedit quod ait Hieronymus lib. II in Jovin.: Eum eliso per noctem gutture interiisse, cum non tam mori se diceret, quam febrem morte excludere. Julianus factum Diogenis pluribus defendit in quinta oratione, eumque ob voratum polypodem crudum immerito exagitari contendit. Videtur Gregorius Nazianzenus ad hanc historiam respicere, cum Diogeni ὀψοφαγίαν, sive obsoniorum aviditatem exprobrat orat. 23, p. 414. Eum inter celebres ὀψοφάγους sive obsonii voratores recenset Athenaeus lib. VIII, cap. 5, ob hunc polypodem voratum.

Πολύποδος ὠμοβορίᾳ ("by eating an octopus raw"). "On the death of Diogenes," says Laertius in book VI, "various things are reported. Some say that after eating a raw octopus he was seized with an attack of bile and died; others, that he died by holding his breath." To this last opinion comes what Jerome says in book II Against Jovinian: that he died "by strangling his throat in the night", saying that he was "not so much dying as shutting out fever by death". Julian defends Diogenes' act at length in his fifth oration, and contends that he is unjustly attacked for devouring a raw octopus. Gregory Nazianzen seems to have this story in view when, in oration 23, p. 414, he reproaches Diogenes with ὀψοφαγία, that is, greed for dainties. Athenaeus, book VIII, ch. 5, counts him among the famous ὀψοφάγοι or devourers of dainties because of this octopus he devoured.

(printed under page 434)

(14) ‹anchor: ἀξιοπίστως ἠσωτεύσατο› · call in col 807

Ἀξιοπίστως ἠσωτεύσατο. Videtur Tertullianus haec Tatiani verba interpretari voluisse cum diceret Apolog. c. 46: Aristippus in purpura sub magna gravitatis specie nepotatur. Sed valde dubito an Tatiani mentem assecutus sit. Neque enim Aristippus tristis quidam libidinosus fuit; nec gravitatem inter voluptates, sed jocum potius et lusum adhibebat, ut ex multis ejus dicteriis apud antiquos memoratis perspicitur. Vid. Clementem Alex. Paedag. p. 177 et 179. Refert Lactantius l. III Institut., c. 14, illud Aristippi dictum, ad quod respexisse Tatianum existimo: Illud inter me, aiebat Aristippus, et nepotes interest, quod isti percharo, ego gratis voluptates consequar. Videtur ἀξιοπίστως idem valere apud Tatianum ac gratis apud Lactantium. Significat enim Aristippum, cum voluptatibus se daret, coactum non fuisse pecuniam statim numerare, sed idem ei honoris habitum fuisse ac divitibus, quibus facile creditur, quia bonum nomen existimari solent. Illud enim ἀξιοπίστως in hanc sententiam Tatianus accipere solet. Opponit n. 13 ἀξιοπιστίαν paupertatis et indigentiae opinioni; et n. 11 divitibus ἀξιοπιστίαν attribuit; quia videlicet bona nomina existimantur, nec numerata pecunia, si quid emere velint, aut pignora, si pecuniam mutuentur, exigi ab illis soleant. Jocatur ergo in Aristippum Tatianus, eumque libidines gratuito satiasse indicat, cum illum ἀξιοπίστως luxuriatum, id est pretii statim solvendi lege, veluti bonum aliquod nomen, immunem fuisse dicit.

Ἀξιοπίστως ἠσωτεύσατο ("he lived prodigally on credit"). Tertullian seems to have meant to render these words of Tatian when he said, Apology ch. 46: "Aristippus plays the spendthrift in purple under a great show of gravity." But I strongly doubt that he caught Tatian's meaning. For Aristippus was not some gloomy libertine; he brought not gravity but rather jest and play to his pleasures, as is seen from the many witticisms of his recorded by the ancients. See Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus pp. 177 and 179. Lactantius, book III of the Institutes, ch. 14, reports this saying of Aristippus, which I think Tatian had in view: "The difference between me and the spendthrifts," said Aristippus, "is that they get their pleasures at a very high price, and I for nothing." Ἀξιοπίστως in Tatian seems to mean the same as "for nothing" in Lactantius. He means that Aristippus, when he gave himself to pleasures, was not obliged to count out money at once, but was given the same regard as the rich, who are readily trusted because they are reckoned good debtors. For Tatian commonly takes ἀξιοπίστως in this sense. In section 13 he sets ἀξιοπιστία against the reputation of poverty and want, and in section 11 he attributes ἀξιοπιστία to the rich; because, that is, they are reckoned good debtors, and neither ready money, if they wish to buy something, nor pledges, if they borrow money, are usually demanded of them. Tatian is therefore jesting at Aristippus, and indicates that he sated his lusts for nothing when he says that he lived in luxury ἀξιοπίστως, that is, exempt, like a good debtor, from the rule of paying the price at once.

(printed under page 434)

(15) ‹anchor: διὰ γαστριμαργίαν ἐπιπράσκετο› · call in col 807

Διὰ γαστριμαργίαν ἐπιπράσκετο. Platonis famae nocuerunt Siculae dapes. Hinc eum Xenophon non obscure vellicat in quadam ad Aeschinem epistola. Tertullianus loco supra citato: Plato, inquit, a Dionysio ventris gratia venditatur. Carpit etiam Gregorius Nazianzenus orat. 3: Siculam Platonis voracitatem, ob quam etiam ipse venditur, ac ne ab ullo quidem discipulorum, imo nec ab homine Graeco redimitur. Ter profectus est in Siciliam Plato, semel quidem sub Dionysio seniore, his sub juniore, ut Plutarchus in Dionis Vita, Diogenes Laertius lib. III, Aristides apud Photium testantur. Utrique tyranno in offensam venit: senior eum Pollidi Lacedaemonio tradidit, a quo venditus est Aeginae; sub juniore in periculum adductus est, ut Dionis ad liberandam insulam hortator. Probabilius haec postrema molestia in amorem Siculae mensae rejiceretur; nam Dionysii junioris invitatu in Siciliam venit, nec ingustatis aulae deliciis abiit. Sed aliud illud periculum, quod Pollidi traditus subiit, in eamdem causam conferri non potest. Nam eo consilio sub tyranno seniore in Siciliam navigavit Plato, ut insulam viseret, nec se in tyranni familiaritatem insinuavit: sed ad ejus colloquium opera Dionis admissus, sic illius animum dicendi libertate commovit, ut statim de illo necando aut saltem vendendo mandata Pollidi data sint, ut narrat Plutarchus in Vita Dionis. Erravit ergo temporibus Tatianus. Multo minus consentit cum Plutarcho S. Cyrillus, qui in libro II adv. Jul., p. 50, ait de Platone: Οὐ γὰρ ἀρεσθέντα ταῖς παρ' αὐτοῦ θωπείαις τὸν Διονύσιον ἀποδόσθαι φασὶν αὐτόν. Venditus enim fertur a Dionysio illius assentationibus offenso.

Διὰ γαστριμαργίαν ἐπιπράσκετο ("he was sold for his gluttony"). Sicilian banquets harmed Plato's reputation. Hence Xenophon gibes at him quite openly in a letter to Aeschines. Tertullian, in the place cited above: "Plato," he says, "is put up for sale by Dionysius for his belly's sake." Gregory Nazianzen also carps at him in oration 3: "the Sicilian voracity of Plato, for which he himself is sold, and is not ransomed by any of his disciples, nor indeed by any Greek." Plato went to Sicily three times, once under the elder Dionysius and twice under the younger, as Plutarch in the Life of Dion, Diogenes Laertius book III, and Aristides in Photius attest. He gave offence to both tyrants: the elder handed him over to Pollis the Lacedaemonian, by whom he was sold at Aegina; under the younger he was brought into danger as the one urging Dion to free the island. This last trouble might more plausibly be put down to love of the Sicilian table, for he came to Sicily at the younger Dionysius' invitation and did not leave without tasting the delights of the court. But the other danger, which he underwent when handed over to Pollis, cannot be laid to the same cause. For Plato sailed to Sicily under the elder tyrant with the purpose of seeing the island, and did not work his way into the tyrant's intimacy; but, admitted to converse with him through Dion's good offices, he so stirred his mind by his freedom of speech that orders were at once given to Pollis to kill him or at least sell him, as Plutarch relates in the Life of Dion. Tatian therefore confused the occasions. St Cyril agrees with Plutarch much less, saying of Plato in book II Against Julian, p. 50: "For they say Dionysius sold him because he was not pleased by his flatteries."

(printed under page 434)

(16) ‹anchor: Ἀλέξανδρόν τε μεμνημένος› · call in col 807

Ἀλέξανδρόν τε μεμνημένος. Legitur ad marginem in cod. Reg. 2: Ἀλεξάνδρῳ τετιμημένος. Vox illa μεμνημένος deest in codice Anglicano. Cotelerius tom. III Monum. Eccl. Graec., p. 657, legendum censet μεμηνημένον μειράκιον, adolescenti furioso assentabatur. At multo aptior emendatio, si legamus, μὴ μεμνημένος, adolescentem esse oblitus. Facile potuit excidere illud μή ob similitudinem syllabae sequentis. Nullus dubito sic legisse Tertullianum: sic enim reddit hunc locum Tatiani: Aristoteles, inquit Apolog. p. 46, tam turpiter Alexandro, regendo potius, adulatur. Nemo non videt quam apte respondeat illud Tertulliani, regendo potius, his Tatiani verbis μὴ μεμνημένος μειράκιον, adolescentem esse oblitus.

Ἀλέξανδρόν τε μεμνημένος. In the margin of the second Royal manuscript is read: Ἀλεξάνδρῳ τετιμημένος ("honoured by Alexander"). The word μεμνημένος is missing in the English manuscript. Cotelier, vol. III of the Monumenta Ecclesiae Graecae, p. 657, thinks μεμηνημένον μειράκιον should be read: "he flattered a raving youth." But a much more fitting emendation is to read μὴ μεμνημένος, "forgetting that he was a youth". The μή could easily have dropped out from its likeness to the following syllable. I have no doubt that Tertullian read it so, for he renders this passage of Tatian thus: "Aristotle," he says, Apology p. 46, "so shamefully flatters Alexander, whom he should rather have been guiding." Everyone sees how aptly Tertullian's "whom he should rather have been guiding" answers to Tatian's words μὴ μεμνημένος μειράκιον, "forgetting that he was a youth".

(printed under page 434)

(17) ‹anchor: παρὰ τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 810

Παρὰ τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην. Ita Regii codices cum Anglicano et editione Tigurina. Aliae κατὰ τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην.

Παρὰ τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην ("according to Aristotle"). So the Royal manuscripts with the English one and the Zurich edition. The others have κατὰ τὸν Ἀριστοτέλην.

(printed under page 435)

(18) ‹anchor: τοιοῦτοι› · call in col 810

Τοιοῦτοι. Addit μέν ad marginem Reg. 2, et mox pro τὸν γάρ habet in margine τὸν δέ.

Τοιοῦτοι ("such"). The second Royal manuscript adds μέν in the margin, and just after has τὸν δέ in the margin for τὸν γάρ.

(printed under page 435)

(19) ‹anchor: ἐμαυτὸν ἐδιδαξάμην› · call in col 810

Ἐμαυτὸν ἐδιδαξάμην. Legendum crediderim, ἐδιζησάμην; tum quia insulsa prorsus esset et Tatiani salibus indigna haec ταυτολογία: Heraclitum non probaverim dicentem, Ego meipsum docui, quia a seipso doctus erat et superbus; tum quia memorabile est inprimis illud Heracliti dictum, quod refertur a Juliano, orat. 6: Ἐδιζησάμην ἐμωυτόν, Ego meipsum investigavi. Confirmant emendationem nostram haec Laertii de Heraclito verba, lib. IX: Ἤκουσέ τε οὐδενός, ἀλλ' αὐτὸν ἔφη διζήσασθαι καὶ μαθεῖν πάντα παρ' ἑαυτοῦ. Neminem audivit, sed se investigasse seipsum dicebat, et a seipso omnia didicisse.

Ἐμαυτὸν ἐδιδαξάμην ("I taught myself"). I would think ἐδιζησάμην ("I searched out") should be read: first, because this tautology would be wholly insipid and unworthy of Tatian's wit: "I would not approve Heraclitus saying, I taught myself, because he was self-taught and proud"; and second, because that saying of Heraclitus reported by Julian, oration 6, is especially memorable: "I searched out myself." These words of Laertius on Heraclitus, book IX, confirm our emendation: "He heard no one, but said that he had searched himself out and learned everything from himself."

(printed under page 435)

(20) ‹anchor: γένηται› · call in col 810

Γένηται. Sic legitur hic locus in margine Regii secundi: Γένηται. Καὶ γὰρ ἔτεσι τριάκοντα περὶ τούτων.

Γένηται ("may become"). In the margin of the second Royal manuscript this passage reads thus: "May become. For in thirty years, concerning these things."

(printed under page 435)

(21) ‹anchor: τὸ Ἡρακλείτου σκότος› · call in col 810

Τὸ Ἡρακλείτου σκότος. Editio Tigurina τὸ Ἡρακλείτειον σκότος. Reg. I et Angl. Ἡράκλειτον. Nemo nescit Heraclitum apud antiquos σκοτεινόν appellatum fuisse. Tenebrosum appellat Tertullianus lib. De anima. Unus ex legatis Philippi Macedonum regis ad Annibalem Heraclitus scotinus vocabatur, nomen et cognomen Heracliti Ephesii referens. Emendandus Cyrillus Alexandrinus in lib. I adv. Jul., pag. 13, ubi legitur septuagesima Olympiade floruisse Democritum et Anaxagoram philosophos physicos simul et Heraclidem cognomine Σκοτεινόν. Nemo non videt legendum esse Heraclitum. Lepide jocatur in has Heracliti tenebras Plato, cum ait lib. VI De rep., p. 498, studium philosophiae in plerisque citius exstingui quam solem Heracliti, quia videlicet clare interdum et splendide disserebat Heraclitus, ut testatur Laertius, sed cito tenebris suis immergebatur.

Τὸ Ἡρακλείτου σκότος ("the darkness of Heraclitus"). The Zurich edition has τὸ Ἡρακλείτειον σκότος; the first Royal and the English manuscripts, Ἡράκλειτον. Everyone knows that Heraclitus was called σκοτεινός ("the Obscure") among the ancients. Tertullian calls him "the dark one" in the book On the Soul. One of the envoys of Philip, king of the Macedonians, to Hannibal was called Heraclitus Scotinus, bearing the name and surname of Heraclitus of Ephesus. Cyril of Alexandria must be corrected in book I Against Julian, p. 13, where it is read that in the seventieth Olympiad the natural philosophers Democritus and Anaxagoras flourished, together with Heraclides surnamed the Obscure. Everyone sees that Heraclitus must be read. Plato jests wittily at this darkness of Heraclitus when he says, Republic book VI, p. 498, that in most people the zeal for philosophy is quenched sooner than the sun of Heraclitus, because, that is, Heraclitus at times discoursed clearly and brilliantly, as Laertius attests, but was soon plunged back into his own darkness.

(printed under page 435)

(22) ‹anchor: ἰατρικὴν ὡς φιλοσοφίαν› · call in col 810

Ἰατρικὴν ὡς φιλοσοφίαν. Medicinam eodem modo ac philosophiam pertractasse dicitur Heraclitus, quia ab illis tenebris, quibus philosophiam demerserat, ne hydropicus quidem factus in consulendis medicis discedere voluit. Nam, ut ait Laertius: Τῶν ἰατρῶν αἰνιγματωδῶς ἐπυνθάνετο εἰ δύναιντο ἐξ ἐπομβρίας αὐχμὸν ποιῆσαι. Quaerebat a medicis per aenigma, an ex imbre siccitatem possent efficere.

Ἰατρικὴν ὡς φιλοσοφίαν ("medicine as philosophy"). Heraclitus is said to have handled medicine in the same way as philosophy, because even when he had become dropsical he would not depart, in consulting the physicians, from the darkness in which he had sunk philosophy. For, as Laertius says, "he asked the physicians in a riddle whether they could make a drought out of a downpour."

(printed under page 435)

(23) ‹anchor: σπασθεὶς› · call in col 810

Σπασθείς. Existimavit auctor editionis Oxoniensis sic interpretandum esse: Dilaceratus a canibus, interiit. At nequaquam Tatianus dilaceratum a canibus Heraclitum dicit, sed ab illo bovis stercore, quod totum corpus convellebat et dilacerabat. Sic etiam apud Tertullianum Heraclitus se bubulo stercore oblitum exussisse dicitur. Idem testatur Hermippus apud Laertium lib. IX, nempe Heraclitum, cum pueris jussisset ut se bovis stercore oblinerent, κατατεινόμενον δευτεραῖον τελευτῆσαι, καὶ ταφῆναι ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ, obriguisse ac postridie interiisse ac sepultum fuisse in foro. Fucum fecit erudito Anglo quod ait ibidem Neanthes Cyzicenus, Heraclitum μὴ δυνηθέντα αὐτὸν ἀποσπάσαι τὰ βόλιτα μεῖναι, καὶ διὰ τὴν μεταβολὴν ἀγνοηθέντα, κυνόβρωτον γενέσθαι, cum non potuisset stercus avellere, ibidem mansisse, et cum ob immutationem agnitus non fuisset, canibus escam fuisse. Sed hoc Neanthis testimonium pugnat illud quidem cum Hermippo de Heracliti sepultura, nequaquam autem de mortis genere; si quidem uterque Heraclitum bovis stercore oblitum periisse memorat; verum alter postridie sepultum dicit, alter a canibus voratum propterea quod ab hominibus agnitus non fuisset.

Σπασθείς ("convulsed", "torn"). The author of the Oxford edition thought it should be rendered: "torn apart by dogs, he died." But Tatian by no means says that Heraclitus was torn apart by dogs, but by that cow-dung, which convulsed and racked his whole body. So too in Tertullian Heraclitus "is said to have burnt himself up, plastered with ox-dung". Hermippus in Laertius, book IX, attests the same, namely that Heraclitus, after ordering boys to plaster him with cow-dung, "stiffened and died on the second day, and was buried in the market-place". The learned Englishman was misled by what Neanthes of Cyzicus says in the same place: that Heraclitus, "being unable to tear off the dung, stayed where he was, and, being unrecognized because of the change, became food for dogs". But this testimony of Neanthes conflicts with Hermippus on Heraclitus' burial, not at all on the manner of his death; for both relate that Heraclitus died plastered with cow-dung, but one says he was buried the next day, the other that he was devoured by dogs because men had not recognized him.

(printed under page 435)

(24) ‹anchor: Μέλιτον› · call in col 810

Μέλιτον. Reg. 2, Μέλητον.

Μέλιτον (Meletus). The second Royal manuscript has Μέλητον.

(printed under page 435)

(25) ‹anchor: ἐν τῷ κατὰ τὴν ἐκπύρωσιν λόγῳ› · call in col 810

Ἐν τῷ κατὰ τὴν ἐκπύρωσιν λόγῳ. Nullus hic liber Zenonis de conflagratione aut de universo citatur; sed quod ex illius de conflagratione sententia consequebatur, id refellit Tatianus.

Ἐν τῷ κατὰ τὴν ἐκπύρωσιν λόγῳ ("in his account of the conflagration"). No book of Zeno on the conflagration or on the universe is cited here; rather Tatian refutes what followed from his doctrine of the conflagration.

(printed under page 435)

(26) ‹anchor: τινῶν ἄλλων› · call in col 810

Ἄλλων. Deest in Reg. secundo. Mox lego πάνυ πλείους ut in Reg. 1, et Angl. Reg. 2, ad marg. πολὺ πλείους. Editi πάλιν πλείους. Doctus abbas in superiore pagina laudatus existimat Heraclitum hic pro Hercule reponendum, ut apud Justinum Apol. I, n. 46.

Ἄλλων ("others"). It is missing in the second Royal manuscript. Just after, I read πάνυ πλείους ("very many more") as in the first Royal and the English manuscript; the second Royal has πολὺ πλείους ("many more") in the margin; the printed editions, πάλιν πλείους. The learned abbot praised on an earlier page thinks Heraclitus should be put back here in place of Hercules, as in Justin, Apology I, no. 46.

(printed under page 435)

(27) ‹anchor: τοῦθ' ὅπερ ἔλεγεν (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 811

Τοῦθ' ὅπερ ἔλεγεν. Claudicat hic Tatiani sententia, sed emendari potest levissima immutatione, si pro τοῦθ' ὅπερ ἔλεγεν, legamus τοῦτο παρ' ὀλίγον. Non enim dicebat Empedocles se Deum esse, sed astu consequi voluit ut Deus haberetur, ac ea mente in ardentem Aetnam desiluit. Quare nihil propius factum est quam ut evanuisse et in coelum translatus esse crederetur. Sed illius commentum nudaverunt crepidae, quas ignis erumpens rejecit.

Τοῦθ' ὅπερ ἔλεγεν ("that which he used to say"). Tatian's sentence limps here, but it can be mended by the slightest change, if for τοῦθ' ὅπερ ἔλεγεν we read τοῦτο παρ' ὀλίγον ("this, within a little"). For Empedocles did not say that he was a god; he wanted by cunning to bring it about that he should be held a god, and with that intent leapt down into burning Etna. So nothing came nearer to happening than that he should be believed to have vanished and been carried up to heaven. But his contrivance was laid bare by his sandals, which the erupting fire threw back.

(printed under page 436)

(28) ‹anchor: γραολογίαν› · call in col 811

Γραολογίαν. Pherecydes anilium fabularum auctor hoc loco dicitur, non ob descriptam deorum genealogiam, ut eruditi viri Gesnerus et Worth. censuerunt, sed ob inventam Metempsychosim. Aniles fabulas vocat Tatianus hoc dogma, quod a Pherecyde Pythagoram accepisse, Platonem imitatione expressisse pronuntiat. Addit de Platone nonnullis videri secus. Revera sic elaboravit Plato in hac illustranda sententia, ut illius parens et architectus habitus sit. Hinc Irenaeus sic de Metempsychosi ac de Platone loquitur lib. II, c. 33: Ad haec Plato, vetus ille Atheniensis, qui et primus sententiam hanc introduxit, cum excusare non posset, oblivionis induxit poculum. De eodem Platone Tertullianus lib. De anima, c. 23: Novum, inquit, elaboravit argumentum, μαθήσεις ἀναμνήσεις, id est discentias, reminiscentias esse. Sustulimus ope codicis Anglicani τήν ante has voces περὶ τούτου.

Γραολογίαν ("old wives' talk"). Pherecydes is here called the author of old wives' tales, not for having set out the genealogy of the gods, as the learned Gesner and Worth judged, but for having invented metempsychosis. Tatian calls this doctrine old wives' tales; he declares that Pythagoras received it from Pherecydes and that Plato reproduced it by imitation. He adds that some take a different view of Plato. In fact Plato laboured so hard at setting out this doctrine that he was held to be its father and architect. Hence Irenaeus speaks thus of metempsychosis and of Plato, book II, ch. 33: "To this Plato, that ancient Athenian, who also first introduced this opinion, since he could not excuse it, brought in the cup of forgetfulness." Of the same Plato Tertullian says in the book On the Soul, ch. 23: "He worked out a new argument," that learnings are recollections. On the authority of the English manuscript we have removed τήν before the words περὶ τούτου.

(printed under page 436)

(29) ‹anchor: τῇ Κράτητος κοινογαμίᾳ› · call in col 811

Τῇ Κράτητος κοινογαμίᾳ. Legendum monet κυνογαμίᾳ auctor editionis Oxoniensis. Quam lectionem duplici ratione confirmat; 1° quidem, quia communes nuptias nusquam Crates approbasse, meretrices nonnunquam insectatus esse dicitur. Deinde vero quia apud Clementem Alexandrinum Strom. IV, p. 523, apud Theodoretum adv. Graec. p. 671, et apud Suidam Crates dicitur κυνογαμίαν, sive caninas nuptias aperto et publico concubitu in porticu celebrasse. Assentiri non possum erudito viro communitatem mulierum Crateti probatam non fuisse. Certe Diogenes illius praeceptor hoc inter alia impudenter autumabat, teste Laertio, communes mulieres esse oportere, ne verbo quidem nuptias appellans. Ipse Crates filiam suam discipulis fertur tradidisse. Quod autem meretricibus convicium fecisse dicitur, id minime mirum de homine omnibus conviciari solito. Magis arridet altera doctissimi editoris ratio, ex Clementis, Theodoreti et Suidae testimoniis petita. Celebriores enim Cynici ob caninos, sive publicos concubitus, quam ob mulierum communitatem. Gregorius Naz. orat. 23, p. 19, κοινογαμίαν, ut Tatianus, exprobrat Crateti. Sed Elias Cretensis videtur legisse κυνογαμίαν. Hanc enim potissimum causam affert, cur Crates ita notetur, quod in publica schola corpus cum uxore miscuerit.

Τῇ Κράτητος κοινογαμίᾳ ("with Crates' community of wives"). The author of the Oxford edition advises reading κυνογαμίᾳ ("dog-marriage"). He supports this reading on two grounds: first, that Crates is nowhere said to have approved common marriages, and is said at times to have railed at harlots; and second, that in Clement of Alexandria, Stromata IV, p. 523, in Theodoret Against the Greeks p. 671, and in the Suda, Crates is said to have celebrated a κυνογαμία, a dog's wedding, by open and public intercourse in the portico. I cannot agree with the learned man that community of women was not approved by Crates. Certainly his teacher Diogenes, among other things, shamelessly maintained, as Laertius attests, that women ought to be held in common, not even using the word marriage. Crates himself is said to have given his own daughter to his disciples. That he is said to have abused harlots is no wonder in a man accustomed to abuse everyone. The learned editor's other reason, drawn from the testimony of Clement, Theodoret and the Suda, is more attractive. For the Cynics were more notorious for dog-like, that is public, intercourse than for community of women. Gregory Nazianzen, oration 23, p. 19, reproaches Crates with κοινογαμία, as Tatian does. But Elias of Crete seems to have read κυνογαμία, for he gives as the chief reason why Crates is so branded "that he had intercourse with his wife in the public school".

(printed under page 436)

(30) ‹anchor: καὶ οὐ μᾶλλον› · call in col 811

Καὶ οὐ μᾶλλον. Reg. 2, cum Angl. καὶ μᾶλλον. Mox Reg. 2, ἐπιζητεῖν ἐπὶ τῷ et ad marg. τό. Angl. ἐπὶ τὸ ζητεῖν ἐπὶ τό. Sic etiam Tigur.

Καὶ οὐ μᾶλλον ("and not rather"). The second Royal with the English manuscript has καὶ μᾶλλον ("and rather"). Just after, the second Royal has ἐπιζητεῖν ἐπὶ τῷ, with τό in the margin; the English manuscript ἐπὶ τὸ ζητεῖν ἐπὶ τό. So too the Zurich edition.

(printed under page 436)

(31) ‹anchor: φιλοσόφων καὶ οὐ φιλοσόφων› · call in col 811

Φιλοσόφων καὶ οὐ φιλοσόφων. Delendum videtur illud καί quod hujus griphi elegantiam deformat. Erit enim elegantius si legas, ut apud Clementem Alex., ἄκουε μῦθον, οὐ μῦθον lib. Quis dives, etc. et ἄνδρες οὐκ ἄνδρες initio Exhort., vel forte legendum, ut apud Justinum in minore Apol., n. 3: Φιλοψόφων καὶ οὐ φιλοσόφων. Strepitus non sapientiae amatorum.

Φιλοσόφων καὶ οὐ φιλοσόφων ("of philosophers and not philosophers"). The καί seems to need deleting, since it spoils the elegance of this riddle. It will be more elegant if you read, as in Clement of Alexandria, "hear a tale that is no tale" in the book Who Is the Rich Man, etc., and "men who are not men" at the start of the Exhortation; or perhaps one should read, as in Justin's shorter Apology, no. 3: Φιλοψόφων καὶ οὐ φιλοσόφων, "lovers of noise and not lovers of wisdom".

(printed under page 436)

(32) ‹anchor: ἐκπεφώνηκε› · call in col 811

Ἐκπεφώνηκε. Edit. Tigur. ἐκπεφρόνηκε. Paris. anni 1615 ἐκπεφρώνηκε. Mox Reg. 2 ἐπιπροσκρούματα.

Ἐκπεφώνηκε ("has uttered"). The Zurich edition has ἐκπεφρόνηκε; the Paris edition of 1615, ἐκπεφρώνηκε. Just after, the second Royal manuscript has ἐπιπροσκρούματα.

(printed under page 436)

(33) ‹anchor: ἑαυτοῖς› · call in col 811

Ἑαυτοῖς. Ita Reg. 1, cum Anglicano et Front. Duc.; editi αὐτοῖς, αὐτοῖς Reg. 2.

Ἑαυτοῖς ("to themselves"). So the first Royal with the English manuscript and Fronton du Duc; the printed editions have αὐτοῖς, and the second Royal αὐτοῖς.

(printed under page 436)

(34) ‹anchor: βασιλείας προλήμματι› · call in col 811

Βασιλείας προλήμματι. Ita Reg. uterque cum Anglicano; editi, excepto Tigur., habent βασιλέας, ex conjectura prorsus inutili. Putarunt enim eruditi viri, hanc vocem, βασιλείας esse in singulari gignendi casu; hinc auctor editionis Oxon. sic interpretandum putat, si legatur βασιλείας, regiae majestatis praetextu. At facilis et usitata est haec loquendi ratio, βασιλείας προλήμματι imperia sive imperantes anticipatis officiis colere. Nam ut ἀρχή non solum imperium designat, sed eos etiam qui imperant, sic etiam βασιλεία. Hinc illud Gregorii Naz. orat. 3, p. 66, in philosophos dictum, τὰς σεμνὰς τυραννίδας μόνον οὐ προσκυνοῦσι, splendidas tyrannides tantum non adorant.

Βασιλείας προλήμματι. So both Royal manuscripts with the English one; the printed editions, except the Zurich, have βασιλέας ("kings"), from an altogether needless conjecture. For learned men thought that the word βασιλείας was in the genitive singular; hence the author of the Oxford edition thinks that, if βασιλείας is read, it should be rendered "under pretext of royal majesty". But this manner of speaking is easy and usual: βασιλείας προλήμματι, to court empires, that is rulers, with anticipated services. For as ἀρχή denotes not only rule but also those who rule, so too does βασιλεία. Hence that saying of Gregory Nazianzen against the philosophers, oration 3, p. 66: "they all but worship splendid tyrannies."

(printed under page 436)

(35) ‹anchor: προλήμματι› · call in col 811

Προλήμματι. Reg. 1, προσλήμματι, 2, προλήμματι. Ita etiam editio Paris. anni 1615, et Oxon. Habent προλήμματι cod. Angl. et Ducaeus.

Προλήμματι. The first Royal has προσλήμματι, the second προλήμματι. So too the Paris edition of 1615 and the Oxford edition. The English manuscript and du Duc have προλήμματι.

(printed under page 436)

(36) ‹anchor: καθ' ἡμῶν› · call in col 811

Καθ' ἡμῶν. Ita Reg. uterque cum Anglic.; editi καθ' ἡμᾶς. Mox iidem codices cum editione Tigurina τοῖς τινῶν. Aliae editiones τοῖς ὑμῶν.

Καθ' ἡμῶν ("against us"). So both Royal manuscripts with the English one; the printed editions have καθ' ἡμᾶς. Just after, the same manuscripts with the Zurich edition have τοῖς τινῶν; the other editions τοῖς ὑμῶν.

(printed under page 436)

(none; notes 27–36, called in this column's Greek, are filed under the facing Latin, n811)

(37) ‹anchor: γινώσκων (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 814

Γινώσκων. Reg. secundus ad marg. et Joannis Frisii codex pariter ad marg. et Fronto Ducaeus habent γινώσκω. Aliae editiones γινώσκων.

Γινώσκων ("knowing"). The second Royal manuscript in the margin, the manuscript of Johannes Frisius likewise in the margin, and Fronton du Duc have γινώσκω ("I know"). The other editions have γινώσκων.

(printed under page 437)

(38) ‹anchor: διῆκον› · call in col 814

Διῆκον. Reg. uterque et Fronto Ducaeus διήκων.

Διῆκον ("pervading", neuter). Both Royal manuscripts and Fronton du Duc have διήκων (masculine).

(printed under page 437)

(39) ‹anchor: τοὺς ἐμούς› · call in col 814

Τοὺς ἐμούς. Postrema vox percommode reperta est in Reg. primo; deerat in aliis mss. et editis, excepta editione Frontonis Ducaei.

Τοὺς ἐμούς ("my own"). The last word was very conveniently found in the first Royal manuscript; it was missing in the other manuscripts and printed editions, except the edition of Fronton du Duc.

(printed under page 437)

(40) ‹anchor: ὅπερ δὲ› · call in col 814

Ὅπερ δέ. Reg. 2, et Angl. cum editione Tigur. ὥσπερ δέ.

Ὅπερ δέ ("which, however"). The second Royal and the English manuscript with the Zurich edition have ὥσπερ δέ ("just as, however").

(printed under page 437)

(41) ‹anchor: Θεὸν δωροδοκητέον› · call in col 814

Οὐδὲ τὸν ἀνωνόμαστον Θεὸν δωροδοκητέον. Si quis illud δωροδοκητέον, idem esse non putet ac munerari, et haec verba ita reddenda existimet, ut reddidit Gesnerus: Non existimandum est Deum innominatum muneribus affici, haud equidem repugnabo. Hujus verbi is videtur sensus esse maxime accuratus: munera in mentem venire non debent, ubi de Deo, qui nomine caret, agitur. Loquitur manifeste Tatianus de victimis et nidoribus, quibus ethnici deos suos colebant. Infra n. 16 deos vocat δωρολήπτας.

Οὐδὲ τὸν ἀνωνόμαστον Θεὸν δωροδοκητέον ("nor is the unnameable God to be bribed with gifts"). If anyone thinks that δωροδοκητέον is not the same as "to present with gifts", and judges that these words should be rendered as Gesner rendered them, "It must not be thought that the unnamed God is moved by gifts," I will not object. The most exact sense of this word seems to be: gifts ought not to come to mind where it is a question of God, who has no name. Tatian is plainly speaking of the victims and the savour of burnt offerings with which the heathen worshipped their gods. Below, in section 16, he calls the gods δωρολῆπται, "takers of gifts".

(printed under page 437)

(42) ‹anchor: ὑφ' ἡμῶν› · call in col 814

Ὑφ' ἡμῶν. Codex mss. Angl. ὑφ' ἡμῖν. Editio Oxon. et Paris. an. 1615, ὑφ' ὑμῶν.

Ὑφ' ἡμῶν ("by us"). The English manuscript has ὑφ' ἡμῖν; the Oxford edition and the Paris edition of 1615, ὑφ' ὑμῶν ("by you").

(printed under page 437)

(43) ‹anchor: αὐτῷ ὑπέστησε› · call in col 814

Ὑπέστησε. Hoc verbum prave redditum in sententiam Tatiani tenebras injecit. Sic enim habet interpretatio Gesneri: Si vero respicias potentiam ejus, in qua visibilia et invisibilia cuncta consistunt, omnia cum ipso erant. In ipso enim per potentiam Verbi, tum ipse, tum Verbum, quod in eo erat, exstitit. Inde accusatus Tatianus quod Verbum ante mundi creationem non actu, ut personam, sed potentia tantum crediderit in Patre cum aliis rebus exstitisse. Iniquam criminationem nova interpretatio refellit. Haec autem verba σὺν αὐτῷ γάρ uncinis inclusi nec in interpretando Latine reddidi, quia ab aliquo librario addita videntur. Nam 1° Illud γάρ deest in Regiis codicibus et Anglicano et Tigurina editione. Quod si haec vocula a librariis addita; idem dicendum erit de his vocibus σὺν αὐτῷ quae cum ea necessario conjuncta sunt. 2° Repugnat ut Deus dicatur solus non fuisse, quia omnia in eo potestate exsistebant. 3° Non aliter legit hunc locum Tertullianus, qui Tatianum sic imitatur: Ante omnia enim, inquit cap. 5, adv. Prax., Deus erat solus, ipse sibi et mundus et locus et omnia. Solus autem, quia nihil extrinsecus praeter illum. Caeterum ne tunc quidem solus; habebat enim secum, quam habebat in semetipso, rationem suam scilicet. Deum ergo Tertullianus solum non fuisse existimat ante mundi creationem, quia Verbum illius cum eo exsistebat, minime vero propter creaturas potentia in ipso exsistentes.

Ὑπέστησε ("sustained", "made to subsist"). This verb, wrongly rendered, has cast darkness on Tatian's meaning. For Gesner's translation reads: "But if you regard his power, in which all things visible and invisible consist, all things were with him. For in him, through the power of the Word, both he and the Word which was in him came to exist." Hence Tatian was accused of believing that the Word existed in the Father before the creation of the world not in act, as a person, but only in potency, along with other things. The new translation refutes an unjust charge. I have enclosed the words σὺν αὐτῷ γάρ in brackets and not rendered them in the Latin translation, because they seem to have been added by some copyist. For, first, the γάρ is missing in the Royal manuscripts, the English one and the Zurich edition; and if this little word was added by copyists, the same must be said of the words σὺν αὐτῷ, which are necessarily joined with it. Second, it is incongruous that God should be said not to have been alone because all things existed in him potentially. Third, Tertullian read the passage no otherwise, imitating Tatian thus: "For before all things," he says, Against Praxeas ch. 5, "God was alone, himself his own world and place and all things. Alone, however, because there was nothing outside him besides himself. Yet not even then was he alone; for he had with him that which he had in himself, namely his Reason." Tertullian therefore judges that God was not alone before the creation of the world because his Word existed with him, and by no means on account of creatures existing potentially in him.

(printed under page 437)

(44) ‹anchor: Οὐ κατὰ κενοῦ χωρήσας (read on the column image; above the foot images)› · call in col 815

Οὐ κατὰ κενοῦ χωρήσας. Verbum non progressum est in vacuum et inane, quia statim atque progressum est, mundus e nihilo eductus. In quo quidem significat Tatianus Verbum non esse rem inanimam, sive sonum inanem, sed personam omnibus Patris ideis, ejusque potentia et omnibus attributis instructam, qua progrediente non potuit effectio non consequi. Tatiani sensum egregie explicat Tertullianus dum ait: Quod est enim, dices, sermo, nisi vox et sonus oris, et, sicut grammatici tradunt, aer offensus, intelligibilis auditu, caeterum vacuum nescio quid et inane et incorporale. At ego nihil dico de Deo inane et vacuum prodire potuisse, ut non de inani et vacuo prolatum, nec carere substantia quod de tanta substantia processit, et tantas substantias fecit; fecit enim et ipse quae facta sunt per illum. Quale est ut nihil sit ipse sine quo nihil factum est; ut inanis solida et vacuus plena et incorporalis corporalia sit operatus. Tertull. cap. 5 adv. Prax.

Οὐ κατὰ κενοῦ χωρήσας ("not having gone forth into the void"). The Word did not go forth into the void and empty, because as soon as it went forth, the world was brought out of nothing. By this Tatian indeed signifies that the Word is not a lifeless thing, or an empty sound, but a person furnished with all the Father's ideas, and with his power and all his attributes, at whose going forth the effect could not fail to follow. Tertullian explains Tatian's sense excellently when he says: "For what, you will say, is speech but the voice and sound of the mouth, and, as the grammarians teach, struck air, intelligible to the hearing, but otherwise some void, empty and incorporeal thing? But I say that nothing empty and void could have come forth from God, since it was not uttered from what is empty and void; nor could that lack substance which proceeded from so great a substance and made such great substances; for he himself made the things that were made through him. How could he himself be nothing, without whom nothing was made, so that the empty made solid things, the void full things, and the incorporeal bodily things?" Tertullian, ch. 5 Against Praxeas.

(printed under page 438)

(45) ‹anchor: Ἔργον πρωτότοκον τοῦ Πατρός (read on the column image; above the foot images)› · call in col 815

Ἔργον πρωτότοκον τοῦ Πατρός. Sic Regius primus; editi τοῦ Πνεύματος, excepta tamen editione Frontonis Ducaei. Non verendum est ne Filium Dei in rebus creatis numeret Tatianus. Satis ejus aeternitati consulit, dum illud omnia ab aeterno sustentasse dicit, atque hanc generationem ad mundi creationem nihil aliud esse quam voluntariam administrationem. Aequalitatem et substantiae unitatem non minus aperte declarat, cum Verbum ait esse lumen de lumine accensum; ita tamen ut a Patre separari non possit. Verbum ergo vocatur opus, quia non in vacuum progressum est, sed statim atque prodiit, effectus consecutus est. Unde Philo lib. De sacrificiis Abel et Cain, p. 140: Ὁ γὰρ Θεὸς λέγων ἅμα ἐποίει, μηδὲν μεταξὺ ἀμφοῖν τιθείς· εἰ δὲ χρὴ δόγμα κινεῖν ἀληθέστερον, ὁ Λόγος ἔργον αὐτοῦ. Deus enim simul dicendo faciebat, nihil inter utrumque spatii interponens; vel si verior sententia proferenda, Verbum est opus ejus. Justinus Dialog. n. 114, contendit his in verbis: Videbo coelos tuos, opera digitorum tuorum, non aliam operationem intelligendam esse quam Verbum Dei. Sic etiam Tertullianus adv. Hermogen., c. 20: Sapientiam fuisse initium viarum, quia cogitatio et dispositio prima Sophiae fit operatio, de cogitatu viam operibus instituens. In quo quidem observandum est Verbum appellari opus, non solum quia Deus instrumentis non indiget ac dicendo operatur, sed etiam maxime quia per consubstantialem personam operatur, non per sonum evanescentem aut inanimam efficientiam. Hinc etiam vocatur opus primogenitum, quod de re inanima dici non posset, cui nec ideae mundi inessent, nec omnipotentia ad mundum creandum. Sed cum ideae, quae, ut pote aeternae, antiquiores sunt mundo, traditae Verbo fuerint; cumque exemplar mundi in hoc Verbo omnia sustentante descriptum fuerit, Verbum appellatur opus primogenitum Patris. Tota res illustratur his Philonis verbis ex libro De mundi opificio: Οὐδ' ὁ ἐκ τῶν ἰδεῶν κόσμος ἄλλον ἂν ἔχοι τόπον, ἢ τὸν θεῖον Λόγον τὸν ταῦτα διακοσμήσαντα... Εἰ δέ τις ἐθελήσειε γυμνοτέροις χρήσασθαι τοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οὐδὲν ἂν ἕτερον εἴποι τὸν νοητὸν εἶναι κόσμον, ἢ Θεοῦ Λόγον ἤδη κοσμοποιοῦντος. Neque ille ex ideis mundus alium habuerit locum, quam divinum Verbum, quod adornavit haec omnia... Quod si cui libeat apertioribus uti vocabulis, nihil aliud dixerit esse mundum intelligibilem, quam Verbum Dei mundum jam condentis.

Ἔργον πρωτότοκον τοῦ Πατρός ("the firstborn work of the Father"). So the first Royal manuscript; the printed editions have τοῦ Πνεύματος ("of the Spirit"), except, however, the edition of Fronton du Duc. There is no fear that Tatian counts the Son of God among created things. He has safeguarded his eternity well enough when he says that he sustained all things from eternity, and that this generation for the creation of the world is nothing other than a "voluntary undertaking of administration". He declares his equality and unity of substance no less plainly when he says that the Word is a light kindled from light, yet so that it cannot be separated from the Father. The Word is therefore called a work because "it did not go forth in vain", but as soon as it went forth it achieved its effect. Hence Philo, in the book On the Sacrifices of Abel and Cain, p. 140: "For God in speaking was at the same time making, setting nothing between the two; or, if one must put forward a truer doctrine, the Word is his work." Justin, Dialogue no. 114, contends that in the words "I will see your heavens, the works of your fingers" no other operation is to be understood than the Word of God. So too Tertullian, Against Hermogenes ch. 20: that Wisdom was the beginning of the ways, "because the first thought and disposition of Wisdom becomes operation, laying out from thought a way for the works". In this one must observe that the Word is called a work not only because God needs no instruments and operates by speaking, but most of all because he operates through a consubstantial person, not through a vanishing sound or a lifeless efficacy. Hence he is also called the firstborn work, which could not be said of a lifeless thing, in which neither the ideas of the world would reside nor the omnipotence to create the world. But since the ideas, which, being eternal, are older than the world, were handed over to the Word, and since the pattern of the world was drawn in this Word who sustains all things, the Word is called the firstborn work of the Father. The whole matter is illustrated by these words of Philo from the book On the Creation of the World: "Nor would the world made of the ideas have any other place than the divine Word that set all these in order... And if anyone should wish to use plainer terms, he would say that the intelligible world is nothing other than the Word of God already engaged in making the world."

(printed under page 438)

(46) ‹anchor: τὸ δὲ μερισθὲν (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 815

Τὸ δὲ μερισθὲν οἰκονομίας αἵρεσιν προσ- [the note goes on at the head of the right-hand note column, under col 816; its opening lines there lie above the foot images] ... etiam ipse sermo speciem et ornatum suum sumit, sonum et vocem, cum dicit Deus: « Fiat lux, » adv. Prax., c. 7. Idem paulo ante dicebat, nempe cap. 5: Rationalis enim Deus, et ratio in ipso prius; et ita ab ipso omnia. Quae ratio sensus ipsius est; hanc Graeci λόγον dicunt, quo vocabulo etiam sermonem appellamus. Ideoque jam in usu est nostrorum per simplicitatem interpretationis, sermonem dicere in primordio apud Deum fuisse, cum magis rationem competat antiquiorem haberi, quia non sermonalis a principio, sed rationalis Deus etiam ante principium; et quia ipse sermo ratione consistens, priorem eam ut substantiam suam ostendit. Tamen et sic nihil interest. Nam etsi Deus sermonem suum nondum miserat, proinde eum cum ipsa et in ipsa ratione intra semetipsum habebat, tacite cogitando et disponendo secum, quae per sermonem mox erat facturus. Subtilis illa ejusdem personae sub duobus nominibus consideratio non displicuit Augustino, qui in libro Quaestionum octoginta trium explicans illud Joannis: In principio erat Verbum. quaest. 63, sic loquitur: Hoc loco melius Verbum interpretamur, ut significetur non solum ad Patrem respectus, sed ad illa etiam, quae per Verbum facta sunt, operativa potentia. Ratio autem, etsi per eam nihil fiat, recte ratio dicitur. Huc ergo redit id quod Filio ad mundi creationem progredienti communicatum fuit a Patre, nempe species et ornatus, sonus et vox, ut ait Tertullianus, cujus verbis respondet apud Tatianum voluntariae administrationis susceptio. Subtili distinctione eadem persona nunc ratio, nunc Verbum dicitur; sed non magis in Filio suspicanda mutatio, quam in ipso Patre, qui non sermonalis a principio, sed rationalis etiam ante principium. Sed cur Tatianus, itidem ut Justinus, exemplo utitur facis de alia face accensae? Nonne id aptius quadraret cum aeterna generatione, in qua Deus totam suam Filio substantiam ita tradidit, ut ipse eam non amitteret, quemadmodum fax, ex qua aliae accenduntur, minime minuitur. 1° Jam observavimus ad Justini Dialog. n. 128, aeternam generationem et processionem ex temporaria progressione dijudicari. 2° Exemplum facis de alia accensae non idcirco adhibent Justinus et Tatianus, quod Filium Dei tunc lumen de lumine esse coepisse crediderint; sed (continues)

Τὸ δὲ μερισθὲν οἰκονομίας αἵρεσιν προσ[λαβόν] ("but that which is divided, having taken on the choice of an administration") [the note goes on at the head of the right-hand note column, under col 816; its opening lines there lie above the foot images] ... the word itself also takes on its form and adornment, sound and voice, when God says, "Let there be light", Against Praxeas ch. 7. The same author said a little before, namely in ch. 5: "For God is rational, and Reason was first in him, and so all things are from him. This Reason is his own mind; the Greeks call it λόγος, by which word we also mean 'speech'. And so it is now customary among our people, through simplicity of translation, to say that Speech was in the beginning with God, though it is more fitting to hold Reason to be the older, because God was not speaking from the beginning but was rational even before the beginning; and because Speech itself, consisting in Reason, shows Reason to be prior as its substance. Yet even so it makes no difference. For although God had not yet sent forth his Speech, he nonetheless had it within himself with and in his very Reason, silently thinking and arranging with himself what he was soon to make through his Speech." That subtle consideration of the same person under two names did not displease Augustine, who, explaining John's "In the beginning was the Word" in the book of Eighty-three Questions, question 63, speaks thus: "In this place we better translate 'Word', so that what is signified is not only the relation to the Father but also the operative power towards the things made through the Word. Reason, however, even if nothing is made through it, is rightly called reason." To this, then, comes what was communicated by the Father to the Son as he went forth for the creation of the world, namely form and adornment, sound and voice, as Tertullian says; and to his words corresponds, in Tatian, the taking up of the voluntary administration. By a subtle distinction the same person is now called Reason, now Word; but no more is change to be suspected in the Son than in the Father himself, who "was not speaking from the beginning, but was rational even before the beginning". But why does Tatian, like Justin, use the example of a torch lit from another torch? Would that not fit better with eternal generation, in which God so handed over his whole substance to the Son that he did not lose it, just as a torch from which others are lit is in no way diminished? First, we have already observed on Justin's Dialogue no. 128 that the eternal generation and procession are judged from the temporal going forth. Second, Justin and Tatian do not use the example of a torch lit from another because they believed that the Son of God then began to be light from light; but (continues)

(printed under page 438)

(47) ‹anchor: ἐνδεᾶ› · call in col 815

Ἐνδεᾶ. Reg. 2, ἐνδεῆ.

Ἐνδεᾶ ("lacking"). The second Royal manuscript has ἐνδεῆ.

(printed under page 438)

(continued; number not visible, the long note on the Word carried from page 438) ‹anchor: on the previous page› · call in col 818

(continued) sed in hoc tantum consistit comparatio, quod quemadmodum fax, ex qua aliae accenduntur, minime imminuitur, ita Patris substantia, Filio progrediente, minime divisa est, nec Verbum progrediens ex Patris potentia genitorem Verbi expertem fecit. Inde autem manifestum est, quam certa et explorata Justino et Tatiano fuerit unitas numerica substantiae in Patre et Filio. Nam cum lumen de alio lumine accensum separatim exsistat primo minime imminuto; cur Filius, qui lumen est de lumine, separari a Patre non posset quin divideretur et minueretur Patris substantia; cur istud, inquam, nisi quia una prorsus et singularis in Patre et Filio substantia? Eadem substantiae singularitas confirmatur exemplo humani λόγου quo Justinus et Tatianus utuntur.

(printed under page 439)

(48) ‹anchor: ἀντεγέννησε (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 818

Ἀντεγέννησε. Ex his confirmatur et explicatur quidquid antiqui scriptores de Verbi ad mundi creationem generatione dixerunt. Cum Filius omnes ideas Patris ac omnia attributa possideat, cumque mundi exemplar in Verbo descriptum fuerit, inter Verbi generationem illam, sive progressionem et mundi creationem necessaria intercessit connexio.

Ἀντεγέννησε ("begot in turn"). By this is confirmed and explained whatever the ancient writers said of the generation of the Word for the creation of the world. Since the Son possesses all the Father's ideas and all his attributes, and since the pattern of the world was drawn in the Word, there was a necessary connexion between that generation or going forth of the Word and the creation of the world.

(printed under page 439)

(49) ‹anchor: μεταῤῥυθμίζω› · call in col 818

Μεταῤῥυθμίζω. Reg. 2, Angl. et Tigur. μεταῤῥυθμίζων.

Μεταῤῥυθμίζω ("I reshape"). The second Royal, the English manuscript and the Zurich edition have μεταῤῥυθμίζων ("reshaping").

(printed under page 439)

(50) ‹anchor: ὁ Θεός› · call in col 818

Ὁ Θεός. Reg. 1, καὶ ὁ Θεός. Mox Ducaeus καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἄλλου.

Ὁ Θεός ("God"). The first Royal manuscript has καὶ ὁ Θεός ("and God"). Just after, du Duc has καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἄλλου ("and by the other").

(printed under page 439)

(51) ‹anchor: διὰ τοῦτο καὶ σωμάτων› · call in col 818

Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ σωμάτων. Non immerito Tatianus corporum resurrectionem ex materiae creatione consequi existimat. Nefarii enim haeretici, qui mundum a vero Deo creatum negabant, nihil etiam loci relinquebant corporum resurrectioni. At semel posito materiam a vero Deo creatam esse; non jam metuendum est ne corpus humanum restituere non possit. Gesnerus, omissa praepositione, legendum censet: Μόνων τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἔσεσθαι.

Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ σωμάτων ("for this reason also of bodies"). Not without reason does Tatian hold that the resurrection of bodies follows from the creation of matter. For the wicked heretics who denied that the world was created by the true God left no room either for the resurrection of bodies. But once it is laid down that matter was created by the true God, there is no longer any fear that he cannot restore the human body. Gesner, omitting the preposition, thinks one should read: "that the resurrection will be of men alone."

(printed under page 439)

(52) ‹anchor: χάριν κρίσεως› · call in col 818

Χάριν κρίσεως. Tertullianus Apolog., cap. 48: Certe quia ratio restitutionis destinatio judicii est, necessario idem ipse qui fuerat exhibebitur, ut boni seu contrarii meriti judicium a Deo referat. Ideoque repraesentabuntur et corpora. Vide infra Athenag. De resurrect.

Χάριν κρίσεως ("for the sake of judgement"). Tertullian, Apology ch. 48: "Surely, since the reason for the restoration is the appointment of judgement, the very same man who was will necessarily be produced, to receive from God the judgement of his good or contrary deserts. And therefore the bodies too will be brought back." See below Athenagoras, On the Resurrection.

(printed under page 439)

(53) ‹anchor: Ῥαδάμανθυς› · call in col 818

Ῥαδάμανθυς. Sic omnes codices mss. et editi. Legitur Ῥαδάμανθος in editione Oxoniensi.

Ῥαδάμανθυς (Rhadamanthys). So all the manuscripts and printed editions. Ῥαδάμανθος is read in the Oxford edition.

(printed under page 439)

(54) ‹anchor: πρὶν ἢ γενέσθαι› · call in col 818

Πρὶν ἢ γενέσθαι. Reg. 2, πρὶν γενέσθαι. Totum hoc argumentum mutuatus est Tatianus a magistro suo Justino, Apolog. I. Sic etiam Tertullianus loco modo laudato: Considera teipsum, o homo, et fidem rei invenies. Recogita quid fueris, antequam esses; utique nihil. Meminisses enim, si quid fuisses. Qui ergo nihil fueras priusquam esses, idem nihil factus cum esse desieris, cur non possis rursus esse de nihilo, ejusdem ipsius auctoris voluntate qui te voluit esse de nihilo? Quid novi tibi eveniet? Qui non eras, factus es; cum iterum non eris, fies. Redde, si potes, rationem qua factus es, et tunc require qua fies.

Πρὶν ἢ γενέσθαι ("before coming to be"). The second Royal manuscript has πρὶν γενέσθαι. Tatian borrowed this whole argument from his master Justin, Apology I. So too Tertullian, in the place just cited: "Consider yourself, O man, and you will find belief in the thing. Recall what you were before you existed: nothing, surely; for you would remember if you had been anything. You, then, who were nothing before you existed, and who will become nothing again when you cease to exist, why could you not exist again out of nothing, by the will of the same Author who willed you to exist out of nothing? What new thing will befall you? You who were not were made; when again you are not, you will be made. Give, if you can, the reason by which you were made, and then ask the reason by which you will be made."

(printed under page 439)

(55) ‹anchor: μὴ πάλαι (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 819

Μὴ πάλαι. Anglic. et Tigur. μὴ πάλιν.

Μὴ πάλαι ("not long ago"). The English manuscript and the Zurich edition have μὴ πάλιν ("not again").

(printed under page 440)

(56) ‹anchor: κἂν πῦρ ἐξαφανίσῃ μου τὸ σαρκίον› · call in col 819

Κἂν πῦρ ἐξαφανίσῃ μου τὸ σαρκίον. Sic Reg. 1 et Anglic. Editi ἐξαφανίσῃ πᾶν τὸ σαρκίον.

Κἂν πῦρ ἐξαφανίσῃ μου τὸ σαρκίον ("even if fire should destroy my poor flesh"). So the first Royal and the English manuscript. The printed editions have ἐξαφανίσῃ πᾶν τὸ σαρκίον ("should destroy all the flesh").

(printed under page 440)

(57) ‹anchor: Λόγος ἐκ τῆς λογικῆς δυνάμεως› · call in col 819

Λόγος ἐκ τῆς λογικῆς δυνάμεως. Potentia rationalis hoc loco non est vis productiva Verbi, ut editor Oxoniensis existimat; multo minus potestas creandi, ut placuit Petavio; sed idem est prorsus ac ipsum Verbum, quod Tatianus pro varia considerandi ratione nunc Verbum appellat, nunc λόγου δύναμιν et λογικὴν δύναμιν, Verbi sive rationis potentiam et rationalem potentiam. Dicebat antea n. 5: Deus erat in principio. Principium autem Λόγου δύναμιν, Verbi potentiam esse accepimus. Deus apte et recte dicitur esse in Filio, sive in Verbo suo. Nequaquam dicatur esse in vi productiva Verbi, aut in potentia creandi. Hoc ipso in loco, vel saltem non multo post ipsa Verbi persona bis appellatur Λόγου δύναμις. Sic etiam infra n. 18. Non aliud ergo discrimen inter Verbum et rationalem potentiam admittit Tatianus, quam inter Verbum et rationem Tertullianus et Augustinus, quorum testimonia modo retulimus.

Λόγος ἐκ τῆς λογικῆς δυνάμεως ("the Word from the rational power"). The rational power in this place is not the productive force of the Word, as the Oxford editor thinks, much less the power of creating, as Petau held; it is exactly the same as the Word himself, whom Tatian, according to the aspect under which he considers him, now calls Word, now λόγου δύναμις and λογικὴ δύναμις, "the power of the Word" or "of reason", and "rational power". He said earlier, in section 5: "God was in the beginning; and we have received that the beginning is the power of the Word." God is fitly and rightly said to be in the Son, that is, in his Word; he would by no means be said to be in the productive force of the Word, or in the power of creating. In this very place, or at least not much later, the very person of the Word is twice called λόγου δύναμις. So too below, section 18. Tatian therefore admits no other distinction between the Word and the rational power than Tertullian and Augustine admit between Word and Reason, whose testimonies we have just reported.

(printed under page 440)

(58) ‹anchor: Πατρός› · call in col 819

Πατρός. Deest in Reg. 2.

Πατρός ("of the Father"). It is missing in the second Royal manuscript.

(printed under page 440)

(59) ‹anchor: εἰκόνα τῆς ἀθανασίας› · call in col 819

Εἰκόνα τῆς ἀθανασίας. S. Clemens Strom. VI, p. 663, Tatianum, ut saepe alias, imitatur. Ait enim: Ὁ Θεὸς ἔκτισε τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐπὶ ἀφθαρσίᾳ, καὶ εἰκόνα τῆς ἰδίας ἰδιότητος ἐποίησεν αὐτόν. Legendum ἀϊδιότητος.

Εἰκόνα τῆς ἀθανασίας ("an image of immortality"). St Clement, Stromata VI, p. 663, imitates Tatian here as often elsewhere. For he says: "God created man for incorruption, and made him an image of his own ἰδιότης." Read ἀϊδιότητος ("eternity").

(printed under page 440)

(60) ‹anchor: Θεοῦ μοῖραν› · call in col 819

Θεοῦ μοῖραν. Reg. 2: Θεοῦ μοίρας. Dei portionem Tatianus non animam humanam appellat, ut sibi editor Oxoniensis finxit, sed Spiritum sanctum, a quo animam accipere immortalitatem declarat. Eodem sensu Filius apud Tertullianum adv. Prax., c. 9, dicitur derivatio totius et portio.

Θεοῦ μοῖραν ("a portion of God"). The second Royal manuscript has Θεοῦ μοίρας. By "a portion of God" Tatian does not mean the human soul, as the Oxford editor imagined, but the Holy Spirit, from whom, he declares, the soul receives immortality. In the same sense the Son is said in Tertullian, Against Praxeas ch. 9, to be "a derivation and portion of the whole".

(printed under page 440)

(61) ‹anchor: ὃ πλὴν μόνον παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ› · call in col 819

Ὃ πλὴν μόνον παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ. Ita 1 Reg. et Ducaeus. At Reg. 2, Angl. et Tigur. habent ὅπλην. Deest ὅ in editt. Paris. Legitur ad marginem Regii secundi ὅπερ μόνῳ πάρεστι τῷ Θεῷ, quod idem valet.

Ὃ πλὴν μόνον παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ ("which [is] only with God"). So the first Royal and du Duc. But the second Royal, the English manuscript and the Zurich edition have ὅπλην. The ὅ is missing in the Paris editions. In the margin of the second Royal is read ὅπερ μόνῳ πάρεστι τῷ Θεῷ ("which belongs to God alone"), which comes to the same.

(printed under page 440)

(62) ‹anchor: τὸ μέλλον› · call in col 819

Τὸ μέλλον. Melius τοῦ μέλλοντος, ut observat Anglus editor. Mox legendum videtur αὐτεξουσίῳ γνώμῃ.

Τὸ μέλλον ("the future"). Better τοῦ μέλλοντος, as the English editor observes. Just after, αὐτεξουσίῳ γνώμῃ ("by free choice") seems to be the right reading.

(printed under page 440)

(63) ‹anchor: διὰ τὸ πρωτόγονον› · call in col 819

Τὸ πρωτόγονον. Ad verbum, ob primogenituram; Gesnerus, utpote provectiorem aetate. Manifestum est Tatianum de eo loqui, quem mox primogenitum appellat, nempe de diabolo. Non ideo tamen ita appellat, ut nonnulli opinati sunt, quod angelos ante homines creatos crederet, sed respicit ad haec verba Scripturae, quae de diabolo antiqui scriptores intelligunt: Τουτέστιν ἀρχὴ πλάσματος Κυρίου, Job. XL, 14.

Τὸ πρωτόγονον ("being first-born"). Word for word, "on account of his primogeniture"; Gesner has "as being more advanced in age". It is plain that Tatian is speaking of the one he presently calls the first-born, namely the devil. Yet he does not call him so, as some have supposed, because he believed the angels were created before men; he has in view these words of Scripture, which the ancient writers understand of the devil: "This is the beginning of the Lord's handiwork," Job 40:14.

(printed under page 440)

(64) ‹anchor: καὶ Θεὸν ἀνέδειξαν (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 822

Καὶ Θεὸν ἀνέδειξαν. De Adamo et Eva haec intelligenda non puto, qui serpentem quidem secuti sunt, sed eum tamen pro Deo non habuerunt. At utrumque convenit, ut observavimus ad Cohort. Justini, n. 21; iis, qui deorum cultum primi induxerunt. Hi enim non solum primogenitum illum angelum pro Deo habuere, sed etiam, ob acceptam ab Adamo et Eva haereditatem peccati, non immerito dici possunt et a serpente decepti fuisse et a Verbo ejecti paradiso. Unde Tatianus de omnibus hominibus ait n. 11: Non facti sumus ut moreremur; sed nostra culpa morimur. Perdidit nos libera voluntas; servi facti sumus qui liberi eramus.

Καὶ Θεὸν ἀνέδειξαν ("and they declared him a god"). I do not think this is to be understood of Adam and Eve, who did follow the serpent but did not hold him for a god. But both things fit, as we observed on Justin's Exhortation, no. 21, those who first brought in the worship of gods. For these not only held that first-born angel for a god, but also, because of the inheritance of sin received from Adam and Eve, can not unfittingly be said both to have been deceived by the serpent and to have been cast out of paradise by the Word. Hence Tatian says of all men in section 11: "We were not made to die; we die by our own fault. Free will destroyed us; we who were free became slaves."

(printed under page 441)

(65) ‹anchor: καὶ τὸν ἐπανιστάμενον› · call in col 822

Καὶ τὸν ἐπανιστάμενον. Deest καί in codice Anglicano.

Καὶ τὸν ἐπανιστάμενον ("and the one who rose up against"). The καί is missing in the English manuscript.

(printed under page 441)

(66) ‹anchor: καὶ οἱ μιμησάμενοι› · call in col 822

Καὶ οἱ μιμησάμενοι. Corruptus hic locus in tribus mss. et edit. Tigur. ubi sic legitur: Καὶ τοῦτον (Angl., Tigur. τούτων) οἱ μιμησάμενοι τούτου τά, etc. Paulo ante mallem legere καὶ ἀπόνοιαν.

Καὶ οἱ μιμησάμενοι ("and those who imitated"). This passage is corrupt in three manuscripts and the Zurich edition, where it reads: Καὶ τοῦτον (the English manuscript and Zurich, τούτων) οἱ μιμησάμενοι τούτου τά, etc. A little before I would rather read καὶ ἀπόνοιαν ("and madness").

(printed under page 441)

(67) ‹anchor: ὑπόθεσις› · call in col 822

Ὑπόθεσις. Eadem habes apud Justinum Dialog. n. 124. Sic etiam Irenaeus lib. III, c. 33, n. 8: Serpens initium et materiam apostasiae suae habens hominem, et lib. V, c. 24, n. 4: Invidens homini apostata a divina factus est lege. Idem docent Tertullianus lib. De pat. c. 5, et Cyprianus in libro De zelo et livore, ac alii plures. Non invidiam hoc loco commemorat Tatianus, sed, quod ex invidiae fonte profluxit, astrologiae inventionem ad hominum videlicet perniciem. Superbiam et affectatam divinitatem eis exprobrat n. 9 et 12. In quo quidem observandum est, peccatis malorum angelorum, quae antiqui scriptores cum hominibus aut in homines commissa enumerant, videri praeivisse peccatum superbiae. Nam Tatianus, qui homines materiam fuisse defectionis angelorum asseverat, paulo ante dicebat: Postquam autem homines unum aliquem praeter caeteros, propterea quod primogenitus erat, astutiorem assectati sunt, etc. Non videtur haec astutia nisi spiritui perverso et a prima sanctitate in vitium delapso congruere. Sic etiam Basilius, qui diabolum invidia lapsum esse docet in orationibus de invidia et de humilitate, non solum in oratione habita in Lacizis, qnae ob styli dissimilitudinem dubia est, invidiae superbiam praeivisse docet; sed etiam in commentario in Isaiam prophetam, quem Basilii esse multis rationibus probavimus in Vit. Basil. ait: Fortasse, antequam homo crearetur, loci aliquid etiam diaboli poenitentiae relictum fuisse. Τάχα γὰρ πρὸ τοῦ κτισθῆναι τὸν ἄνθρωπον τόπος μετανοίας καὶ τῷ διαβόλῳ ὑπελείπετο. Minus sane probabilis haec conjectura, sed tamen eam Cassianus ascivit in collationem 8, c. 10.

Ὑπόθεσις ("occasion", "ground"). You have the same in Justin, Dialogue no. 124. So too Irenaeus, book III, ch. 33, no. 8: "The serpent, having man as the beginning and matter of his apostasy," and book V, ch. 24, no. 4: "Envying man, he became an apostate from the divine law." Tertullian teaches the same in the book On Patience, ch. 5, and Cyprian in the book On Jealousy and Envy, and many others. Tatian does not here mention envy, but what flowed from the spring of envy, the invention of astrology, plainly for men's ruin. He reproaches them with pride and an affected divinity in sections 9 and 12. In this it should be observed that the sin of pride seems to have gone before the sins of the wicked angels which the ancient writers list as committed with men or against men. For Tatian, who asserts that men were the occasion of the angels' defection, said a little before: "But after men had followed one more cunning than the rest because he was the first-born," etc. This cunning seems to fit only a perverse spirit fallen from its first holiness into vice. So too Basil, who teaches in his orations on envy and on humility that the devil fell through envy, teaches that pride went before envy not only in the oration delivered at Lacizi, which is doubtful because of the dissimilarity of style, but also in the commentary on the prophet Isaiah, which we proved to be Basil's by many arguments in the Life of Basil; he says: "Perhaps, before man was created, some room for repentance was left even to the devil." This conjecture is indeed less probable, but Cassian nevertheless adopted it in Conference 8, ch. 10.

(printed under page 441)

(68) ‹anchor: τῆς ἀστροθεσίας› · call in col 822

Τῆς ἀστροθεσίας. Astrologiam homines a daemonibus edoctos fuisse declarat Tertullianus De idololatria, c. 9.

Τῆς ἀστροθεσίας ("of the arrangement of the stars"). Tertullian declares in On Idolatry, ch. 9, that men were taught astrology by the demons.

(printed under page 441)

(69) ‹anchor: πᾶσά τε γένεσις› · call in col 822

Πᾶσά τε γένεσις. Hac voce non designatur mundi inferioris natura, sed tota illa, ut vocant astrologi, genitura, quae ex tabula positionis siderum constituitur. Hinc ait Tatianus num. 9, iracundum et laboriosum, temperantem et intemperantem, ab iisdem geniturae gubernatoribus tales exstitisse. Et n. 11: Πῶς οὖν γένεσιν τὴν καθ' εἱμαρμένην ἀποδέξομαι;

Πᾶσά τε γένεσις ("and every nativity"). This word does not denote "the nature of the lower world", but that whole nativity, as the astrologers call it, which is constructed from the chart of the positions of the stars. Hence Tatian says in section 9 that the irascible and the toiling, the temperate and the intemperate, "have become such by the same governors of the nativity". And in section 11: "How then shall I accept a nativity governed by fate?"

(printed under page 441)

(70) ‹anchor: ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ› · call in col 822

Ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ. Clemens Alexandrinus eos, qui deorum nuptias et liberorum procreationes et adulteria et convivia et risus induxerunt, sic compellat: Οἴμοι τῆς ἀθεότητος! σκηνὴν πεποιήκατε τὸν οὐρανόν. O impietatem! scenam fecistis coelum. Protrept.

Ὥσπερ ἐν θεάτρῳ ("as in a theatre"). Clement of Alexandria addresses thus those who brought in "the marriages of the gods, their begetting of children, adulteries, banquets and laughter": "Alas for the godlessness! You have made heaven a stage." Protrepticus.

(printed under page 441)

(71) ‹anchor: τούτοις› · call in col 822

Τούτοις. Cod. Fris. τοῖς τοιούτοις.

Τούτοις ("to these"). The Frisius manuscript has τοῖς τοιούτοις ("to such as these").

(printed under page 441)

(72) ‹anchor: καὶ ὁ γαμῶν› · call in col 822

Ὁ γαμῶν. Existimat vir doctissimus (not. in S. Joan. Damasc. lib. De haeres.) matrimonium a Tatiano vituperari, eumque jam tum ad haeresim inclinasse, cum haec scriberet. Sed si Tatianus matrimonium in diis exagitat, num idcirco illud in hominibus exagitasse et impermissum dixisse videbitur? Imitatur hunc locum Clemens Alexandrinus, ut in nota praecedenti vidimus, nec veretur matrimonium in diis eodem modo ac Tatianus explodere. Idem in alio ejusdem operis loco sic loquitur p. 23: Ἀνάγκη τοίνυν θεραπείας καὶ τροφῆς παρεισάμενος αὐτοῖς, ὧν εἰσιν ἐνδεεῖς. Διὸ τράπεζαι καὶ μέθαι καὶ γέλωτες καὶ συνουσίαι· οὐκ ἂν ἀφροδισίοις χρωμένων ἀνθρώπων, οὐδὲ παιδοποιουμένων, οὐδὲ μὴν ὑπνωσσόντων, εἰ ἀθάνατοι καὶ (continues)

Ὁ γαμῶν ("he who marries"). A most learned man (in his notes on St John Damascene's book On Heresies) thinks that marriage is censured by Tatian, and that he was already inclining to heresy when he wrote this. But if Tatian attacks marriage among the gods, will he therefore seem to have attacked it among men and called it forbidden? Clement of Alexandria imitates this passage, as we saw in the preceding note, and does not hesitate to hoot down marriage among the gods in the same way as Tatian. In another place of the same work, p. 23, he speaks thus: "Necessity has brought in upon them care and food, which they lack. Hence tables and drinking-bouts and laughter and intercourse; men would not use the pleasures of love, nor beget children, nor indeed sleep, if they were immortal and (continues)

(printed under page 441)

(73) ‹anchor: πῶς οὐχὶ θνητός (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 823

Πῶς οὐχὶ θνητός. De daemonibus, qui sub deorum nominibus colebantur, quaerit Tatianus, quomodo non existimentur mortales; non quod eos mortales crederet, sed quia illos per totam vitam mori, ut ait n. 14, ac toties mori putabat, quoties sectatores suos ad peccandum erudiunt.

Πῶς οὐχὶ θνητός ("how is he not mortal?"). Tatian asks of the demons who were worshipped under the names of gods how they are not reckoned mortal; not that he believed them mortal, but because he thought that they "die through their whole life", as he says in section 14, "and die as often as they train their followers to sin".

(printed under page 442)

(74) ‹anchor: Ῥέαν μὲν γὰρ νενομοθετηκέναι› · call in col 823

Ῥέαν μὲν γὰρ νενομοθετηκέναι. Hunc locum repraesentandum duxi, ut habetur in codicibus mss. et edit. Tigurina, excepto tamen quod interpunctionem mutaverim et Verbum φασίν referam ad Ῥέαν, cum antea referretur ad Κυβέλην. Facilius est supplere verbum καλοῦσι. Editiones Parisienses et Oxon. habent Ῥέαν νενομοθέτηκε, Ducaeus Ῥέα.

Ῥέαν μὲν γὰρ νενομοθετηκέναι ("that Rhea has laid down the law"). I have thought fit to give this passage as it stands in the manuscripts and the Zurich edition, except that I have changed the punctuation and refer the verb φασίν ("they say") to Ῥέαν, whereas before it was referred to Κυβέλην. It is easier to supply the verb καλοῦσι ("they call"). The Paris and Oxford editions have Ῥέαν νενομοθέτηκε; du Duc, Ῥέα.

(printed under page 442)

(75) ‹anchor: ταύτης Ἄττιν› · call in col 823

Ταύτης Ἄττιν. Frisii codex ad marg. αὐτῆς, Gesnerus legendum conjicit Ἄτην.

Ταύτης Ἄττιν ("her Attis"). The Frisius manuscript has αὐτῆς in the margin; Gesner conjectures that Ἄτην should be read.

(printed under page 442)

(76) ‹anchor: ταύτην μοι› · call in col 823

Ταύτην μοι. Sic Reg. 2. Sic etiam ad marginem Anglic. et Reg. 2, qui cum Tigur. habent in textu ταύτην μή. Editi ταύτην ἤ.

Ταύτην μοι ("this one, for me"). So the second Royal manuscript. So too in the margin of the English manuscript and the second Royal, which with the Zurich edition have ταύτην μή in the text. The printed editions have ταύτην ἤ.

(printed under page 442)

(77) ‹anchor: τῆς ἀνδρείας› · call in col 823

Τῆς ἀνδρείας. Legendum ἁγνείας suspicatur auctor editionis Oxon. At ea vox omnino retinenda. Proprium enim est Minervae τὸ ἀνδρικόν, ut ait Justinus in orat. adv. Graec., n. 2, ut quae nihil prorsus muliebre perageret. Quamobrem si ei Vulcanus virginitatem eripuisset, simul eam virilitate illa spoliasset.

Τῆς ἀνδρείας ("of her manliness"). The author of the Oxford edition suspects that ἁγνείας ("chastity") should be read. But that word must certainly be kept. For manliness is proper to Minerva, as Justin says in the Oration against the Greeks, no. 2, since she did nothing at all womanly. Therefore if Vulcan had robbed her of her virginity, he would at the same time have stripped her of that manliness.

(printed under page 442)

(78) ‹anchor: γναμπτὰς› · call in col 823

Γναμπτάς. Regii et Angl. γνάπτας. Sic habent Homeri versus Il. E, v. 401: Πόρπας τε γναμπτὰς θ' ἕλικας κάλυκάς τε καὶ ὅρμους. Hunc puellarem mundum Vulcanus Iliad. 18, per novem annos apud Eurynomen nympham et Thetyn fabricasse se dicit. GESNER.

Γναμπτάς ("curved"). The Royal and English manuscripts have γνάπτας. So runs Homer's line, Iliad E, line 401: "brooches and curved spirals, rosettes and necklaces." In Iliad 18 Vulcan says that he made this girlish finery for nine years in the house of the nymph Eurynome and of Thetis. GESNER.

(printed under page 442)

(79) ‹anchor: τυραννοκτονεῖ› · call in col 823

Τυραννοκτονεῖ. Frustra eruditi viri illud τυραννοκτονεῖ idem esse putant ac tyrannice occidit, ob filios videlicet a Saturno immaniter voratos. Cum enim hanc interpretationem vox Graeca non patitur; tum vero quid vetat Saturnum tyrannicidam dici ob Patrem solio deturbatum, virilibus exsectis. Auctorem hujus interpretationis habeo Gregorium Naz. qui Jovem exemplo patris tyrannicidam esse pronuntiat, quia quemadmodum patrem Saturnus, ita Saturnum Jupiter regno dejecit. Locus exstat orat. 3, p. 107, ubi sic loquitur Gregorius: Πῶς δὲ οὐ πείσει Κρόνος Οὐρανὸν ἐκτεμών, ἵνα ἄγονος ᾖ θεῶν καὶ δῷ κύμασιν ἀποτελέσαι θεὸν ἀφροῦ γέννημα, καὶ Κρόνῳ Ζεὺς ἐπανιστάμενος κατὰ μίμησιν τοῦ πατρός, ὁ γλυκὺς λίθος καὶ πικρὸς τυραννοκτόνος. Quidni autem hoc persuadeat (reverentiam erga parentes) Saturnus Coelo genitales partes amputans, ne deos gignat, verum hoc fluctibus det, ut deam spumae fetum efficiant; et Jupiter adversus Saturnum Patris exemplo insurgens, dulcis, inquam, ille lapis et saevus tyrannicida.

Τυραννοκτονεῖ ("he slays a tyrant"). Learned men wrongly think that τυραννοκτονεῖ means the same as "he slew tyrannically", namely because of the children cruelly devoured by Saturn. For the Greek word does not admit this interpretation; and what forbids Saturn being called a tyrant-slayer for having thrown his father from the throne after cutting off his genitals? I have Gregory Nazianzen as authority for this interpretation, who declares Jupiter a tyrant-slayer after his father's example, because as Saturn cast his father from the kingdom, so Jupiter cast out Saturn. The passage is in oration 3, p. 107, where Gregory speaks thus: "And how will Cronus not persuade [men to it], cutting off Uranus so that he should beget no gods, and giving it to the waves to bring to birth a goddess, offspring of foam; and Zeus rising against Cronus in imitation of his father, that sweet stone and bitter tyrant-slayer?"

(printed under page 442)

(80) ‹anchor: θύρας δ' ἐπίθεσθε βεβήλοις› · call in col 823

Βεβήλοις. Sic uterque Regius et Anglicanus cum Tigurina editione. Aliae editiones βέβηλοι, quam scripturam vitio non carere probavimus, Cohort. S. Justini, n. 14.

Βεβήλοις ("to the profane"). So both Royal manuscripts and the English one with the Zurich edition. The other editions have βέβηλοι ("you profane"), a reading we have shown not to be free of fault, on St Justin's Exhortation, no. 14.

(printed under page 442)

(81) ‹anchor: διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 826

Διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους. Ducaeus vertendum existimavit, propter Athenienses. Sed minus animadvertit stylum Tatiani, qui paulo ante dicebat, διὰ τὸν Μελέαγρον, per Meleagrum, διὰ τὸν Ἥφαιστον, per Vulcanum. Difficilis locus mutata interpunctione enitescit. Antea scriptum erat: διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἐν τῷ τεμένει τοῦ Λητοΐδου καλεῖται, etc. Ex quo tenebrae et iis quae praecedunt, et iis quae sequuntur injectae. Nunc utraque facilius explicabimus. Ait Tatianus: Ceres filiam luget et nonnulli per Athenienses decipiuntur, quia videlicet ex illo Cereris luctu originem mysteriorum repetebant, et quos his mysteriis initiabant, iis multa quidem bona et, ut ait Cicero II, De legibus, n. 14, spem meliorem moriendi promittebant: sed eos decipi pronuntiat Tatianus, quibus inanissimae illae spes illudebant.

Διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ("through the Athenians"). Du Duc thought it should be translated "on account of the Athenians". But he paid too little attention to Tatian's style, who said a little before διὰ τὸν Μελέαγρον, "through Meleager", διὰ τὸν Ἥφαιστον, "through Vulcan". The difficult passage becomes clear once the punctuation is changed. Before, it was written: διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἐν τῷ τεμένει τοῦ Λητοΐδου καλεῖται, etc., which cast darkness both on what precedes and on what follows. Now we shall explain both more easily. Tatian says: "Ceres mourns her daughter, and some are deceived through the Athenians," because, that is, they traced the origin of the mysteries back to that mourning of Ceres, and to those whom they initiated into these mysteries they promised many good things and, as Cicero says, On the Laws II, no. 14, a better hope in dying; but Tatian declares that those whom these most empty hopes mocked were deceived.

(printed under page 443)

(82) ‹anchor: ὀμφαλός› · call in col 826

Ὀμφαλός. Non Delphos ita appellat Tatianus, sed locum in Apollinis templo ubi sepultus erat Bacchus.

Ὀμφαλός ("navel"). Tatian does not give this name to Delphi, but to the place in Apollo's temple where Bacchus had been buried.

(printed under page 443)

(83) ‹anchor: καὶ τὴν ἄλογον› · call in col 826

Καὶ τὴν ἄλογον. Non id dicit Tatianus, quod eum dixisse existimarunt interpretes, vitae deteriori laudem conciliari, dum coelo consecrantur qui male vixerunt. Sed daemones per siderum positionem perfecisse dicit, ut vita a ratione aliena rationi consentanea videretur; quia scilicet per tabulam positionis siderum fatum induxerunt, et sive quis virtutem colat, sive vitiosus sit, ab iisdem geniturae gubernatoribus talis exstitit, non propria voluntate. Similia habemus paulo ante n. 8. Supra legendum videtur: Ἢ τὴν ἀκρασίαν τοῦ Ἀπόλ.

Καὶ τὴν ἄλογον ("and the irrational [life]"). Tatian does not say what the translators thought he said, that praise is won for the worse life when those who lived badly are consecrated in heaven. He says that the demons brought it about "through the position of the stars" that a life estranged from reason should seem agreeable to reason; because, namely, by the chart of the stars' positions they brought in fate, and whether a man practises virtue or is vicious, he became such "by the same governors of the nativity", not by his own will. We have similar things a little before, in section 8. Above, it seems one should read: Ἢ τὴν ἀκρασίαν τοῦ Ἀπόλ[λωνος] ("or Apollo's incontinence").

(printed under page 443)

(84) ‹anchor: ἀπ' αὐτῶν› · call in col 826

Ἀπ' αὐτῶν. Sic Reg. 1. Editi ἐπ' αὐτῶν. Mox Reg. 2 et Angl. cum Tigur. ὀνομαθετησάντων τὴν γένεσιν. Gesnerus addendum putat καὶ ὁ πλουτῶν. Paulo post lege ὁ νικώμενος νῦν εἰσαῦθις.

Ἀπ' αὐτῶν ("from them"). So the first Royal manuscript. The printed editions have ἐπ' αὐτῶν. Just after, the second Royal and the English manuscript with the Zurich edition have ὀνομαθετησάντων τὴν γένεσιν ("who named the nativity"). Gesner thinks καὶ ὁ πλουτῶν ("and the rich man") should be added. A little after, read ὁ νικώμενος νῦν εἰσαῦθις ("he who is now beaten, another time").

(printed under page 443)

(85) ‹anchor: γελοῖον εἶναι› · call in col 826

Εἶναι. Deest in Reg. 2 et Angl.

Εἶναι ("to be"). It is missing in the second Royal and the English manuscript.

(printed under page 443)

(86) ‹anchor: ἀστροθετούμενον› · call in col 826

Ἀστροθετούμενον. Reg. 2, ἀστροθετευόμενον. Ad hunc locum exstat hoc scholium in marg. (continues)

Ἀστροθετούμενον ("set among the stars"). The second Royal manuscript has ἀστροθετευόμενον. At this place the following scholium stands in the margin (continues)

(printed under page 443)

(87) ‹anchor: βασιλείας (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 827

Βασιλείας. Hunc locum illustrat Gesnerus petita ex nugis astrologorum observatione. Si geniturae gubernaculum accipienti Saturno, inquit Pontanus lib. VIII, cap. 2, de rebus coelestibus, opportunoque in loco collocato, opportuno etiam ac felici e loco beneficae stellae suffragium contulerint, sitque diurna genitura; natus ille futurus est nobilis, praeclarisque in actionibus ac negotiis versabitur, honores, dignitates, magistratusque consecuturus, quos signa, loca, signorumque ipsorum domini, eorumque configurationes pollicebuntur.

Βασιλείας ("of kingship"). Gesner illustrates this passage with an observation drawn from the trifles of the astrologers. "If," says Pontano in book VIII, ch. 2, On Celestial Things, "when Saturn takes the helm of the nativity and is placed in a favourable position, the beneficent stars lend their support from a favourable and fortunate position too, and the nativity is diurnal, the child will be noble and will be engaged in distinguished actions and affairs, and will attain the honours, dignities and magistracies that the signs, the places, the lords of the signs themselves and their configurations promise."

(printed under page 444)

(88) ‹anchor: σχηματουργία› · call in col 827

Σχηματουργία. Legendum Σχηματουργίαι.

Σχηματουργία ("figure-making"). Read the plural Σχηματουργίαι.

(printed under page 444)

(89) ‹anchor: παρανομήσητε› · call in col 827

Παρανομήσητε. Reg. 1 et Angl. παρανομίσητε.

Παρανομήσητε ("you should transgress"). The first Royal and the English manuscript have παρανομίσητε.

(printed under page 444)

(90) ‹anchor: ἂν μὴ λάβωσιν› · call in col 827

Ἂν μὴ λάβωσιν. Reg. 1 ἂν λάβωσιν, et supra lineam μή.

Ἂν μὴ λάβωσιν ("unless they receive"). The first Royal manuscript has ἂν λάβωσιν, with μή above the line.

(printed under page 444)

(91) ‹anchor: εἰ μή› · call in col 827

Εἰ μή. Ita Reg. uterque, Angl., Tigur. et Fronto Ducaeus. Sed legendum videtur εἰ μή τις. Aliae editiones εἰ μὴ καί.

Εἰ μή ("unless"). So both Royal manuscripts, the English one, the Zurich edition and Fronton du Duc. But εἰ μή τις ("unless someone") seems to be the right reading. The other editions have εἰ μὴ καί.

(printed under page 444)

(92) ‹anchor: μισθοῦ δι' ἐπιορκίας› · call in col 827

Μισθοῦ δι' ἐπιορκίας. Sic Reg. uterque cum Anglicano. Editi μισθοῦ ἢ δι' ἐπιορκίας. Ope parenthesis spero me lucem loco difficillimo attulisse. Ibidem Grabius Not. in Apol. Justini n. 21, legendum putat θεοὺς καταγγέλλων.

Μισθοῦ δι' ἐπιορκίας ("for pay, through perjury"). So both Royal manuscripts with the English one. The printed editions have μισθοῦ ἢ δι' ἐπιορκίας ("for pay or through perjury"). By means of a parenthesis I hope I have brought light to a most difficult passage. In the same place Grabe, in his notes on Justin's Apology, no. 21, thinks θεοὺς καταγγέλλων ("proclaiming gods") should be read.

(printed under page 444)

(93) ‹anchor: θεολογήσας› · call in col 827

Θεολογήσας. Sic Reg. uterque; editi θεολογῆσαι. Fronto Ducaeus κατὰ τὸν Ὅμηρον θεολογῆσαι. Legendum videtur κατὰ τὸ ὅμοιον.

Θεολογήσας ("having deified"). So both Royal manuscripts; the printed editions have θεολογῆσαι. Fronton du Duc has κατὰ τὸν Ὅμηρον θεολογῆσαι ("to deify after Homer's manner"). It seems κατὰ τὸ ὅμοιον ("in like manner") should be read.

(printed under page 444)

(94) ‹anchor: σεσυλήκατε› · call in col 827

Τί μοι τὸν Θεὸν σεσυλήκατε; nempe illius nomen et cultum in res creatas transferendo. Infra n. 12 daemones vocantur λῃσταὶ θεότητος, latrones divinitatis.

Τί μοι τὸν Θεὸν σεσυλήκατε; ("Why have you robbed God?"), namely by transferring his name and worship to created things. Below, in section 12, the demons are called "robbers of the Godhead".

(printed under page 444)

(95) ‹anchor: προσκυνεῖς› · call in col 827

Προσκυνεῖς. Fronto Ducaeus καὶ προσκυνεῖς. Vid. Apol. I Justini n. 24. Praeclare S. Clemens Strom. p. 635: Καὶ τὰ ἴδια βρώματα βροτοῖς, θύματα θύουσι καὶ νεκρὰ νεκροῖς προσφέροντες, ὡς θεοῖς, ἀχαριστοῦσι τῷ Θεῷ. Legendum videtur βρώματα βρωτοῖς, θύματα θύμασι vel θύεσι, cibos cibis, victimas victimis offerentes.

Προσκυνεῖς ("you worship"). Fronton du Duc has καὶ προσκυνεῖς. See Justin's Apology I, no. 24. St Clement says admirably, Stromata p. 635: "And they sacrifice their own food as victims to mortals, and offering dead things to the dead as to gods, they are ungrateful to God." It seems one should read βρώματα βρωτοῖς, θύματα θύμασι or θύεσι: "offering food to food, victims to victims".

(printed under page 444)

(96) ‹anchor: ὁ Ἐγγόνασι› · call in col 827

Ἐγγόνασι. Fronto ἐνγόνασις. Ibidem Reg. 2 et Angl. θλίβει. Engonasin signum in coelo est, quod Latine Ingeniculus vocatur, et est Hercules, qui dextro genu nixus sinistro pede capitis draconis dextram partem opprimere conatur. GESNERUS.

Ἐγγόνασι ("the Kneeler"). Fronton has ἐνγόνασις. In the same place the second Royal and the English manuscript have θλίβει ("crushes"). The Engonasin is a constellation, called in Latin Ingeniculus ("the Kneeler"); it is Hercules, who, resting on his right knee, tries to crush the right side of the dragon's head with his left foot. GESNER.

(printed under page 444)

(97) ‹anchor: δίκαιος καὶ σώφρων› · call in col 827

Δίκαιος καὶ σώφρων. Haec de Sophrone accipio, insigni scriptore et statuario, non de probo et honesto viro.

Δίκαιος καὶ σώφρων ("just and temperate"). I take these words of Sophron, the distinguished writer and statuary, not of an upright and honest man.

(printed under page 444)

(98) ‹anchor: ὑπὸ Ὀρέστου (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 830

Ὑπὸ Ὀρέστου. Angl. ἀπὸ Ὀρέστου. Non de Helena haec dicta, sed de Clytaemnestra editor Oxoniensis existimavit.

Ὑπὸ Ὀρέστου ("by Orestes"). The English manuscript has ἀπὸ Ὀρέστου. The Oxford editor judged that these words are said not of Helen but of Clytemnestra.

(printed under page 445)

(99) ‹anchor: δοξομανίας› · call in col 830

Δοξομανίας. Sic mss. codd. et Fronto Ducaeus. Aliae editiones δοξημανίας.

Δοξομανίας ("of mad love of glory"). So the manuscripts and Fronton du Duc. The other editions have δοξημανίας.

(printed under page 445)

(1) ‹anchor: καὶ δι' ἀξιοπιστίας ... γίνονται› · call in col 830

Καὶ δι' ἀξιοπιστίας... γίνονται. Legendum videtur κἂν δι' ἀξιοπιστίας... γίνωνται.

Καὶ δι' ἀξιοπιστίας... γίνονται ("and through credit... they become"). It seems one should read κἂν δι' ἀξιοπιστίας... γίνωνται ("even if through credit... they become").

(printed under page 445)

(2) ‹anchor: τί μοι... τί δή μοι› · call in col 830

Τί μοι... τί δή μοι. Sic tres mss. codices et editio Tigurina. Parisienses τί μή... τί δὲ μή.

Τί μοι... τί δή μοι ("why to me... why then to me"). So three manuscripts and the Zurich edition. The Paris editions have τί μή... τί δὲ μή.

(printed under page 445)

(3) ‹anchor: διὰ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ καταλήψεως› · call in col 830

Διὰ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ καταλήψεως. Si haec scriptura servetur, sic erit interpretandum: Per tuam ipsius comprehensionem, sive cognitionem, veterem generationem repudians. Sed longe melior sententia exstabit, si legamus, αὐτοῦ pro ἑαυτοῦ: Vive Deo, per cognitionem ipsius veterem generationem repudians. Satis perspicitur nihil vitii inesse huic sententiae. Agnitio enim Dei, inquit Irenaeus lib. V, c. 12, n. 4, renovat hominem. Infra n. 20, Tatianus Christianam doctrinam vocat τὴν περὶ Θεοῦ κατάληψιν. Et n. 13, docet animam, quae Dei cognitione instructa est, immortalem fieri. Cum autem animae immortalitatem repetat ex conjunctione cum Spiritu sancto; liquet eum Dei cognitione non nudam cognitionem intelligere, sed amorem etiam hac voce et conjunctionem cum Spiritu sancto complecti. Unde non mirum si per hanc cognitionem renovari hominem docet.

Διὰ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ καταλήψεως ("through his own apprehension"). If this reading is kept, it must be rendered: "rejecting the old birth through your own apprehension", that is, knowledge. But a far better sense will result if we read αὐτοῦ for ἑαυτοῦ: "Live to God, rejecting the old birth through knowledge of him." It is plain enough that there is nothing amiss in this sense. "For the knowledge of God," says Irenaeus, book V, ch. 12, no. 4, "renews man." Below, in section 20, Tatian calls Christian doctrine "the apprehension of God". And in section 13 he teaches that the soul which is furnished with the knowledge of God becomes immortal. Since he derives the soul's immortality from its union with the Holy Spirit, it is clear that by the knowledge of God he does not mean bare knowledge, but includes in this word love as well and union with the Holy Spirit. So it is no wonder that he teaches that man is renewed through this knowledge.

(printed under page 445)

(4) ‹anchor: δύο πνευμάτων διαφορὰς› · call in col 830

Δύο πνευμάτων διαφοράς. Ingreditur Tatianus prolixam disputationem de animae humanae imbecillitate, nisi a Spiritu sancto ad consequendam immortalitatem adjuvetur. Huic sententiae non parum lucis affert Irenaeus, qui Tatiani vestigiis Spiritum sanctum immortalitatis auctorem esse demonstrans, similiter monet eum a spiritu illo universum mundum permeante distinguendum esse. Sic loquitur S. martyr lib. V, cap. 12, n. 2: Aliud est enim afflatus vitae, qui et animalem efficit hominem: et aliud Spiritus vivificans, qui et spiritalem efficit eum. Aliud autem est quod factum est ab eo qui fecit. Afflatus igitur temporalis, Spiritus autem sempiternus. Supra Tatianus, n. 4, Spiritum divinum, quem perfectum Deum vocat, ab inferiore spiritu distingui monet.

Δύο πνευμάτων διαφοράς ("two different kinds of spirit"). Tatian enters on a long discussion of the weakness of the human soul unless it is helped by the Holy Spirit to attain immortality. Irenaeus throws no little light on this view: following in Tatian's footsteps, he shows that the Holy Spirit is the author of immortality, and likewise warns that he must be distinguished from that spirit which pervades the whole world. The holy martyr speaks thus, book V, ch. 12, no. 2: "For the breath of life, which makes man animal, is one thing, and the life-giving Spirit, which makes him spiritual, is another. And that which was made is one thing, and he who made it another. The breath, then, is temporal, but the Spirit everlasting." Above, in section 4, Tatian warns that the divine Spirit, whom he calls perfect God, is to be distinguished from the inferior spirit.

(printed under page 445)

(5) ‹anchor: γεγονυῖαν› · call in col 830

Γεγονυῖαν. Sic Reg. 1 et Front. melius quam editi καὶ γεγονυῖαν.

Γεγονυῖαν ("having come to be"). So the first Royal manuscript and Fronton, better than the printed editions' καὶ γεγονυῖαν.

(printed under page 445)

(6) ‹anchor: τὰ μέν τοι (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 831

Τὰ μέν τοι. Ita Reg. uterque. Editi τὰ μέν τι.

Τὰ μέν τοι. So both Royal manuscripts. The printed editions have τὰ μέν τι.

(printed under page 446)

(7) ‹anchor: πνεύματος (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 831

Πνεύματος. In Reg. 1 habemus hoc scholion: Δαίμονες σύνθετοι ἐξ ὕλης καὶ εἴδους.

Πνεύματος ("of spirit"). In the first Royal manuscript we have this scholium: "Demons are composed of matter and form."

(printed under page 446)

(8) ‹anchor: τὰ δὲ καθ' ἕκαστα (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 831

Τὰ δὲ καθ' ἕκαστα. Sic Reg. 1. Editi τὸ δὲ καθ' ἕκαστα. Mox editi διαγραφῆς. Scripsimus ut in mss. et apud Ducaeum.

Τὰ δὲ καθ' ἕκαστα ("and the particular things"). So the first Royal manuscript. The printed editions have τὸ δὲ καθ' ἕκαστα. Just after, the printed editions have διαγραφῆς. We have written it as in the manuscripts and in du Duc.

(printed under page 446)

(9) ‹anchor: οὓς ὑμεῖς οὕτω φατὲ› · call in col 831

Οἱ δαίμονες οὓς ὑμεῖς οὕτω φατέ. Daemones quos ita appellatis. Videtur daemonum nomine angelos bonos et malos designare. Nam si malos tantum, non diceret Gentilibus: Daemones quos ita appellatis; quippe cum Christianorum proprium esset daemonum nomen malis angelis tribuere.

Οἱ δαίμονες οὓς ὑμεῖς οὕτω φατέ ("the demons, as you call them"). He seems to denote good and bad angels by the name of demons. For if he meant only the bad, he would not say to the Gentiles, "the demons, as you call them"; since it was the Christians' own usage to give the name of demons to the bad angels.

(printed under page 446)

(10) ‹anchor: τὸ ἀπ' αὐτῆς› · call in col 831

Τὸ ἀπ' αὐτῆς. Sic Reg. 1 et Angl. et Fronto Duc. Editi τὸ ὑπ' αὐτῆς.

Τὸ ἀπ' αὐτῆς ("from it"). So the first Royal, the English manuscript and Fronton du Duc. The printed editions have τὸ ὑπ' αὐτῆς.

(printed under page 446)

(11) ‹anchor: οἱ δὲ τῆς› · call in col 831

Οἱ δὲ τῆς. Scholion ad haec verba exhibet Reg. 1, quod sic habet: Τοῦτο Πλατωνικόν, εἰς δύο διαιρεῖν εἴδη τοὺς δαίμνας, ἀϋλοτέρους καὶ ὑλικωτέρους, καὶ τοὺς μὲν ἀϋλοτέρους ἀγαθοὺς εἶναι, τοὺς δὲ ὑλικωτέρους πονηροὺς καὶ κακοποιούς.

Οἱ δὲ τῆς ("but others, of [matter]"). The first Royal manuscript gives a scholium on these words, which runs thus: "This is Platonic: to divide the demons into two kinds, the less material and the more material, and to hold that the less material are good, and the more material wicked and evil-doing."

(printed under page 446)

(12) ‹anchor: λόγοις› · call in col 831

Λόγοις. Ita Reg. 1, et Angl. et codex, ex quo Tigurina editio; legitur λόγῳ in aliis. Mox Reg. 2, et Anglic. et Tigur. οὓς οἱ, forte pro ὅσοι.

Λόγοις ("words"). So the first Royal, the English manuscript and the manuscript from which the Zurich edition was made; λόγῳ is read in the others. Just after, the second Royal, the English manuscript and the Zurich edition have οὓς οἱ, perhaps for ὅσοι.

(printed under page 446)

(13) ‹anchor: ἀποσκορακίζοντες› · call in col 831

Ἀποσκορακίζοντες. Clemens Alex. II Paedag, c. 12, p. 208: Τὰ κόσμια, ὥσπερ κοροκόσμια ἀποσκορακιστέον.

Ἀποσκορακίζοντες ("spurning"). Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus II, ch. 12, p. 208: "Ornaments, like girls' trinkets, are to be spurned."

(printed under page 446)

(¹) ‹anchor: the scripture call in the Greek above (not visible on the foot images)› · call in col 834 Joan. I, 5.

John 1:5.

(printed under page 447)

(14) ‹anchor: ἀξιοπαθήσητε (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 834

Ἀξιοπαθήσητε. Editor Oxoniensis legendum putat ἀναξιοπαθήσητε. Sed hoc verbum non videtur cum Graecae linguae ingenio conciliari posse. Melius profecto ἀξιοπαθεῖν, quod idem videtur esse, ac propriae dignitatis opinione aliquid aspernari et fugere. Mox Reg. 2, Anglic. et Tigur. κἂν μὴ ὡς τῇ. In Reg. 1, μή supra lineam.

Ἀξιοπαθήσητε ("you should take offence"). The Oxford editor thinks ἀναξιοπαθήσητε should be read. But that word does not seem reconcilable with the genius of the Greek language. Far better ἀξιοπαθεῖν, which seems to mean the same as to scorn and shun something from a sense of one's own dignity. Just after, the second Royal, the English manuscript and the Zurich edition have κἂν μὴ ὡς τῇ. In the first Royal, μή stands above the line.

(printed under page 447)

(15) ‹anchor: οὐκ ἔστιν ἀθάνατος› · call in col 834

Οὐκ ἔστιν ἀθάνατος. Videtur prima specie inesse his verbis, nec inest tamen deterior sententia. Multi immortalitatem animae a Tatiano everti existimant, velut auctor dissertationis quae post Tatiani orationem exstat ad calcem editionis Oxoniensis. Sed illius sensum in Praefatione satis probatum ac purgatum fuisse spero. Consuli etiam possunt quae initio Dialogi cum Tryphone notavimus. Nunc satis erit observare Tatianum non eam animae immortalitatem denegare, quae ex Dei voluntate et omnipotentia pendeat, sed quae ipsius animae viribus et naturae tribuatur. Quid enim aliud sibi volunt haec illius verba: Non est immortalis per se ipsa. Et paulo post: Per se enim nihil aliud est quam tenebrae. Sic etiam animae mortem interpretatur, non dissolutionem et destructionem, sed peccatum et vitiosum rerum corporearum amorem; id quod satis declarat his verbis: Deorsum ad materiam vergit, una cum carne moriens. Illud: Θνήσκει μὲν γὰρ καὶ λύεται, non potest de destructione intelligi, cum eam solutionem attribuat Tatianus animae quae non moritur, πάλιν τε οὐ θνήσκει κἂν πρὸς καιρὸν λυθῇ.

Οὐκ ἔστιν ἀθάνατος ("it is not immortal"). At first sight these words seem to contain a worse sense, yet they do not. Many think that the immortality of the soul is overthrown by Tatian, such as the author of the dissertation that stands after Tatian's oration at the end of the Oxford edition. But I hope that his meaning has been sufficiently vindicated and cleared in the Preface. What we noted at the beginning of the Dialogue with Trypho may also be consulted. For now it will be enough to observe that Tatian does not deny that immortality of the soul which depends on God's will and omnipotence, but that which would be ascribed to the soul's own powers and nature. For what else do these words of his mean: "It is not immortal of itself"? And a little after: "For of itself it is nothing but darkness." So too he interprets the death of the soul not as dissolution and destruction but as sin and the vicious love of bodily things, as he makes plain enough by these words: "It sinks down to matter, dying together with the flesh." The words "for it dies and is dissolved" cannot be understood of destruction, since Tatian ascribes that dissolution to the soul that does not die: "and again it does not die, even if it be dissolved for a time."

(printed under page 447)

(16) ‹anchor: καθ' ἑαυτήν› · call in col 834

Καθ' ἑαυτήν. Haec desunt in Reg. 2 et Anglic., ac suspecta sunt editori Oxoniensi, sed prorsus immerito.

Καθ' ἑαυτήν ("of itself"). These words are missing in the second Royal and the English manuscript, and are suspected by the Oxford editor, but quite without reason.

(printed under page 447)

(17) ‹anchor: ἀνίσταται› · call in col 834

Ἀνίσταται. Quo sensu animam antiqui dixerint cum corpore resurgere, ex iis perspici potest, quae observabimus ad Theophili lib. I.

Ἀνίσταται ("rises again"). In what sense the ancients said that the soul rises again with the body can be seen from what we shall observe on Theophilus, book I.

(printed under page 447)

(18) ‹anchor: ψυχὴ γάρ› · call in col 834

Ψυχὴ γάρ. Non absimiliter Irenaeus lib. V, cap. 9, n. 4: Non possidet, sed possidetur caro. Et paulo post: Caro haec secundum seipsam, id est, sola regnum Dei haereditate possidere non potest; haereditate autem possideri in regno a Spiritu potest. Haereditate enim possidet qui vivit ea quae sunt mortui.... Ille enim dominatur et praeest et disponit ea quae haereditate possidet, quemadmodum ipse velit, illa vero subjecta sunt et dominantur ab eo et sub dominatu sunt ejus qui possidet.

Ψυχὴ γάρ ("for the soul"). Not unlike this, Irenaeus, book V, ch. 9, no. 4: "The flesh does not possess, but is possessed." And a little after: "This flesh, by itself, that is, alone, cannot possess the kingdom of God as an inheritance; but it can be possessed as an inheritance in the kingdom by the Spirit. For the living man inherits what belongs to the dead.... For he rules over, presides over and disposes of what he possesses by inheritance as he himself wills, while those things are subject and are ruled by him and are under the dominion of him who possesses them."

(printed under page 447)

(19) ‹anchor: ὁ Λόγος› · call in col 834

Ὁ Λόγος. Reg. uterque ἡ Λόγος. Verbum non confundit cum Spiritu sancto, quamvis utrumque lucem appellet. Sed cum Joannes de Verbo dixerit: Lux in tenebris lucet, his verbis utitur Tatianus ut lucem etiam esse probet illius Spiritum, per quem inhabitat in nobis, ac sine hac luce animam nostram tenebras esse. Propter illam identitatem substantiae in Verbo et Spiritu sancto, quos Verbum a sua consuetudine excludit, ab iis discedit potentior Spiritus, ut ait Tatianus n. 7.

Ὁ Λόγος ("the Word"). Both Royal manuscripts have ἡ Λόγος. He does not confuse the Word with the Holy Spirit, though he calls both light. But since John said of the Word, "The light shines in the darkness," Tatian uses these words to show that his Spirit too, through whom he dwells in us, is light, and that without this light our soul is darkness. Because of that identity of substance in the Word and the Holy Spirit, the mightier Spirit departs from those whom the Word shuts out from his fellowship, as Tatian says in section 7.

(printed under page 447)

(20) ‹anchor: τοῦ μὲν› · call in col 834

Τοῦ μέν. Reg. 2, τούτου μέν.

Τοῦ μέν. The second Royal manuscript has τούτου μέν.

(printed under page 447)

(21) ‹anchor: ἕπεσθαι› · call in col 834

Ἕπεσθαι. Reg. 2, et Angelic. cum edit. Tigur. ἔσεσθαι. Ibidem deest negatio in editione Tigurina ante βουλομένην. Quod autem vocat Spiritum animae συνδίαιτον, in hoc assentientem habet Clementem Alexandrinum, qui sic loquitur Protrept. p. 40: Ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν οἱ τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ Θεοῦ περιφέροντες ἐν τῷ ζῶντι καὶ κινουμένῳ τούτῳ ἀγάλματι, τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, σύνοικον εἰκόνα, σύμβουλον, συνόμιλον, συνέστιον, συμπαθῆ, ἀνάθημα γεγόναμεν τῷ Θεῷ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ.

Ἕπεσθαι ("to follow"). The second Royal and the English manuscript (printed "Angelic.") with the Zurich edition have ἔσεσθαι ("to be"). In the same place the negative before βουλομένην is missing in the Zurich edition. In calling the Spirit the soul's "companion", he has Clement of Alexandria agreeing with him, who speaks thus in the Protrepticus, p. 40: "We are those who carry about the image of God in this living and moving statue, man, an image that dwells with us, counsels us, converses with us, shares our hearth and our feelings; we have become an offering to God for Christ's sake."

(printed under page 447)

(22) ‹anchor: τέλεια (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Τέλεια. Reg. τελετά et ad marg. τελευταῖα.

Τέλεια ("perfect"). The Royal manuscript has τελετά, and in the margin τελευταῖα.

(printed under page 448)

(23) ‹anchor: ἀντισοφιστεύουσι (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Ἀντισοφιστεύουσι. Sic etiam paulo ante artes daemonum vocabat ἀντισοφιστήματα.

Ἀντισοφιστεύουσι ("they practise counter-sophistries"). So too a little before he called the demons' arts ἀντισοφιστήματα ("counter-sophistries").

(printed under page 448)

(24) ‹anchor: κατακολουθήσασα (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Κατακολουθήσασα. Codex Joan. Fris. ad marg. κατακολουθοῦσα.

Κατακολουθήσασα ("having followed"). The manuscript of Johannes Frisius has κατακολουθοῦσα ("following") in the margin.

(printed under page 448)

(25) ‹anchor: δικαίως (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Δικαίως. Ita Fronto Ducaeus, quem sequi non dubitavi, quamvis in aliis editis legatur δικαίοις.

Δικαίως ("justly"). So Fronton du Duc, whom I did not hesitate to follow, although δικαίοις ("to the just") is read in the other printed editions.

(printed under page 448)

(26) ‹anchor: συμπλεκόμενον (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Συμπλεκόμενον. Sic etiam Irenaeus De Spiritu sancto lib. V, c. 12, n. 2: Τὸ δὲ περιλαβὸν ἔνδοθεν καὶ ἔξωθεν τὸν ἄνθρωπον. Spiritus circumdans intus et foris hominem.

Συμπλεκόμενον ("intertwined"). So too Irenaeus on the Holy Spirit, book V, ch. 12, no. 2: "the Spirit, embracing man within and without".

(printed under page 448)

(27) ‹anchor: τὸν διάκονον τοῦ πεπονθότος Θεοῦ (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Τὸν διάκονον τοῦ πεπονθότος Θεοῦ. Praeclare hoc de Filio dictum, quem alibi n. 20, Tatianus vocat Deum in forma hominis natum. Sic etiam Clemens Alex. Protrept. p. 66: Πίστευσον, ἄνθρωπε, ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ Θεῷ· πίστευσον, ἄνθρωπε, τῷ παθόντι καὶ προσκυνουμένῳ Θεῷ ζῶντι. Crede, homo, homini et Deo; crede, homo, passo et adorato Deo viventi. Neque etiam de sancto Spiritu exiliter aut impie sensit. Ministrum illum quidem vocat, sed eum ita vocat, quia Pater et Filius per Spiritum in nobis tanquam in templis habitant, n. 15; ac per eumdem Spiritum corpora et animae nostrae vivificantur n. 7, 13, 15. Elucet divinitas et omnipotentia Spiritus sancti in hoc ministerio, nec magis Deo indignum est, quam suscepta a Filio administratio ad mundi creationem. Spiritus sanctus apud Tertullianum Praescript. cap. 28, vocatur Dei villicus, Christi vicarius. Suspecta esse non debet Tatiani sententia de sancto Spiritu, quem hoc ipso in loco Sapientiam vocat et n. 4, Deum perfectum.

Τὸν διάκονον τοῦ πεπονθότος Θεοῦ ("the minister of the God who suffered"). This is finely said of the Son, whom Tatian elsewhere, in section 20, calls God born in the form of man. So too Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus p. 66: "Believe, O man, in him who is man and God; believe, O man, in the living God who suffered and is worshipped." Nor did he think meanly or impiously of the Holy Spirit. He does call him a minister, but he calls him so because the Father and the Son dwell in us as in temples through the Spirit, section 15, and through the same Spirit our bodies and souls are given life, sections 7, 13, 15. The divinity and omnipotence of the Holy Spirit shine out in this ministry, and it is no more unworthy of God than the administration undertaken by the Son for the creation of the world. In Tertullian, Prescription ch. 28, the Holy Spirit is called "God's steward, Christ's vicar". Tatian's view of the Holy Spirit ought not to be suspect, since in this very place he calls him Wisdom, and in section 4 perfect God.

(printed under page 448)

(28) ‹anchor: μεμονωμένας (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 835

Μεμονωμένας. Ita Reg. uterque et Angl. melius multo quam editi μεμωρωμένας.

Μεμονωμένας ("left alone"). So both Royal manuscripts and the English one, much better than the printed editions' μεμωρωμένας ("made foolish").

(printed under page 448)

(29) ‹anchor: ἐκπαιδεύσωσιν› · call in col 835

Ἐκπαιδεύσωσιν. Reg. 2 et Angl. ἐκπαιδεύουσι.

Ἐκπαιδεύσωσιν ("they may train"). The second Royal and the English manuscript have ἐκπαιδεύουσι ("they train").

(printed under page 448)

(30) ‹anchor: ἀντὶ θανάτου› · call in col 835

Ἀντὶ θανάτου. Videtur legendum una voce ἀντιθανάτου, ut antea ἀντισοφιστήματα, ἀντισοφιστεύουσι.

Ἀντὶ θανάτου ("instead of death"). It seems it should be read as one word, ἀντιθανάτου ("a counter-death"), like ἀντισοφιστήματα and ἀντισοφιστεύουσι earlier.

(printed under page 448)

(31) ‹anchor: ῥᾳδίως› · call in col 835

Ῥᾳδίως. Anglic. ῥᾴδιον.

Ῥᾳδίως ("easily"). The English manuscript has ῥᾴδιον.

(printed under page 448)

(32) ‹anchor: ἀθανασίας› · call in col 835

Ἀθανασίας. Sic Reg. uterque et Ducaeus. Editi ἀθανασίης.

Ἀθανασίας ("of immortality"). So both Royal manuscripts and du Duc. The printed editions have ἀθανασίης.

(printed under page 448)

(33) ‹anchor: διὰ παντὸς καὶ διὰ τοῦ ζῆν› · call in col 835

Διὰ παντὸς καὶ διὰ τοῦ ζῆν. Melius forte διὰ παντὸς τοῦ ζῆν.

Διὰ παντὸς καὶ διὰ τοῦ ζῆν ("continually and through living"). Perhaps better διὰ παντὸς τοῦ ζῆν ("through the whole of life").

(printed under page 448)

(34) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀθανασίαν› · call in col 835

Τὴν ἀθανασίαν. Reg. uterque et Anglic. τὴν αὐτὴν ἀθανασίαν.

Τὴν ἀθανασίαν ("immortality"). Both Royal manuscripts and the English one have τὴν αὐτὴν ἀθανασίαν ("the same immortality").

(printed under page 448)

(35) ‹anchor: κατὰ δὲ τὴν› · call in col 835

Κατὰ δὲ τήν. Reg. 2, et Anglic. κατὰ μὲν τήν. Sic interpretatur Gesnerus quasi legendum esset: κατὰ μὲν τὴν σύστασιν, κατὰ δὲ τὴν κόλασιν. Sed nihil mihi videtur mutandum. Nam vox illa σύστασις, quae apud Tatianum saepe essentiam et naturam significat, saepe etiam statum significat. Legimus enim n. seq.: τῆς συστάσεως τὸ εἶδος, et paulo post: Θανάτου τὴν σύστασιν.

Κατὰ δὲ τήν ("but according to the"). The second Royal and the English manuscript have κατὰ μὲν τήν. Gesner translates as though one should read: κατὰ μὲν τὴν σύστασιν, κατὰ δὲ τὴν κόλασιν ("in constitution..., but in punishment..."). But nothing seems to me to need changing. For the word σύστασις, which in Tatian often signifies essence and nature, often also signifies state. For we read in the next section, "the form of the constitution", and a little after, "the state of death".

(printed under page 448)

(36) ‹anchor: συνθετή (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 838

Συνθετή. Male in edit. Paris. συνετή. Huc pertinet quod paulo ante dicebat, spiritum et animam primis hominibus fuisse concessa, ut partim ex materia constarent, partim materia praestantiores essent. An ergo corpoream et compositam animam existimavit Tatianus? Non immorabor in hac illustranda quaestione; siquidem antequam statuatur, utrum animam Tatianus corpoream necne existimaverit, excutiendum erit quid corporis nomine intelligat, quam disceptationem Augustinus inutilem judicat. An forte, inquit lib. II De anima, n. 7, animam non spiritum esse sed corpus? Non quidem magnum doctrinae Christianae arbitror esse detrimentum ista nescire: et si de corporum generibus subtiliter disputetur, hoc majore difficultate quam utilitate perdiscitur. Sententiam Tatiani illustrare potest Methodius, qui apud Photium cod. 234, sub fin., negat animam esse incorpoream, quia, si incorporea sit, impassibilem esse necesse sit, nec cum corpore dolente et patiente mutari. Unde sic concludit: Εἰ δὲ συμπάσχοι τῷ σώματι, καθάπερ καὶ διὰ τῆς ἐπιμαρτυρήσεως τῶν φαινομένων ἐπιδείκνυται, ἀσώματος εἶναι οὐ δύναται. Ἤγουν ἀγένητος καὶ ἀνενδεὴς καὶ ἀκάματος φύσις ὁ Θεὸς μόνος ᾄδεται ἀσώματος ὤν, διὸ καὶ ἀόρατος· Θεὸν γὰρ οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν· αἱ δὲ ψυχαὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς τῶν ὅλων, σώματα νοερὰ ὑπάρχουσαι, εἰς λόγῳ θεωρητὰ μέλη διακεκόσμηνται. Sic etiam S. Basilius ep. 8, negat angelos esse naturae simplicis, atque id solius Dei proprium esse statuit.

Συνθετή ("composite"). The Paris edition wrongly has συνετή ("intelligent"). To this belongs what he said a little before, that spirit and soul were granted to the first men "so that they might partly consist of matter and partly be superior to matter". Did Tatian then think the soul bodily and composite? I shall not dwell on clearing up this question; for before it is settled whether Tatian thought the soul bodily or not, it will have to be examined what he understands by the word "body", a dispute which Augustine judges useless. "Or perhaps," he says in book II On the Soul, no. 7, "that the soul is not spirit but body? I do not think it any great loss to Christian doctrine not to know these things; and if one disputes subtly about the kinds of bodies, it is learned with more difficulty than profit." Methodius can shed light on Tatian's view; in Photius, codex 234, near the end, he denies that the soul is incorporeal, because if it were incorporeal it would have to be impassible and not be affected along with the body when it suffers and feels pain. Hence he concludes thus: "But if it suffers with the body, as is shown also by the testimony of what appears, it cannot be incorporeal. For God alone is hymned as the unbegotten, self-sufficient and untiring nature, being incorporeal, and therefore also invisible, for no one has seen God; but souls, from the Creator and Father of all, being intellectual bodies, have been ordered into members discernible by reason." So too St Basil, letter 8, denies that the angels are of a simple nature, and lays it down that this is proper to God alone.

(printed under page 449)

(37) ‹anchor: ἔστι γὰρ ἄνθρωπος (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 838

Ἔστι γὰρ ἄνθρωπος, etc. Hominem suum vocabant Gnostici substantiam illam, quam ab Achamoth, sive a Spiritu sancto accepisse se fingebant; corpus et animam spernebant, ut peritura et ab inferiore Deo creata; sed ob acceptam a Spiritu sancto particulam immortales sibi et Deo consubstantiales videbantur. Ab his longe discrepat Tatianus, qui non particulam Spiritus sancti substantiae in nos derivari existimat, sed ipsum in nobis tanquam in templis habitare. Quamobrem cum eum hominem solum esse contendit, in quo Spiritus sanctus habitat, secus vero, negat a belluis distare; Spiritus sancti gratiam commendat, hominis imbellicitatem agnoscit, qui nisi adjuvetur a Spiritu sancto, in vitium flectitur. Quam quidem Tatiani sententiam sic imitatur Irenaeus, ut simul explicet et illustret. Sunt tria, inquit, ex quibus perfectus homo constat, carne, anima et spiritu: et altero quidem salvante et figurante, qui est Spiritus; altero quod unitur et formatur, quod est caro: id vero quod inter haec est duo, quod est anima... Quotquot autem timent Deum et credunt in adventum Filii ejus, et per fidem constituunt in cordibus suis Spiritum Dei, hi tales juste homines dicentur, et mundi et spirituales et viventes Deo; quia habent Spiritum Patris. De his autem qui non habent Spiritum sanctum sic loquitur cap. 8: Eos autem qui abjiciunt quidem Spiritus consilium, carnis autem voluptatibus serviunt, et effrenati dejiciuntur in sua desideria, quippe nullam habentes aspirationem divini Spiritus, sed porcorum et canum more vivunt, hos juste Apostolus carnales vocat, quoniam nihil aliud quam carnalia sentiunt. Et prophetae autem propter hanc eamdem causam irrationalibus animalibus assimilant eos, etc.

Ἔστι γὰρ ἄνθρωπος, etc. ("for man is..."). The Gnostics called their "man" that substance which they imagined they had received from Achamoth, that is, from the Holy Spirit; they despised body and soul as destined to perish and created by an inferior God, but because of the particle received from the Holy Spirit they thought themselves immortal and consubstantial with God. Tatian differs widely from them: he does not think that a particle of the Holy Spirit's substance is drawn off into us, but that the Spirit himself dwells in us as in temples. Accordingly, when he contends that he alone is a man in whom the Holy Spirit dwells, and denies that one who is otherwise differs from the beasts, he commends the grace of the Holy Spirit and acknowledges the weakness of man, who, unless he is helped by the Holy Spirit, is bent towards vice. Irenaeus imitates this view of Tatian in such a way as at once to explain and illustrate it. "There are three things," he says, "of which the perfect man consists: flesh, soul and spirit; the one saving and shaping, which is the Spirit; the other united and formed, which is the flesh; and that which is between these two, which is the soul... But all who fear God and believe in the coming of his Son, and through faith establish the Spirit of God in their hearts, such as these will justly be called men, both pure and spiritual and living to God, because they have the Spirit of the Father." Of those who do not have the Holy Spirit he speaks thus in ch. 8: "But those who reject the counsel of the Spirit and serve the pleasures of the flesh, and are cast down unbridled into their own desires, having no breath of the divine Spirit, but living after the manner of swine and dogs, these the Apostle justly calls carnal, because they mind nothing but the things of the flesh. And the prophets too, for this same reason, liken them to irrational animals," etc.

(printed under page 449)

(38) ‹anchor: οὔτι ἕτερον› · call in col 838

Οὔτι ἕτερον. Ita Reg. 1 et Angl. et Reg. 2, ad marg. Sic etiam editio Tigurina, excepto quod habet ὄντι, pro οὔτι. Aliae editiones τὸ δὲ συγκρινόμενον ὄντι ἕτερον ἢ αὐτό, παρόμοιον δέ. Quod autem comparatur cum eo quod est, aliud quidem est, sed tamen simile. Similis sententia apud Tertullianum lib. II adv. Marc., cap. 9: Porro imago, inquit, veritati non usquequaque adaequabitur; aliud est enim secundum veritatem esse, aliud ipsam veritatem esse.

Οὔτι ἕτερον ("nothing other"). So the first Royal and the English manuscript, and the second Royal in the margin. So too the Zurich edition, except that it has ὄντι for οὔτι. The other editions have τὸ δὲ συγκρινόμενον ὄντι ἕτερον ἢ αὐτό, παρόμοιον δέ: "What is compared with that which is, is indeed something other, but yet like it." A similar thought in Tertullian, book II Against Marcion, ch. 9: "Moreover," he says, "the image will not be in every respect equal to the reality; for it is one thing to be according to the reality, another to be the reality itself."

(printed under page 449)

(²) ‹anchor: the scripture call in the text above (not visible on the foot images)› · call in col 839 Psal. VIII, 4.

Psalm 8:4 [Vulgate numbering; 8:5 in the Hebrew].

(printed under page 450)

(39) ‹anchor: σώματος (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 839

Σώματος. Reg. 2, Angl. et Front. σώματα. Ibidem Ducaeus οὐδαμῶς. Non absimilis est S. Basilii sententia, qui in libro De Spiritu sancto cap. 16, p. 32, sic loquitur de angelis: Οὐσία αὐτῶν ἀέριον πνεῦμα, εἰ τύχοι, ἢ πῦρ ἄϋλον... διὸ καὶ ἐν τόπῳ εἰσὶ καὶ ὁρατοὶ γίνονται.

Σώματος ("of body"). The second Royal, the English manuscript and Fronton have σώματα ("bodies"). In the same place du Duc has οὐδαμῶς ("in no way"). Not unlike this is the view of St Basil, who in the book On the Holy Spirit, ch. 16, p. 32, speaks thus of the angels: "Their substance is an airy spirit, perhaps, or an immaterial fire... and so they are in a place and become visible."

(printed under page 450)

(40) ‹anchor: τοῖς ψυχικοῖς (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 839

Τοῖς ψυχικοῖς. Non verendum est ne hanc vocem Tatianus eodem sensu usurpet ac Gnostici, quorum errores amplexus est post compositam hanc orationem. Neque enim, ut illi, catholicos hac voce designat, sed eos tantum qui non ita vivunt, ut in eis habitet Spiritus sanctus. In quo quidem Tatianus auctorem habet Apostolum, qui ait I Cor. II, 14: Ψυχικὸς δὲ ἄνθρωπος οὐ δέχεται τὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ Θεοῦ. Animalis autem homo non percipit ea quae sunt Spiritus Dei. Sic etiam Irenaeus lib. V, cap. 6, n. 1: Si autem defuerit animae Spiritus, animalis est vere, qui est talis, etc. Idem cap. 12, n. 3, animales opponit spiritualibus. Quamvis ergo haeretici, dum catholicos vocant psychicos sive animales, invidiam huic voci conflassent, non idcirco ex catholicorum usu facessebat.

Τοῖς ψυχικοῖς ("to the soul-bound", "the natural men"). There is no fear that Tatian uses this word in the same sense as the Gnostics, whose errors he embraced after composing this oration. For he does not, as they did, mean Catholics by this word, but only those who do not live so that the Holy Spirit dwells in them. In this Tatian has the Apostle as his authority, who says, 1 Corinthians 2:14: "The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God." So too Irenaeus, book V, ch. 6, no. 1: "But if the Spirit is lacking to the soul, such a man is truly natural," etc. The same, ch. 12, no. 3, sets the natural against the spiritual. Although, then, the heretics, by calling Catholics psychics or natural men, had stirred up odium against this word, it did not for that reason drop out of Catholic usage.

(printed under page 450)

(41) ‹anchor: κατὰ τό (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 839

Κατὰ τό. Angl. et Tigur. τὸ κατὰ τό.

Κατὰ τό. The English manuscript and the Zurich edition have τὸ κατὰ τό.

(printed under page 450)

(42) ‹anchor: τὴν... ἀποβολήν (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 839

Τὴν... ἀποβολήν. Reg. 2 τάς... ἀποβολάς. Quod ait Tatianus materiam animae imperare voluisse, id explicat n. seq., ubi docet daemones adhibita inferiore ac viliore materia operam dare, ut nos vincant. Unde hortatur ut materiam repudiet quisquis illos vincere volet.

Τὴν... ἀποβολήν ("the casting off"). The second Royal manuscript has the plural τάς... ἀποβολάς. What Tatian says, that matter sought to rule the soul, he explains in the next section, where he teaches that the demons work to overcome us by using the lower and baser matter. Hence he urges whoever wishes to overcome them to reject matter.

(printed under page 450)

(43) ‹anchor: κατὰ τὸν εἰκότα λόγον (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 839

Κατὰ τὸν εἰκότα λόγον. Hic aliquid subintelligendum atque ex supra dictis eruendum, ita ut haec sit sententia: Per poenitentiam vocatio hominibus concessa, quia inferiores sunt angelis secundum Scripturam, quae dicit, etc.

Κατὰ τὸν εἰκότα λόγον ("with good reason"). Something must be understood here and drawn out from what was said above, so that the sense is: a calling through repentance has been granted to men, because they are lower than the angels according to the Scripture, which says, etc.

(printed under page 450)

(44) ‹anchor: χωρὶς εἰ μὴ› · call in col 839

Χωρὶς εἰ μή. Ita Reg. 2. Editi ἀποθανεῖν χωρίς; εἰ μή. Ibidem editi: Εἰ μὴ ὁ ζῶν ἄνθρωπος μέν, ἀνόητος δὲ ἀδύνατος. Emendavimus ope Reg. 1. Paulo ante editi τίς δὲ γὰρ αὐτή. Emendavit Ducaeus.

Χωρὶς εἰ μή ("unless"). So the second Royal manuscript. The printed editions have ἀποθανεῖν χωρίς; εἰ μή. In the same place the printed editions have: Εἰ μὴ ὁ ζῶν ἄνθρωπος μέν, ἀνόητος δὲ ἀδύνατος. We have corrected it with the help of the first Royal. A little before, the printed editions have τίς δὲ γὰρ αὐτή; du Duc corrected it.

(printed under page 450)

(45) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀθάνατον› · call in col 839

Τὴν ἀθάνατον. Huc redit sententia Tatiani. Animam immortalem, id est incorpoream et spiritalem, quae cum corpore conjuncta membris corporis impediebatur, credibile non est sagaciorem, cum ex corpore migraverit, futuram in iisdem membris ad sanandum aut nocendum adhibendis. Alium Tatiano sensum ascribere non sinunt, quae leguntur n. 17: Quo enim pacto vivus ego minime sim malus, mei autem mortui, nihil agente me, reliquiae quae non moventur, imo nec sentiunt, aliquid quod sentiatur efficiant.

Τὴν ἀθάνατον ("the immortal [soul]"). Tatian's meaning comes to this: it is not credible that the immortal soul, that is, the incorporeal and spiritual soul, which while joined with the body was hampered by the body's members, should become shrewder, once it has left the body, at using those same members to heal or to harm. What is read in section 17 does not allow another sense to be ascribed to Tatian: "For how should it be that, while I am alive, I am not at all wicked, but when I am dead my remains, which do not move and do not even feel, without my doing anything, should produce something that is felt?"

(printed under page 450)

(46) ‹anchor: τοῖς ἀνθρώποις› · call in col 839

Τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. Reg. 1 et 2, τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ad marginem.

Τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ("against men"). The first and second Royal manuscripts have τοὺς ἀνθρώπους in the margin.

(printed under page 450)

(47) ‹anchor: καὶ ἡμῖν (text above not on the foot images)› · call in col 842

Καὶ ἡμῖν. Regii codices cum Anglicano et editione Tigurina habent ὑμῖν, et paulo post ψυχὰς ὑμῖν. Codex Anglicanus καὶ ὑμῖν ἐστιν. Ibidem deest δυνάμεως aut aliquid simile post ἀπαθανατιζούσης. Paulo post Reg. 1 νομίζωσι, Angl. et Tigur. νομίζουσιν. Ita Reg. 2 et ad marg. νομισθῶσι. Aliae editiones νομίζωνται ex conjectura Gesneri. Sic etiam infra n. 35, pro eo quod legitur νομίζωσι in mss. et edit. Tigur., et νομισθῶσι apud Eusebium, editiones aliae habent νομίζωνται.

Καὶ ἡμῖν ("and to us"). The Royal manuscripts with the English one and the Zurich edition have ὑμῖν ("to you"), and a little after ψυχὰς ὑμῖν. The English manuscript has καὶ ὑμῖν ἐστιν. In the same place δυνάμεως ("power") or something similar is missing after ἀπαθανατιζούσης ("immortalizing"). A little after, the first Royal has νομίζωσι, the English manuscript and the Zurich edition νομίζουσιν. So the second Royal, with νομισθῶσι in the margin. The other editions have νομίζωνται, from Gesner's conjecture. So too below, in section 35, where νομίζωσι is read in the manuscripts and the Zurich edition and νομισθῶσι in Eusebius, the other editions have νομίζωνται.

(printed under page 451)

(48) ‹anchor: εἰ τοῖς› · call in col 842

Εἰ τοῖς. In editione Tigurina legitur ad marginem ἢ τῆς. Ibidem vox θρησκείας deest in codicibus Regiis et Anglicano. Legerem libenter ἢ τιμῆς εἰς αὐτούς.

Εἰ τοῖς ("if to the"). In the Zurich edition ἢ τῆς is read in the margin. In the same place the word θρησκείας ("worship") is missing in the Royal manuscripts and the English one. I would gladly read ἢ τιμῆς εἰς αὐτούς ("or of honour towards them").

(printed under page 451)

(49) ‹anchor: πρὸς τὴν ὁμοίαν› · call in col 842

Πρὸς τὴν ὁμοίαν. Id est, animam nostram, quae ipsis simillima est, ope materiae oppugnant. Dicebat supra Tatianus n. 6: Materiae mihi cognatae confusionem emendo, quia scilicet veritatem in hominum sibi similium animos insinuare conabatur. Cur autem angelos et homines materiam appellet, quamvis utrosque a materia longe discernat, id aptiore in loco examinabitur, nempe in part. II praefat. [Ὕλῃ δὲ τῇ κάτω, κ. τ. λ. Materia inferiore materiam sibi similem oppugnant daemones. Dicebat Tatianus in eamdem sententiam n. 6: Materiae mihi cognatae confusionem emendo. Forte haec intelligenda ut illud Tertulliani de angelis dictum lib. De carne Christi, cap. 6: Constat angelos carnem propriam non gestasse, ut puta natura substantiae spiritalis, et si corporis alicujus, sui tamen generis. Animam spiritualis esse substantiae declarat Tatianus, et cum eam negat videri posse nisi per corpus n. 15, et cum ait n. 13, Spiritum sanctum ab initio convictorem animae fuisse, et animas, quae sapientiae paruerunt, cognatum sibi Spiritum attraxisse. Distinguit duo spirituum discrimina, quorum alter anima vocatur, alter anima praestantior, Dei imago et similitudo. Utrumque primis hominibus datum, ut partim ex materia constarent, partim materia praestantiores essent; id est, ut partim materiales essent per corpus spiritu corporeo motum, partim materia praestantiores essent per mentem Spiritu sancto animatam. Angelis compagem spiritalem attribuit Tatianus, ut ignis et aeris n. 13. Sed cum eos ex materia compactos dicit n. 12 et materiae ac nequitiae quosdam esse splendores, vel id de corporibus sui generis, ut ait Tertullianus, intelligendum, vel de corporibus vere e materia factis, quae angelis attribuere videtur n. 15. Ea enim spiritualibus hominibus facile conspicua esse docet, a psychicis autem non videri posse nisi admodum raro n. 15.] —Ex Addendis et Emendandis.

Πρὸς τὴν ὁμοίαν ("against the one like them"). That is, they attack our soul, which is most like themselves, by means of matter. Tatian said above, in section 6: "I correct the confusion of the matter akin to me," because, namely, he was trying to instil the truth into the minds of men like himself. Why he calls angels and men matter, though he distinguishes both widely from matter, will be examined in a more fitting place, namely in part II of the preface. [Ὕλῃ δὲ τῇ κάτω, etc.: "With the lower matter the demons attack the matter like themselves." Tatian said to the same effect in section 6: "I correct the confusion of the matter akin to me." Perhaps this should be understood like Tertullian's saying about the angels in the book On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 6: "It is agreed that the angels did not bear flesh of their own, being, let us say, of a spiritual nature of substance, and if of some body, yet of their own kind." Tatian declares that the soul is of a spiritual substance, both when he denies, in section 15, that it can be seen except through the body, and when he says in section 13 that the Holy Spirit was from the beginning the soul's companion, and that souls which obeyed wisdom drew to themselves the Spirit akin to them. He distinguishes "two kinds of spirits, one of which is called soul, the other greater than the soul, the image and likeness of God. Both were given to the first men, so that they might partly consist of matter and partly be superior to matter"; that is, so that they might be partly material through the body moved by a bodily spirit, and partly superior to matter through the mind animated by the Holy Spirit. Tatian attributes to angels a spiritual frame, as of fire and air, section 13. But when he says in section 12 that they are "compacted of matter", and that they are certain radiances of matter and wickedness, this must be understood either of "bodies of their own kind", as Tertullian says, or of bodies truly made of matter, which he seems to attribute to angels in section 15. For he teaches that these are easily visible to spiritual men, but cannot be seen by the soul-bound except very rarely, section 15.] — From the Addenda et Emendanda.

(printed under page 451)

(50) ‹anchor: τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν› · call in col 842

Τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν. Ita Reg. 1, licet alia manu. Editi τῆς ἐν ὑμῖν.

Τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ("of that in us"). So the first Royal manuscript, though in another hand. The printed editions have τῆς ἐν ὑμῖν ("in you").

(printed under page 451)

(51) ‹anchor: αὐτῶν ὧνπερ› · call in col 842

Αὐτῶν ὧνπερ. Sic Reg. 1 et Anglic., et ad marg. edit. Tigur. Aliae edit. αὐτῶν ὧν πέρι. Mox Reg. 2 ἀπολαύσητε.

Αὐτῶν ὧνπερ ("the same as those which"). So the first Royal and the English manuscript, and the Zurich edition in the margin. The other editions have αὐτῶν ὧν πέρι. Just after, the second Royal manuscript has ἀπολαύσητε.

(printed under page 451)

(52) ‹anchor: Τρόπος› · call in col 843

Τρόπος. Edit. Tigur. τύπος.

Τρόπος ("manner"). The Zurich edition has τύπος ("type").

(printed under page 452)

(53) ‹anchor: Ποικιλίαι… παραλήψεις› · call in col 843

Ποικιλίαι... παραλήψεις. Sic codices tres mss., et Tigur. et Front. Aliae edit. ποικίλαι... παράληψις. Melius forte δραστικαί τινος.

Ποικιλίαι… παραλήψεις ("varieties… applications"). So the three manuscript codices, and the Zurich edition and Fronto's. Other editions have ποικίλαι… παράληψις. Perhaps better δραστικαί τινος ("effective for something").

(printed under page 452)

(54) ‹anchor: Ἕκαστον αὐτῶν› · call in col 843

Ἕκαστον αὐτῶν. Angl. et Tigur. ἕκαστος et ad marg. ἕκαστον. Ibidem legitur ἰσχύειν in codicibus Regiis et Anglicano et edit. Tigurina quae ad marginem habet ἰσχύει. Daemones definivisse dicit ad quid res ejusmodi valerent, id est quid per radicum varietates et ossium appositiones ipsi perficerent, et quos in usus ista adhiberent, ad fucum hominibus faciendum. Fatetur quidem Tatianus n. 16, interdum habitum corporis nostri a daemonibus concuti; ac negat eos sanare, sed prorsus illudere, n. 18.

Ἕκαστον αὐτῶν ("each of them"). The English edition and the Zurich have ἕκαστος, with ἕκαστον in the margin. In the same place ἰσχύειν is read in the Royal codices and the English one and in the Zurich edition, which has ἰσχύει in the margin. He says that the demons defined what things of this kind were good for, that is, what they themselves accomplished through the varieties of roots and the applications of bones, and to what uses they put these things, to deceive men. Tatian does admit, n. 16, that the state of our body is sometimes shaken by demons; and he denies that they heal, saying rather that they simply make sport of us, n. 18.

(printed under page 452)

(55) ‹anchor: Ἐπιλαμβάνοντες› · call in col 843

Ἐπιλαμβάνοντες. Reg. 1 λαμβάνοντες. Secundus cum Angl. et Tigur. ὑπολαμβάνοντες. Legitur in 1 Reg. ὑπό supra lineam.

Ἐπιλαμβάνοντες ("laying hold"). Royal codex 1 has λαμβάνοντες. The second, with the English and Zurich editions, has ὑπολαμβάνοντες. In Royal 1, ὑπό is read above the line.

(printed under page 452)

(56) ‹anchor: Παριόντας› · call in col 843

Παριόντας. Reg. 2 παριέντας.

Παριόντας ("passing by"). Royal codex 2 has παριέντας.

(printed under page 452)

(57) ‹anchor: Προσυνάπτειν› · call in col 843

Προσυνάπτειν. Fronto Ducaeus legit προσανάπτειν. Editor Anglus citat Gatakerum qui in Adnotationibus in M. Antoninum p. 107, legendum monet προσσυνάπτειν..

Προσυνάπτειν ("to join to besides"). Fronton du Duc reads προσανάπτειν. The English editor cites Gataker, who in his Notes on Marcus Antoninus, p. 107, advises reading προσσυνάπτειν.

(printed under page 452)

(58) ‹anchor: παρατρέπουσιν, πόαις› · call in col 843

Πόαις. Sic Regii codices et Tigurina editio. Aliae habent ποίαις. Non legitimum herbarum usum damnat Tatianus, nec medicinam daemonibus acceptam refert; sed in superstitiosas radicum et ossium appositiones invehitur. Aliud est enim, inquit Augustinus lib. II De doctrina Christiana n. 45, dicere: Tritam herbam si biberis, venter non dolebit; et aliud est dicere: Istam herbam collo si suspenderis, venter non dolebit. Ibi enim probatur contemperatio salubris, hic significatio superstitiosa damnatur. Christianos accusabat Celsus quod lustrationes et incantationes docerent et varia in numeris, lapidibus, plantis et radicibus amuleta. Sed hanc criminationem sprevit Origenes, ut nulla prorsus verisimilitudine coloratam, lib. VI Cels., p. 301.

Πόαις ("by herbs"). So the Royal codices and the Zurich edition. Others have ποίαις. Tatian does not condemn the lawful use of herbs, nor does he credit medicine to the demons; he inveighs against superstitious applications of roots and bones. For it is one thing, says Augustine, De doctrina Christiana II, n. 45, to say: "If you drink this herb ground up, your stomach will not ache"; and another to say: "If you hang this herb round your neck, your stomach will not ache." In the one a healthful mixture is approved, in the other a superstitious signification is condemned. Celsus accused the Christians of teaching purifications and incantations and various amulets in numbers, stones, plants and roots. But Origen spurned this charge as coloured with no likelihood at all, Against Celsus VI, p. 301.

(printed under page 452)

(59) ‹anchor: οὐχὶ τοῦ τελείου› · call in col 843

Τοῦ τελείου. Sic Regii codices et Anglic. Editi τοῦ Θεοῦ τελείου. Tigur. τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ τελείου.

Τοῦ τελείου ("of the perfect one"). So the Royal codices and the English edition. The printed editions have τοῦ Θεοῦ τελείου; the Zurich, τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ τελείου ("of the perfect God").

(printed under page 452)

(60) ‹anchor: οἰκτίστῳ θανάτῳ› · call in col 843

Οἰκτίστῳ θανάτῳ. Ut intelligatur Tatiani sententia, observandum est antiquos existimasse animas hominum violenter mortuorum multo plus posse in magicis operationibus, quam eorum qui sicca et matura morte obierunt. Invocantur quidam, inquit Tertullianus lib. De anima, cap. 57, ahori et biaeothanati sub illo fidei argumento, quod credibile videatur eas potissimum animas ad vim et injuriam facere, quas per vim et injuriam saevus et immaturus finis extorsit, quasi ad vicem offensae. Ex his emendari possunt quae paulo post sequuntur. Hanc quoque fallaciam, inquit, spiritus nequam sub personis defunctorum delitescentis, nisi fallor, etiam rebus probamus, cum in exorcismis interdum aliquem se ex parentibus hominem sui (Rigalt. suis) affirmat, interdum gladiatorem, vel bestiarium, sicut et alibi Deum nihil magis curans quam hoc ipsum excludere quod praedicamus, ne facile credamus animas universas ad inferos redigi, ut et judicii et resurrectionis fi- (continues)

Οἰκτίστῳ θανάτῳ ("by a most pitiable death"). To understand Tatian's meaning, note that the ancients thought the souls of men who died by violence had far more power in magical operations than the souls of those who died a dry and ripe death. "Some are invoked," says Tertullian, On the Soul, ch. 57, "the untimely dead and those who died by violence, on the plea that it seems credible that those souls above all are given to violence and injury which a cruel and untimely end wrenched away by violence and injury, as if in requital of the offence." From this what follows shortly after can be corrected. "This deceit too of the wicked spirit lurking under the persons of the dead we prove, if I am not mistaken, by facts as well, when in exorcisms it sometimes declares itself one of the kinsmen of the man (Rigault: of his own), sometimes a gladiator or a beast-fighter, as elsewhere a god, caring for nothing so much as to shut out this very thing that we preach, so that we may not readily believe that all souls are brought down to the underworld, that both the judgement and the resurrection … (continues)

(printed under page 452)

(61) ‹anchor: Εἰ δὲ… παραιτούμεθα› · call in col 846

Εἰ δὲ.... παραιτούμεθα. Locum corruptissimum sic emendavi ope Regii primi. Habent enim alii codices cum Tigurina editione εἰ δὲ παραιτούμενα. Reg. 2 ad marg., παραιτούμενοι. Aliae editiones, οἱ δὲ παραιτούμενοι. Legendum conjicit editor Anglus ὑποστάσεως εἴδη.... παραιτούμενα.

Εἰ δὲ… παραιτούμεθα ("but if … we decline"). I have emended this very corrupt passage thus with the help of the first Royal codex. The other codices, with the Zurich edition, have εἰ δὲ παραιτούμενα. Royal 2 has in the margin παραιτούμενοι. Other editions have οἱ δὲ παραιτούμενοι. The English editor conjectures we should read ὑποστάσεως εἴδη… παραιτούμενα.

(printed under page 453)

(62) ‹anchor: Φαυλοτέραν ὕλην› · call in col 846

Φαυλοτέραν ὕλην. Videtur Tatianus materiam deteriorem intelligere, non eam cujus naturae aliquid insit vitii (nihil enim non creatum a Deo, nihil non bonum esse paulo antea monebat), sed eam quae cum sua sponte nihil afferat ad morbi curationem, sine superstitione, ac magicae operationis crimine ad morbos curandos adhiberi non potest. Quia autem saepe fiebat, ut ejusmodi res ad dissimulandum et occultandum scelus, cum aliis rebus sua sponte ad aegros levandos utilibus conjungerentur; ne sic quidem magicae operationis crimen evitari pronuntiat. Sic Augustinus in libro II De doctrina Christiana, n. 30, fucatum ejusmodi magicae operationis genus condemnat ac remedia, quae mitiore nomine physica vocant, ut quasi non superstitione implicare, sea natura prodesse videantur. Sic loquitur, n. 45: Quanquam ubi praecantationes et invocationes et characteres non sunt, plerumque dubium est utrum res quae alligatur, aut quoquo modo adjungitur sanando corpori, vi naturae valeat, quod libere adhibendum est; an significativa quadam obligatione proveniat, quod tanto prudentius oportet cavere Christianum, quanto efficacius prodesse videbitur.

Φαυλοτέραν ὕλην ("a baser matter"). Tatian seems to mean the inferior matter: not matter whose nature has some fault in it (for he warned a little before that nothing is not created by God, nothing not good), but matter which, since of itself it contributes nothing to curing disease, cannot be used to cure diseases without superstition and the charge of magical operation. And because it often happened that such things, to disguise and hide the crime, were joined with other things of themselves useful for relieving the sick, he declares that not even so is the charge of magical operation escaped. So Augustine, De doctrina Christiana II, n. 30, condemns this disguised kind of magical operation, and the remedies "which they call by the milder name of 'natural', so that they may seem not to entangle in superstition but to do good by nature". So he says at n. 45: "Although, where there are no charms, invocations or characters, it is very often doubtful whether the thing that is tied on, or in any way applied to heal the body, works by the force of nature, in which case it may be used freely, or comes by some signifying bond, which a Christian must beware of the more prudently the more effectually it seems to do good."

(printed under page 453)

(63) ‹anchor: Πολλάκις καὶ… ἐφ' ἕτερον› · call in col 846

Πολλάκις καὶ.... ἐφ' ἕτερον. Sic Reg. 1 et Angl. Editi πολλάκις γὰρ διὰ τῆς ὑφ' ἕτερον.

Πολλάκις καὶ… ἐφ' ἕτερον. So Royal 1 and the English edition. The printed editions have πολλάκις γὰρ διὰ τῆς ὑφ' ἕτερον.

(printed under page 453)

(64) ‹anchor: Τῶν κακῶν… τοῖς κακοῖς› · call in col 846

Τῶν κακῶν.... τοῖς κακοῖς. Sic codices tres mss. et Tigur. et Fronto Ducaeus. Aliae editiones τῶν καλῶν.... τοῖς καλοῖς.

Τῶν κακῶν… τοῖς κακοῖς ("of the bad… to the bad"). So the three manuscript codices, the Zurich edition and Fronton du Duc. Other editions have τῶν καλῶν… τοῖς καλοῖς ("of the good… to the good").

(printed under page 453)

(65) ‹anchor: Τῷ ληστεύοντι› · call in col 846

Τῷ ληστεύοντι. Fronto Ducaeus ὁ τῷ ληστεύοντι.

Τῷ ληστεύοντι ("to the robber"). Fronton du Duc has ὁ τῷ ληστεύοντι.

(printed under page 453)

(66) ‹anchor: Καὶ ὁ μή› · call in col 846

Καὶ ὁ μή. Deest καί in utroque Regio.

Καὶ ὁ μή ("and he who does not"). καί is missing in both Royal codices.

(printed under page 453)

(67) ‹anchor: Καλόν› · call in col 846

Καλόν. Sic Fronto Ducaeus et codex Joannis Frisii. Reg. uterque πρὸς τὸν νομιζόμενον κακόν.

Καλόν ("good"). So Fronton du Duc and the codex of Johannes Frisius. Both Royal codices have πρὸς τὸν νομιζόμενον κακόν ("towards the one reckoned bad").

(printed under page 453)

(68) ‹anchor: Τοῦ κρίναντος› · call in col 846

Τοῦ κρίναντος. Editi addunt τοῦτον, quod multo melius abest a Reg. I, et Angl. Nam superiora verba, τῷ δὲ φαύλῳ ἀναμιγείς, non significant conjunctionem cum hominibus malis, sed cum rebus; eamque Tatianus vitiosam esse demonstrat, exemplo petito ex ipsa cum hominibus malis, conjunctione. Inde patet, expungendum esse τοῦτον, ac paulo ante legendum εἰς αὐτό.

Τοῦ κρίναντος ("of him who judged"). The printed editions add τοῦτον, which is much better absent, as in Royal 1 and the English edition. For the words above, τῷ δὲ φαύλῳ ἀναμιγείς ("mixed with the base"), signify not union with bad men but with things; and Tatian shows that union to be faulty by an example drawn from union with bad men itself. Hence it is plain that τοῦτον should be struck out, and that a little before we should read εἰς αὐτό.

(printed under page 453)

(69) ‹anchor: μᾶλλον αὐτόν› · call in col 846

Θεραπεύεις.... αὐτόν. Fronto Ducaeus σεαυτόν. Gesnerus legendum conjicit σαυτόν. Non legitimum, ut jam dixi, medicinae usum vituperat Tatianus, sed postquam incantationes notavit, nunc illud etiam praescribit ut medicinae non fidamus, quasi ipsa in se aliud praeter materiales compositiones habeat, sed utilitatem, quam ex ea percipimus, ad Deum referamus. Basilius in ultima longiorum regularum pluribus demonstrat sic medicina utendum esse, ut morborum levatio non huic arti, sed Deo accepta referatur.

Θεραπεύεις… αὐτόν ("you heal… him"). Fronton du Duc has σεαυτόν ("yourself"). Gesner conjectures we should read σαυτόν. Tatian does not, as I have said, find fault with the lawful use of medicine; but having censured incantations, he now prescribes this too: that we should not trust in medicine as though it had in itself anything besides its material compositions, but should refer to God the benefit we receive from it. Basil, in the last of the Longer Rules, shows at length that medicine is to be so used that the relief of disease is credited not to this art but to God.

(printed under page 453)

(70) ‹anchor: δυνάμει κατακολούθησον› · call in col 846

Κατακολούθησον. Ita Reg. 1, melius quam (continues)

Κατακολούθησον ("follow"). So Royal 1, better than … (continues)

(printed under page 453)

(71) ‹anchor: Λησταῖς› · call in col 847

Λησταῖς. S. Joannes Chrysostomus orat. I in Judaeos dicit de daemonibus: Insidiari sciunt ac nocere, non mederi; sed tamen etiamsi Deo permittente aliquando medeantur, quemadmodum homines, nimirum adhibitis medicamentis; in hoc comparat eos cum latronibus, qui pueris interdum bellaria, placentas, astragalos porrigunt, quibus inescatos libertate ac vita ipsa privant. Vid. Athenag. Apol., n. 23 et 27.

Λησταῖς ("to robbers"). St John Chrysostom, Oration I against the Jews, says of the demons: "They know how to lie in wait and to harm, not to heal." Yet even though, by God's permission, they sometimes heal, as men do, namely by applying medicines, in this he compares them with robbers "who sometimes hold out to children sweets, cakes, knucklebones, and having baited them, rob them of liberty and of life itself." See Athenagoras, Apology [Plea], nn. 23 and 27.

(printed under page 454)

(72) ‹anchor: Μισθοῦ› · call in col 847

Μισθοῦ. Sic mss. codices et Tigurin. Aliae editiones μισθῷ.

Μισθοῦ ("of a wage"). So the manuscript codices and the Zurich edition. Other editions have μισθῷ.

(printed under page 454)

(73) ‹anchor: Καὶ τὴν αὐτάρκειαν ἀσκεῖν› · call in col 847

Καὶ τὴν αὐτάρκειαν ἀσκεῖν. Haec verba sic reddenda: et frugalitatem exerceri. Hanc frugalitatem Tatianus n. 9 sic exprimit: Πένης δὲ καὶ ὁ μετριώτατος τῶν καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἐφιέμενος εὐμαρέστερον περιγίνεται. Ex Addendis et emendandis.

Καὶ τὴν αὐτάρκειαν ἀσκεῖν ("and to practise self-sufficiency"). These words should be rendered "and that frugality is practised". Tatian expresses this frugality at n. 9 thus: "The poor man, and he who desires only the most moderate things for his own state, comes through more easily." From the Addenda and Corrigenda.

(printed under page 454)

(74) ‹anchor: Ἀποδέουσι› · call in col 847

Ἀποδέουσι. Sig. Reg. secundus, licet supra lineam Editi ἀποδεύουσι.

Ἀποδέουσι ("they fall short"). So the second Royal codex, though above the line. The printed editions have ἀποδεύουσι.

(printed under page 454)

(75) ‹anchor: Ἐτησίους χρυσοῦς› · call in col 847

Ἐτησίους χρυσοῦς. Lucianus in Eunucho non longe a primordio sic loquitur: Συντέτακται μέν, ὦ Πάμφιλε, ὡς οἶσθα, ἐκ βασιλέως μισθοφορά τις, οὐ φαύλη, κατὰ γένη τοῖς φιλοσόφοις, Στωϊκοῖς λέγω καὶ Πλατωνικοῖς καὶ Ἐπικουρείοις, ἔτι καὶ τοῖς ἐκ τοῦ Περιπάτου, τὰ ἴσα τούτοις ἅπασιν. Ἔδει δὲ ἀποθανόντος αὐτῶν τινὸς ἄλλον ἀντικαθίστασθαι, δοκιμασθέντα ψήφῳ τῶν ἀρίστων· καὶ τὰ ἆθλα οὐ βοείη τις ἦν, κατὰ τὸν ποιητήν, οὐδ' ἱερήϊον, ἀλλὰ μύριαι κατὰ τὸν ἐνιαυτὸν ἐφ' ὅτῳ συνεῖναι τοῖς νέοις. Scis, Pamphile, salarium, idque non exiguum, ab imperatore constitutum fuisse singulis generibus philosophorum, puta Stoicis, Platonicis, Epicureis, et Peripateticis, unicuique sectae praemium aequale. Caeterum demortuo ex his quopiam, alius in ejus locum subrogandus, optimatum calculis probatus. Praemium autem non pellis bubula juxta poetam, neaue porcellus: sed in singulos annos decem millia nummorum, quos accipiunt ut doceant juventutem.

Ἐτησίους χρυσοῦς ("yearly gold pieces"). Lucian in The Eunuch, not far from the beginning, says: "As you know, Pamphilus, a stipend, and no mean one, has been fixed by the emperor for the philosophers by schools, I mean Stoics, Platonists and Epicureans, and also those of the Peripatos, the same for all of these. When one of them died, another had to be put in his place, approved by the vote of the best men; and the prize was not an ox-hide, as the poet says, nor a victim, but ten thousand a year for keeping company with the young." [The Latin rendering follows, to the same effect.]

(printed under page 454)

(76) ‹anchor: Τῇ μεγάλῃ πόλει› · call in col 847

Τῇ μεγάλῃ πόλει. Gesnerus ac ipse etiam Fronto Ducaeus Megalopolim a Tatiano designari arbitrati sunt. Melius Ruffinus et Christophorsonus magnam civitatem interpretantur in Hist. eccles. Eusebii, qui hunc Tatiani locum citat lib. IV, cap. 16. Romam ita appellari a Tatiano perspicuum est, tum ex minore Justini Apologia, tum hoc ipso ex loco, ubi in Justinum, quem Romae passum esse constat, Crescentis insidias commemorat Tatianus. Eodem modo Romam designat Porphyrius lib. II De abstin. animal., p. 226, ubi sic loquitur: Ἀλλ' ἔτι καὶ νῦν τίς ἀγνοεῖ κατὰ τὴν μεγάλην πόλιν τῇ τοῦ Λατιαρίου Διὸς ἑορτῇ σφαζόμενον ἄνθρωπον; Sed etiam nunc quis nescit in magna urbe die festo Jovis Latiarii hominem mactari? Sic etiam Roma appellatur apud Theodoret. in epistola Concilii Constantinopolitani, addito tamen Romae proprio nomine. Interdum id nomen defertur aliis urbibus, ut Alexandriae apud Evagrium lib. II, cap. 4, Thebis apud Synesium De Provid. p. 94; Constantinopoli in epistola modo citata et apud S. Joannem Chrysost. or. 17 ad Antioch. et in epist. Attici ad Cyrillum, et apud Pallad. Vit. S. Chrysost. p. 85, et Photium Nomocan. cap. 2, tit. 8.

Τῇ μεγάλῃ πόλει ("in the great city"). Gesner, and even Fronton du Duc himself, thought Tatian meant Megalopolis. Rufinus and Christopherson do better to render it "the great city" in the Church History of Eusebius, who quotes this passage of Tatian in book IV, ch. 16. That Rome is so called by Tatian is clear both from Justin's shorter Apology and from this very passage, where Tatian recalls the plots of Crescens against Justin, who certainly suffered at Rome. Porphyry designates Rome the same way in On Abstinence from Animal Food II, p. 226, where he says: "But even now who does not know that in the great city, at the feast of Latiarian Jupiter, a man is slaughtered?" [the Latin rendering follows]. Rome is so called also in Theodoret, in the letter of the Council of Constantinople, though with Rome's own name added. Sometimes the name is given to other cities: to Alexandria in Evagrius II, ch. 4; to Thebes in Synesius, On Providence, p. 94; to Constantinople in the letter just cited, in St John Chrysostom's Homily 17 to the people of Antioch, in the letter of Atticus to Cyril, in Palladius's Life of St Chrysostom, p. 85, and in Photius's Nomocanon, ch. 2, title 8.

(printed under page 454)

(77) ‹anchor: δὲ ὁ καταφρονῶν› · call in col 847

Ὁ καταφρονῶν. Legitur: Ὁ καταφρονεῖν συμβουλεύων οὕτως αὐτὸς ἐδεδίει τὸν θάνατον apud Euseb. Hist. l. IV, c. 16.

Ὁ καταφρονῶν ("he who despised"). In Eusebius, Church History IV, 16, the reading is: "He who counselled despising death was himself so afraid of death."

(printed under page 454)

(78) ‹anchor: ἐμὲ οὓς κακῷ› · call in col 847

Καὶ ἐμὲ οὓς κακῷ. Legendum ὡς κακῷ jamdudum monuere interpretes Tatiani. Codex Joan. Fris. οἷον κακῷ. Sic habet Eusebius ὡς καὶ Ἰουστῖνον, καθάπερ μεγάλῳ κακῷ, τῷ θανάτῳ. Videtur Eusebius de industria illud καὶ ἐμέ omisisse, quia nihil conducebat illius proposito. Probat enim ex hoc testimonio Justinum insidiis a Crescente structis occisum fuisse; quod idem Tatiano non evenit. Sed tamen retinendas esse has voces non solum ex codicum mss. consensu declaratur, sed etiam ex his quae sequuntur: Quosnam autem philosophorum, nisi nos solos, insectari solebat? Fuit ergo periculorum Justini socius Tatianus, quamvis mortem magno suo malo tunc effugerit.

Καὶ ἐμὲ οὓς κακῷ ("and me, whom … with an evil"). Tatian's translators long ago advised reading ὡς κακῷ ("as with an evil"). The codex of Johannes Frisius has οἷον κακῷ. Eusebius has: "so as Justin, as with a great evil, with death." Eusebius seems to have omitted καὶ ἐμέ ("and me") on purpose, because it did nothing for his purpose: from this testimony he proves that Justin was killed through plots laid by Crescens, which did not happen to Tatian. Yet that these words should be kept is shown not only by the agreement of the manuscript codices but also by what follows: "But which of the philosophers did he use to persecute, except us alone?" Tatian, then, shared Justin's dangers, though he escaped death at the time, to his own great harm.

(printed under page 454)

(79) ‹anchor: θανάτῳ περιβαλεῖν› · call in col 847

Περιβαλεῖν. Angl. περιλαβεῖν.

Περιβαλεῖν ("to bring upon"). The English edition has περιλαβεῖν.

(printed under page 454)

(¹) ‹anchor: factum est nihil› · call in col 850 Joan. I, 3.

John 1:3.

(printed under page 455)

(80) ‹anchor: Συνήλεγχεν› · call in col 850

Συνήλεγχεν. Euseb. ἐξήλεγχεν. Nicephorus et codices Colbertini Eusebii cum uno ex Regiis perantiquo habent ut Tatianus.

Συνήλεγχεν ("he convicted"). Eusebius has ἐξήλεγχεν. Nicephorus and the Colbert codices of Eusebius, with one very old Royal codex, read as Tatian does.

(printed under page 455)

(81) ‹anchor: Μόνους› · call in col 850

Μόνους. Ita mss. codices et Fronto Ducaeus. Aliae editiones νόμους.

Μόνους ("alone"). So the manuscript codices and Fronton du Duc. Other editions have νόμους ("laws").

(printed under page 455)

(82) ‹anchor: Δοξομανίαν› · call in col 850

Δοξομανίαν. Jam antea emendavimus vulgatam lectionem δοξημανίαν, quae cum iterum hic occurreret, visa est emendanda, quamvis in codicibus mss. et editis exstet, excepto cod. Angl. et edit. Front. Ducaei.

Δοξομανίαν ("mania for glory"). We have already corrected the common reading δοξημανίαν before; since it occurred here again it seemed it should be corrected, although it stands in the manuscript codices and the printed editions, except the English codex and Fronton du Duc's edition.

(printed under page 455)

(83) ‹anchor: Τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ γνώσεως› · call in col 850

Τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ γνώσεως. Horum verborum non is videtur esse sensus, ut mortem Dei cognitionis comparandae causa spernamus, sed ut eam pro fide libenter oppetamus. Dei enim cognitio idem interdum sonat apud Tatianum ac fides quae per charitatem operatur. Anima Dei cognitione instructa n. 13 idem est ac anima quae Spiritum sanctum accepit.

Τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ γνώσεως ("of the knowledge of God"). The sense of these words seems to be not that we should despise death for the sake of gaining knowledge of God, but that we should gladly meet it for the faith. For in Tatian "knowledge of God" sometimes means the same as the faith that works through charity. The soul furnished with knowledge of God, n. 13, is the same as the soul that has received the Holy Spirit.

(printed under page 455)

(84) ‹anchor: Πιοῦσά τις ὕδωρ› · call in col 850

Πιοῦσά τις ὕδωρ. Lucianus in Bis accusato peracute ridet laboriosam artem Apollinis, cui nunc Delphis esse necesse est: paulo post Colophonem cursu petit: inde et Xanthum transit, postea Clarum currendo contendit, deinde Delum aut Branchidas, denique quocunque vates sacrum laticem pota, manducata lauro et concusso tripode venire jubet: καὶ ὅλως ἔνθα ἂν ἡ πρόμαντις πιοῦσα τοῦ ἱεροῦ νάματος καὶ μασησαμένη δάφνης καὶ τὴν τρίποδα διασεισαμένη κελεύῃ παρεῖναι. Narrat Cornelius Tacitus ad annum 771, apud Clarium Apollinem, non feminam ut apud Delphos, sed certis e familiis et ferme Mileto accitum sacerdotem, hausta fontis arcani aqua edere responsa versibus. Vid. Greg. Nyss. contra falsum, Vit. Apollonii lib. VII, Porphyrium in epistola ad Anebonem, ubi videtur a Luciano dissentire. Nam Clarium quidem sacerdotem ait, epota aqua, in exstasim rapi; at Pythiae id evenire, dum insidet cuidam orificio; in Branchidis autem prophetissam id assequi, dum vaporibus ex aqua manantibus perfunditur.

Πιοῦσά τις ὕδωρ ("a woman, having drunk water"). Lucian in The Double Indictment very sharply mocks the laborious calling of Apollo, who must now be at Delphi, a little later runs to Colophon, from there crosses to Xanthus, then hastens at a run to Claros, then to Delos or Branchidae; in short, wherever the prophetess, having drunk the sacred water, chewed the laurel and shaken the tripod, bids him come [the Greek repeats this]. Cornelius Tacitus relates, under the year 771 [of Rome], that at the shrine of Clarian Apollo it was not a woman, as at Delphi, but a priest summoned from certain families and mostly from Miletus, who, after drinking the water of a secret spring, gave the responses in verse. See Gregory of Nyssa, Against Fate [printed "contra falsum"]; the Life of Apollonius, book VII; and Porphyry in the Letter to Anebo, where he seems to disagree with Lucian: he says that the priest of Claros is rapt into ecstasy after drinking the water, but that this happens to the Pythia while she sits over a certain opening, and to the prophetess at Branchidae while she is bathed in vapours rising from water.

(printed under page 455)

(85) ‹anchor: Διὰ λιβάνων› · call in col 850

Διὰ λιβάνων. Legimus apud Dionem Cassium, pag. 42, exstitisse Apolloniae oraculum quoddam, ubi ex thure in ignem injecto futura praenoscebantur. Ejusmodi oraculis operam videntur dedisse, qui a Cyrillo Alex. VI, in Jul., p. 198, vocantur ἐμπυρομάντεις.

Διὰ λιβάνων ("by frankincense"). We read in Dio Cassius, p. 42, that there was an oracle at Apollonia where the future was foreknown from incense thrown on a fire. Those whom Cyril of Alexandria, Against Julian VI, p. 198, calls ἐμπυρομάντεις ("fire-diviners") seem to have practised oracles of this kind.

(printed under page 455)

(86) ‹anchor: ξύλῳ μαντικῷ› · call in col 850

Ξύλῳ μαντικῷ. S. Hieronymus in illud Osee IV: Populus meus in ligno suo interrogavit, et baculus ejus annuntiavit ei, sic loquitur: Propheta quasi stupens et mirabundus eloquitur: Populus meus, qui quondam meo vocabatur nomine, lignum interrogavit et virgas; quod genus divinationis Graeci ῥαβδομαντείαν vocant. Unde in Ezechiele legimus (c. XXV) quod virgas suas miscuerit Nabuchodonosor contra Ammon et Jerusalem, et exierit virga contra Jerusalem. Vid. Cyrill. Alexand. in eumdem Osee locum.

Ξύλῳ μαντικῷ ("a prophetic piece of wood"). St Jerome, on Hosea 4, "My people asked counsel of their wood, and their staff declared to them," says: "The prophet speaks as if astonished and wondering: My people, who once were called by my name, asked counsel of wood and of rods; a kind of divination the Greeks call ῥαβδομαντεία [rod-divination]. Hence we read in Ezekiel (ch. 25) that Nebuchadnezzar mixed his rods against Ammon and Jerusalem, and the rod came out against Jerusalem." See Cyril of Alexandria on the same passage of Hosea.

(printed under page 455)

(87) ‹anchor: ὑπάρχῃς ἀνώτερος› · call in col 850

Ἀνώτερος. Deest in Reg. 2, ubi ad marg. κρείττων.

Ἀνώτερος ("above"). Missing in Royal 2, which has κρείττων ("stronger") in the margin.

(printed under page 455)

(88) ‹anchor: εἰκόνα· μόνον› · call in col 850

Μόνον. Anglicanus codex et edit. Tigur. pro hac voce habent μίαν.

Μόνον ("only"). The English codex and the Zurich edition have μίαν ("one") for this word.

(printed under page 455)

(89) ‹anchor: Προσάπτειν σὲ δεῖ› · call in col 851

Προσάπτειν σὲ δεῖ. Postremam vocem addidimus ex Regiis codicibus, et Angl. et Tigur.

Προσάπτειν σὲ δεῖ ("you must attach"). We have added the last word from the Royal codices and the English and Zurich editions.

(printed under page 456)

(90) ‹anchor: Ἔτι καθέλκει› · call in col 851

Ἔτι καθέλκει. Sic Reg. 1, Angl., Fronto Ducaeus, et ad marg. edit. Tigurina. Aliae editiones ἐπικαθέλκει.

Ἔτι καθέλκει ("still drags down"). So Royal 1, the English edition, Fronton du Duc, and the Zurich edition in its margin. Other editions have ἐπικαθέλκει.

(printed under page 456)

(91) ‹anchor: Μετῳκίσθησαν› · call in col 851

Μετῳκίσθησαν. Ad marginem Regii primi legitur hoc scholium: Κατ' ἐξουσίαν διδασκαλικῶς, οὐκ ἐπιδεικτικῶς ταῦτα.

Μετῳκίσθησαν ("they were removed"). In the margin of the first Royal codex this scholium is read: "These things by authority, as teaching, not by demonstration."

(printed under page 456)

(92) ‹anchor: Τὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦτον› · call in col 851

Τὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦτον. Nempe οὐρανόν, ex quo patet hac voce non coelum a Tatiano intelligi, ut Valesius existimavit, not. in Euseb., p. 259, sed orbem terrarum. Agit enim hic de paradiso, quem in terra longe praestantiore, quam haec nostra est, situm fuisse pronuntiat. Sed cum id difficile ad credendum videri posset, ultra eas regiones, quae nobis cognitae sunt, alias esse longe meliores contendit, ac testimonio utitur geographorum, qui, ut observat Ducaeus, solebant teste Plutarcho Vit. Thes. ad marginem tabularum adnotare: Τὰ δὲ ἐπέκεινα θῖνες ἄνυδροι καὶ θηριώδεις, ἢ πηλὸς ἀϊδνής, ἢ Σκυθικὸν κρύος, ἢ πέλαγος πεπηγός. Tota ergo Tatiani disputatio hujus orbis terrarum finibus continetur, ac proinde illud τὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦτον idem valet ac τὰ δὲ ἐπέκεινα, quod paulo post sequitur, ac de regionibus ultra eas, quae nobis cognitae sunt, repositis accipi debet. Caeterum non soli Tatiano ejusmodi ultra Oceanum regiones placuerunt. Notum enim est omnibus illud S. Clementis in epist. I ad Cor., cap. 20: Ὠκεανὸς ἀνθρώποις ἀπέραντος καὶ οἱ μετ' αὐτὸν κόσμοι. Oceanus hominibus impermeabilis et qui post ipsum sunt mundi. Vide adnotationem Cotelerii in hunc S. Clementis locum. In Platonis testimonio, quod citatur ab Athenagora, Apol., n. 4, οὐρανός idem sonat ac κόσμος, et cum mundus saepe orbem terrarum significet, videtur id Tatianum adduxisse, ut οὐρανόν eodem sensu usurparet. Huc ergo redit tota illius sententia: mundus noster non est infinitus, sed nostrae ignorationi tribuendum, si remotiores illius terminos non deprehendimus. Mox cod. Joan. Tres. ἐν τέρματι.

Τὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦτον ("the things beyond this"), that is, beyond οὐρανός ("heaven"). From this it is plain that by this word Tatian means not the sky, as Valesius thought (notes on Eusebius, p. 259), but the world of lands. For he is speaking here of paradise, which he declares was situated in a land far more excellent than this of ours. But since this might seem hard to believe, he maintains that beyond the regions known to us there are others far better, and he uses the testimony of the geographers, who, as du Duc observes, used, on Plutarch's witness (Life of Theseus), to write in the margins of their maps: "What lies beyond is waterless sand full of wild beasts, or murky mud, or Scythian frost, or a frozen sea." All Tatian's argument, then, is contained within the bounds of this world of lands, and so τὰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τοῦτον means the same as τὰ δὲ ἐπέκεινα ("what lies beyond"), which follows a little later, and must be taken of regions lying beyond those known to us. Tatian was not alone, moreover, in holding to such regions beyond the Ocean. Everyone knows St Clement's saying in the First Letter to the Corinthians, ch. 20: "The Ocean, impassable to men, and the worlds beyond it." See Cotelier's note on this passage of St Clement. In the testimony of Plato cited by Athenagoras, Apology [Plea], n. 4, οὐρανός means the same as κόσμος; and since "world" often signifies the world of lands, this seems to have led Tatian to use οὐρανός in the same sense. His whole meaning, then, comes to this: our world is not infinite, but if we do not discover its more distant bounds, that must be put down to our ignorance. Next, the codex of Joan. Tres. [sic, for Johannes Frisius?] has ἐν τέρματι ("at the end").

(printed under page 456)

(93) ‹anchor: ἀμπώτεις› · call in col 851

Ἀμπώτεις. Ita Reg. 1, et Front. Editi ἀμπώτις.

Ἀμπώτεις ("ebb tides"). So Royal 1 and Fronton du Duc. The printed editions have ἀμπώτις.

(printed under page 456)

(94) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀθανασίαν› · call in col 851

Τὴν ἀθανασίαν. Haec desunt in codice Anglicano, nec leguntur in Regio 1, nisi ad marginem, ac forte e margine in textum venerunt. Nullus autem dubito quin hoc loco legendum sit, ut in interpretatione expressi σῶμα, non vero Πνεῦμα. Non enim Spiritus sanctus, sed corpus cum anima induet immortalitatem.

Τὴν ἀθανασίαν ("immortality"). These words are missing in the English codex and are not read in Royal 1 except in the margin, and perhaps came into the text from the margin. I have no doubt that in this place we should read, as I expressed it in the translation, σῶμα ("body"), not Πνεῦμα ("spirit"). For not the Holy Spirit but the body, together with the soul, will put on immortality.

(printed under page 456)

(95) ‹anchor: Ἀκειρεκόμης› · call in col 854

Ἀκειρεκόμης. Joannis Frisii codex: ἀκερσεκόμης.

Ἀκειρεκόμης ("unshorn-haired"). The codex of Johannes Frisius has ἀκερσεκόμης.

(printed under page 457)

(96) ‹anchor: Θεσπιάσι› · call in col 854

Θεσπιάσι. Non immerito castigavit Fronto Ducaeus hanc Gesneri interpretationem: Qui Thespii filias quinquaginta violavit. Illud enim Θεσπιάσι locum, ubi gesta res est, necessario designat. Praeterea, ut idem observat Ducaeus, Thestii filias hoc stuprum passas esse testantur Pausanias in Boeoticis, Athenaeus lib. XIII, Clemens in Protrept., Arnobius lib. IV. His adjungi potest Gregorius Naz. orat. 3, p. 108. Favet tamen Gesneri sententiae Diodorus Siculus, qui testatur Thespim Atheniensem Erechthei filium, cum quinquaginta filias ex diversis mulieribus genuisset, easque omnes ex Herculis complexu prolem suscipere vehementer optaret, eum ad solemne quoddam sacrificium invitasse, eidemque magnifice admodum et laute excepto singulas seorsim submisisse. Illum autem cum omnibus una eademque nocte congressum, eorum qui Thespiadae vocantur patrem effectum esse. Addit ex his Thespiadis duos Thebis mansisse, septem vero in urbe Thespiarum, δημούχους fuisse, eorumque posteros perdiu urbis principes fuisse.

Θεσπιάσι ("at Thespiae"). Fronton du Duc rightly censured Gesner's rendering, "who violated the fifty daughters of Thespius"; for Θεσπιάσι necessarily denotes the place where the deed was done. Besides, as du Duc also observes, Pausanias in the Boeotica, Athenaeus book XIII, Clement in the Protrepticus and Arnobius book IV testify that it was the daughters of Thestius who suffered this outrage. Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 3, p. 108, may be added to them. Diodorus Siculus, however, supports Gesner's view: he testifies that Thespius the Athenian, son of Erechtheus, having begotten fifty daughters by different women and earnestly wishing them all to bear children by Hercules, invited him to a solemn sacrifice and, having entertained him very splendidly and handsomely, sent the daughters to him one by one; and that Hercules, lying with them all on one and the same night, became the father of those called the Thespiadae. He adds that of these Thespiadae two remained at Thebes, while seven were δημοῦχοι ("rulers of the people") in the city of Thespiae, and their descendants were for a very long time the city's chief men.

(printed under page 457)

(97) ‹anchor: Καθ' ὑμᾶς› · call in col 854

Καθ' ὑμᾶς. Sic Regius 1, et edit. Tigurina. Aliae editiones καθ' ἡμᾶς.

Καθ' ὑμᾶς ("among you"). So Royal 1 and the Zurich edition. Other editions have καθ' ἡμᾶς ("among us").

(printed under page 457)

(98) ‹anchor: Κρύπτει τὸν ὄνειρον› · call in col 854

Κρύπτει τὸν ὄνειρον. Frustra auctor Editionis Oxon. ὄνειρον hic poni putat pro ὄνηρον, auxiliatorem. Respicit Tatianus ad librum secundum Iliadis, ubi Jupiter dicitur Agamemnoni somnium perniciosum, οὖλον ὄνειρον, misisse, ut Achillem honore afficeret, ac multos perderet apud naves Achivorum. Sic Somnium jussu Jovis alloquebatur Agamemnonem: Θωρῆξαί σε κέλευσε καρηκομόωντας Ἀχαιοὺς, Πανσυδίῃ· νῦν γάρ κεν ἕλοις πόλιν εὐρυάγυιαν Τρώων. Armare te jussit comatos Achivos omnibus copiis: nunc enim capies civitatem latos vicos habentem Trojanorum. Agamemnon cum ambiguam illam vocem πανσυδίῃ minus intelligeret, quae, ut observat Synesius De insomn., p. 149, Achillem et Myrmidonum phalangem complectebatur, stulte delusus est, quasi urbem primo impetu sine Achillis auxilio capturus.

Κρύπτει τὸν ὄνειρον ("hides the dream"). The editor of the Oxford edition wrongly thinks ὄνειρον stands here for ὄνηρον, "helper". Tatian has in view the second book of the Iliad, where Jupiter is said to have sent Agamemnon a baneful dream, οὖλον ὄνειρον, in order to honour Achilles and destroy many at the ships of the Achaeans. So the Dream, at Jupiter's command, addressed Agamemnon: "He bade you arm the long-haired Achaeans with all speed; for now you might take the wide-wayed city of the Trojans" [the Latin rendering follows]. Agamemnon, not well understanding the ambiguous word πανσυδίῃ ("with all the host"), which, as Synesius observes, On Dreams, p. 149, included Achilles and the phalanx of the Myrmidons, was foolishly deceived, as if he would take the city at the first assault without Achilles' help.

(printed under page 457)

(99) ‹anchor: Πρός› · call in col 854

Πρός. Reg. 2 et Fris. εἰς.

Πρός ("towards"). Royal 2 and Frisius have εἰς ("into").

(printed under page 457)

(1) ‹anchor: Μυθολογοῦντας› · call in col 854

Μυθολογοῦντας. Fronto Ducaeus addit ἡμᾶς.

Μυθολογοῦντας ("telling fables"). Fronton du Duc adds ἡμᾶς ("us").

(printed under page 457)

(2) ‹anchor: Μηνύσαντος› · call in col 854

Μηνύσαντος. Legendum putat H. Stephanus μηνύσοντος.

Μηνύσαντος ("having disclosed"). Henri Estienne thinks we should read μηνύσοντος ("who will disclose").

(printed under page 457)

(3) ‹anchor: Καὶ ὑφ' ὑμῶν› · call in col 854

Καὶ ὑφ' ὑμῶν. Sic Ducaeus, cui favent Regii codices, nisi quod habent ὑφ' ἡμῶν καὶ ὑφ' ὑμῶν. Aliae editiones καὶ ὑφ' ἡμῶν. Mox leg. ἢ γὰρ τοιοῦτοι.

Καὶ ὑφ' ὑμῶν ("and by you"). So du Duc, supported by the Royal codices, except that they have ὑφ' ἡμῶν καὶ ὑφ' ὑμῶν ("by us and by you"). Other editions have καὶ ὑφ' ἡμῶν ("and by us"). Next, read ἢ γὰρ τοιοῦτοι ("for either such …").

(printed under page 457)

(4) ‹anchor: ἐρεῖτε› · call in col 854

Ἐρεῖτε. Ita codex Anglicanus, Tigur. et Ducaeus. Alii ἐρεῖ τε, nempe Achillem et omnes Graecos, Hectorem et omnes barbaros, Metrodorus, si secum constet, pariter asseverabit nullos exstitisse. Sed malim legere ἐρεῖτε. Monitis paulo ante Graecis ne fabulas suas ad physiologiam trahant, nunc demonstrat quid incommodi ex hac rerum explicandarum ratione consequatur. Ibidem codex Joannis Frisii ἐν τῇ ποιήσει παρεισήχθησαν. Mox Reg. 1 τῶν προειρημένων. Deerat articulus in editis.

Ἐρεῖτε ("you will say"). So the English codex, the Zurich edition and du Duc. Others have ἐρεῖ τε ("and he will say"): that is, Metrodorus, if he is consistent, will likewise assert that Achilles and all the Greeks, Hector and all the barbarians, never existed. But I would rather read ἐρεῖτε. Having warned the Greeks a little before not to drag their fables into natural philosophy, he now shows what trouble follows from this way of explaining things. In the same place the codex of Johannes Frisius has ἐν τῇ ποιήσει παρεισήχθησαν ("were introduced in the poem"). Next, Royal 1 has τῶν προειρημένων; the article was missing in the printed editions.

(printed under page 457)

(5) ‹anchor: Ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ὑποθέσεως› · call in col 855

Ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ὑποθέσεως. Male Gesnerus, argumento sermonis invitati. Paulo ante comparaverat res Christianorum cum ethnicorum rebus dicendo: Propria intuentes monumenta, saltem nos ut similia fabulantes approbate. Inde adductus est ut Metrodori nugas referret. Ne cui ergo videretur seriam comparationem instituisse inter res adeo dissimiles, declarat se haec dixisse tanquam ex hypothesi, id est supponendo, at minime statuendo aut concedendo res Christianas cum Graecis posse conferri.

Ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ὑποθέσεως ("as on a supposition"). Gesner renders it wrongly, "invited by the subject of the discourse". A little before, he had compared the things of the Christians with those of the heathen, saying: "Looking at your own records, at least approve of us as telling like tales." That led him to report the trifles of Metrodorus. So that no one should think he had set up a serious comparison between things so unlike, he declares that he said this as on a hypothesis, that is, by supposing, not at all by laying down or granting, that Christian things can be compared with Greek.

(printed under page 458)

(6) ‹anchor: Τοῖς εἰς ὕλην› · call in col 855

Τοῖς εἰς ὕλην. Articulus additus ex cod. Angl. et editione Tigurina.

Τοῖς εἰς ὕλην ("to those [sunk] into matter"). The article has been added from the English codex and the Zurich edition.

(printed under page 458)

(7) ‹anchor: Εἶδόν τινα› · call in col 855

Εἶδόν τινα. Tatiani editores, et eruditi critici, in his Tillemontius, Crescentem Cynicum, jam antea notatum, iterum hoc loco describi existimant. Sed illis assentiri non possum. Nam Tatianum de mimis loqui demonstrant et quae praecedunt, et quae sequuntur, ac ipsa etiam instituta descriptio. Quod enim sic praefatur: Quis non rideat solemnes ludos, id eum non de philosophis, sed de spectaculis disputaturum indicat. Tres autem ludorum species percurrit, mimos, pugiles et gladiatores. De duobus postremis nulla prorsus controversia; neque etiam de primis ulla supererit, si attendamus haec verba: Ut qui alius sit intus, foris autem id quod non est mentiatur. Hunc vidi luxu valde diffluentem et mollitie omni fractum, ac modo oculis rutilantem, modo manus huc et illuc versantem, nunc Veneri, nunc Apollini similem. Nonne haec ad scenam necessario referenda, ubi, ut ait Tertullianus, lib. De spect., cap. 10: Quae privata et propria sunt scenae de gestu et flexu corporis, nam mollitiam Veneri et Libero immolant; ubi, ut idem Apol., cap. 15, imago dei alicujus ignominiosissimum caput et famosum vestit, et corpus impurum et ad istam artem effeminatione productum Minervam aliquam vel Herculem repraesentat. Quod autem hunc hominem Tatianus caedium actorem et magistrum moechandi vocat, id cum scena quadrare nemo non videt.

Εἶδόν τινα ("I saw a certain man"). Tatian's editors and learned critics, among them Tillemont, think that Crescens the Cynic, already censured, is described again here. But I cannot agree with them. For what precedes and what follows, and the very description he sets out, show that Tatian is speaking of mime-actors. When he begins, "Who would not laugh at the solemn games?", he signals that he is about to discuss not philosophers but the shows. He runs through three kinds of games: mimes, boxers and gladiators. About the last two there is no dispute at all; nor will any remain about the first if we attend to these words: "so as to be one thing within and to feign outwardly what he is not. I saw this man flowing with luxury and broken by every softness, now flashing with his eyes, now turning his hands this way and that, now like Venus, now like Apollo." Must not these be referred to the stage, where, as Tertullian says, On the Shows, ch. 10, "the things private and proper to the stage, of gesture and bending of the body, offer their softness to Venus and Liber"; where, as he also says, Apology ch. 15, "the likeness of some god clothes a most disgraced and infamous head, and an impure body, trained for that art by effeminacy, represents some Minerva or Hercules"? And that Tatian calls this man an actor of murders and a teacher of adultery, everyone sees fits the stage.

(printed under page 458)

(8) ‹anchor: Λυγιζόμενον› · call in col 855

Λυγιζόμενον. Reg. 2, λογιζόμενον.

Λυγιζόμενον ("bending supply"). Royal 2 has λογιζόμενον ("reckoning").

(printed under page 458)

(9) ‹anchor: Διὰ πηλίνης ὄψεως› · call in col 855

Διὰ πηλίνης ὄψεως. Quod ait Lucianus Peregrinum facie luto illita prodiisse in publicum, χριόμενος δὲ πηλῷ τὸ πρόσωπον, id ut insigne hujus Cynici dementiae exemplum narrat. Quare immerito eruditus Oxoniensis editor inde concludit, luteam faciem de qua hic Tatianus, Crescenti convenire. Multo aptius hac voce designatur larva ab histrionibus adhiberi solita.

Διὰ πηλίνης ὄψεως ("through a face of clay"). When Lucian says that Peregrinus went out in public with his face smeared with mud, "anointing his face with clay", he tells it as a striking example of that Cynic's madness. So the learned Oxford editor wrongly concludes from it that the clay face Tatian speaks of here fits Crescens. Far more aptly the word designates the mask that actors commonly used.

(printed under page 458)

(10) ‹anchor: Ἕνα κατήγορον πάντων τῶν θεῶν› · call in col 855

Ἕνα κατήγορον πάντων τῶν θεῶν. Haec theatris optime conveniunt, ubi deorum flagitia et facinora agebantur aut acta referebantur. Unde Tertullianus Apol. cap. 15: Caetera lasciviae ingenia etiam voluptatibus vestris per deorum dedecus operantur... Sed et histrionum litterae omnem foeditatem eorum designant, et I, ad Nat.: Exinde quis non poetarum ex auctoritate principis sui in deos insolens, aut vera prodendo aut falsa fingendo? Et tragici quidem aut comici pepercerunt, ut non aerumnas ac poenas dei praefarentur? Sic etiam Lactantius lib. V, c. 20: Qualis haec religio aut quanta majestas putanda est quae adoratur in templis, illuditur in theatris! Vid. Theophil. lib. III, n. 15.

Ἕνα κατήγορον πάντων τῶν θεῶν ("one accuser of all the gods"). This fits the theatres perfectly, where the shameful deeds and crimes of the gods were acted or recounted. Hence Tertullian, Apology ch. 15: "The other wits of wantonness also serve your pleasures by the disgrace of the gods… The actors' scripts, too, set out all their foulness"; and To the Nations I: "Thenceforth which of the poets, on the authority of their chief, is not insolent towards the gods, either betraying truths or inventing falsehoods? And have the tragedians or comedians spared them, so as not to set forth the troubles and punishments of a god?" So too Lactantius, book V, ch. 20: "What kind of religion, or how great a majesty, must that be thought which is adored in the temples and mocked in the theatres!" See Theophilus, book III, n. 15.

(printed under page 458)

(11) ‹anchor: Δεισιδαιμονίας› · call in col 855

Δεισιδαιμονίας. Quia scilicet, ut paulo ante dixit, haec occasione pravorum daemonum fieri solebant. Sic etiam Tertullianus De spect., cap. 10, demonstrat res scenicas idololatria totas contineri, sive origo spectetur, sive apparatus, sive theatrum, quod proprie sacrarium Veneris est.

Δεισιδαιμονίας ("of superstition"). Because, as he said a little before, these things used to be done at the prompting of wicked demons. So too Tertullian, On the Shows, ch. 10, shows that stage things are wholly bound up with idolatry, whether one looks at their origin, their equipment or the theatre, "which is properly the shrine of Venus".

(printed under page 458)

(12) ‹anchor: Θησαυρομανίας› · call in col 855

Θησαυρομανίας. Videtur deesse καί, aut forte nomen aliquod simile iis quae praecedunt et sequuntur.

Θησαυρομανίας ("of treasure-madness"). καί seems to be missing, or perhaps some noun like those that precede and follow.

(printed under page 458)

(13) ‹anchor: Καταδικαζομένων ἀφορμήν› · call in col 855

Καταδικαζομένων ἀφορμήν. Saepe usu evenit, ut scenae insignium virorum accusatoribus viam aperirent. Unde Aristophanes cum Anyto et Melito constituisse dicitur, ut Socratem luderet in Nubibus. Sed praecipue in Christianos invehi solebant mimi et scenobatae. Odisse debemus, inquit Tertullianus, De spect. 26, istos conventus et coetus ethnicorum, vel quod illic nomen Dei blasphematur, illic in nos quotidiani leones expostulantur, inde persecutiones decernuntur, inde tentationes emittuntur. Ex his emendari potest locus corruptus, lib. I, ad Nat. cap. 10, ubi ait: Quod si, ut unus atque alius... mus ait, idcirco vobis quoque irascuntur (dii) quoniam de nostra eradicatione negligitis, absolutum est de infirmitate et mediocritate eorum. Videtur commode expleri haec lacuna, si legatur, unus atque alius mimus.

Καταδικαζομένων ἀφορμήν ("an occasion for those condemned"). It often happened that the stage opened the way for the accusers of eminent men. Hence Aristophanes is said to have agreed with Anytus and Meletus to mock Socrates in the Clouds. But mimes and stage-players were especially given to attacking the Christians. "We ought to hate," says Tertullian, On the Shows 26, "those gatherings and assemblies of the heathen, if only because there the name of God is blasphemed, there lions are daily demanded against us, from there persecutions are decreed, from there temptations are sent out." From this a corrupt passage can be corrected, To the Nations I, ch. 10, where he says: "But if, as one and another …mus says, the gods are angry with you too because you neglect to root us out, the case is settled as to their weakness and smallness." The gap seems to be well filled if we read "one and another mime (mimus)".

(printed under page 458)

(14) ‹anchor: Συλαγωγεῖσθε› · call in col 858

Συλαγωγεῖσθε. Ita Reg. uterque, Angl. et Tigur. In Regio 2 legitur ad marginem ψυχαγωγεῖσθε. Aliae editiones δημαγωγεῖσθε, ex conjectura Gesneri, ut observat editor Anglus.

Συλαγωγεῖσθε ("you are carried off as plunder"). So both Royal codices, the English and the Zurich. In Royal 2 ψυχαγωγεῖσθε ("you are beguiled") is read in the margin. Other editions have δημαγωγεῖσθε, from Gesner's conjecture, as the English editor observes.

(printed under page 459)

(15) ‹anchor: Ῥιναυλοῦσι› · call in col 858

Ῥιναυλοῦσι. Hic in margine ascriptum erat: Ἤτοι ῥινοκτυποῦσιν, οἱονεὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῖς ῥώθωσι συνέλκοντες (συνελκόντων Aelon.), ποιὸν ἦχον ἐπὶ κατάγελων ἀποτελοῦσι (occurrit hoc Scholion in codice priore Regio), id est, spiritum naribus concipientes sonum risus excitandi gratia elidunt. GESNER. Ista, ni fallor, ob oculos habuit Clemens, Paedag., lib. III, c. 4, ubi ait de ejusmodi hominibus: Τὸ πορνικὸν ἀναίδην εἰς ἀσέλγειαν διὰ ῥινῶν ἐπιψοφοῦντες ἐπικιναίδισμα, et paulo post: Ἐπικροτοῦσι τῇ ῥινί, βατράχων δίκην, καθάπερ ἔνοικον τοῖς μυκτῆρσι τὴν χολὴν κεκτημένοι. WORTH. Sic etiam Persius sat. I: Rancidulum quiddam balba de nare locutus.

Ῥιναυλοῦσι ("they pipe through the nose"). Here was written in the margin: "That is, they make a noise with the nose, as it were drawing the breath in through the nostrils (Aelon. συνελκόντων), and produce a certain sound for laughter" (this scholium occurs in the first Royal codex); that is, drawing breath through their nostrils they force out a sound to raise a laugh. GESNER. Clement, unless I am mistaken, had this in view, Paedagogus III, ch. 4, where he says of such men: "sounding through their nostrils the harlot's lewd, shameless trill to wantonness"; and a little after: "they snort with the nose like frogs, as though they had bile lodged in their nostrils." WORTH. So too Persius, Satire I: "having uttered something rancid from a lisping nose."

(printed under page 459)

(16) ‹anchor: Παρ' ὑμῖν› · call in col 858

Παρ' ὑμῖν. Sic Anglicanus codex. Editi παρ' ἡμῖν. Ibidem Reg. 1, κηρύσσοντα. Editi habebant κηρύσσονται. Mox Joannis Frisii codex ἐκφωνήματα.

Παρ' ὑμῖν ("among you"). So the English codex. The printed editions have παρ' ἡμῖν ("among us"). In the same place Royal 1 has κηρύσσοντα; the printed editions had κηρύσσονται. Next, the codex of Johannes Frisius has ἐκφωνήματα ("utterances").

(printed under page 459)

(17) ‹anchor: Καὶ διὰ σχημάτων› · call in col 858

Καὶ διὰ σχημάτων. Non figuras poeticas, sed gestus indicat Tatianus. Sic apud Clem. Alex, Paedag., lib. III, cap. 4, ejusmodi homines ἀκολάστοις ῥήμασι καὶ σχήμασι τέρπειν dicuntur.

Καὶ διὰ σχημάτων ("and through figures"). Tatian means not poetic figures but gestures. So in Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus III, ch. 4, such men are said "to delight with licentious words and gestures".

(printed under page 459)

(18) ‹anchor: Περιφέροντας› · call in col 858

Περιφέροντας. Angl. et Ducaeus ἐπιφέροντας. Mox idem codex Angl. ὑβρίσεως.

Περιφέροντας ("carrying about"). The English edition and du Duc have ἐπιφέροντας. Next, the same English codex has ὑβρίσεως.

(printed under page 459)

(19) ‹anchor: ὁ πονῶν› · call in col 858

Ὁ πονῶν. Cod. Joan. Fris. ὁ πεινῶν.

Ὁ πονῶν ("the toiling man"). The codex of Johannes Frisius has ὁ πεινῶν ("the hungry man").

(printed under page 459)

(20) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀνθρωποφαγίαν› · call in col 858

Τὴν ἀνθρωποφαγίαν. Angl. et Tigur. διὰ τήν. Reg. 2.

Τὴν ἀνθρωποφαγίαν ("cannibalism"). The English and Zurich editions have διὰ τήν ("for the sake of"). Royal 2.

(printed under page 459)

(21) ‹anchor: αἱματοχυσίαις› · call in col 858

Αἱματοχυσίαις. Reg. uterque αἱματεκχυσίαις.

Αἱματοχυσίαις ("bloodsheddings"). Both Royal codices have αἱματεκχυσίαις.

(printed under page 459)

(22) ‹anchor: χάριν τοῦ φονεύεσθαι› · call in col 858

Φονεύεσθαι. Sic editio Tigurina ad marginem. Male in aliis editionibus φονεῦσθαι.

Φονεύεσθαι ("to be killed"). So the Zurich edition in its margin. Other editions wrongly have φονεῦσθαι.

(printed under page 459)

(23) ‹anchor: τὴν Ἀλκμαίωνος› · call in col 858

Ἀλκμαίωνος. Quae sequuntur existimat eruditus editor Oxon. non Euripidis quidem verba esse, sed sententiam. At nihil ex Euripide decerpit hoc loco Tatianus; sed actorem poetice describit, cui mandatae Alcmaeonis matricidae partes.

Ἀλκμαίωνος ("of Alcmaeon"). The learned Oxford editor thinks that what follows is not Euripides' words but his meaning. But Tatian takes nothing from Euripides here; he describes in poetic terms the actor given the part of Alcmaeon the matricide.

(printed under page 459)

(24) ‹anchor: Κέχηνέ τε› · call in col 859

Κέχηνέ τε. Reg. 2, κεχήνει τε.

Κέχηνέ τε ("and gapes"). Royal 2 has κεχήνει τε.

(printed under page 460)

(25) ‹anchor: Ἡγησιλάου› · call in col 859

Ἡγησιλάου. Legendum Ἀκουσιλάου monet eruditus editor Oxoniensis atque hujus emendationis auctorem citat Jonsium, lib. I, cap. 3, De scriptoribus philosophicis.

Ἡγησιλάου ("of Hegesilaus"). The learned Oxford editor advises reading Ἀκουσιλάου ("of Acusilaus"), and cites Jonsius, De scriptoribus philosophicis I, ch. 3, as the author of this emendation.

(printed under page 460)

(26) ‹anchor: Τῆς ἐκείνου γλώττης› · call in col 859

Τῆς ἐκείνου γλώττης. Subaudiendum videtur ἕνεκα. Editor Oxoniensis hanc esse sententiam putat: Qui pariter ac Acusilaus in re mythica versatur.

Τῆς ἐκείνου γλώττης ("of his tongue"). ἕνεκα ("for the sake of") seems to be understood. The Oxford editor thinks the meaning is: "who, like Acusilaus, deals in mythical matter".

(printed under page 460)

(27) ‹anchor: Τὸν Θηβαῖον› · call in col 859

Τὸν Θηβαῖον. Interdum in hac oratione occurrunt verba loco suo depulsa, quae restitui non possunt, nisi accuratissime investigando. Deesse aliquod videtur post τὸν μυθικὸν αὐλητήν, nec satis commode dicitur κατὰ Ἀριστόξενον, τὸν Θηβαῖον Ἀντιγενίδην πολυπραγμονεῖν. Cum enim durior haec loquendi ratio, tum vero Aristoxenus non in solo Antigenide Thebaeo occupatus fuit, sed aliorum etiam tibicinum vitas scripsit. Quare videntur haec verba τὸν Θηβαῖον Ἀντιγενίδην multo aptius collocari posse post τὸν μυθικὸν αὐλητήν.

Τὸν Θηβαῖον ("the Theban"). Now and then in this oration words occur that have been driven from their place and cannot be restored except by the most careful inquiry. Something seems to be missing after τὸν μυθικὸν αὐλητήν ("the legendary flute-player"), and it is not very fitly said "to busy oneself, following Aristoxenus, with the Theban Antigenides". For this way of speaking is rather harsh, and besides, Aristoxenus was not occupied with Antigenides of Thebes alone but wrote the lives of other flute-players too. So the words τὸν Θηβαῖον Ἀντιγενίδην seem much more aptly placed after τὸν μυθικὸν αὐλητήν.

(printed under page 460)

(28) ‹anchor: Τῶν ὑμετέρων› · call in col 859

Τῶν ὑμετέρων. Legendum ἡμετέρων, aut nulla prorsus erit vel absurda sententia. Petit Tatianus, ut cum sua ethnicis instituta permittat, eodem se esse jure patiantur. Eamdem illis fert conditionem, n. 20 et n. 25.

Τῶν ὑμετέρων ("of yours"). Read ἡμετέρων ("of ours"), or there will be no sense at all, or an absurd one. Tatian asks that, since he leaves the heathen their own institutions, they let him be under the same right. He offers them the same terms at n. 20 and n. 25.

(printed under page 460)

(29) ‹anchor: Ἐξαμελοῦσι› · call in col 859

Ἐξαμελοῦσι. Angl. et Reg. ἐξαμπλοῦσι, et ad marg. ἐξαπλῶσι. Cynici qui et ἐξωμίαι saepius dicti sunt, pallium induebant humero dextro subjectum, et in sinistrum conjectum, ante et retro duplicatum. Unde et alterum humerum nudatum et exsertum habebant, alterum duplicato pallii textu coopertum. Idem de Cynicis notat et Cyprianus, lib. De bono patientiae: Apparet non esse illic veram patientiam, ubi sit insolens affectatae libertatis audacia et exserti ac seminudi pectoris inverecunda jactantia. WORTH.

Ἐξαμελοῦσι ("they bare"). The English edition and the Royal have ἐξαμπλοῦσι, with ἐξαπλῶσι in the margin. The Cynics, often also called ἐξωμίαι ("one-shouldered"), wore the cloak passed under the right shoulder and thrown over the left, doubled before and behind; so they had one shoulder bared and exposed, the other covered by the doubled fabric of the cloak. Cyprian too notes the same of the Cynics, On the Good of Patience: "It is clear that there is no true patience where there is the insolent boldness of an affected liberty and the shameless display of a bared and half-naked breast." WORTH.

(printed under page 460)

(30) ‹anchor: Ὑφάντου› · call in col 859

Ὑφάντου. Reg. 2, ὑφάντων.

Ὑφάντου ("woven"). Royal 2 has ὑφάντων.

(printed under page 460)

(31) ‹anchor: Διὰ δὲ τήν› · call in col 859

Διὰ δὲ τήν. Illud δέ addidi ex codice Anglicano et edit. Tigur. et Front.

Διὰ δὲ τήν ("but because of the"). I have added δέ from the English codex and the Zurich and Fronton editions.

(printed under page 460)

(32) ‹anchor: Ἄλογον μίμησιν› · call in col 859

Ἄλογον μίμησιν. Lege ἀλόγων.

Ἄλογον μίμησιν ("an irrational imitation"). Read ἀλόγων ("of irrational creatures").

(printed under page 460)

(33) ‹anchor: Πλάτωνος ἔπη› · call in col 859

Ἔπη. Sic ope Reg. 1 et Angl. emendavi, atque ita emendandum monuerat editor Oxoniensis quod vitiose in editis legebatur: Τὸ φιλοσοφεῖν τοῖς Πλάτωνος ἐπὶ δόγμασι.

Ἔπη ("follow"). So I have corrected, with the help of Royal 1 and the English codex, what was faultily read in the printed editions, "philosophising upon the doctrines of Plato"; and the Oxford editor had advised that it be so corrected.

(printed under page 460)

(34) ‹anchor: Φερεκύδους δόγματος› · call in col 859

Τοῦ Φερεκύδους δόγματος. Aristoteles Pherecydis doctrinae haeres est, et animae immortalitatem exagitat. Duo maxima vitia insunt huic vulgatae scripturae. 1° Aristotelem Pherecydis doctrinae haeredem facit. At id prorsus absurdum, et veterum testimoniis repugnans, in primis Tatiani, qui supra n. 3, non Aristotelem, sed Pythagoram Pherecydis decretorum haeredem vocat. 2° Non minus absurde Aristoteles Pherecydis imitator in exagitanda animae immortalitate diceretur; cum Pherecydes immortalis animae asseverandae princeps fuisse dicatur. In eadem sententia, inquit Lactantius lib. VII, cap. 8, fuit etiam Pythagoras antea (nempe ante Platonem) ejusque praeceptor Pherecydes, quem Cicero tradit primum de immortalitate animarum disputasse. Dubium ergo non est, quin legendum sit: Φησί, καὶ τοῦ Φερεκύδους δόγματος κληρονόμος ἐστί· ὁ δὲ Ἀριστοτέλης τῆς ψυχῆς, etc. His quae de Pherecyde ejusque discipulo Pythagora dixi, contraria videri non debent quae apud Tertullianum leguntur lib. De resurr., cap. I: Nihil esse post mortem, inquit, Epicuri schola est. Ait et Seneca omnia finiri post mortem, etiam ipsam. Satis est autem si non minor philosophia Pythagorae et Empedoclis. Sed Platonici immortalem animam contrario reclamant. Non dubito quin legendum sit, Protagorae et Empedoclis.

Τοῦ Φερεκύδους δόγματος ("of Pherecydes' doctrine"). [The common translation reads:] "Aristotle is heir to Pherecydes' doctrine and assails the immortality of the soul." Two very great faults lie in this common reading. First, it makes Aristotle heir to Pherecydes' doctrine; but that is quite absurd and contrary to the testimony of the ancients, above all of Tatian, who at n. 3 above calls not Aristotle but Pythagoras "heir of Pherecydes' teachings". Second, it would be no less absurd to call Aristotle Pherecydes' imitator in assailing the soul's immortality, since Pherecydes is said to have been the first to assert the immortal soul. "Of the same opinion," says Lactantius, book VII, ch. 8, "was Pythagoras earlier (that is, before Plato), and his teacher Pherecydes, who Cicero records was the first to discuss the immortality of souls." There is no doubt, then, that we should read: "He says; and he is heir to Pherecydes' doctrine. But Aristotle [assails the immortality] of the soul", etc. What I have said of Pherecydes and his disciple Pythagoras should not seem contradicted by what is read in Tertullian, On the Resurrection, ch. 1: "That there is nothing after death," he says, "is the school of Epicurus. Seneca too says that all things end after death, even death itself. It is enough, however, if the no less philosophy of Pythagoras and Empedocles [says so]. But the Platonists cry out against it, holding the soul immortal." I do not doubt that we should read "of Protagoras and Empedocles".

(printed under page 460)

(35) ‹anchor: Ῥαδάμανθυν› · call in col 862

Ῥαδάμανθυν. Ita tres mss. et Tigur. Aliae edit. Ῥαδάμανθον.

Ῥαδάμανθυν ("Rhadamanthys"). So the three manuscripts and the Zurich edition. Other editions have Ῥαδάμανθον.

(printed under page 461)

(36) ‹anchor: Οἱ πεπαιδευμένοι› · call in col 862

Οἱ πεπαιδευμένοι. Ita Reg. 1, haud paulo melius quam in editis οἱ ἐπιτηδευόμενοι, qui de industria id fingitis. Non enim hujus calumniae inventores erant hi, quos alloquitur Tatianus, sed eam ab aliis traditam ac sine certo auctore et capite, sine argumentis jactatam probabant. Unde eos Tatianus, itidem ut falsos testes, edoctos et subornatos fuisse dicit.

Οἱ πεπαιδευμένοι ("you who have been taught"). So Royal 1, far better than the printed editions' οἱ ἐπιτηδευόμενοι, "you who invent this on purpose". For those whom Tatian addresses were not the inventors of this slander; they approved it as handed down by others and bandied about without sure author or source and without proofs. Hence Tatian says they were schooled and suborned, just like false witnesses.

(printed under page 461)

(37) ‹anchor: Τὰ ἐν ὑμῖν› · call in col 862

Τὰ ἐν ὑμῖν. Ita Reg. uterque, in quibus tamen legitur τίνα ante τά, quemadmodum et in cod. Anglic., et in edit. Tigur. Aliae editiones τὰ ἐν ἡμῖν, et sic Reg. 1, supra lineam.

Τὰ ἐν ὑμῖν ("the things among you"). So both Royal codices, in which, however, τίνα is read before τά, as also in the English codex and the Zurich edition. Other editions have τὰ ἐν ἡμῖν ("the things among us"), and so Royal 1 above the line.

(printed under page 461)

(38) ‹anchor: Βιβλίων› · call in col 862

Βιβλίων. Reg. 2, βίβλων.

Βιβλίων ("of books"). Royal 2 has βίβλων.

(printed under page 461)

(39) ‹anchor: τὸ δὲ ἐνεστώς› · call in col 862

Τὸ δὲ ἐνεστώς. Similis sententia apud Eusebium De laud. const. cap. 6, p. 615, ubi Eusebius docet aevum nec senescere nec interire, nec praesens apprehendi posse, nedum praeteritum aut futurum. Hoc enim non est, quippe quod jam transiit; futurum vero nondum adest, ac proinde non est omnino. Praesens autem apprehendi non posse sic probat: Τὸ δέ γε νῦν αὐτοῦ λεγόμενον, ἅμα νοήματι καὶ φωνῇ, λόγου θᾶττον διαδιδράσκει. Οὐκ ἔστι δ' ἄλλως αὐτοῦ ἐπιλαβέσθαι, ὡς ἑστῶτος· ἢ γὰρ τὰ μέλλοντα (leg. ἢ γὰρ μέλλοντα) προσδοκᾶν, ἢ παρελθόντα συνορᾶν ἀνάγκη. Ἅμα γὰρ ἐννοίᾳ συνολισθαίνων φεύγει. Praesens autem quod dicitur tempus, simul cum ipsa cogitatione ac locutione, imo etiam citius evolat. Prorsus vero ipsum tanquam praesens apprehendere non licet. Nam illud aut futurum exspectemus aut praeteritum contemplemur necesse est. Quippe simul cum ipsa cogitatione fugiens elabitur.

Τὸ δὲ ἐνεστώς ("and the present"). A like thought is in Eusebius, In Praise of Constantine, ch. 6, p. 615, where Eusebius teaches that time neither grows old nor perishes, and that the present cannot be grasped, still less the past or the future. For the past is not, since it has already gone by; and the future is not yet here, and so is not at all. That the present cannot be grasped he proves thus: "What is called its 'now', together with thought and speech, runs off quicker than a word. It cannot otherwise be laid hold of as standing still; for we must either await what is to come (read: 'await it as coming') or look back on what has passed. For it slips away and flees together with the thought" [the Latin rendering follows].

(printed under page 461)

(40) ‹anchor: ὑμῖν γεγόνασιν› · call in col 862

Γεγόνασιν Reg. 2 habuit prima manu γέγονεν.

Γεγόνασιν ("have become"). Royal 2 had γέγονεν at the first hand.

(printed under page 461)

(41) ‹anchor: ἑαυτοῖς ἀλλήλους› · call in col 862

Ἀλλήλους. Ita Reg. 1 et Ducaeus. Aliae editiones ἀλλήλοις.

Ἀλλήλους ("one another"). So Royal 1 and du Duc. Other editions have ἀλλήλοις.

(printed under page 461)

(42) ‹anchor: Ἀποκρύπτετε› · call in col 863

Ἀποκρύπτετε. Eruditus auctor editionis Oxoniensis hanc lectionem refellit ac legendum esse contendit ἀποκηρύσσετε, praedicatis. Hac potissimum ratione nititur, quod Christus, Pharisaeorum ostentationem notans, ἐν γωνίαις τῶν πλατειῶν, in angulis platearum stantes precari dicat. Sed non animadvertit vir eruditus aliud esse in angulis platearum orare, aliud in angulis loqui. Qui in angulis platearum orat, multorum oculos non effugit; qui in angulis loquitur, a paucis tantum audiri potest. Illud autem dubium esse non potest quin latendi causa angulos philosophi quaesierint. Callicles apud Platonem in Gorgia, p. 485, ait philosophum media urbis loca et forum fugientem latebras persequi μετὰ μειρακίων ἐν γωνίᾳ τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων ψιθυρίζοντα, cum tribus aut quatuor in angulo pueris susurrantem. Eodem sensu apud Themist. or. 22, ἐν γωνίᾳ ψιθυρίζειν. Apud Photium cod. 242, in Vita Isidori opponuntur vitae actuosae ac multas utilitates praestanti οἱ ἐν γωνίᾳ καθήμενοι λόγοι, sedentes in angulis sermones. Quotusquisque nunc, inquit Hieronymus Praefat. lib. III in epist. ad Galat., Aristotelem legit? Quanti Platonis vel libros novere vel nomen? Vix in angulis otiosi eos senes recolunt. Lactantius lib. IV, cap. 16: Bonos facere, inquit, oportet potius, quam inclusos in angulis facienda praecipere. Testatur Origenes lib. III adv. Celsum, n. 5, nonnullos Cynicos publice apud fortuitum auditorium solitos esse disserere, δημοσίᾳ πρὸς τοὺς παρατυγχάνοντας διαλεγόμενοι. Sed cum Tatianus opponat eorum in angulis disputationes superbae in publicum proditioni, liquet eum loqui de doctrina, quam philosophorum plerique instar mysterii occultam tenebant. Vid. Origenem I adv. Celsum, Synesium ep. 142.

Ἀποκρύπτετε ("you hide away"). The learned author of the Oxford edition rejects this reading and contends we should read ἀποκηρύσσετε, "you proclaim". He relies chiefly on this: that Christ, censuring the Pharisees' ostentation, says they pray standing "at the corners of the streets". But the learned man did not notice that it is one thing to pray at street corners, another to talk in corners. One who prays at street corners does not escape many eyes; one who talks in corners can be heard by only a few. And there can be no doubt that the philosophers sought out corners in order to lie hidden. Callicles in Plato's Gorgias, p. 485, says that the philosopher, shunning the city's centre and the market-place, pursues hiding-places, "whispering in a corner with three or four lads". In the same sense Themistius, Oration 22, has "to whisper in a corner". In Photius, codex 242, in the Life of Isidore, "discourses that sit in a corner" are set against an active life that renders many services. "How many now," says Jerome, preface to book III on the Letter to the Galatians, "read Aristotle? How many know Plato's books, or even his name? Scarcely do idle old men in corners recall them." Lactantius, book IV, ch. 16: "One ought rather to make men good," he says, "than, shut up in corners, to give precepts for what should be done." Origen testifies, Against Celsus III, n. 5, that some Cynics used to lecture in public to a chance audience, "discoursing publicly to those who happened by". But since Tatian sets their disputations in corners against a proud publication, it is plain that he is speaking of the teaching that most of the philosophers kept hidden like a mystery. See Origen, Against Celsus I, and Synesius, Letter 142.

(printed under page 462)

(43) ‹anchor: μυστήρια τετιμωρήκατε› · call in col 863

Τετιμωρήκατε. Si nihil mutetur in textu, is erit sensus: Quamvis tanta fuerit licentia Diagorae, ut Athenis pulsus fuerit, tamen ejus Phrygios libros legitis, nec nobis infensi esse desinitis. Sed mihi valde arridet eruditi abbatis Orbacensis, jam non semel a me laudati, sententia, qui legendum putat τετιμήκατε. Diagoram Atheniensem, quamvis mysteria evulgaverit, in pretio habetis; et qui Phrygios illius libros legitis, nos odio habetis. Hanc emendationem confirmat vir doctissimus simili Tertulliani loco, ubi legitur, Apol. cap. 12, edit. Pamel.: Iidem estis, qui Senecam aliquem pluribus et majoribus de vestra superstitione perorantem reprehenditis. Melius in edit. Rigaltii, probatis.

Τετιμωρήκατε ("you punished"). If nothing in the text is changed, the sense will be: "Although Diagoras was so licentious that he was driven out of Athens, still you read his Phrygian books, and you do not cease to be hostile to us." But I am much taken with the view of the learned abbot of Orbais, already praised by me more than once, who thinks we should read τετιμήκατε ("you honoured"): "Diagoras the Athenian, though he divulged the mysteries, you hold in esteem; and you who read his Phrygian books hold us in hatred." That most learned man confirms this emendation by a like passage of Tertullian, Apology ch. 12, where Pamelius's edition reads: "You are the same who censure a Seneca when he declaims more and at greater length against your superstition." Rigault's edition has, better, "approve".

(printed under page 462)

(44) ‹anchor: Φρυγίοις αὐτοῦ λόγοις› · call in col 863

Τοῖς Φρυγίοις αὐτοῦ λόγοις. In his Phrygiis libris ea quae ad Cybelen pertinent, tractata a Diagora fuisse existimat Vossius lib. II De historicis Graecis, cap. 2. Deorum autem refellendorum cum ipse Diagoras, tum duo alii, quos modo nominabit Tatianus, hanc viam sequebantur, ut eos vel homines esse vel res inanimas probarent. Arnobius lib. IV Contra gentes recenset Diagoram et Leontem Pellaeum inter scriptores, qui scrupulosae diligentiae cura in lucem res abditas libertate ingenua protulerunt; seque posse declarat eorum testimonio omnes istos ........ deos homines fuisse monstrare. Non dubium quin iidem scriptores non segniter elaboraverint in revocandis ad naturam fabulosis diis. Sic enim de Phrygiis et Aegyptiacis libris Plutarchus apud Eusebium Praep. Evangel. lib. III, c. 1: Ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἡ παλαιὰ φυσιολογία καὶ παρ' Ἕλλησι καὶ βαρβάροις λόγος ἦν φυσικὸς ἐγκεκαλυμμένος μύθοις, τὰ πολλὰ δι' αἰνιγμάτων καὶ ὑπονοιῶν ἐπίκρυφος καὶ μυστηριώδης θεολογία, τά τε λαλούμενα τῶν σιγωμένων σαφέστερα τοῖς πολλοῖς ἔχοντα (leg. ἔχουσα), καὶ τὰ σιγώμενα τῶν λαλουμένων ὑποπτότερα, δῆλόν ἐστιν ἐν τοῖς Ὀρφικοῖς ἔπεσι καὶ τοῖς Αἰγυπτιακοῖς καὶ Φρυγίοις λόγοις. Antiquam physiologiam et apud Graecos et apud barbaros rationem fuisse naturalem fabulis involutam, et plerumque per aenigmata et abditas sententias occultam et mysterii plenam theologiam, in qua et his, quae tacentur, clariora non sunt apud vulgus ea quae enuntiantur, et quae tacentur plus suspicionis afferunt quam quae enuntiantur; id manifestum est ex Orphicis versibus et Aegyptiacis ac Phrygiis libris. Leg. οὐ σαφέστερα

Τοῖς Φρυγίοις αὐτοῦ λόγοις ("his Phrygian discourses"). Vossius, De historicis Graecis II, ch. 2, thinks that in these Phrygian books Diagoras treated what concerns Cybele. In refuting the gods, both Diagoras himself and two others whom Tatian will name shortly followed this path: they proved them to be either men or lifeless things. Arnobius, Against the Nations IV, lists Diagoras and Leon of Pella among the writers "who with scrupulous diligence and frank freedom brought hidden things to light", and declares that by their testimony he can show "that all those … gods were men". No doubt the same writers worked hard at reducing the fabled gods to nature. For so Plutarch, in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel III, ch. 1, says of the Phrygian and Egyptian books: "That the ancient natural philosophy, among Greeks and barbarians alike, was a natural account wrapped in myths, a theology for the most part hidden and mysterious by way of riddles and hints, in which what is spoken is clearer to the many than what is kept silent (read ἔχουσα), and what is kept silent more suspect than what is spoken, is plain in the Orphic verses and the Egyptian and Phrygian books" [the Latin rendering follows]. Read οὐ σαφέστερα ("not clearer").

(printed under page 462)

(45) ‹anchor: λόγοις ἐντυγχάνοντες› · call in col 863

Ἐντυγχάνοντες. Reg. uterque: ἐντυγχάνοντας.

Ἐντυγχάνοντες ("reading"). Both Royal codices have ἐντυγχάνοντας.

(printed under page 462)

(46) ‹anchor: Δόξας Ἀππίωνος› · call in col 866

Δόξας Ἀππίωνος. Editi Ἀπίωνος, manifesto errore. Vocatur enim Appion sub finem hujus orationis et apud Justinum Cohort. n. 9, et alios scriptores.

Δόξας Ἀππίωνος ("the opinions of Appion"). The printed editions have Ἀπίωνος, a plain error. For he is called Appion near the end of this oration, and in Justin's Exhortation, n. 9, and in other writers.

(printed under page 463)

(47) ‹anchor: Δᾳδουχῇ· τοὺς ἄρχοντας› · call in col 866

Δᾳδουχῇ· τοὺς ἄρχοντας. Conatus sum huic loco lucem afferre, sic interpungendo. Editi δᾳδουχῇ τοὺς ἄρχοντας. Sic reddidit Gesnerus: Licet contemptor eorum Epicurus faces in deorum festis principibus ferat.

Δᾳδουχῇ· τοὺς ἄρχοντας ("carries the torch; the rulers"). I have tried to throw light on this passage by punctuating it so. The printed editions have δᾳδουχῇ τοὺς ἄρχοντας, which Gesner rendered: "Although Epicurus, their despiser, carries torches before the chief men at the festivals of the gods."

(printed under page 463)

(48) ‹anchor: Πείθεσθαι› · call in col 866

Πείθεσθαι. Sic Reg. uterque et Ducaeus. Aliae editiones πιθέσθαι.

Πείθεσθαι ("to obey"). So both Royal codices and du Duc. Other editions have πιθέσθαι.

(printed under page 463)

(49) ‹anchor: Ἡροδότου› · call in col 866

Ἡροδότου. Legendum esse Ἡροδώρου probat eruditus Worthius, quia nihil hujusmodi occurrit apud Herodotum: at de Hercule scripsisse Herodorum patet ex Clem. Alex. Strom. I, pag. 306, idemque apud Athenaeum lib. IX, c. ult., sub finem sic citatur: Ἡρόδωρος δ' ἐν ἑπτακαιδεκάτῃ τοῦ καθ' Ἡρακλέα λόγου.

Ἡροδότου ("of Herodotus"). The learned Worth shows that we should read Ἡροδώρου ("of Herodorus"), because nothing of this kind occurs in Herodotus; but that Herodorus wrote about Hercules is clear from Clement of Alexandria, Stromata I, p. 306, and he is cited in Athenaeus, book IX, last chapter, near the end, thus: "Herodorus in the seventeenth book of his account of Heracles."

(printed under page 463)

(50) ‹anchor: τὸ συγγίνεσθαι› · call in col 866

Συγγίνεσθαι. Reg. 1, συγγενέσθαι.

Συγγίνεσθαι ("to have intercourse"). Royal 1 has συγγενέσθαι.

(printed under page 463)

(51) ‹anchor: προνομίας› · call in col 866

Προνομίας. Reg. uterque, προνομίαις.

Προνομίας ("of privilege"). Both Royal codices have προνομίαις.

(printed under page 463)

(52) ‹anchor: διὰ θηλυδριῶν› · call in col 866

Διὰ θηλυδριῶν. Observat Augustinus lib. VI De civ. Dei, sacra committi infamibus gallis, quibus ne in scenam quidem prodire liceat.

Διὰ θηλυδριῶν ("through effeminates"). Augustine observes, City of God VI, that the rites were entrusted to infamous Galli, who were not allowed even to appear on the stage.

(printed under page 463)

(53) ‹anchor: τὸν Λατιάριον› · call in col 866

Τὸν Λατιάριον. Tres mss. et edit. Tigur. habent τὸν κατὰ τούς. Reg. 2, ad marg., τὸν κατ' αὐτούς, atque ita legendum existimabat H. Stephanus.

Τὸν Λατιάριον ("the Latiarian"). The three manuscripts and the Zurich edition have τὸν κατὰ τούς. Royal 2 has in the margin τὸν κατ' αὐτούς ("the one among them"), and Henri Estienne thought it should be so read.

(printed under page 463)

(54) ‹anchor: Δύναμαι› · call in col 867

Δύναμαι. Legendum δύνωμαι existimavit H. Stephanus. Sed non videtur Tatiani oratio ad accuratissimas grammaticae leges semper revocanda.

Δύναμαι ("I can"). Henri Estienne thought we should read δύνωμαι. But Tatian's language does not seem always to need recalling to the strictest laws of grammar.

(printed under page 464)

(55) ‹anchor: Ἐλάβομεν› · call in col 867

Ἐλάβομεν. Reg. 2, Angl. et edit. Tigur. ἐλαύνομεν.

Ἐλάβομεν ("we received"). Royal 2, the English and the Zurich edition have ἐλαύνομεν ("we drive").

(printed under page 464)

(56) ‹anchor: Πεποιημένος› · call in col 867

Πεποιημένος. Ita tres mss. et Tigur. Aliae editiones πεπεισμένος ex conjectura Gesneri, qui immerito immutavit scripturam a Tatiano non semel usurpatam; supra enim n. 13: Τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ Θεοῦ πεποιημένη, anima Dei cognitione instructa.

Πεποιημένος ("having made"). So the three manuscripts and the Zurich edition. Other editions have πεπεισμένος ("persuaded"), from Gesner's conjecture; he wrongly changed a phrasing Tatian uses more than once, for above, at n. 13, he has "having made the knowledge of God [her own]", the soul furnished with knowledge of God.

(printed under page 464)

(57) ‹anchor: Τούτου› · call in col 867

Τούτου. Ita Reg. uterque, Angl. et Tigur. Habent aliae editiones τοῦ πονηροῦ ex conjectura Gesneri, satis illa quidem accommodata ad sententiam Tatiani, sed tamen minime necessaria. Liquet enim Tatianum loqui de diabolo, qui nostra invasit et omnia possessionem suam esse ducit, cuique consistendi copiam damus, dum thesaurum occultum fodimus. Haec de peccato, sive de nequitia, de qua paulo ante locutus est, intelligi non possunt, sed diabolo prorsus conveniunt. Atque hunc quidem hac voce, iste, satis manifeste designat Tatianus; cum praesertim, ut ipse paulo post admonet, non Graecis, sed Christianis haec dicta voluerit. Quare nulla contextus immutandi causa, nec probandus videtur is qui ad oram Reg. 1 scripsit, λείπειν δοκεῖ, deesse aliquid videtur.

Τούτου ("of this one"). So both Royal codices, the English and the Zurich. Other editions have τοῦ πονηροῦ ("of the evil one"), from Gesner's conjecture: fitting enough to Tatian's meaning, but not at all necessary. For it is plain that Tatian is speaking of the devil, who has invaded what is ours, thinks everything his possession, and to whom we give room to stand while we dig for hidden treasure. These things cannot be understood of sin, or of the wickedness he spoke of a little before, but fit the devil exactly. And Tatian indicates him clearly enough by the word "this one", especially since, as he himself warns a little later, he meant these words for Christians, not for Greeks. So there is no reason to change the text, nor does the one who wrote in the margin of Royal 1, "something seems to be missing", deserve approval.

(printed under page 464)

(58) ‹anchor: λόγοις Θεοῦ› · call in col 867

Λόγοις Θεοῦ. Angl. et Tigur. λόγων Θεοῦ.

Λόγοις Θεοῦ ("the words of God"). The English and the Zurich have λόγων Θεοῦ.

(printed under page 464)

(59) ‹anchor: κονιορτῷ› · call in col 867

Κονιορτῷ. Ita Reg. uterque. Editi κονιορτῶν. Videtur Tatianus respicere ad illum Heracliti dictum: Χρυσὸν οἱ διζόμενοι γῆν πολλὴν ὀρύσσουσι καὶ εὑρίσκουσιν ὀλίγον. Qui rimantur aurum, plurimam terram effodiunt, parumque inveniunt, apud Theodoret. I adv. Graec., p. 478.

Κονιορτῷ ("with dust"). So both Royal codices. The printed editions have κονιορτῶν. Tatian seems to have in view that saying of Heraclitus: "Those who seek gold dig much earth and find little" [the Latin rendering follows], in Theodoret, Against the Greeks I, p. 478.

(printed under page 464)

(60) ‹anchor: τούτῳ› · call in col 867

Τούτῳ. Sic uterque Reg. Editi habebant τούτων: atque hujus scripturae vitio tenebrae erant Tatiani verba, adeo ut editor Oxoniensis, dum malam interpretationem emendare conatur, pejorem effecerit, ad Deum referens, quae de diabolo dicuntur. Legendum videtur παρέσχομεν.

Τούτῳ ("to this one"). So both Royal codices. The printed editions had τούτων; and through the fault of that reading Tatian's words were in darkness, so that the Oxford editor, trying to amend a bad interpretation, produced a worse one, referring to God what is said of the devil. It seems we should read παρέσχομεν ("we provided").

(printed under page 464)

(61) ‹anchor: τὸ γὰρ αὐτοῦ πᾶν› · call in col 867

Τὸ γὰρ αὐτοῦ πᾶν, etc. Haec etiam diabolo optime conveniunt, qui dicere ausus est Christo: Haec omnia tibi dabo, quia mihi tradita sunt.

Τὸ γὰρ αὐτοῦ πᾶν ("for all … as his"), etc. These words also fit the devil perfectly, who dared to say to Christ: "All these things I will give you, for they have been delivered to me."

(printed under page 464)

(62) ‹anchor: προσῆκόν› · call in col 867

Προσῆκον. Προσήκειν Reg. 2, Angl. Sic etiam Eusebius, qui totum hunc Tatiani locum, iis tamen omissis, quae numeris 32, 33, 34 et 35 continentur, inseruit lib. X Praep., cap. 11. Paulo ante leg. βουλομένοις.

Προσῆκον ("fitting"). Royal 2 and the English have προσήκειν; so too Eusebius, who inserted this whole passage of Tatian, omitting however what is contained in numbers 32, 33, 34 and 35, in Preparation for the Gospel X, ch. 11. A little before, read βουλομένοις ("for those who wish").

(printed under page 464)

(63) ‹anchor: Τῷ ἑκάτερον› · call in col 870

Τῷ ἑκάτερον. Euseb. τῷ γάρ et mox παλαίτατον, πρεσβύτατον. Testatur Worthius in codice ms. collegii S. Joan. B. legi παλαιότατον.

Τῷ ἑκάτερον ("in that each"). Eusebius has τῷ γάρ, and next παλαίτατον, πρεσβύτατον ("most ancient, oldest"). Worth testifies that παλαιότατον is read in the manuscript codex of St John the Baptist's College.

(printed under page 465)

(64) ‹anchor: Νῦν› · call in col 870

Νῦν. Deest apud Euseb., sed non deesse in codice ms. testatur idem vir eruditus.

Νῦν ("now"). Missing in Eusebius; but the same learned man testifies that it is not missing in the manuscript codex.

(printed under page 465)

(65) ‹anchor: Ἀλλ' ἔτι καὶ τῆς› · call in col 870

Ἀλλ' ἔτι καὶ τῆς. Euseb. ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῆς.

Ἀλλ' ἔτι καὶ τῆς ("but also of the"). Eusebius has ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῆς.

(printed under page 465)

(66) ‹anchor: Χρήσομαι› · call in col 870

Χρήσομαι. Euseb. καταχρήσομαι.

Χρήσομαι ("I shall use"). Eusebius has καταχρήσομαι.

(printed under page 465)

(67) ‹anchor: Ὑφ' ὑμῶν› · call in col 870

Ὑφ' ὑμῶν. Ita Eusebius. Editi ἡμῶν. Reg. 1 habet ὑ supra lineam.

Ὑφ' ὑμῶν ("by you"). So Eusebius. The printed editions have ἡμῶν ("us"). Royal 1 has ὑ above the line.

(printed under page 465)

(68) ‹anchor: Παραδεκτέον› · call in col 870

Παραδεκτέον. Euseb. παραδεκτόν. Mox Reg. 1 et Tigur., τόσῳ δ' ἂν ἀποδεικνύηται. Mox Euseb. ὁπόταν.

Παραδεκτέον ("must be accepted"). Eusebius has παραδεκτόν. Next, Royal 1 and the Zurich have τόσῳ δ' ἂν ἀποδεικνύηται. Next, Eusebius has ὁπόταν ("whenever").

(printed under page 465)

(69) ‹anchor: Ὅπλων› · call in col 870

Ὅπλων. Ita Euseb. et codices mss. Editi ὅλων, excepta Oxon. edit.

Ὅπλων ("of arms"). So Eusebius and the manuscript codices. The printed editions have ὅλων ("of all"), except the Oxford edition.

(printed under page 465)

(70) ‹anchor: Ἀντερείδων› · call in col 870

Ἀντερείδων. Ita Euseb. et tres mss. et Tigur. et Oxon. Editiones aliae ἀναντιῤῥήτων.

Ἀντερείδων ("resisting"). So Eusebius, the three manuscripts, the Zurich and the Oxford. Other editions have ἀναντιῤῥήτων ("indisputable").

(printed under page 465)

(71) ‹anchor: Λαμβάνω› · call in col 870

Λαμβάνω. Euseb. παραλαμβάνω, et mox πρεσβύτατοι μὲν... Ῥηγῖνος.

Λαμβάνω ("I take"). Eusebius has παραλαμβάνω, and next πρεσβύτατοι μὲν… Ῥηγῖνος ("the oldest… of Rhegium").

(printed under page 465)

(72) ‹anchor: Στησίμβροτος› · call in col 870

Στησίμβροτος. Euseb. Στησύμβροτος.

Στησίμβροτος ("Stesimbrotus"). Eusebius has Στησύμβροτος.

(printed under page 465)

(73) ‹anchor: Ἀντίμαχος› · call in col 870

Ἀντίμαχος. Euseb. Καλλίμαχος. Idem paulo post μετὰ δὲ ἐκείνους.

Ἀντίμαχος ("Antimachus"). Eusebius has Καλλίμαχος ("Callimachus"); and a little after, μετὰ δὲ ἐκείνους ("and after them").

(printed under page 465)

(74) ‹anchor: Καὶ Χαμαιλέων› · call in col 870

Καὶ Χαμαιλέων. Conjunctionem ex Eusebio addidi: editi nostri habebant ὁ Χαμαιλέων. Reg. I, Angl. et cod. Joan. Fris. Χαμαιλέων. Reg. 2 Χαμαλέων. Euseb. Χαμελέων.

Καὶ Χαμαιλέων ("and Chamaeleon"). I have added the conjunction from Eusebius; our printed editions had ὁ Χαμαιλέων. Royal 1, the English and the codex of Johannes Frisius have Χαμαιλέων; Royal 2, Χαμαλέων; Eusebius, Χαμελέων.

(printed under page 465)

(75) ‹anchor: Κράτητα πρὸ τῆς› · call in col 870

Πρὸ τῆς. Paulo aliter Clemens Alexandrinus: Περὶ τὴν Ἡρακλειδῶν κάθοδον .... μετὰ ἔτη ὀγδοήκοντα.

Πρὸ τῆς ("before the"). Clement of Alexandria puts it a little differently: "about the return of the Heraclidae … eighty years after".

(printed under page 465)

(76) ‹anchor: Ἐρατοσθένη› · call in col 870

Ἐρατοσθένη. Euseb. Ἐρατοσθένην.

Ἐρατοσθένη ("Eratosthenes"). Eusebius has Ἐρατοσθένην.

(printed under page 465)

(77) ‹anchor: Ἰωνικὴν ἀποικίαν› · call in col 870

Ἀποικίαν. Addit Eusebius ἔτεσιν.

Ἀποικίαν ("migration"). Eusebius adds ἔτεσιν ("by years").

(printed under page 465)

(78) ‹anchor: Ἀρχίππου› · call in col 870

Ἀρχίππου. Ita Ducaeus. Editi Ἀρξίππου.

Ἀρχίππου ("Archippus"). So du Duc. The printed editions have Ἀρξίππου.

(printed under page 465)

(79) ‹anchor: ἑκατόν· ὅπερ› · call in col 870

Ὅπερ. Legitur ὃ apud Euseb. ὃ γάρ in mss. et Tigur.

Ὅπερ ("which"). Eusebius reads ὅ; the manuscripts and the Zurich, ὃ γάρ.

(printed under page 465)

(80) ‹anchor: διακοσίων τεσσαράκοντα› · call in col 870

Τεσσαράκοντα. Sic habet Eusebius, sicque emendandum monuit Ducaeus tum ex cod. ms. Reg. tum quod paulo ante dixerit Tatianus migrationem Ionicam annis 740 post bellum Trojanum contigisse. Legebatur in editis πεντήκοντα. Hieronymus in Chronico habet sexaginta.

Τεσσαράκοντα ("forty"). So Eusebius has it, and du Duc advised so correcting it, both from the Royal manuscript codex and because Tatian had said a little before that the Ionian migration took place 740 [sic] years after the Trojan War. The printed editions read πεντήκοντα ("fifty"). Jerome in the Chronicle has sixty.

(printed under page 465)

(81) ‹anchor: τετρακοσίοις ἐννενήκοντα› · call in col 870

Τετρακοσίοις ἐννενήκοντα. Sic Reg. uterque, et Angl. Ducaeus et edit. Tigurina, cujus ad marginem cum positum fuisset, τετρακοσίοις ἑπτά, placuit id Gesnero, et inductum fuit in Parisienses editiones, sed utraque scriptura bis vitiosa est. Primum vitium in his verbis occurrit: Τινὲς δὲ πρὸ τῶν Ὀλυμπιάδων ἔφασαν αὐτὸν γεγονέναι. Quos hactenus nominaverat Tatianus, hi omnes natu majorem Olympiadibus Homerum dixerant. Cur ergo nunc, velut in singulari quadam opinione, dicit: Quidam autem illum ante Olympiades exstitisse dixerunt! Huc accedit aliud erratum. Nam si ante Olympiades exstitit, neque annis 490, neque 407, post Iliaca exstitit; si quidem annos ipsos 407, ab Iliacis rebus ad Olympiades numerat Tatianus. Utrumque vulnus sanabitur, si post has voces αὐτὸν γεγονέναι, addamus ἔτεσιν ἐννενήκοντα, quidam illum ante Olym- (continues)

Τετρακοσίοις ἐννενήκοντα ("four hundred and ninety"). So both Royal codices, the English, du Duc and the Zurich edition; since τετρακοσίοις ἑπτά ("four hundred and seven") had been set in the latter's margin, Gesner adopted it and it was brought into the Paris editions. But each reading is faulty twice over. The first fault lies in these words: "Some said he lived before the Olympiads." All those Tatian had named so far had said Homer was older than the Olympiads. Why then does he now say, as if of some singular opinion, "Some said he existed before the Olympiads"? To this is added another error. For if he existed before the Olympiads, he existed neither 490 nor 407 years after the Trojan affairs, since Tatian counts exactly 407 years from the Trojan affairs to the Olympiads. Both wounds will be healed if after the words αὐτὸν γεγονέναι we add ἔτεσιν ἐννενήκοντα ("by ninety years"): "some [said] that he [lived ninety years] before the Olym- … (continues)

(printed under page 465)

(82) ‹anchor: Κατὰ Γύγην› · call in col 871

Κατὰ Γύγην. Ita Eusebius et Worth. Editi nostri καὶ Γύγην.

Κατὰ Γύγην ("in the time of Gyges"). So Eusebius and Worth. Our printed editions have καὶ Γύγην ("and Gyges").

(printed under page 466)

(83) ‹anchor: Ὕστερον› · call in col 871

Ὕστερον. Hanc vocem, quae deerat in editis, restituit Reg. I Hanc etiam habet in marg. Reg. 2. Legitur apud Eusebium ὕστερον τῶν Ἰλιακῶν.

Ὕστερον ("later"). This word, missing in the printed editions, has been restored from Royal 1. Royal 2 also has it in the margin. Eusebius reads ὕστερον τῶν Ἰλιακῶν ("later than the Trojan affairs").

(printed under page 466)

(84) ‹anchor: Περὶ μὲν τοῦ χρόνου› · call in col 871

Περὶ μὲν τοῦ χρόνου. Euseb. τῶν χρόνων. Paulo post idem στάσεώς τε, quod melius mihi videtur.

Περὶ μὲν τοῦ χρόνου ("concerning the time"). Eusebius has τῶν χρόνων ("the times"). A little after, he has στάσεώς τε, which seems better to me.

(printed under page 466)

(85) ‹anchor: Περὶ αὐτοῦ› · call in col 871

Περὶ αὐτοῦ. Euseb. τὰ περὶ αὐτῶν.

Περὶ αὐτοῦ ("about him"). Eusebius has τὰ περὶ αὐτῶν ("the things about them").

(printed under page 466)

(86) ‹anchor: Αὐτάρκως› · call in col 871

Αὐτάρκως. Ita Reg. uterque et Euseb. Editi αὐταρκέως. Mox idem δυνατὸν γὰρ παντί.

Αὐτάρκως ("sufficiently"). So both Royal codices and Eusebius. The printed editions have αὐταρκέως. Next, the same [Eusebius] has δυνατὸν γὰρ παντί ("for it is possible for anyone").

(printed under page 466)

(87) ‹anchor: Λόγους› · call in col 871

Λόγους. Ita Euseb. tres mss. et editio Tigurina. Aliae editiones χρόνους ex mala Gesneri conjectura.

Λόγους ("accounts"). So Eusebius, the three manuscripts and the Zurich edition. Other editions have χρόνους ("times"), from a bad conjecture of Gesner's.

(printed under page 466)

(88) ‹anchor: Δυνατόν› · call in col 871

Δυνατόν. Euseb. δύναται. Quod deinde ait Tatianus: Quid enim causae est cur in scribendo erratur, nisi quia non vera componuntur, sic debet intelligi: Quid causae est cur temporibus in scribendo erratur, nisi quia non vera componuntur?

Δυνατόν ("possible"). Eusebius has δύναται. What Tatian then says, "For what cause is there for error in writing, except that untrue things are put together?", should be understood thus: "What cause is there for error in writing about dates, except that untrue things are put together?"

(printed under page 466)

(89) ‹anchor: Πλουτοῦντες› · call in col 871

Πλουτοῦντες. Ita Reg. I, et ad marginem secundus. Editi πληροῦντες.

Πλουτοῦντες ("being rich"). So Royal 1, and the second in its margin. The printed editions have πληροῦντες ("filling").

(printed under page 466)

(90) ‹anchor: Ὑπεραλεῖ› · call in col 871

Ὑπεραλεῖ. Editio Paris. anni 1656, nescio unde habet ὑπεραίρει.

Ὑπεραλεῖ. The Paris edition of 1656 has, I know not whence, ὑπεραίρει ("surpasses").

(printed under page 466)

(91) ‹anchor: καλὸν μέν› · call in col 871

Καλὸν μέν. Particula addita ex tribus mss. et Tigur. Ibidem editi εἰ δ' οὖν. Melius Ducaeus, quem secuti sumus. Mox ex Gesneri conjectura ἔτι Θεοῦ. Tres mss. et Tigur. ἔστω.

Καλὸν μέν ("it is good"). The particle has been added from the three manuscripts and the Zurich edition. In the same place the printed editions have εἰ δ' οὖν; du Duc, whom we have followed, has it better. Next, from Gesner's conjecture, ἔτι Θεοῦ; the three manuscripts and the Zurich have ἔστω ("let it be").

(printed under page 466)

(92) ‹anchor: τὸ ἄτονον› · call in col 871

Ἄτονον. Male in Paris. edit. ἄτοπον.

Ἄτονον ("feebleness"). The Paris edition wrongly has ἄτοπον ("absurd").

(printed under page 466)

(93) ‹anchor: λοιδορούντων› · call in col 871

Λοιδορούντων. Codex Joan. Fris. λοιδορεῖσθαι.

Λοιδορούντων ("reviling"). The codex of Johannes Frisius has λοιδορεῖσθαι.

(printed under page 466)

(94) ‹anchor: Ἐῤῥωμένον› · call in col 874

Ἐῤῥωμένον. Ita Reg. 1, sic etiam Reg. 2 in margine. Editi, excepto Frontone Ducaeo et Oxon., ἐρωμένην.

Ἐῤῥωμένον ("strong"). So Royal 1, and so too Royal 2 in its margin. The printed editions, except Fronton du Duc and the Oxford, have ἐρωμένην ("beloved").

(printed under page 467)

(95) ‹anchor: Μανίας› · call in col 874

Μανίας. Hanc vocem suppeditavit Reg. 1, μέθης ad marginem Reg. 2. Paulo ante editi παρ' ἡμῖν, excepto Ducaeo, quem secutus sum.

Μανίας ("of madness"). Royal 1 supplied this word; Royal 2 has μέθης ("of drunkenness") in the margin. A little before, the printed editions have παρ' ἡμῖν ("among us"), except du Duc, whom I have followed.

(printed under page 467)

(96) ‹anchor: Ἐν γυναιξὶ καὶ μειρακίοις› · call in col 874

Ἐν γυναιξὶ καὶ μειρακίοις. Hoc probri genere utebatur Celsus in Christianos, quod lanifices, sutores, fullones in suis aedibus, et illitteratissimos quosque, pueros et mulierculas ad Christianam religionem adducere conentur, ac pueris dicant debere eos, relicto patre et praeceptoribus, ire cum mulierculis et collusoribus pueris in conclave mulierum aut officinam sutoriam, fulloniamve, ut mysteriis initientur, ἵνα τὸ τέλειον λάβωσι. Digna est quae perlegatur Origenis praeclarissima responsio, l. II, p. 145. Quod autem ethnici Christianis, ut probrum objiciebant, id religionis defensores magnae laudi esse ducebant, ut paulo antea Tatianus, Justinus Apol. II, n. 10; Athenag. Apol., n. 11; Clem. Alexandr. Strom. IV, p. 497; Lactantius l. VI Institut., c. 4; Theodoret. adv. Graecos l. V. Vide Juliani impia dicteria apud S. Cyrill. l. VII, p. 229, et responsionem S. Cyrilli.

Ἐν γυναιξὶ καὶ μειρακίοις ("among women and lads"). Celsus used this kind of reproach against the Christians: that wool-workers, cobblers and fullers in their houses, and all the most unlettered folk, try to bring boys and silly women to the Christian religion, and tell the boys that they must leave father and teachers and go with the women and their boy playmates into the women's quarters, or the cobbler's or fuller's shop, to be initiated into the mysteries, "that they may receive the perfect". Origen's most excellent reply, book II, p. 145, deserves to be read through. What the heathen threw at the Christians as a reproach, the defenders of religion counted a great glory: so Tatian a little before; Justin, Apology II, n. 10; Athenagoras, Apology [Plea], n. 11; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata IV, p. 497; Lactantius, Institutes VI, ch. 4; Theodoret, Against the Greeks V. See Julian's impious gibes in St Cyril, book VII, p. 229, and St Cyril's reply.

(printed under page 467)

(97) ‹anchor: Ἀσχημονεῖτε› · call in col 874

Ἀσχημονεῖτε. Reg. 2 ἀσχημονεῖται.

Ἀσχημονεῖτε ("you behave disgracefully"). Royal 2 has ἀσχημονεῖται.

(printed under page 467)

(98) ‹anchor: Σιλανίων› · call in col 874

Σιλανίων. Reg. uterque Σειλανίων.

Σιλανίων ("Silanion"). Both Royal codices have Σειλανίων.

(printed under page 467)

(99) ‹anchor: Ναυκύδης› · call in col 874

Ναυκύδης. Angl. Νακύδης.

Ναυκύδης ("Naucydes"). The English has Νακύδης.

(printed under page 467)

(1) ‹anchor: Βοΐσκος› · call in col 874

Βοΐσκος. Gesnerus, cujus adnotatio in editione Oxoniensi apponitur, legendum conjicit Βοηθός, qui sculptor insignis fuit, Plinio majorem in modum laudatus lib. XXXIII, c. 12, et XXXIV, c. 8, et XXXVI, c. 13.

Βοΐσκος ("Boiscus"). Gesner, whose note is printed in the Oxford edition, conjectures we should read Βοηθός ("Boethus"), who was a distinguished sculptor, praised highly by Pliny, book XXXIII, ch. 12, XXXIV, ch. 8, and XXXVI, ch. 13.

(printed under page 467)

(2) ‹anchor: Μυρώ› · call in col 874

Μυρώ. Reg. 2, Τυρώ.

Μυρώ ("Myro"). Royal 2 has Τυρώ ("Tyro").

(printed under page 467)

(3) ‹anchor: οἱ δημιουργοί› · call in col 874

Δημιουργοί. Post hanc vocem addunt uterque Regius et Angl. Κλειτοῦς δὲ Ἀμφίστρατος.

Δημιουργοί ("the craftsmen"). After this word both Royal codices and the English add "and of Clito, Amphistratus".

(printed under page 467)

(4) ‹anchor: ἐκφωνήματα› · call in col 874

Ἐκφωνήματα. Sic etiam supra n. 12: Θειοτέρας δέ τινος ἐκφωνήσεως λόγοις κατακεχρωμένων, et n. 3, ἐκπεφώνηκε pro eo quod habebatur in Tigurina editione ἐκπεφρόνηκε. Eadem editio hoc loco ἐκφρονήματα.

Ἐκφωνήματα ("utterances"). So too above, n. 12: "of those who have used words of a more divine utterance"; and n. 3, ἐκπεφώνηκε for what stood in the Zurich edition, ἐκπεφρόνηκε. The same edition has here ἐκφρονήματα.

(printed under page 467)

(5) ‹anchor: τῆς παρ' ὑμῖν παιδός› · call in col 874

Τῆς παρ' ὑμῖν παιδός. In Reg. 1, legitur hoc scholium ad marginem: Γλαυκίππην λέγει, Glaucippen dicit. Sed inepta prorsus haec adnotatio, cum luce clarius sit Tatianum de Sappho loqui.

Τῆς παρ' ὑμῖν παιδός ("than your girl"). In Royal 1 this scholium is read in the margin: "He means Glaucippe." But the note is quite inept, since it is clearer than daylight that Tatian is speaking of Sappho.

(printed under page 467)

(6) ‹anchor: Πανηγύρει› · call in col 875

Πανηγύρει. Joan. Fris. ὁμηγύρει.

Πανηγύρει ("at the festival"). Johannes Frisius has ὁμηγύρει ("at the gathering").

(printed under page 468)

(7) ‹anchor: Δημοσίας› · call in col 875

Δημοσίας. Reg. 2, δημοσίου.

Δημοσίας ("public"). Royal 2 has δημοσίου.

(printed under page 468)

(8) ‹anchor: Μύρωνος› · call in col 875

Μύρωνος. Haec lectio conjectura est Gesneri in editiones Tigurina posteriores inducta. Legitur Μήκωνος in tribus mss. et Tigur. Gesnerus Myconem aut Myronem restituendum esse existimat. Uterque inter insignes statuarios numeratur et a Plinio ob artis praestantiam laudatur lib. XXXIV, c. 8. Addit Gesnerus in Buculam Myronis permulta epigrammata legi lib. 4 Florileg. Graec., sect. 7.

Μύρωνος ("of Myron"). This reading is a conjecture of Gesner's, brought into the editions later than the Zurich. Μήκωνος is read in the three manuscripts and the Zurich. Gesner thinks Mycon or Myron should be restored. Both are counted among the distinguished sculptors and are praised by Pliny for the excellence of their art, book XXXIV, ch. 8. Gesner adds that a great many epigrams on Myron's Heifer are read in the Greek Anthology, book 4, section 7.

(printed under page 468)

(9) ‹anchor: Γλυκέραν› · call in col 875

Γλυκέραν. Reg. uterque, Angl. et Tigur. διὰ τὴν Γλυκέραν.

Γλυκέραν ("Glycera"). Both Royal codices, the English and the Zurich have διὰ τὴν Γλυκέραν ("because of Glycera").

(printed under page 468)

(10) ‹anchor: Τοιαύτας εἶναι› · call in col 875

Τοιαύτας εἶναι. Deest postrema vox in cod. Angl. et Reg. 2.

Τοιαύτας εἶναι ("to be such"). The last word is missing in the English codex and Royal 2.

(printed under page 468)

(11) ‹anchor: ὑμεῖς› · call in col 875

Ὑμεῖς. Reg. 1, ἢ ὑμεῖς.

Ὑμεῖς ("you"). Royal 1 has ἢ ὑμεῖς.

(printed under page 468)

(12) ‹anchor: καταβοθρώσαντες› · call in col 875

Καταβοθρώσαντες. Ita Reg. 1, et Angl. et Ducaeus. Reg. 2 ad marginem καταβορβώσαντες. Editi καταβορθώσαντες.

Καταβοθρώσαντες ("burying in a pit"). So Royal 1, the English and du Duc. Royal 2 has in the margin καταβορβώσαντες. The printed editions have καταβορθώσαντες.

(printed under page 468)

(13) ‹anchor: ἐναπόλλυτε› · call in col 875

Ἐναπόλλυτε. Ducaeus ἐναπόλοιντο, cod. Joan. Fris. ἐναπόλλοιτο.

Ἐναπόλλυτε ("you destroy therein"). Du Duc has ἐναπόλοιντο; the codex of Johannes Frisius, ἐναπόλλοιτο.

(printed under page 468)

(14) ‹anchor: καὶ κατανοεῖν› · call in col 875

Καὶ κατανοεῖν. Ita Reg. 2. et Angl. Legitur in Reg. I, ἡγεῖσθαι κατανοεῖν et supra lineam καί. Editi ἡγεῖσθαι τὸ κατανοεῖν.

Καὶ κατανοεῖν ("and to contemplate"). So Royal 2 and the English. Royal 1 reads ἡγεῖσθαι κατανοεῖν, with καί above the line. The printed editions have ἡγεῖσθαι τὸ κατανοεῖν.

(printed under page 468)

(15) ‹anchor: μυστικωτέρας› · call in col 875

Μυστικωτέρας. Reg. 2, μυστικώτερον.

Μυστικωτέρας ("more mystical"). Royal 2 has μυστικώτερον.

(printed under page 468)

(16) ‹anchor: Λήρους› · call in col 875

Λήρους. Angl. λήρους τε καί.

Λήρους ("trifles"). The English has λήρους τε καί.

(printed under page 468)

(17) ‹anchor: μυθολογήματα› · call in col 875

Μυθολογήματα. Fris. ψευδολογήματα.

Μυθολογήματα ("fables"). Frisius has ψευδολογήματα ("lies").

(printed under page 468)

(18) ‹anchor: Τεκεῖν› · call in col 878

Τεκεῖν. Ita Reg. uterque et Ducaeus. Editi τέκνων.

Τεκεῖν ("to give birth"). So both Royal codices and du Duc. The printed editions have τέκνων ("of children").

(printed under page 469)

(19) ‹anchor: Πρὸς τὰ Καλλιάδου› · call in col 878

Πρὸς τὰ Καλλιάδου. Legendum πρὸς τῇ, vel πρὸς τὴν Νέαιραν.

Πρὸς τὰ Καλλιάδου ("besides the works of Calliades"). Read πρὸς τῇ, or πρὸς τὴν Νέαιραν ("besides Neaera").

(printed under page 469)

(20) ‹anchor: Αὐτόν› · call in col 878

Αὐτόν. Reg. 2 et Joan. Fris. αὐτήν.

Αὐτόν ("him"). Royal 2 and Johannes Frisius have αὐτήν ("her").

(printed under page 469)

(21) ‹anchor: Σπιλούμενον› · call in col 878

Σπιλούμενον. Tres codices mss. habent ὁ ψελιούμενον. Tigurina editio ὁ ψελιούμενον. Unde Gesnerus effecit Σπιλούμενον, quia Praxiteles apud Plinium lib. XXXIV, c. 8, Spilumenen, id est contaminatam dicitur effinxisse. Fecit Praxiteles Stephusam, Spilumenen, Oenophorum. Probat Gesneri conjecturam Ducaeus; sed eruditus Oxoniensis editor legendum existimat ὁ ψελλιούμενον, mulierculam armilla instructam.

Σπιλούμενον ("defiled"). The three manuscript codices have ὁ ψελιούμενον. The Zurich edition has ὁ ψελιούμενον. From this Gesner made Σπιλούμενον, because Praxiteles, in Pliny, book XXXIV, ch. 8, is said to have made a Spilumene, that is, a defiled woman: "Praxiteles made a Stephusa, a Spilumene, an Oenophorus." Du Duc approves Gesner's conjecture; but the learned Oxford editor thinks we should read ὁ ψελλιούμενον, "a little woman wearing a bracelet".

(printed under page 469)

(22) ‹anchor: Τὸ τοιοῦτον› · call in col 878

Τὸ τοιοῦτον. Editi addunt εἶδος, quod multo elegantius deest in perantiquo codice Regio, cujus tamen ad oram alia manu additum fuit.

Τὸ τοιοῦτον ("such a thing"). The printed editions add εἶδος ("form"), which is much more elegantly absent in the very old Royal codex, though it was added in its margin by another hand.

(printed under page 469)

(23) ‹anchor: ὡς αὐτούς› · call in col 878

Ὡς αὐτούς. Ita Reg. 1 et Angl. et Tigur. Deerat vocula in aliis editionibus. Reg. 2, ὡσαύτως.

Ὡς αὐτούς ("as to them"). So Royal 1, the English and the Zurich. The little word was missing in other editions. Royal 2 has ὡσαύτως ("likewise").

(printed under page 469)

(24) ‹anchor: Οὐ γὰρ ὡς› · call in col 878

Οὐ γὰρ ὡς. Sic emendatum ope Reg. 1. Legebatur οὐχ ὡς in editis.

Οὐ γὰρ ὡς ("for not as"). So corrected with the help of Royal 1. The printed editions read οὐχ ὡς.

(printed under page 469)

(25) ‹anchor: τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς› · call in col 878

Τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς. H. Stephanus legendum conjecit τῆς καθ' ὑμᾶς, eam philosophiam, quam vos barbaricam appellatis, amplexus sum. Sed pluribus locis Tatianus Judaeorum et Christianorum doctrinam hoc nomine barbaram dicit. Barbaricos libros commemorat n. 29; Moysem barbarae omnis sapientiae principem vocat, n. 31; barbarae philosophiae addictum se esse dicit n. 42.

Τῆς καθ' ἡμᾶς ("of ours"). Henri Estienne conjectured we should read τῆς καθ' ὑμᾶς: "I embraced the philosophy which you call barbarian." But in several places Tatian calls the teaching of the Jews and Christians barbarian by this very name. He mentions barbarian books at n. 29; he calls Moses the founder of all barbarian wisdom, n. 31; he says he is devoted to the barbarian philosophy, n. 42.

(printed under page 469)

(26) ‹anchor: τῶν φιλοσοφούντων› · call in col 878

Φιλοσοφούντων. Reg. 1, et Angl. φιλοσοφησάντων. Ibidem editi addunt πλῆθος. Sed elegantius abest a Regio 1, ad oram tamen additum fuit.

Φιλοσοφούντων ("of those who philosophise"). Royal 1 and the English have φιλοσοφησάντων. In the same place the printed editions add πλῆθος ("multitude"); but it is more elegantly absent from Royal 1, though it was added in the margin.

(printed under page 469)

(27) ‹anchor: ἀεὶ πάντα› · call in col 878

Πάντα. Melius πολλά. Sic enim, ut observavit Gesnerus, in Elegiis Solonis legitur versus quem Tatian. citat: Γηράσκω δ' αἰεὶ πολλὰ διδασκόμενος.

Πάντα ("all things"). Better πολλά ("many things"). For so, as Gesner observed, the verse Tatian quotes is read in Solon's Elegies: "I grow old ever learning many things."

(printed under page 469)

(28) ‹anchor: Μὴ μόνον› · call in col 879

Μὴ μόνον. Ita Eusebius. Legitur in Reg. 1, μὴ ὕστερον. Deerat negatio in editis.

Μὴ μόνον ("not only"). So Eusebius. Royal 1 reads μὴ ὕστερον ("not later"). The negative was missing in the printed editions.

(printed under page 470)

(29) ‹anchor: Ὑπειλήφθω› · call in col 879

Ὑπειλήφθω. Eusebius addit γεγονέναι.

Ὑπειλήφθω ("let it be taken"). Eusebius adds γεγονέναι ("to have been").

(printed under page 470)

(30) ‹anchor: Συστρατεύεσθαι› · call in col 879

Συστρατεύεσθαι. Euseb. συνεκστρατεῦσαι.

Συστρατεύεσθαι ("to campaign together"). Eusebius has συνεκστρατεῦσαι.

(printed under page 470)

(31) ‹anchor: Καὶ εἰ βούλεται› · call in col 879

Καὶ εἰ βούλεται. Euseb. κἂν βούληται.

Καὶ εἰ βούλεται ("and if he wishes"). Eusebius has κἂν βούληται.

(printed under page 470)

(32) ‹anchor: Τῆς δὲ Ἰλίου› · call in col 879

Τῆς δὲ Ἰλίου. Secundam voculam desumpsi ex Eusebio, qui sic habet: Πολλοῖς ἔτεσι· τῆς δὲ γεγονυίας Ἰλίου.

Τῆς δὲ Ἰλίου ("but of Ilium"). I have taken the second little word from Eusebius, who has: "by many years; but of the Ilium that came to be …"

(printed under page 470)

(33) ‹anchor: Τί μοι λέγειν› · call in col 879

Τί μοι λέγειν. Euseb.: τί με λέγειν δεῖ.

Τί μοι λέγειν ("why should I speak"). Eusebius has τί με λέγειν δεῖ ("why must I speak").

(printed under page 470)

(34) ‹anchor: Βηρωσός› · call in col 879

Βηρωσός. Euseb. Βηρωσσός, et sic infra ubi idem nomen occurrit.

Βηρωσός ("Berosus"). Eusebius has Βηρωσσός, and so below where the same name occurs.

(printed under page 470)

(35) ‹anchor: Γεγονώς› · call in col 879

Γεγονώς. Euseb. γενόμενος.

Γεγονώς ("having been"). Eusebius has γενόμενος.

(printed under page 470)

(36) ‹anchor: Τῷ μετ' αὐτὸν τρίτῳ› · call in col 879

Τῷ μετ' αὐτὸν τρίτῳ. Euseb. τῷ μετὰ Σέλευκον τρίτῳ.

Τῷ μετ' αὐτὸν τρίτῳ ("to the third after him"). Eusebius has "to the third after Seleucus".

(printed under page 470)

(37) ‹anchor: Ἐκθέμενος› · call in col 879

Ἐκθέμενος. Eusebius ἐκτιθέμενος.

Ἐκθέμενος ("having set out"). Eusebius has ἐκτιθέμενος.

(printed under page 470)

(38) ‹anchor: Πρὸ δὲ τῆς› · call in col 879

Πρὸ δὲ τῆς. Secundam voculam suppeditavit Eusebius. Ex eodem sumpsimus κατώτερον pro eo quod erat in editis nostris κατώτερα.

Πρὸ δὲ τῆς ("but before the"). Eusebius supplied the second little word. From him too we took κατώτερον ("later") in place of what stood in our printed editions, κατώτερα.

(printed under page 470)

(39) ‹anchor: Ἰόβας, ὃς περί› · call in col 879

Ὃς περί. Illud etiam ὅς Eusebio debemus.

Ὃς περί ("who, about"). We owe this ὅς too to Eusebius.

(printed under page 470)

(40) ‹anchor: τοὺς Χαλδαίους› · call in col 879

Τοὺς Χαλδαίους. Ita Reg. uterque et Euseb. Editi τὰ Χαλδαίων. Tigur. τοὺς Χαλδαίων. (Sic etiam Angl.) et ad marginem τὰ Χαλδαίων.

Τοὺς Χαλδαίους ("the Chaldaeans"). So both Royal codices and Eusebius. The printed editions have τὰ Χαλδαίων ("the affairs of the Chaldaeans"). The Zurich has τοὺς Χαλδαίων (so too the English), with τὰ Χαλδαίων in the margin.

(printed under page 470)

(41) ‹anchor: Χαῖτος, ὁ καί› · call in col 879

Χαῖτος ὁ καί. Editi nostri καὶ ὅ, quod quidem emendavi beneficio Eusebii. Sed aliud erratum est in voce Χαῖτος. Eusebius ἄσιτος. Legendum esse Λαῖτος probat eruditus Oxoniensis Editor testimonio Clementis Strom. I, pag. 326, atque ita placuisse Reinesio et Bocharto monet.

Χαῖτος ὁ καί ("Chaetus, who also"). Our printed editions have καὶ ὅ, which I have corrected thanks to Eusebius. But there is another error in the word Χαῖτος. Eusebius has ἄσιτος. The learned Oxford editor shows from the testimony of Clement, Stromata I, p. 326, that we should read Λαῖτος ("Laetus"), and notes that Reinesius and Bochart agreed.

(printed under page 470)

(42) ‹anchor: ἄφιξις› · call in col 879

Ἄφιξις. Ita Regius uterque et Eusebius. Editi ἄφιξιν. Habet etiam Eusebius ἁρπαγή.

Ἄφιξις ("arrival"). So both Royal codices and Eusebius. The printed editions have ἄφιξιν. Eusebius also has ἁρπαγή ("rape").

(printed under page 470)

(43) ‹anchor: Χείραμον› · call in col 879

Χείραμον. Eusebius Εἴραμον.

Χείραμον ("Hiram"). Eusebius has Εἴραμον.

(printed under page 470)

(44) ‹anchor: τὴν θυγατέρα› · call in col 879

Τὴν θυγατέρα. Euseb. τὴν ἑαυτοῦ θυγατέρα, et mox τοῦ νεώ.

Τὴν θυγατέρα ("the daughter"). Eusebius has τὴν ἑαυτοῦ θυγατέρα ("his own daughter"), and next τοῦ νεώ ("of the temple").

(printed under page 470)

(45) ‹anchor: ἐπ' ἀκριβές› · call in col 879

Ἐπ' ἀκριβές. Ita Ducaeus et ad marginem Tigur. Eusebius ἀκριβεῖς. Editi ἐπ' ἀκριβεῖς.

Ἐπ' ἀκριβές ("accurate"). So du Duc and the Zurich in its margin. Eusebius has ἀκριβεῖς; the printed editions, ἐπ' ἀκριβεῖς.

(printed under page 470)

(46) ‹anchor: Χρόνων› · call in col 882

Χρόνων. Ita mss. et Euseb. Editi χρόνῳ, excepta tamen Ducaei editione.

Χρόνων ("of the times"). So the manuscripts and Eusebius. The printed editions have χρόνῳ, except du Duc's edition.

(printed under page 471)

(47) ‹anchor: Πραγμάτων› · call in col 882

Πραγμάτων. Eusebius γραμμάτων, apud quem etiam legitur, omisso verbo ἑρμηνεύς, Πτολεμαῖος.

Πραγμάτων ("of affairs"). Eusebius has γραμμάτων ("of writings"); in him, too, the word ἑρμηνεύς ("interpreter") is omitted, and Πτολεμαῖος is read.

(printed under page 471)

(48) ‹anchor: Ἄμωσιν› · call in col 882

Ἄμωσιν. Codex Joannis Frisii Ἄμασιν.

Ἄμωσιν ("Amosis"). The codex of Johannes Frisius has Ἄμασιν.

(printed under page 471)

(49) ‹anchor: Ἦλθον› · call in col 882

Ἦλθον. Eusebius ἤθελεν, apud quem etiam adnotatur ad marginem fortasse delenda esse haec verba: Λέγει δὲ οὕτως.

Ἦλθον ("they came"). Eusebius has ἤθελεν ("he wished"); in him it is also noted in the margin that perhaps these words should be deleted: "He speaks thus."

(printed under page 471)

(50) ‹anchor: Κατέσκαψε τὴν Αὔαριν› · call in col 882

Κατέσκαψε τὴν Αὔαριν. Eusebius habet κατέστρεψε, sed praecipua varietas in voce sequenti posita. Habet enim Clemens Alexandrinus Ἀθυρίαν. Reg. 1, Αὐαρίαν. Codex Joan. Fris. Αὐαρία. Eusebius Ἄβαριν, quod idem est ac Αὔαριν urbem. Sic etiam codex ms. Clementis pro Ἀθυρίαν. Editiones Tatiani Μαρίαν. Existimat Ducaeus legi posse Μαρεῖαν, ac fortasse intelligendum, Amosim effodisse Mariam, id est Euripo ducto commisisse Mariam cum Nilo, vel cum ipso mari Mediterraneo. Sed tamen alteram vocem in textum recipere non dubitavi, tum quia ei favent mss. codices et Clemens ac Eusebius; tum quia consentit cum historiae monumentis. Nam rex ille, sub quo egressi sunt ex Aegypto Israelitae, apud Manethonem Tethmosis, apud Appionem, ut non solum ex Tatiano patet, sed etiam ex Justino Cohort., n. 9, Amasis dictus est. Is autem cum bellum gesserit cum Israelitis, non mirum si urbem Avarim evertisse dicitur, quae praecipua videtur Israelitarum fuisse, teste Manethone apud Josephum I contra App., p. 1052.

Κατέσκαψε τὴν Αὔαριν ("he razed Avaris"). Eusebius has κατέστρεψε ("overthrew"), but the chief variation lies in the following word. Clement of Alexandria has Ἀθυρίαν; Royal 1, Αὐαρίαν; the codex of Johannes Frisius, Αὐαρία; Eusebius, Ἄβαριν, which is the same as the city Avaris. So too the manuscript codex of Clement, in place of Ἀθυρίαν. The editions of Tatian have Μαρίαν. Du Duc thinks Μαρεῖαν could be read, and perhaps understood as "Amosis dug through Marea", that is, joined Marea to the Nile, or to the Mediterranean itself, by a channel. But I did not hesitate to take the other word into the text, both because the manuscript codices, Clement and Eusebius favour it, and because it agrees with the records of history. For the king under whom the Israelites went out of Egypt is called Tethmosis in Manetho, and in Appion Amasis, as is plain not only from Tatian but also from Justin's Exhortation, n. 9. And since he waged war with the Israelites, it is no wonder he is said to have overthrown the city of Avaris, which seems to have been the chief city of the Israelites, on the testimony of Manetho in Josephus, Against Apion I, p. 1052.

(printed under page 471)

(51) ‹anchor: Κρίασις› · call in col 882

Κρίασις. Sic habet Eusebius Ἀργεῖος, Κρίασος, Φόρβας, Τριόπας. Sic etiam in cod. Angl., nisi quod habet Χρίασις, pro quo legendum Χρίασος existimat Munckerus in editione Mythographorum, citatus ab Editore Oxoniensi.

Κρίασις ("Criasis"). Eusebius has it thus: "Argeius, Criasus, Phorbas, Triopas." So too the English codex, except that it has Χρίασις, for which Muncker, in his edition of the Mythographers, cited by the Oxford editor, thinks we should read Χρίασος.

(printed under page 471)

(52) ‹anchor: Κροτώπας› · call in col 882

Κροτώπας. Euseb. Κροτωπός.

Κροτώπας ("Crotopas"). Eusebius has Κροτωπός.

(printed under page 471)

(53) ‹anchor: Σθενέλαος› · call in col 882

Σθενέλαος. Fris. Σθένελος.

Σθενέλαος ("Sthenelaus"). Frisius has Σθένελος.

(printed under page 471)

(54) ‹anchor: Προῖτος, Ἄβας› · call in col 882

Προῖτος, Ἄβας. Euseb. Ἄβας, Προῖτος.

Προῖτος, Ἄβας ("Proetus, Abas"). Eusebius has "Abas, Proetus".

(printed under page 471)

(55) ‹anchor: Σθενέλαος› · call in col 882

Σθενέλαος. Deest in utroque Regio et apud Eusebium.

Σθενέλαος ("Sthenelaus"). Missing in both Royal codices and in Eusebius.

(printed under page 471)

(56) ‹anchor: τὸν νουνεχῆ συνιέναι› · call in col 882

Συνιέναι. Ita Eusebius, melius quam in editis nostris συνῆναι. Codex Joan. Fris. habet ut Eusebius. Legitur συνεῖναι in utroque Reg. et apud Ducaeum.

Συνιέναι ("to understand"). So Eusebius, better than our printed editions' συνῆναι. The codex of Johannes Frisius reads as Eusebius does. συνεῖναι is read in both Royal codices and in du Duc.

(printed under page 471)

(57) ‹anchor: οὐδ' ἱστορίας› · call in col 882

Οὐδ' ἱστορίας. Ita Eusebius multo melius quam editi nostri οὐ δι' ἱστορίας.

Οὐδ' ἱστορίας ("not even of history"). So Eusebius, much better than our printed editions' οὐ δι' ἱστορίας.

(printed under page 471)

(58) ‹anchor: ἐπὶ Φορωνέως, μόγις› · call in col 882

Ἐπὶ Φορωνέως, μόγις. Euseb. ὑπὸ Φορωνέως μόλις.

Ἐπὶ Φορωνέως, μόγις ("in Phoroneus's time, hardly"). Eusebius has ὑπὸ Φορωνέως μόλις ("under Phoroneus, scarcely").

(printed under page 471)

(59) ‹anchor: οἱ ἄνθρωποι› · call in col 882

Οἱ ἄνθρωποι. Ita Reg. 1, Euseb., Fris. et Ducaeus. Male in editis nostris οἱ οὐρανοί, in quibus etiam mox aliud erratum, nempe οἱ κατὰ Ἴναχον, quod quidem auctore Eusebio sustulimus. Reg. 2 habet εἰ, sed ad marginem. Sic etiam Joannes Frisius et Ducaeus.

Οἱ ἄνθρωποι ("men"). So Royal 1, Eusebius, Frisius and du Duc. Our printed editions wrongly have οἱ οὐρανοί ("the heavens"), and in them another error follows shortly, namely οἱ κατὰ Ἴναχον, which we have removed on the authority of Eusebius. Royal 2 has εἰ ("if"), but in the margin. So too Johannes Frisius and du Duc.

(printed under page 471)

(60) ‹anchor: εἰ μετὰ τὸν Ἴναχον› · call in col 882

Εἰ μετὰ τὸν Ἴναχον. Habet Eusebius: Εἰ κατὰ τὸν Ἴναχον αἱ διαφανέσταται... ἐγράφησαν.

Εἰ μετὰ τὸν Ἴναχον ("if after Inachus"). Eusebius has: "If in the time of Inachus the most notable [deeds] … were written down."

(printed under page 471)

(61) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Καὶ Ἀκταία. Deest conjunctio apud Euseb. et Clement. Strom. I, p. 321.

Καὶ Ἀκταία ("and Actaea"). The conjunction is missing in Eusebius and in Clement, Stromata I, p. 321.

(printed under page 472)

(62) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Τριόπαν. Reg. 2 Πριόπαν in margine. Sic etiam Angl. in textu. Euseb. κατὰ δὲ Τριόπαν. Mox Clemens, καὶ Ἄτλας καὶ Ἐπιμηθεύς.

Τριόπαν ("Triopas"). Regius 2 has Πριόπαν in the margin; so too the English [edition] in its text. Eusebius has κατὰ δὲ Τριόπαν ("and in the time of Triopas"). Shortly after, Clement has καὶ Ἄτλας καὶ Ἐπιμηθεύς ("and Atlas and Epimetheus").

(printed under page 472)

(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Καὶ ἡ Ἰώ. Clemens καὶ Ἰνώ.

Καὶ ἡ Ἰώ ("and Io"). Clement has καὶ Ἰνώ ("and Ino").

(printed under page 472)

(64) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Κατὰ δὲ Κέκροπα. Legendum esse κατὰ δὲ Κροτωπόν demonstrat Ducaeus, tum quia Eusebius et Clemens ita habent, tum quia recenset Tatianus Argivos reges, quos inter jam antea numeravit Crotopum. Mox Eusebius Σθενέλαον.

Κατὰ δὲ Κέκροπα ("and in the time of Cecrops"). Ducaeus shows that κατὰ δὲ Κροτωπόν ("in the time of Crotopus") is to be read, both because Eusebius and Clement have it so, and because Tatian is listing the kings of Argos, among whom he has already counted Crotopus. Shortly after, Eusebius has Σθενέλαον ("Sthenelaus").

(printed under page 472)

(65) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Τῆς Εὐρώπης. Haec desunt apud Clementem, apud quem legitur: Ἥ τε ἐκ Κρήτης εἰς Φοινίκην ἀνακομιδή.

Τῆς Εὐρώπης ("of Europa"). These words are missing in Clement, in whom one reads: Ἥ τε ἐκ Κρήτης εἰς Φοινίκην ἀνακομιδή ("and the carrying-off from Crete to Phoenicia").

(printed under page 472)

(66) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Καὶ ὁ. Ita Euseb. et Clem. et Reg. 1. Editi ὡς ὁ; Mox Eusebius et Clemens Ὀρφεύς τε καὶ Μουσαῖος.

Καὶ ὁ ("and the"). So Eusebius, Clement and Regius 1. The printed editions have ὡς ὁ ("as the"). Shortly after, Eusebius and Clement have Ὀρφεύς τε καὶ Μουσαῖος ("both Orpheus and Musaeus").

(printed under page 472)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Ἀπό γε. Ita Eusebius; ἀπό τε Reg. uterque.

Ἀπό γε ("from at least"). So Eusebius; both Regii have ἀπό τε ("and from").

(printed under page 472)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 883

Πρεσβύτερος. Euseb. πρεσβύτατος.

Πρεσβύτερος ("older"). Eusebius has πρεσβύτατος ("oldest").

(printed under page 472)

(69) ‹anchor: δαιμόνων› · call in col 883

Πολέμων, δαιμόνων. Sic in tribus mss. Apud Eusebium, πόλεων. Male in editis ἀπό τε πολέμων δαιμόνων.

Πολέμων, δαιμόνων ("wars, demons"). So in three manuscripts. In Eusebius, πόλεων ("cities"). The printed editions wrongly have ἀπό τε πολέμων δαιμόνων ("and from wars of demons").

(printed under page 472)

(70) ‹anchor: ἤπερ› · call in col 883

Ἤπερ. Eusebius μᾶλλον ἤπερ. Sic etiam Reg. 2 in margine.

Ἤπερ ("than"). Eusebius has μᾶλλον ἤπερ ("rather than"); so too Regius 2 in the margin.

(printed under page 472)

(71) ‹anchor: οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν› · call in col 883

Οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν. Ut haec verba sic redderem, non grato animo, persuasit mihi Clemens Alexandrinus, qui ea non aliam in sententiam videtur accepisse. Ait enim Strom. I, p. 312: Graecos philosophos fures esse et latrones, qui ante adventum Domini ab Hebraeis prophetis partes veritatis non grato animo desumpserint, sed eas sibi tanquam propria dogmata attribuerint. Ταῦτα δ' ἂν εἶεν κλέπται καὶ λῃσταὶ οἱ παρ' Ἕλλησι φιλόσοφοι, καὶ πρὸ τῆς τοῦ Κυρίου παρουσίας παρὰ τῶν Ἑβραϊκῶν προφητῶν μέρη τῆς ἀληθείας οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν λαβόντες, ἀλλ' ὡς ἴδια σφετερισάμενοι δόγματα. Ἐπίγνωσιν ergo intelligebat grati animi significationem, cui officio deesse existimabat Graecorum philosophos, quia sibi tanquam propria attribuerant, quae ab Hebraeis mutuo acceperant.

Οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν. Clement of Alexandria persuaded me to render these words thus, non grato animo ("not with a grateful mind"), since he appears to have taken them in no other sense. For he says, Stromata I, p. 312: that the Greek philosophers are thieves and robbers, who before the Lord's coming took portions of the truth from the Hebrew prophets without gratitude, but attributed them to themselves as their own doctrines. "These, then, would be the thieves and robbers: the philosophers among the Greeks, who even before the Lord's coming took portions of the truth from the Hebrew prophets, not with acknowledgment, but appropriating them as their own doctrines." By ἐπίγνωσις, then, he understood the expression of a grateful mind, a duty in which he judged the Greek philosophers to fail, because they had attributed to themselves as their own what they had borrowed from the Hebrews.

(printed under page 472)

(72) ‹anchor: καὶ παραχαράττειν› · call in col 883

Παρὰ τῶν.... καὶ παραχαράττειν. Ita Eusebius, melius quam editi nostri περὶ τῶν.... ἃ καὶ παραχαράττειν. Habet etiam Clemens παρὰ τῶν. Legitur apud Eusebium οἱ ὅσα.

Παρὰ τῶν .... καὶ παραχαράττειν ("from those .... and to counterfeit"). So Eusebius, better than our printed editions, περὶ τῶν .... ἃ καὶ παραχαράττειν ("about those .... which also to counterfeit"). Clement too has παρὰ τῶν. In Eusebius one reads οἱ ὅσα.

(printed under page 472)

(73) ‹anchor: ἴδιον νομισθῶσι› · call in col 883

Νομισθῶσι. Sic etiam Eusebius. Tres mss. et Tigur. νομίζωσι. Ad oram editionis Tigurinae positum erat νομίζωνται, quod inde in alias fluxit editiones.

Νομισθῶσι ("they might be thought"). So too Eusebius. Three manuscripts and the Zurich edition have νομίζωσι. In the margin of the Zurich edition νομίζωνται had been placed, which flowed from there into other editions.

(printed under page 472)

(74) ‹anchor: ἐπιπλάστου ῥητολογίας› · call in col 883

Ῥητολογίας. Reg. 2, ad marg. ῥητορολογίας. ab al. m.

Ῥητολογίας ("of speechifying"). Regius 2 has ῥητορολογίας in the margin, in another hand.

(printed under page 472)

(75) ‹anchor: ὡς μυθολογίαν› · call in col 883

Ὡς μυθολογίαν. Ita Euseb. Angl. ὡς μυθολογίας. Editi ταῖς μυθολογίαις. Reg. 1 ὡς μυθολογίαις. Consentit haec sententia cum Justino martyre, qui docet Apol. I, n. 54, fabulas inventas fuisse, ut veritas pro fabula haberetur.

Ὡς μυθολογίαν ("as a fable"). So Eusebius. The English [edition] has ὡς μυθολογίας; the printed editions ταῖς μυθολογίαις ("with fables"); Regius 1 ὡς μυθολογίαις. This thought agrees with Justin Martyr, who teaches (Apology I, n. 54) that fables were invented so that the truth might be taken for a fable.

(printed under page 472)

(76) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀλήθειαν παραπρεσβεύωσι› · call in col 883

Παραπρεσβεύωσι. Euseb. παραβραβεύωσι. Sententiam Tatiani sic imitatur Clemens loco jam citato: Καὶ τὰ μὲν παραχαράττοντες, τὰ δὲ ὑπὸ περιεργίας ἀμαθῶς σοφισάμενοι, τὰ δὲ καὶ ἐξευρόντες.

Παραπρεσβεύωσι ("they misrepresent"). Eusebius has παραβραβεύωσι ("they wrongly judge"). Clement imitates Tatian's thought thus in the place already cited: "counterfeiting some things, ignorantly sophisticating others out of curiosity, and inventing others besides."

(printed under page 472)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Καὶ τίνες εἰσί. Deest verbum apud Eusebium.

Καὶ τίνες εἰσί ("and who they are"). The verb is missing in Eusebius.

(printed under page 473)

(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Πρὸς τοὺς ἀποφηναμένους. Vertit Gesnerus: In libro ad eos qui rebus divinis simplicem fidem detrahunt, sive ut in adnotatione explicat: Qui de Deo et rebus divinis demonstrationibus agunt. In hac adnotatione, quam adoptat eruditus Oxoniensis editor, existimat Gesnerus Tatianum idem sensisse ac Apellem, nempe non oportere omnino fidei discuti rationem, sed unumquemque debere in eo, quod credat, permanere, apud Euseb. lib. V, c. 13. Sed 1° Verbum ἀποφαίνεσθαι non idem hoc loco valet ac demonstrationibus agere. 2° Tatianus adhuc catholicus idem sentire non potuit ac Apelles. 3° Si religionem Tatianus argumentis defendi debere non putabat; cur in promisso illo opere statuerat exquisitis argumentis et ex remotissima antiquitate comportatis uti? Ante ἀποφηναμένους supplendum παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν, quae quidem verba, cum paulo ante praecedant, repeti necesse non fuit. Erant tunc apud gentiles plurimi, et ii quidem eruditione insignes viri, qui de Christiana religione plurima sibi ignota et inexplorata effutire non dubitabant. Talis erat Crescens, cujus indoctam temeritatem Justinus coram multis testibus convicerat, Apol. II, n. 3. Statuerat Tatianus veterum testimonio novos refellere. Neque enim alio videtur spectare potuisse meditata illa tot rerum collectio.

Πρὸς τοὺς ἀποφηναμένους ("against those who have pronounced"). Gesner translated: In a book against those who detract from simple faith in divine things, or, as he explains in a note: Those who treat of God and divine things by demonstrations. In this note, which the learned Oxford editor adopts, Gesner thinks that Tatian held the same view as Apelles, namely that the grounds of the faith ought not to be discussed at all, but that each one ought to abide in what he believes, in Eusebius, Book V, ch. 13. But (1) the verb ἀποφαίνεσθαι does not mean in this place the same as to treat by demonstrations. (2) Tatian, while still a Catholic, could not have held the same view as Apelles. (3) If Tatian did not think religion ought to be defended by arguments, why had he resolved in that promised work to use choice arguments gathered from the remotest antiquity? Before ἀποφηναμένους one must supply παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ("among the Greeks"), words which, since they come shortly before, did not need repeating. There were then very many among the gentiles, and men distinguished for learning at that, who did not hesitate to blurt out a great deal about the Christian religion that was unknown and unexamined by them. Such was Crescens, whose unlearned rashness Justin had exposed before many witnesses (Apology II, n. 3). Tatian had resolved to refute the new men by the testimony of the ancients; for that planned collection of so many things seems to have been able to aim at nothing else.

(printed under page 473)

(79) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Τὸ δὲ συνέχον. Euseb. τὸ δὲ νῦν ἔχον.

Τὸ δὲ συνέχον ("the main point"). Eusebius has τὸ δὲ νῦν ἔχον ("for the present").

(printed under page 473)

(80) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Μουσαίου, Ὀρφέως. Melius Eusebius Ὀρφέως, Μουσαίου.

Μουσαίου, Ὀρφέως ("of Musaeus, of Orpheus"). Eusebius, better, has Ὀρφέως, Μουσαίου ("of Orpheus, of Musaeus").

(printed under page 473)

(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Τὰ Ἀριμάσπια. Corrupte Eusebius τὰ Ἀριμώσπια.

Τὰ Ἀριμάσπια ("the Arimaspea"). Eusebius, corruptly, has τὰ Ἀριμώσπια.

(printed under page 473)

(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Εὐμίκλου. Eusebius Εὔκλου, quod quidem magis placet erudito Oxoniensi editori, eique assentitur Fabricius Biblioth. Graec. tom. I, p. 38.

Εὐμίκλου ("of Eumiclus"). Eusebius has Εὔκλου ("of Euclus"), which indeed better pleases the learned Oxford editor, and Fabricius agrees with him, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. I, p. 38.

(printed under page 473)

(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Προσναυτίδου. Uterque Reg. Προναυτίδου. Euseb. Πρατανίδου et ad marg. Προναιτίδου. Gyraldus Dialog., p. 48, De poet. hist. et Vossius lib. I, De historicis Graecis, cap. 1, legendum putant Προσμαντίδου. Sed id minime probatur erudito Worthio, eique magis arridet Προναπίδου. Is enim Homeri praeceptor fuisse perhibetur apud Diodorum Siculum lib. III, p. 140. Erudito editori assentitur Fabricius Biblioth. tom. I, p. 159.

Προσναυτίδου. Both Regii have Προναυτίδου; Eusebius Πρατανίδου, and in the margin Προναιτίδου. Gyraldus (Dialogues, p. 48, On the History of the Poets) and Vossius (Book I, On the Greek Historians, ch. 1) think Προσμαντίδου should be read. But that is not at all approved by the learned Worth, who prefers Προναπίδου (Pronapides); for he is said to have been Homer's teacher, in Diodorus Siculus, Book III, p. 140. Fabricius agrees with the learned editor, Bibliotheca, vol. I, p. 159.

(printed under page 473)

(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 886

Ἐπιφερόμενα. Euseb. ἐπεισφερόμενα. Joan. Fris. ἀναφερόμενα. J. Scal. l. De emendat. temporum ἔπη φερόμενα.

Ἐπιφερόμενα ("ascribed"). Eusebius has ἐπεισφερόμενα; Johannes Frisius ἀναφερόμενα; Joseph Scaliger, in the book On the Emendation of Times, ἔπη φερόμενα ("the epics current").

(printed under page 473)

(85) ‹anchor: γενεαῖς τῶν Ἰλιακῶν› · call in col 886

Ἰλιακῶν. Euseb. Τρωϊκῶν.

Ἰλιακῶν ("of the Iliac [wars]"). Eusebius has Τρωϊκῶν ("of the Trojan").

(printed under page 473)

(86) ‹anchor: συντάττειν ἀπείργει› · call in col 886

Ἀπείργει. Ita Reg. 1, et Euseb. et Reg. 2, ad marginem. Editi ἀπείργειν.

Ἀπείργει ("prevents"). So Regius 1, Eusebius, and Regius 2 in the margin. The printed editions have ἀπείργειν.

(printed under page 473)

(87) ‹anchor: ποιήσομαι› · call in col 886

Ποιήσομαι. Euseb. ποιήσωμεν.

Ποιήσομαι ("I shall make"). Eusebius has ποιήσωμεν ("let us make").

(printed under page 473)

(88) ‹anchor: σοφίας, ἀγχινοίας τε καὶ νομοθεσίας› · call in col 886

Ἀγχινοίας τε καὶ νομοθεσίας. Sic Eusebius. Editi nostri ἀγχινοίᾳ τε καὶ νομοθεσίᾳ.

Ἀγχινοίας τε καὶ νομοθεσίας ("of shrewdness and lawgiving"). So Eusebius. Our printed editions have ἀγχινοίᾳ τε καὶ νομοθεσίᾳ (in the dative).

(printed under page 473)

<!-- NOTE: the opening of note 89 is set from the column images (Q1b); the end of note 89 and the whole of note 90, at the head of the right-hand foot column, are not seen in any crop and are NOT set here. Below the rule the page carries the editors' "277 ANALYSIS APOLOGIAE ATHENAGORAE" (start of the next work, editor's matter), which is not a footnote. It is set in part c887 as editors' matter (the editors' analysis of the Legatio of Athenagoras, not Tatian's), until it has a unit of its own. The Latin column is taken as 887 (left) by the alternation of pages 472–473; not confirmed from these crops. -->

(89) ‹anchor: Σόλων περὶ μζʹ› · call in col 887

Σόλων περὶ μζ'. Ita Reg. uterque et Angl. et Euseb. Editi περὶ μ'. Observat editor Oxon. Meursium, lib. I De archont. Athen. legendum monere περὶ μς', circa quadragesimam sextam. Addit observationem Meursii confirmari his verbis Clementis Alexandrini, Strom. I, p. 302: Ἤκμασεν οὖν ὁ Σόλων κατὰ τὴν τεσσαρακοστὴν ἕκτην Ὀλυμπιάδα. Floruit ergo Solon Olympiade quadragesima [the note runs on at the head of the right-hand foot column, not seen in the crops]

Σόλων περὶ μζ' ("Solon around the 47th"). So both Royal codices, the English codex and Eusebius. The printed editions have περὶ μ' ("around the 40th"). The Oxford editor observes that Meursius, On the Archons of Athens, Book I, advises reading περὶ μς', "around the forty-sixth". He adds that Meursius's observation is confirmed by these words of Clement of Alexandria, Stromata I, p. 302: "So Solon flourished in the forty-sixth Olympiad." Solon therefore flourished in the forty[-sixth] Olympiad [rest not seen]

(printed under page 474)

(91) ‹anchor: κηρύττειν› · call in col 887

Κηρύττειν. Ita Euseb. Reg. 1, Ducaeus et Oxon. Legebatur in aliis codicibus mss. et editis κρύπτειν.

Κηρύττειν ("to proclaim"). So Eusebius, Regius 1, Ducaeus and the Oxford [edition]. In other manuscript codices and printed editions κρύπτειν ("to hide") was read.

(printed under page 474)

(92) ‹anchor: κατ' αὐτόν› · call in col 887

Κατ' αὐτόν. Euseb. ἡ κατ' αὐτόν. Sic etiam Reg. 2, mox Euseb., ἑαυτόν et τῆς κατὰ Θεόν.

Κατ' αὐτόν ("according to him"). Eusebius has ἡ κατ' αὐτόν (with the article); so too Regius 2. Shortly after, Eusebius has ἑαυτόν ("himself") and τῆς κατὰ Θεόν ("of that according to God").

(printed under page 474)

ANALYSIS APOLOGIAE ATHENAGORAE.

ANALYSIS OF THE APOLOGY OF ATHENAGORAS.

Obtulit hanc Apologiam Athenagoras anno 177 imperatori Marco Aurelio, ejusque filio Commodo, ut in Praefatione pluribus demonstramus. Queritur (n. 1, 2) quod sub aequissimis imperatoribus Christiani, nec in summa erga Deum pietate eamdem ac alii in variis et absurdis superstitionibus licentiam, nec in summa morum innocentia eamdem ac gravissimorum criminum rei judiciorum formam obtineant. Deinde (n. 3) venit ad afficta Christianis crimina, atheismum, Thyesteas coenas, Oedipodeos concubitus.

Athenagoras presented this Apology in the year 177 to the emperor Marcus Aurelius and to his son Commodus, as we show at greater length in the Preface. He complains (nn. 1, 2) that under most equitable emperors the Christians obtain neither, for all their piety towards God, the same freedom as others enjoy in their various and absurd superstitions, nor, for all the innocence of their morals, the same form of trial as those accused of the gravest crimes. Next (n. 3) he comes to the crimes fastened upon the Christians: atheism, Thyestean banquets, Oedipodean intercourse.

Probat (n. 4) atheos non esse Christianos ex eorum de uno et ingenito Deo doctrina: cui cum similia dixerint poetae et philosophi (n. 5, 6), nec tamen visi sint athei, multo minus hoc crimine notandos Christianos (n. 7), qui non, ut poetae et philosophi, Deum frustra quaesierunt, sed Spiritus divini oraculis nituntur. Hanc Christianorum doctrinam confirmant (n. 8) incommoda ex deorum multitudine consequentia, et prophetarum testimonia (n. 9). Christiani (n. 10) cum Deo Patre ipsius etiam Filium colunt et Spiritum sanctum; angelos etiam agnoscunt; postremo sic vivendi praeceptis informantur, sic vivunt, ut eos atheos esse nemo suspicari possit (n. 11, 12).

He proves (n. 4) that the Christians are not atheists from their doctrine of the one and unbegotten God: since poets and philosophers have said things like it (nn. 5, 6) and yet were not thought atheists, much less are the Christians to be branded with this charge (n. 7), who have not, like the poets and philosophers, sought God in vain, but rest upon the oracles of the divine Spirit. This doctrine of the Christians is confirmed (n. 8) by the absurdities that follow from a multitude of gods, and by the testimonies of the prophets (n. 9). The Christians (n. 10) worship together with God the Father His Son also, and the Holy Spirit; they acknowledge angels too; lastly, they are so formed by precepts of living, and so live, that no one could suspect them of being atheists (nn. 11, 12).

Sed quia criminatio inde potissimum orta, quod nec sacrificarent Christiani, nec deos colerent, probat Athenagoras (n. 13) Deum nidoribus et victimis cruentis colendum non esse. Quod autem spectat ad deos, demonstrat, si athei sint Christiani, quia non eosdem ac civitates deos colunt, idem omnibus civitatibus crimen inhaerere (n. 14), quia sibi invicem impiae sunt, dum aliae alios colunt; atque etiam si omnes in hac superstitione consentirent, laudandos esse Christianos (n. 15), quod creatorem a re creata, materiam a Deo discernant, ac neque mundum (n. 16), neque mundi partes colant, nedum opera hominum, et deos quorum nomina admodum recentia, et statuae nudius tertius inventae (n. 17.)

But since the accusation arose chiefly from this, that the Christians neither sacrificed nor worshipped the gods, Athenagoras proves (n. 13) that God is not to be worshipped with the savour of burnt offerings and with bloody victims. As regards the gods, he shows that, if the Christians are atheists because they do not worship the same gods as the cities, the same charge clings to all the cities (n. 14), since they are impious towards one another, some worshipping some gods and others others; and that even if all agreed in this superstition, the Christians would deserve praise (n. 15) because they distinguish the creator from the thing created and matter from God, and worship neither the world (n. 16) nor the parts of the world, still less the works of men and gods whose names are quite recent and whose statues were devised but the day before yesterday (n. 17).

Cum autem nonnulli objicerent cultum statuis adhibitum ad deos referri, ac loco argumenti sumerent insitam nonnullis simulacris efficaciam; respondet (n. 18, 19) deos illos poetis et philosophis consentientibus creatos esse ac proinde non colendos; idemque efficit (n. 20, 21, 22) ex eorum absurdis figuris et prave factis et cupiditatibus et amoribus, quae quidem frustra ad naturam revocari demonstrat.

When, however, some objected that the worship paid to statues is referred to the gods, and took as their argument a power inherent in certain images, he replies (nn. 18, 19) that those gods, by the agreement of poets and philosophers, were created, and are therefore not to be worshipped; and he establishes the same (nn. 20, 21, 22) from their absurd forms, their wicked deeds, their lusts and their loves, which, he shows, are in vain referred to nature.

Sed cum objiceretur mira interdum ad deorum statuas fieri; opinatam illam efficaciam ut explicet Athenagoras, ponit in medio (n. 23) sententias Thaletis et Platonis de daemonibus; tum ipse docet (n. 24) angelos a Christianis agnosci, eosque, cum Dei operibus praepositi fuissent, alios in officio permansisse, alios praevaricatos esse et mulierum amore captos fuisse. Inde geniti gigantes, sive daemones. Hi daemones (n. 25), itidem ut mali angeli, dum bono Dei adversantur, locum dederunt nonnullis providentiae perperam negandae. Hi nidorum avidi ad simulacra homines pertrahunt (n. 26), et eorum nomina, quibus erectae sunt statuae, sibi arrogant; perficiuntque ut ad infirmas animas, tanquam a simulacris, visa inania effluant (n. 27); et si quid anima aut conjiciendo divinet, aut medendo et curando navet, hujus rei gloriam arripiunt. Cum antea promisisset Athenagoras, nempe n. 17, se de nominibus deorum dicturum, idque leviter perstrinxisset, paulo uberius probat (n. 28, 29) ex Herodoto et poetis deos illos homines fuisse, et quomodo divinitatis existimationem assecuti sint, investigat (n. 30).

But since it was objected that wonders are sometimes wrought at the statues of the gods, Athenagoras, to explain that supposed power, sets forth (n. 23) the opinions of Thales and Plato on demons; then he himself teaches (n. 24) that angels are acknowledged by the Christians, and that of these, when they had been set over the works of God, some remained in their office, while others transgressed and were captivated by the love of women. From these were begotten the giants, or demons. These demons (n. 25), like the wicked angels, by opposing the good of God, gave some occasion wrongly to deny providence. Greedy for the savour of sacrifices, they draw men to the images (n. 26), and claim for themselves the names of those to whom the statues were erected; and they bring it about that empty visions flow into weak souls as if from the images (n. 27); and if the soul divines anything by conjecture, or accomplishes anything by healing and curing, they seize the glory of it. Since Athenagoras had earlier promised, namely in n. 17, to speak of the names of the gods, and had touched on the matter lightly, he proves somewhat more fully (nn. 28, 29) from Herodotus and the poets that those gods were men, and investigates how they attained the repute of divinity (n. 30).

Odium Christianae virtutis duo alia crimina peperit (n. 31), sed quae satis superque ex Christianorum de Deo et praemiis aeternis doctrina confutata sunt. Praeterea nulla flagitiorum suspicio in iis qui liberiorem aspectum adulterium ducunt (n. 32); quorum summa et in salutando inter se charitas, et in osculis cautio; qui usum matrimonii liberorum procreatione definiunt (n. 33) ac virginitatem perpetuam colunt, aut unicis nuptiis contenti sunt (n. 34). Perinique ergo fieri ut adulteri et puerorum corruptores in eunuchos et semel nubentes invehantur; raptores et malefici in homines non justitiae solum, sed etiam patientiae cultores.

Hatred of Christian virtue begot two other charges (n. 31), but these are refuted more than enough by the Christians' doctrine of God and of eternal rewards. Moreover, there can be no suspicion of shameful deeds in those who count even a too free glance as adultery (n. 32); whose charity in greeting one another is the greatest, and their caution in kisses also; who limit the use of marriage to the begetting of children (n. 33), and cherish perpetual virginity, or are content with a single marriage (n. 34). It is therefore most unjust that adulterers and corrupters of boys should inveigh against eunuchs and those who marry but once; robbers and evildoers against men who cultivate not only justice but patience as well.

Thyesteae coenae sine homicidio fieri non possunt. At nemo unquam vidisse se dixit hominem a Christianis occisum (n. 35). Nulla hujus facinoris suspicio in iis, qui ne justam quidem caedem aspicere velint, nedum gladiatorum ludos; quique abortivis medicamentis uti homicidium, liberos exponere parricidium existimant.

Thyestean banquets cannot take place without homicide. But no one has ever said that he saw a man killed by Christians (n. 35). There can be no suspicion of this crime in those who will not look upon even a just execution, much less the games of gladiators, and who consider the use of abortifacient drugs to be homicide and the exposing of children to be parricide.

Huc accedit (n. 36) Christianorum de resurrectione et praemiis aeternis doctrina, quae si absurda videntur, non idcirco improbi Christiani; sed potius (n. 37) aequum est, ut, cum omnes criminationes diluerint, imperatores eorum petitioni, pro summa sua in omnes humanitate, annuant.

To this is added (n. 36) the Christians' doctrine of the resurrection and of eternal rewards; and if these seem absurd, the Christians are not on that account wicked; rather (n. 37) it is just that, since they have cleared away all the accusations, the emperors should grant their petition, in keeping with their own supreme kindness towards all.

<!-- note: Column 887's upper part holds the end of Tatian's Latin version (ch. 41 close and ch. 42, whose caption "42. Perorat Tatianus." is part of the version, not set here), then the foot notes 89–92 in two columns. Below a rule, the editors' prose shown here, ANALYSIS APOLOGIAE ATHENAGORAE, is printed across the full page width (887–888) in small italic type. It runs to the foot of the page and ends there, complete, on this page. The bold old-edition page numbers "277" (before the title) and "278" (inside the text, before "corruptores") have been left out of the text. "Perinique" is set as printed (read as "Periniquum"). -->