S. Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Contra haereses liber primus

LIBER PRIMUS.

FIRST BOOK.

<!-- note: the book title is printed centred across the full width of cols 437-438, below the running head "S. IRENAEI CONTRA HAERESES LIBER PRIMUS." (page furniture, not set) and above a short rule and the column headings ΠΡΟΟΙΜΙΟΝ / PRAEFATIO. The scan shows a second dot after the title's full stop; it looks like a speck, so one stop is set. No other editors' prose stands in the column: the Greek and the old Latin of the preface follow, then the full-width "BILLII INTERPRETATIO." (Billius's Latin version of the text, not editors' prose; not set here), then footnotes (1)-(10) at the page foot, which are set elsewhere. Nothing runs over from or into a neighbouring column. -->

(¹) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 438 I Timoth. I, 4.

1 Timothy 1:4.

(printed under page 225)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 438

Graeca haec Irenaei ab initio ad medium usque capitis 11 hujus libri debemus Epiphanio, haer. XXXI, a § 9 ad 32 inclusive, ubi cum Valentinianorum commenta compendio retulisset, eadem paulo fusius, ipsamet sanctissimi martyris verba, ut ipse ait, mutuatus, explicat. Τὰ ἑξῆς, inquit, ἀπὸ τῶν τοῦ προειρημένου ἀνδρὸς, δούλου Θεοῦ, Εἰρηναίου δέ φημι, τὴν παράθεσιν ὁλοσχερῶς ποιήσομαι. Ἔχει δὲ οὕτως, etc.

For this Greek of Irenaeus, from the beginning to the middle of chapter 11 of this book, we are indebted to Epiphanius, Heresy XXXI, from § 9 to § 32 inclusive, where, having summarised the inventions of the Valentinians, he sets out the same things somewhat more fully, borrowing, as he himself says, the very words of the most holy martyr. "What follows," he says, "I shall set out in full from the aforementioned man, the servant of God — Irenaeus, I mean. It runs thus," etc.

(printed under page 225)

(2) ‹anchor: Ἐπί› · call in col 438

Ἐπί. Veterem interpretem legisse ἐπεί, non ἐπί, patet ex voce quatenus ab eo adhibita. Huncque recte legisse, ac proinde corruptum esse hodiernum textum Graecum, merito contendunt Billius, Fronto Ducaeus et Feuardentius. E contrario vero pugnat Gallasius pro ἐπί, vultque Graece dici potuisse, ἐπὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν παραπεμπόμενοί τινες, quod ita vertit: nonnulli in veritatem praeter jus et fas emissi. Tum exempla congerit ut probet verbum παραπέμπεσθαι hic de iis accipiendum esse, qui falso praetextu in veritatem ipsam emissi sunt; quales sunt falsi doctores, qui, missione aut vocatione legitima destituti, praeter rationem et ordinem a Satana emissi sunt; quomodo, inquit, et a Demosthene παραπρεσβεία, falsa legatio appellatur. At ut ea significatio alibi obtineret, hic tamen incommoda videretur: nihilque cogit a vulgata et communi significatione verbi παραπέμπειν recedere, quam vel ipsa Lexica docent, quaeque fidei corruptoribus, et Scripturarum adulteratoribus optime convenit. Παραπέμπειν enim, ut recte observat Fronto Duc., idem est ac spernere, rejicere, repudiare. Sic Esther. XIII, 3: παραπέμποντας διηνεκῶς τὰ τῶν βασιλέων διατάγματα. Clem. Alex., lib. III Paedag. c. 9: ἡδονῆς ἕνεκα λούεσθαι παραπεμπτέον, etc. Adverte autem hic, cum Billio et Feuardentio, longissimam esse hanc periodum, utpote in quam Irenaeus multa inculcaverit: quod huic auctori familiare est, librorum praesertim initiis.

Ἐπί ("upon"). That the old translator read ἐπεί ("since"), not ἐπί, is plain from the word quatenus that he uses. Billius, Fronton du Duc and Feuardent rightly contend that he read correctly, and that the present Greek text is therefore corrupt. Gallasius, on the contrary, argues for ἐπί, and holds that the Greek could have said ἐπὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν παραπεμπόμενοί τινες, which he renders "some sent into the truth against right and law". He then gathers examples to prove that the verb παραπέμπεσθαι is to be understood here of those who were sent into the truth itself on a false pretext — such as false teachers, who, lacking lawful mission or calling, were sent by Satan outside reason and order; just as, he says, Demosthenes calls a false embassy παραπρεσβεία. But even if that meaning held elsewhere, here it would seem unsuitable; and nothing compels us to depart from the received and common meaning of the verb παραπέμπειν, which the lexicons themselves teach, and which fits corrupters of the faith and adulterators of the Scriptures perfectly. For παραπέμπειν, as Fronton du Duc rightly observes, is the same as to spurn, reject, repudiate. So Esther 13:3: "continually setting aside the decrees of the kings"; Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus III, ch. 9: "bathing for pleasure is to be set aside," etc. Note here also, with Billius and Feuardent, that this sentence is very long, since Irenaeus has packed much into it — a habit of this author, especially at the beginnings of his books.

(printed under page 225)

(3) ‹anchor: Ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες› · call in col 438

Ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες. Ῥᾳδιουργεῖν τὰ θεῖα λόγια est, inquit Billius, oracula divina mala fide exponere, seu sensum eorum detorquere et adulterare; quod iis, de quibus hic agitur, ἐξηγηταῖς κακοῖς τῶν καλῶς εἰρημένων γενομένοις, omnino congruit. Hanc vocem eo sensu non semel usurpat Irenaeus. Infra cap. 3, num. 6, ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες τὰς ἐξηγήσεις, adulterantes expositiones. Et cap. 20, n. 1, ῥᾳδιούργημα, adulterationem, vel, ut vertit interpres, falsationem.

Ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες ("tampering with"). To tamper with (ῥᾳδιουργεῖν) the divine oracles is, says Billius, to expound the divine oracles in bad faith, or to twist and adulterate their sense; which fits entirely those spoken of here, who have become "bad expositors of what was well said". Irenaeus uses this word in that sense more than once: below, ch. 3, no. 6, ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες τὰς ἐξηγήσεις, "adulterating the expositions"; and ch. 20, no. 1, ῥᾳδιούργημα, "an adulteration", or, as the translator renders it, "a falsification".

(printed under page 225)

(4) ‹anchor: Quatenus› · call in col 438

Quatenus. Hic accipitur pro quandoquidem sive quoniam. Exempla apud auctores Latinos obvia sunt.

Quatenus. Here it is taken for "since" or "because". Examples in Latin authors are ready to hand.

(printed under page 225)

(5) ‹anchor: Refutantes› · call in col 438

Refutantes. Id est, spernentes, rejicientes, repudiantes. Eo sensu accipit Cicero Orat. pro Rabir. Postum. § 16, et II Tuscul. 95.

Refutantes. That is, spurning, rejecting, repudiating. Cicero takes it in that sense in the speech Pro Rabirio Postumo § 16, and Tusculans II, 95.

(printed under page 225)

(6) ‹anchor: Infinitas› · call in col 438

Infinitas. In Graeco ματαίας, vanas, inanes. Sed cum Apostolus, I Timoth. I, 4, habeat ἀπεράντους, infinitas, id in textu Latino servare maluit interpres. Hinc Tertullianus iisdem Apostoli verbis perstringens Valentinianorum deliria de triginta Aeonibus, eorumque genealogia, habet, genealogias indeterminatas.

Infinitas ("endless"). In the Greek ματαίας, "vain, empty". But since the Apostle, 1 Timothy 1:4, has ἀπεράντους, "endless", the translator preferred to keep that in the Latin text. Hence Tertullian, censuring with the same words of the Apostle the ravings of the Valentinians about the thirty Aeons and their genealogy, has "undetermined genealogies".

(printed under page 225)

(7) ‹anchor: Exercitata› · call in col 438

Exercitata. In editt. Eras. et Gallas. et codd. Arundel. et Ottobon. exercita. Sed melius in Feuard. edit., consentiente veteri cod. quem citat, Claromont. et Pass. exercitata. Suspicatur clariss. Grab. ab interprete scriptum excita sive excitata, ex quo tanquam contracte scripto imperiti scribae fecere exercita seu exercitata; quia, inquit, verbum Graecum συγκροτεῖν vix uspiam in exercendi, aliquoties autem in exciendi sive concitandi significatione usurpatur. At, quidquid sit tum de conjectura ipsa, tum de ratione qua nititur, minus inepte, meo quidem sensu, dicitur, subdole exercitata verisimilitudo, quam subdole excitata seu excita. Sed longe melius Graecam vocem συγκεκροτημένη reddidisset interpres, si vertisset, composita, constructa, adornata, vel cum Billio comparata.

Exercitata ("practised"). The editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and the Arundel and Ottoboni manuscripts have exercita. But the reading is better in Feuardent's edition, with the old manuscript he cites agreeing, and in the Clermont and Passionei manuscripts: exercitata. The most distinguished Grabe suspects that the translator wrote excita or excitata, from which, as if written in contracted form, unskilled scribes made exercita or exercitata; because, he says, the Greek verb συγκροτεῖν is scarcely ever used in the sense of exercising, but several times in the sense of rousing or stirring up. But whatever is to be said of the conjecture itself and of the reasoning it rests on, it is, in my judgement at least, less awkward to say "a craftily practised plausibility" than "a craftily roused" one. Yet the translator would have rendered the Greek word συγκεκροτημένη far better had he translated "composed, constructed, adorned", or, with Billius, "contrived".

(printed under page 225)

(8) ‹anchor: Evertunt› · call in col 438

Evertunt. In Claromont. cod. et Pass. vertunt.

Evertunt ("overturn"). In the Clermont manuscript and the Passionei, vertunt ("turn").

(printed under page 225)

(9) ‹anchor: Attrahentes› · call in col 438

Attrahentes. Sic omnes tum editt. tum mss. codd. Libentius tamen legerem abstrahentes, juxta Graecum ἀπάγοντες.

Attrahentes ("drawing to"). So all the editions and manuscripts alike. I would rather read abstrahentes ("drawing away"), in keeping with the Greek ἀπάγοντες.

(printed under page 225)

(10) ‹anchor: Sub occasione agnitionis› · call in col 438

Sub occasione agnitionis. Graec. προφάσει γνώσεως, quod mallem ab interprete redditum, sub specie agnitionis, seu scientiae, cujus scilicet spem injiciebant Valentiniani.

Sub occasione agnitionis ("on the occasion of knowledge"). Greek προφάσει γνώσεως ("on the pretext of knowledge"), which I would rather the translator had rendered "under the appearance of knowledge", or of science — the hope of which, that is, the Valentinians held out.

(printed under page 225)

(1) ‹anchor: Habentes ostendere› · call in col 440

Habentes ostendere. Id est, possint ostendere. Non enim abs re erit hic monere saepius in Irenaeo hanc loquendi formam, quae plane Graeca est, occurrere, habere pro posse. Id semel observasse sufficiat.

Habentes ostendere ("having to show"). That is, "they can show". It will not be beside the point to note here that this turn of speech, which is plainly Greek — habere for posse, "to have" for "to be able" — occurs rather often in Irenaeus. Let it suffice to have observed it once.

(printed under page 226)

(2) ‹anchor: Suadenter› · call in col 440

Suadenter. Claromont. suadentes; quod quidem licet magis Latine, minus tamen apposite tum ad Graecum, tum ad sermonis seriem scriptum.

Suadenter ("persuasively"). The Clermont manuscript has suadentes ("persuading"); which, though more Latin, is written less aptly both to the Greek and to the run of the sentence.

(printed under page 226)

(3) ‹anchor: In eo quod blasphemam› · call in col 440

In eo quod blasphemam, etc. Totus hic locus, in editt. Eras. et Gallas. et codd. Arund. Ottobon. et Merc. 2 misere defoedatus, a Feuardentio ex veteri cod. et textu Graeco restitutus est. Veteri cod. consentiunt Pass. et Vossii codd., nisi quod hi perperam habeant blasphement pro blasphemam; sed rectius et magis exacte ad Graeca, falsum a vero, pro verum a falso, ut in editis legitur.

In eo quod blasphemam, etc. This whole passage, wretchedly disfigured in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and in the Arundel, Ottoboni and second Mercerus manuscripts, was restored by Feuardent from the old manuscript and the Greek text. The Passionei and Vossius manuscripts agree with the old manuscript, except that they wrongly have blasphement for blasphemam; but they read, more correctly and more exactly to the Greek, falsum a vero ("the false from the true") for verum a falso ("the true from the false"), as is read in the printed editions.

(printed under page 226)

(4) ‹anchor: Veriorem semetipsum praefert› · call in col 440

Veriorem semetipsum praefert, etc. Ita Feuard. in marg. Pass. et Voss. caeteri praestat. Sed haec Graecis non satis accurate respondent. Si cum Billio legas φαίνεται pro φαίνεσθαι, sic verte: Ipsa etiam veritate veriorem semetipsum externa quadam specie exhibere videtur imperitioribus. Vel si, retinens φαίνεσθαι, legere malis παρέχει, uti legi posse monet Petavius, vertendum est: Ipsa etiam veritate veriorem semetipsum externa quadam specie conspiciendum exhibet imperitioribus.

Veriorem semetipsum praefert ("shows itself truer"), etc. So Feuardent in the margin, the Passionei and the Vossius; the rest have praestat. But these do not answer accurately enough to the Greek. If with Billius you read φαίνεται for φαίνεσθαι, translate thus: "It seems, by a certain outward show, to present itself to the less skilled as truer even than the truth itself." Or if, keeping φαίνεσθαι, you prefer to read παρέχει, as Petau notes may be read, it is to be translated: "By a certain outward show it presents itself to the less skilled to be seen as truer even than the truth itself."

(printed under page 226)

(5) ‹anchor: Quoniam› · call in col 440

Quoniam. Ita recte Arund. Voss. Clarom. et Feuard. in marg. In Feuard. vero textu, perinde atque in Eras. et Gall. male, quomodo.

Quoniam ("since"). So rightly the Arundel, Vossius and Clermont manuscripts, and Feuardent in the margin. But in Feuardent's text, as in Erasmus and Gallasius, wrongly, quomodo ("how").

(printed under page 226)

(6) ‹anchor: Vitreum in ejus contumeliam› · call in col 440

Vitreum in ejus contumeliam. Accuratior hic Billii versio: Smaragdo, etc., vitrum dedecus infert. Vitreum hic cum Tertulliano lib. ad Mart. c. 4, scribit interpres pro vitrum.

Vitreum in ejus contumeliam ("glass, to its insult"). Billius's version is more accurate here: "glass brings disgrace upon the emerald," etc. The translator writes vitreum here for vitrum ("glass"), as Tertullian does, Ad martyras ch. 4.

(printed under page 226)

(7) ‹anchor: Artificium arguere, quod subdole sit factum› · call in col 440

Artificium arguere, quod subdole sit factum. Τέχνην legit interpres, nos τέχνῃ: quare ita Latine reddidit Billius: artis solertia id quod versute factum est deprehendere queat.

Artificium arguere, quod subdole sit factum ("to expose the artifice, that it was made craftily"). The translator read τέχνην ("art", accusative); we read τέχνῃ ("by art"): hence Billius rendered it in Latin thus: "can detect by skill in the art what was cunningly made".

(printed under page 226)

(8) ‹anchor: Ὡς ὑψηλότερόν τι καὶ μεῖζον ἔχοντες ἐπιδεῖξαι› · call in col 440

Ὡς ὑψηλότερόν τι καὶ μεῖζον ἔχοντες ἐπιδεῖξαι, etc., eum scilicet quem delirantes comminiscebantur Βυθὸν, seu Προπάτορα, aut Προάρχην, quem Patre et rerum omnium principio superiorem esse effutiebant.

"As having something loftier and greater to show," etc. — namely the one whom, in their ravings, they invented, Bythos (the Depth), or Propator (the Forefather), or Proarche (the Fore-beginning), whom they babbled was higher than the Father and the first principle of all things.

(printed under page 226)

(9) ‹anchor: Πειθανῶς μὲν ἐπαγόμενοι…, ἀπιθάνως δὲ ἀπολλύντες› · call in col 440

Πειθανῶς μὲν ἐπαγόμενοι…., ἀπιθάνως δὲ ἀπολλύντες. Elegantem hanc antithesim, quam minus feliciter expressit interpres, sic ego reddendam esse censerem: Oratione quidem ad persuadendum accommodata simpliciores ad inquirendum instigant; absurdis autem ac prorsum incredibilibus fabulis miseros verum a falso discernere non valentes perdunt, quos in Fabricatorem impia et blasphema sentire docent.

"Leading on persuasively …, but destroying unpersuasively." This elegant antithesis, which the translator expressed less happily, I would think should be rendered thus: "With speech fitted to persuade they spur the simpler sort to inquiry; but with absurd and altogether incredible fables they destroy the wretched, who cannot tell the true from the false, teaching them to think impious and blasphemous things of the Maker."

(printed under page 226)

(10) ‹anchor: Μηδὲ ἐν τῷ διακρίνειν› · call in col 440

Μηδὲ ἐν τῷ διακρίνειν. Expungi vult Billius, δὲ ἐν τῷ. Grabius conjicit Irenaeum scripsissse: μὴ δεόντως διακρίνειν. Legerem ego, leviori mutatione facta, μηδέν τι διακρίνειν δυναμένων, nullatenus discernere valentium.

Μηδὲ ἐν τῷ διακρίνειν ("nor in distinguishing"). Billius would strike out δὲ ἐν τῷ. Grabe conjectures that Irenaeus wrote μὴ δεόντως διακρίνειν ("not distinguishing as they ought"). I would read, making a slighter change, μηδέν τι διακρίνειν δυναμένων, "of those not able to distinguish at all".

(printed under page 226)

(11) ‹anchor: Παρέχειν φαίνεσθαι› · call in col 440

Παρέχειν φαίνεσθαι. Vel lege, παρέχει φαίνεσθαι, vel παρέχειν φαίνεται. Addit Latinus interpres per parenthesim: ridiculum est et dicere. quibus verbis nihil in Graeco respondet. Nisi haec de suo addiderit, omiserunt oscitantes scribae: γελοῖόν ἐστι φάναι.

Παρέχειν φαίνεσθαι. Read either παρέχει φαίνεσθαι or παρέχειν φαίνεται. The Latin translator adds in a parenthesis: "it is ridiculous even to say it", words to which nothing in the Greek answers. Unless he added them of his own, drowsy scribes have left out γελοῖόν ἐστι φάναι.

(printed under page 226)

(12) ‹anchor: Ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος ἡμῶν εἴρηται› · call in col 440

Ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος ἡμῶν εἴρηται. Virum hunc, eorum qui apostolos viderant discipulum, saepius laudat Irenaeus; ut libri hujus cap. 15, lib. III, c. 17 et 23, et lib. IV, c. 27, et ab eo multa didicisse se confitetur. Ejusdem meminit Eusebius lib. V Hist. cap. 8. Nomen autem ejus uterque reticet.

"It was said by one better than we." This man, a disciple of those who had seen the apostles, Irenaeus praises quite often — as in ch. 15 of this book, Book III, chs. 17 and 23, and Book IV, ch. 27 — and he confesses that he learned much from him. Eusebius mentions him, Ecclesiastical History V, ch. 8. But both keep silent about his name.

(printed under page 226)

(13) ‹anchor: Ἀκεραίως› · call in col 440

Ἀκεραίως. Legendum puto ἀκέραιος, adjective, quemadmodum legit Latinus interpres. Id enim exigunt sermonis series et auctoris scopus, ut attendenti patebit; ἀκεραίως autem hic commodum habere sensum vix potest.

Ἀκεραίως ("unmixedly", adverb). I think ἀκέραιος should be read, as an adjective, as the Latin translator read it. For the run of the sentence and the author's aim require it, as will be plain to one who attends; whereas ἀκεραίως can scarcely make good sense here.

(printed under page 226) <!-- note: in (10) the page prints scripsissse (three s), a misprint kept as printed (Q2a). -->

(¹) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 442 Matth. VII, 15.

Matthew 7:15.

(printed under page 227)

(1) ‹anchor: Παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν αἰτίαν› · call in col 442

Παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν αἰτίαν. Praepositionem παρά, in edit. omnibus perperam omissam, ex cod. Reg. restituimus.

Παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν αἰτίαν ("through our fault"). The preposition παρά, wrongly omitted in all the editions, we have restored from the Royal manuscript.

(printed under page 227)

(2) ‹anchor: Ἐπιβουλήν› · call in col 442

Ἐπιβουλήν. Ἐπιβολήν legit Latinus interpres: vertit enim, superindumentum. Vocem tamen ἐπιβουλήν retineri nihil vetat, qua posita accommodate ad auctoris institutum cum Cornario verteris: Propter externas ovillae pellis insidias.

Ἐπιβουλήν ("plot"). The Latin translator read ἐπιβολήν ("covering"), for he translated superindumentum ("overgarment"). Yet nothing forbids keeping the word ἐπιβουλήν; with it, you would translate, aptly to the author's purpose, with Cornarius: "because of the outward snares of the sheep's skin".

(printed under page 227)

(3) ‹anchor: Μὴ πάντες τὸν ἐγκέφαλον ἐξεπτύκασιν› · call in col 442

Μὴ πάντες τὸν ἐγκέφαλον ἐξεπτύκασιν. Sic cod. Reg. et editt. omnes. Interpres vero legisse videtur ἔχουσιν vel ἐσχήκασιν, ni forte (quod a vero simili non abhorret), Graecae phraseos sensum haud assecutus, hanc vertendo immutarit. Animum torquent Gallasius, Billius, Fronto Duc. et Grabius, ut obscurae hujus sententiae sensum expiscentur. Non meminerant, puto, Plautum in Mostellaria dixisse cerebrum mungere, pro callidiorem, seu astutiorem evadere, vel efficere: Imo etiam cerebrum quoque omnem e capite munxisti meum: Nam omnia malefacta vestra repperi radicitus. Eodem prorsus sensu dictum ab Irenaeo ἐγκέφαλον ἐκπτύειν, cerebrum exspuere, quo a Plauto cerebrum mungere. Nempe rationem affert ille cur omnes portentosa et abstrusa Valentinianorum mysteria assequi non valeant; quia, inquit, μὴ πάντες τὸν ἐγκέφαλον ἐξεπτύκασι, non omnes cerebrum exspuerunt; id est, non omnes cerebrum satis emunctum, seu defaecatum habent, non ea ingenii subtilitate pollent, ut perdifficilia et obscurissima dogmata pervadere possint.

Μὴ πάντες τὸν ἐγκέφαλον ἐξεπτύκασιν ("not all have spat out their brain"). So the Royal manuscript and all the editions. The translator, though, seems to have read ἔχουσιν or ἐσχήκασιν ("have"), unless perhaps (which is not unlikely) he failed to grasp the sense of the Greek phrase and altered it in translating. Gallasius, Billius, Fronton du Duc and Grabe rack their minds to fish out the sense of this obscure sentence. They did not remember, I think, that Plautus in the Mostellaria said "to blow the brain clean" for "to become, or make, sharper or more cunning": "Nay, you have even blown all the brain out of my head: for I have found out all your misdeeds by the roots." Irenaeus's "to spit out the brain" is said in exactly the same sense as Plautus's "to blow the brain". He gives, that is, the reason why not all can grasp the monstrous and abstruse mysteries of the Valentinians: because, he says, "not all have spat out their brain"; that is, not all have a brain sufficiently cleared or purged, nor are they strong in such subtlety of mind that they can penetrate the most difficult and obscure doctrines.

(printed under page 227)

(4) ‹anchor: Μήτε συγγράφειν εἰθισμένοι› · call in col 442

Μήτε συγγράφειν εἰθισμένοι. Non improbabiliter hinc concludit Feuardentius, hos quinque libros primum esse Irenaei fetum. Sed de his alibi diximus.

Μήτε συγγράφειν εἰθισμένοι ("nor being used to writing"). Feuardent not improbably concludes from this that these five books are Irenaeus's first offspring. But we have spoken of this elsewhere.

(printed under page 227)

(5) ‹anchor: Rudis cum sit› · call in col 442

Rudis cum sit. In Graeco non ἀκέραιος adjective, sed ἀκεραίως, quod si revera legendum foret, sensus est: Quis facile poterit hoc vere probare, seu potius explorare. Vide quae observavimus ad textum Graecum.

Rudis cum sit ("since he is unskilled"). In the Greek, not ἀκέραιος as an adjective but ἀκεραίως; if that really were to be read, the sense is: "Who will easily be able truly to test this," or rather "examine it". See what we observed on the Greek text.

(printed under page 227)

(6) ‹anchor: Ovilis pellis› · call in col 442

Ovilis pellis. Sic vetus Feuard. cod. cum Anglicanis et Clarom. Scilicet, ovilis adjective, pro ovillae seu ovinae; quod quidem adjectivi genus Latinis inusitatum, at barbaro interpreti condonandum.

Ovilis pellis ("sheep's skin"). So Feuardent's old manuscript, with the English manuscripts and the Clermont. That is, ovilis as an adjective, for ovillae or ovinae; a form of adjective unused by the Latins, but to be pardoned in a barbarous translator.

(printed under page 227)

(7) ‹anchor: Habent› · call in col 442

Habent. Gr. ἐξεπτύκασιν, exspuerunt. Interpres vero legit, ἐσχήκασιν. Vide notata ad textum Graecum.

Habent ("have"). Greek ἐξεπτύκασιν, "have spat out". But the translator read ἐσχήκασιν ("have had"). See the notes on the Greek text.

(printed under page 227)

(8) ‹anchor: Aliud docent› · call in col 442

Aliud docent. Gr. παραδιδασκόντων, perperam docent, seu falsa docent.

Aliud docent ("teach otherwise"). Greek παραδιδασκόντων, "teach wrongly", or "teach false things".

(printed under page 227)

(9) ‹anchor: Ptolemaeum› · call in col 442

Ptolemaeum. Clarom. ubique habet, Ptolomaeus, Ptolomaeum, etc. Sic etiam passim Tertullianus.

Ptolemaeum. The Clermont manuscript everywhere has Ptolomaeus, Ptolomaeum, etc. So too Tertullian throughout.

(printed under page 227)

(10) ‹anchor: Quae est› · call in col 442

Quae est. Ita recte cod. Arund. et Merc. 2. In editt. vero male, qui est. Id enim ad Ptolemaei et asseclarum sententiam, non ad Ptolemaeum ipsum referri demonstrat textus Graecus, in quo legitur, ἀπάνθισμα οὖσαν, scilicet, γνώμην τῶν περὶ Πτολεμαῖον. Perperam igitur Feuard. ad lib. II, cap. 4, et alii ex hoc loco collegerunt, Ptolemaeum ab Irenaeo vocari flosculum scholae Valentini, decepti videlicet haud satis accurata interpretatione vocis ἀπάνθισμα. Haec enim proprie non flosculum, sed delibationem, seu, ut alius quispiam mediae vel infimae Latinitatis interpres vertisset, deflorationem hic significat. Id nempe vult Irenaeus, Ptolemaeum quod subtilius erat e Valentini dogmatibus delibasse ac excerpsisse, ut hypothesim suam hinc conficeret.

Quae est ("which is", feminine). So rightly the Arundel manuscript and the second Mercerus. In the editions, wrongly, qui est ("who is"). For the Greek text shows that this refers to the opinion of Ptolemy and his followers, not to Ptolemy himself; it reads ἀπάνθισμα οὖσαν, that is, "the opinion of Ptolemy's circle" (γνώμην τῶν περὶ Πτολεμαῖον). Wrongly therefore did Feuardent, on Book II, ch. 4, and others gather from this place that Ptolemy is called by Irenaeus "the little flower of Valentinus's school" — misled, that is, by a not very accurate rendering of the word ἀπάνθισμα. For this properly means here not "little flower" but "a culling", or, as some other translator of middle or late Latinity would have rendered it, "a deflowering". What Irenaeus means is that Ptolemy culled and excerpted whatever was subtler from the doctrines of Valentinus, so as to construct his own system from it.

(printed under page 227)

(11) ‹anchor: Occasiones dabimus› · call in col 442

Occasiones dabimus. Gr. ἀφορμὰς δώσομεν, quod mallem cum Petavio vertisset inter- (continues)

Occasiones dabimus ("we shall give occasions"). Greek ἀφορμὰς δώσομεν, which I would rather the translator had rendered, with Petau, … (continues)

(printed under page 227)

(³) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 444 Matth. X, 26.

Matthew 10:26.

(printed under page 228)

(1) ‹anchor: Non stantia› · call in col 444

Non stantia. In Eras. Gall. et Feuard., non constantia. In Graec. vero, et fortasse melius, ἀλλόκοτα, monstrosa, seu absurda.

Non stantia ("not standing"). In Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, non constantia ("not consistent"). But in the Greek, and perhaps better, ἀλλόκοτα, "monstrous" or "absurd".

(printed under page 228)

(2) ‹anchor: Absconsae› · call in col 444

Absconsae. Scil. doctrinae ipsorum. Sic ex cod. Claromont. et Pass. restituimus. In caeteris, et in editione ipsa Oxoniensi, vitiose absconsa.

Absconsae ("hidden", feminine). That is, their doctrines. So we have restored it from the Clermont and Passionei manuscripts. In the others, and in the Oxford edition itself, wrongly absconsa (neuter).

(printed under page 228)

(3) ‹anchor: Vacamus› · call in col 444

Vacamus. Sic reponere non dubitavimus, codd. Voss. et Clarom. auctoritate moti, in quibus legitur quidem vacamur, sed manifesto scribarum lapsu, pro vacamus. Cum enim in mss. antiquioribus non exigua sit affinitas inter s et r, proclive fuit festinantibus scribis posteriorem pro priori scribere; quorum codices alii exscribentes, nec barbaram vocem vacamur intelligentes, scripserunt, alii vocamur (ut prius in cod. Clarom. scriptum fuerat, sed postea emendatum), alii avocamur; quod posterius in editt. omn. legitur. Legendum vero vacamus, demonstrat vox Graeca ἀσχολουμένων, quam Latine reddidit Billius, operam ponimus; Cornarius vero et Petavius, occupati sumus.

Vacamus ("we give ourselves to"). We have not hesitated to restore this, moved by the authority of the Vossius and Clermont manuscripts, in which vacamur is indeed read, but by an evident slip of the scribes, for vacamus. For since in the older manuscripts there is no small likeness between s and r, it was easy for hurried scribes to write the latter for the former; and others copying their manuscripts, not understanding the barbarous word vacamur, wrote, some vocamur (as had first been written in the Clermont manuscript, but was afterwards corrected), others avocamur, which latter is read in all the editions. That vacamus is to be read is shown by the Greek word ἀσχολουμένων, which Billius rendered in Latin "we spend our effort", and Cornarius and Petau "we are occupied".

(printed under page 228)

(4) ‹anchor: Auges› · call in col 444

Auges. In Eras. Gallas. et Feuard. male, augeas. Hic enim auges scribitur pro augebis, juxta Graecum αὐξήσεις. Plura siquidem verba terminationem habent utriusque, secundae scilicet et tertiae conjugationis. Sic Fulgeo, Fulgo, Ferveo, Fervo. Fervere littora flammis, Virg. IV Aen. 567. Sylvae stridunt, Virg. II Aen. 84. Vide Voss. lib. V De arte grammat. c. 3, et Novam methodum addiscendi linguam Lat., Gallice scriptam, pag. 353, edit. 1696.

Auges ("you increase"). In Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, wrongly, augeas. For auges is written here for augebis ("you will increase"), following the Greek αὐξήσεις. Many verbs indeed have the endings of both the second and the third conjugation: so fulgeo and fulgo, ferveo and fervo. "The shores seethe (fervere) with flames," Virgil, Aeneid IV, 567. "The woods hiss (stridunt)," Virgil, Aeneid II, 84 [as printed]. See Vossius, De arte grammatica V, ch. 3, and the New Method of Learning the Latin Tongue, written in French, p. 353, edition of 1696.

(printed under page 228)

(5) ‹anchor: In latitudine sensus tui› · call in col 444

In latitudine sensus tui, etc. Haec, litterae nimium addictus, interpres obscuravit; clarius reddidit Petavius: In spatiosum mentis tuae sinum recondita, quae paucis a me perstricta sunt, uberiore fructu compensabis.

In latitudine sensus tui ("in the breadth of your mind"), etc. The translator, too bound to the letter, obscured this; Petau rendered it more clearly: "What I have touched on briefly, once laid up in the spacious bosom of your mind, you will repay with richer fruit."

(printed under page 228)

(6) ‹anchor: Et potenter asseres› · call in col 444

Et potenter asseres. Ut potenter asseras habent Voss. Pass. et Feuard. in marg.; sed prior lectio magis cum Graeco convenit.

Et potenter asseres ("and you will powerfully maintain"). The Vossius and Passionei manuscripts and Feuardent in the margin have ut potenter asseras ("so that you may powerfully maintain"); but the former reading agrees better with the Greek.

(printed under page 228)

(7) ‹anchor: Quaerenti tibi› · call in col 444

Quaerenti tibi. Pro quaerente te, id est flagitante te jam pridem, scriptum vult Grabius. Ego vero quaerenti tibi referrem ad non solum facere tibi manifestam, posteriusque tibi utpote superfluum expungerem.

Quaerenti tibi ("to you asking"). Grabe would have it written for quaerente te, that is, "you having long since demanded it". I, however, would refer quaerenti tibi to "not only to make plain to you", and would strike out the second tibi as superfluous.

(printed under page 228)

(8) ‹anchor: Ἰδιωτικῶς› · call in col 444

Ἰδιωτικῶς. Id ad tibi referri mavult Feuardentius: ut sensus sit, privatim, tibi soli. Malim ego ad praecedentia referri, ut sit idem ἰδιωτικῶς, ac rudi et simplici, seu vulgari stylo, et absque λέξεων καλλωπισμοῦ.

Ἰδιωτικῶς ("plainly; privately"). Feuardent prefers to refer this to "to you", so that the sense is "privately, to you alone". I would rather refer it to what precedes, so that ἰδιωτικῶς is the same as "in a rough and simple, or common, style, and without embellishment of words".

(printed under page 228)

(9) ‹anchor: Ἐφόδια δοῦναι› · call in col 444

Ἐφόδια δοῦναι. Idipsum est quod superius dixit, ἀφορμὰς δώσομεν, subsidia ministrabimus. Scilicet ἐφόδιον proprie viaticum, auxiliumque viae, ut loquitur Virgilius Aeneid. I, 36; hic vero opitulationem, auxilium, subsidium, argumentum significat.

Ἐφόδια δοῦναι ("to give provisions for the way"). This is the very thing he said above, ἀφορμὰς δώσομεν, "we shall furnish aids". Ἐφόδιον properly means provision for a journey, "help for the way", as Virgil puts it, Aeneid I, 36; but here it means assistance, help, aid, argument.

(printed under page 228)

(1) ‹anchor: Τέλειον Αἰῶνα προόντα› · call in col 446

Τέλειον Αἰῶνα προόντα. Sic Theodoret. lib. I Haer. Fab., cap. 7: Πρῶτον Αἰῶνα τέλειον· et Tertull. cap. 7: Substantialiter quidem αἰῶνα τέλειον appellant, personaliter vero προαρχὴν, et τὴν ἀρχὴν, etiam Bython.

Τέλειον Αἰῶνα προόντα ("a perfect pre-existent Aeon"). So Theodoret, Haereticarum fabularum I, ch. 7: "a first perfect Aeon"; and Tertullian, ch. 7: "Substantially they call him the perfect Aeon, but personally Proarche (the Fore-beginning), and the Beginning, and also Bythos."

(printed under page 229)

(2) ‹anchor: Τοῦτον δὲ καί› · call in col 446

Τοῦτον δὲ καί. Adde, προαρχὴν ante προπάτορα· illam enim vocem legit vetus interpres, et legendam demonstrant Tertullianus et Theodoret. locis cit.

Τοῦτον δὲ καί ("and him also"). Add προαρχήν before προπάτορα; for the old translator read that word, and Tertullian and Theodoret, in the places cited, show that it should be read.

(printed under page 229)

(3) ‹anchor: Ὑπάρχοντα δ' αὐτόν› · call in col 446

Ὑπάρχοντα δ' αὐτόν. Ante haec verba legisse videtur Latinus interpres ὑπάρχειν δ' αὐτὸν ἀόρατον καὶ ἀχώρητον, ut probe monet Fronto Duc., quae ideo forte omisit scriba, quod eadem fere mox recurrant.

Ὑπάρχοντα δ' αὐτόν ("and he being"). Before these words the Latin translator seems to have read "and that he is invisible and incomprehensible", as Fronton du Duc rightly notes; the scribe perhaps omitted them because nearly the same words recur shortly after.

(printed under page 229)

(4) ‹anchor: Χρόνων› · call in col 446

Χρόνων. Hanc vocem addidit, puto, sciolus quis explicationis causa, veritus scilicet ne αἰών hic substantialiter acciperetur, pro primo Valentinianorum Aeone; cum aevum aut saeculum significet. Eam enim non agnoscunt neque Latinus interpres, neque Tertullianus, neque Theodoretus.

Χρόνων ("of times"). This word was added, I think, by some smatterer for the sake of explanation, afraid, that is, that αἰών might be taken here substantially, for the first Aeon of the Valentinians, when it means an age or period. For neither the Latin translator, nor Tertullian, nor Theodoret recognises it.

(printed under page 229)

(5) ‹anchor: Ἣν δὴ καὶ Χάριν, καὶ Σιγήν› · call in col 446

Ἣν δὴ καὶ Χάριν, καὶ Σιγήν, etc. Hinc Theodoreti textum emendes, in quo, vitiose legitur: Χάριν καὶ σεπτὴν καλουμένην. Pro σεπτήν, repone Σιγήν. Emendes etiam Indiculum haereseon Pseudo-Hieronymi, et pro, ea gratia appellatum Σιγήν, lege, Gratiam appellant et Σιγήν.

"Whom they also call Charis (Grace) and Sige (Silence)," etc. From this you may correct the text of Theodoret, in which is wrongly read "called Grace and august (σεπτήν)". For σεπτήν put back Σιγήν. You may also correct the Indiculus haereseon of Pseudo-Jerome, and for "by that grace called Sige" read "they call her Grace and Sige".

(printed under page 229)

(6) ‹anchor: Καθάπερ σπέρμα, ἣν προβαλέσθαι ἐνενοήθη› · call in col 446

Καθάπερ σπέρμα, ἣν προβαλέσθαι ἐνενοήθη. In hujus loci lectione non consentiunt Billius, Grabius et Fronto Duc. Prior omittit, καθάπερ σπέρμα, quod tamen habet Tertullianus. Grabius deletum vult articulum ἣν, utpote redundantem: Fronto Duc. conjunctionem καὶ ante καθέσθαι. Ego vero, nulla deleta voce, verbum ἐννοηθῆναι duntaxat, per ellipsin omissum, subintellectum velim ante vel post καθέσθαι, ista, ἣν προβαλέσθαι ἐνενοήθη, intra parenthesim includendo; et sic planus evadit mihi sensus: Hunc porro Bythum aliquando in animum induxisse ex sese rerum omnium initium proferre; atque hanc quam emittere statuerat productionem, velut semen in Sigen, quae una cum eo erat, demittere etiam voluisse. Ejusmodi ellipseon, imo et duriorum, non rara sunt cum apud Graecos, tum apud Latinos exempla. Nec reprehendet quisquam quod καί ante καθέσθαι interpreter etiam, cum ea significatio passim obvia sit.

"Like a seed, which he had thought to put forth." Billius, Grabe and Fronton du Duc do not agree on the reading of this place. The first omits "like a seed", which Tertullian nevertheless has. Grabe wants the article ἥν struck out as redundant; Fronton du Duc, the conjunction καί before καθέσθαι. I, however, deleting no word, would have only the verb ἐννοηθῆναι, omitted by ellipsis, understood before or after καθέσθαι, enclosing the words "which he had thought to put forth" in a parenthesis; and so the sense comes out plain to me: "This Bythos, then, at some time took it into his mind to put forth from himself the beginning of all things; and this production, which he had resolved to emit, he also willed to deposit, like a seed, in Sige, who was with him." Examples of such ellipses, and harsher ones too, are not rare among both Greeks and Latins. Nor will anyone fault me for rendering καί before καθέσθαι as "also", since that meaning is met everywhere.

(printed under page 229)

(7) ‹anchor: Καθέσθαι› · call in col 446

Καθέσθαι. In cod. Reg. καταθέσθαι.

Καθέσθαι ("to deposit"). In the Royal manuscript, καταθέσθαι.

(printed under page 229)

(8) ‹anchor: Aeonibus› · call in col 446

Aeonibus. Addit textus Graecus, χρόνων, temporum; quam vocem non reddidit interpres. At ut in hoc excusandus, in eo certe reprehendendus quod αἰῶσι verterit aeonibus; αἰών enim hic non inusitato Valentinianorum, sed vulgari sensu accipitur, pro aevo aut saeculo. Vide notam 4.

Aeonibus ("in Aeons"). The Greek text adds χρόνων, "of times", a word the translator did not render. But if he is to be excused in this, he is certainly to be faulted for rendering αἰῶσι as aeonibus; for αἰών is taken here not in the peculiar sense of the Valentinians but in the common sense, for an age or period. See note 4.

(printed under page 229)

(9) ‹anchor: Et velut semen prolationem hanc praemitti voluit› · call in col 446

Et velut semen prolationem hanc praemitti voluit. Quod non attenderit interpres ad ellipsin verbi ἐννοηθῆναι, toti periodo, dum vertit, nebulas offundit. Clarius, ni fallor, haec a nobis reddita. Vide notam 6.

Et velut semen prolationem hanc praemitti voluit ("and willed this emission to be sent forth like a seed"). Because the translator did not attend to the ellipsis of the verb ἐννοηθῆναι, he cast a fog over the whole sentence in translating it. We have rendered it more clearly, unless I am mistaken. See note 6.

(printed under page 229)

(1) ‹anchor: Unigenitum vocant› · call in col 448

Unigenitum vocant. Atqui non proprie, inquit Tertull. lib. cont. Val. c. 7, siquidem non solus agnoscitur; nam cum illo processit et femina, cui Veritas nomen est. Quanto congruentius Protogenes vocaretur!

Unigenitum vocant ("they call him Only-begotten"). "Yet not properly," says Tertullian, Against the Valentinians, ch. 7, "since he is not recognised as alone; for with him came forth a female too, whose name is Truth. How much more fittingly he would be called Protogenes (First-born)!"

(printed under page 230)

(2) ‹anchor: Sentientem autem unigenitum› · call in col 448

Sentientem autem unigenitum, etc. Clarius indiculus a Cotelerio restitutus: Intelligens autem sensus (Nus) ad quid esset emissus. Et Tertull. c. 7: Nus simul accepit (id est percepit, sive intellexit) prolationis suae officium.

Sentientem autem unigenitum ("the Only-begotten, perceiving"), etc. More clearly the Indiculus restored by Cotelier: "But Mind (Nous), understanding for what he had been emitted." And Tertullian, ch. 7: "Nous at once received" (that is, perceived or understood) "the office of his emission."

(printed under page 230)

(3) ‹anchor: Emissum secundum conjugationem› · call in col 448

Emissum secundum conjugationem. Ita Claromont. cum textu Graec. Pass. Ottobon. et partim Arund. Merc. 2 et Voss. In editt. vero Eras. Gallas. et Feuard. male, emissam secundam conjugationem.

Emissum secundum conjugationem ("emitted according to conjugation"). So the Clermont manuscript, with the Greek text, the Passionei, the Ottoboni, and in part the Arundel, the second Mercerus and the Vossius. But in the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, wrongly, emissam secundam conjugationem ("a second conjugation emitted").

(printed under page 230)

(4) ‹anchor: Πυθαγορικὴν Τετρακτύν› · call in col 448

Πυθαγορικὴν Τετρακτύν. Τετρακτύν cum Petavio et Theodoreto scribo, non τετρακτήν, ut perperam legitur in Basileensi Epiphanii edit. quam secuti sunt Feuard. et Grabius ipse; τετρακτύν enim dicebant Pythagorici, non τετρακτήν. Tetradem vero et Quadrigam vocat Tertull. Pythagorica ab Irenaeo dicitur; nemo enim nescit quantum quaternario numero tribuerent Pythagorici. Perfectum, imo omnem esse numerum asserebant; quia, inquit Plutarch. lib. I De placitis philosoph., c. 3, in se numerum vi complectitur denarium, ultra quem proprie non est numerus; nam reliqui ultra, qui dicuntur, numeri, priorum sunt repetitiones. Continet autem denarium, quia habet quatuor, tria, duo, unum, quae simul collecta denarium efficiunt. Propterea adeo sacra illis tetras erat, ut, Plutarcho loco cit. et Porphyrio testibus, inde sanctioris jurisjurandi religionem sibi fecissent: Οὐ μὰ τὸν ἁμετέρᾳ ψυχᾷ παραδόντα τετρακτὺν, Παγὰν ἀενάου φύσεως ῥιζώματ' ἔχουσαν. Per eum, qui animae nostrae tradidit quaternarium, Fontem perennis naturae radices habentem.

Πυθαγορικὴν Τετρακτύν ("a Pythagorean Tetractys"). I write τετρακτύν with Petau and Theodoret, not τετρακτήν, as is wrongly read in the Basel edition of Epiphanius, which Feuardent and Grabe himself followed; for the Pythagoreans said τετρακτύς, not τετρακτή. Tertullian calls it the Tetrad and the Quadriga. Irenaeus calls it Pythagorean, for no one is unaware how much the Pythagoreans attributed to the number four. They asserted that it was a perfect number, nay, all number; because, says Plutarch, De placitis philosophorum I, ch. 3, it embraces in itself potentially the number ten, beyond which there is properly no number, for the so-called numbers beyond are repetitions of the earlier ones. And it contains ten because it has four, three, two and one, which added together make ten. Hence the tetrad was so sacred to them that, as Plutarch in the place cited and Porphyry attest, they made of it the bond of a more solemn oath: "No, by him who gave our soul the tetractys, the fount of ever-flowing nature that holds its roots." [Latin:] "By him who handed on the four to our soul, the fount of everlasting nature, holding its roots."

(printed under page 230)

(5) ‹anchor: Προβαλεῖν καὶ αὐτὸν Λόγον› · call in col 448

Προβαλεῖν καὶ αὐτὸν Λόγον. C. R. ὑποβαλεῖν. Caeterum Irenaeo consentit Tertullianus cap. 7. Emittit et ipse (Nus) ex semetipso Sermonem, etc. Eadem habet Indiculus supra citatus, a Cotelerio emendatus, ad calcem tom. I Monum. Eccles. Gr., p. 767. Memoriae itaque lapsus est, infert optime Grabius, in Cyrilli Catech. 6, ubi Βυθῷ generatio Λόγου ascribitur. Est quoque ibidem prava lectio, distinctio, versio textus. Lege, pergit vir doctus, ex ms. 25 Roe. in Bibliotheca Bodl. emendatum, recteque distinctum: Βυθὸς ἐγέννησε Σιγὴν καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Σιγῆς ἐτεκνοποίει Λόγον. Τοῦ παρ' Ἕλλησιν Διὸς οὗτος χείρων, τοῦ τῇ ἀδελφῇ μιγνυμένου· τέκνον γὰρ τοῦ Βυθοῦ ἐλέγετο εἶναι ἡ Σιγή· Bythus genuit Sigen, et ex Sige filium suscepit Logon. Iste pejor est Jove gentilium, qui sorori commistus est; quippe Sige Bythi proles esse ferebatur. Magis tamen, fateor, propenderem in conjecturam eruditissimi Pearsonii Vindic. Epist. S. Ignat., part. II, cap. V, edit. Cantabrig. 1672, pag. 48, scilicet, neque λόγου, neque λόγον legendum esse, sed utramque vocem expungendam, utpote minime necessariam, sive priora, sive posteriora verba respicias. Neutra posterioribus competit; Cyrillus enim non Logon, sed Bythum Jovi comparat. Prioribus neque λόγου convenit, neque λόγον necessarium est; nam τεκνοποιεῖν, liberos procreare, quicunque tandem illi sint, satis ad hujus loci sensum exprimendum valet. Docet enim Cyrillus Jovem sorori mistum fuisse, Bythum vero ex filia sua procreasse liberos: quod turpius est. Quanquam haud excusari posse videatur quod Σιγὴν ἐκ Βυθοῦ genitam esse asserit Cyrillus. Sigen enim et ipsam ingenitam, Bythoque συνυπάρχουσαν ab haereticis dici, satis expresse tradunt Irenaeus et Theodoretus.

"That he himself also put forth the Word (Logos)." The Royal manuscript has ὑποβαλεῖν. Tertullian, ch. 7, agrees with Irenaeus: "He too (Nous) emits from himself the Word," etc. The Indiculus cited above, as corrected by Cotelier, at the end of vol. I of the Monumenta Ecclesiae Graecae, p. 767, has the same. It is therefore a slip of memory, as Grabe very well infers, in Cyril's Catechesis 6, where the generation of the Logos is ascribed to Bythos. There is also, in the same place, a faulty reading, punctuation and translation of the text. Read, the learned man goes on, as corrected from Roe manuscript 25 in the Bodleian Library and rightly punctuated: "Bythos begot Sige, and of Sige he begot the Logos. This one is worse than the Zeus of the Greeks, who lay with his sister; for Sige was said to be the child of Bythos." [Latin:] "Bythus begot Sige, and of Sige received a son, Logos. He is worse than the Jupiter of the gentiles, who coupled with his sister; for Sige was reported to be the offspring of Bythus." Yet I confess I would lean rather to the conjecture of the most learned Pearson, Vindiciae Epistolarum S. Ignatii, part II, ch. 5, Cambridge edition 1672, p. 48: namely, that neither λόγου nor λόγον should be read, but both words struck out as not at all necessary, whether you look to the earlier or the later words. Neither fits the later words, for Cyril compares not the Logos but Bythos to Jupiter. With the earlier words λόγου does not agree, and λόγον is not necessary; for τεκνοποιεῖν, "to beget children", whoever they may be, suffices to express the sense of this place. For Cyril teaches that Jupiter lay with his sister, but Bythos begot children of his own daughter, which is fouler. Although it seems that Cyril cannot be excused for asserting that Sige was begotten of Bythos: for Irenaeus and Theodoret state quite expressly that the heretics called Sige herself unbegotten and co-existing with Bythos.

(printed under page 230)

(6) ‹anchor: Μόρφωσιν παντὸς τοῦ Πληρώματος› · call in col 448

Μόρφωσιν παντὸς τοῦ Πληρώματος. Emendandus ergo Tertullianus loco jam saepe cit. et pro formati Pleromatis totius emissa, legendum formationem Pleromatis, etc., ut recte ante me notavit Grab.

Μόρφωσιν παντὸς τοῦ Πληρώματος ("the formation of the whole Pleroma"). Tertullian must therefore be corrected in the place already often cited, and for "emitted … of the whole formed Pleroma" read "the formation of the Pleroma", etc., as Grabe rightly noted before me.

(printed under page 230)

(7) ‹anchor: Καλουμένων› · call in col 448

Καλουμένων. Legendum esse καλουμένην monet Fronto Duc. et videt quisque. Ita legit vetus interpres.

Καλουμένων ("called", genitive plural). Fronton du Duc notes, and anyone can see, that καλουμένην should be read. So the old translator read.

(printed under page 230)

(none) <!-- note: footnotes (1)-(3) are called in this column (Βύθιος, Σύνεσις, σεσιγημένοι); the page's footnotes (1)-(9) are set once under col 450 (Q2a pointer). -->

(1) ‹anchor: Βύθιος› · call in col 450

Βύθιος. Sic et Tertullianus cap. 8. Bythius adjective, ad discrimen primi parentis Bythi ita dictus, aiunt Pamelius et Fronto Duc. Male ergo in Theodoreti textu legitur Βυθὸν καὶ Μίξιν.

Βύθιος (Bythios). So too Tertullian, ch. 8. "Bythius" is an adjective, so called to distinguish him from the first parent Bythos, say Pamelius and Fronton du Duc. Wrongly, therefore, is "Bythos and Mixis" read in the text of Theodoret.

(printed under page 231)

(2) ‹anchor: Ἀείνους καὶ Σύνεσις› · call in col 450

Ἀείνους καὶ Σύνεσις. Sic et Tertull. loco mox cit. Ainus et Synesis. Perperam itaque apud Theodoretum habetur Νοῦς καὶ Σύνεσις. Νοῦς enim a Βυθῷ, non ab Ἀνθρώπῳ emissus est.

Ἀείνους καὶ Σύνεσις (Aeinous and Synesis). So too Tertullian in the place cited just now: "Ainus and Synesis." Wrongly, therefore, Theodoret has "Nous and Synesis"; for Nous was emitted by Bythos, not by Anthropos (Man).

(printed under page 231)

(3) ‹anchor: Σεσιγημένοι› · call in col 450

Σεσιγημένοι. Alludere videtur Irenaeus ad Σιγὴν Aeonum matrem. Sed alia ratione σεσιγημένους καὶ μὴ γινωσκομένους dicit, quia, ut observat Theodoretus, τούτους φασὶ τοὺς λ' Αἰῶνας τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀδήλους εἶναι, αὐτοῖς δὲ μόνοις γνωρίμους· Hos triginta Aeones dicunt aliis quidem omnibus ignotos esse, ipsis vero solis cognitos.

Σεσιγημένοι ("passed over in silence"). Irenaeus seems to allude to Sige, mother of the Aeons. But he calls them "silenced and unknown" for another reason: because, as Theodoret observes, "they say these thirty Aeons are hidden from all others, but known to themselves alone." [Latin:] "They say these thirty Aeons are unknown to all others, but known to themselves alone."

(printed under page 231)

(4) ‹anchor: Id est cogitationi› · call in col 450

Id est cogitationi. Haec, uti et sequentia, id est Veritati, id est Vitae, explicationis gratia addita sunt.

Id est cogitationi ("that is, to Thought"). These words, like the following "that is, to Truth", "that is, to Life", were added for the sake of explanation.

(printed under page 231)

(5) ‹anchor: Quam Gratiam et Silentium vocant› · call in col 450

Quam Gratiam et Silentium vocant. Verba haec in Graeco deficiunt, nec Irenaei esse videntur. Vero prorsus similis Grabii conjectura, primum a quopiam ad marginem ascripta, in textum irrepsisse: neque enim Irenaeum quod paulo ante dixerat, inutiliter mox repetiturum.

Quam Gratiam et Silentium vocant ("whom they call Grace and Silence"). These words are wanting in the Greek and do not seem to be Irenaeus's. Grabe's conjecture is altogether likely: that they were first written in the margin by someone and crept into the text; for Irenaeus would not uselessly repeat at once what he had said a little before.

(printed under page 231)

(6) ‹anchor: In conjugatione› · call in col 450

In conjugatione. Ita legendum ex textu Graeco conjecerat Fronto Duc. Sed ita revera habent Arund. Voss. Merc. 2 et Clarom. Editi vero perperam: in conjugationem.

In conjugatione ("in conjugation"). Fronton du Duc had conjectured from the Greek text that this should be read. And in fact the Arundel, Vossius, second Mercerus and Clermont manuscripts have it so. But the printed editions wrongly have in conjugationem ("into conjugation").

(printed under page 231)

(7) ‹anchor: Aenos› · call in col 450

Aenos. Ainos scribendum vult Fronto Duc. et ita quoque scripsit Feuard. infra lib. II, cap. 14, n. 8. Scribi vellem ego cum Tertull. c. 8, Ainus. Quemadmodum enim a Νοῦς dixerunt interpretes Latini Nus; sic ab Ἀείνους dicendum videtur Ainus, et ita scripsisse Billium video, recte quidem; sed minus recte, quod pro Synesis scripsit Phronesis. In Graeco siquidem Σύνεσις legitur, non Φρόνησις, quae aliunde una Aeonum Basilidis, non Valentini erat.

Aenos. Fronton du Duc wants Ainos written, and so Feuardent also wrote below, Book II, ch. 14, no. 8. I would have it written, with Tertullian, ch. 8, Ainus. For as the Latin translators made Nus from Νοῦς, so from Ἀείνους it seems Ainus should be said; and I see that Billius wrote it so, rightly indeed — but less rightly in writing Phronesis for Synesis. For in the Greek Σύνεσις is read, not Φρόνησις, which was, besides, one of the Aeons of Basilides, not of Valentinus.

(printed under page 231)

(8) ‹anchor: Theletos› · call in col 450

Theletos. Non Teletos, inquit Fronto Duc.; nam saepe τῆς θελήσεως, et τοῦ θελήματος meminit in his mysteriis haereticorum Irenaeus, ut cap. 6 (nunc 12) hujus libri, etsi aliter Pamelio videtur. Billius certe semper Theleti scripsit; neque mihi unquam occurrit τελετός, perfectus. Θελητόν autem habes I Reg. XV, 22: εἰ θελητὸν τῷ Κυρίῳ. Itaque melius voluntate expetitum reddidissent interpretes, quam, ut Cornarius in versione Epiphanii, voluntatem, alius voluntarium. Hactenus Fronto Duc. Quem autem Theleton appellat Irenaeus, hunc eumdem et Philetum vocat Tertullianus cap. 9. Suspicantur quidem nonnulli pro Philetum legendum Theleton, suspicarer et ego, nisi cap. 30 et 32 idem Phileti nomen occurreret. Credere itaque malim, duo fuisse unius et ejusdem Aeonis nomina.

Theletos. "Not Teletos," says Fronton du Duc; "for Irenaeus often mentions 'willing' and 'will' in these mysteries of the heretics, as in ch. 6 (now 12) of this book, though Pamelius thinks otherwise. Billius certainly always wrote Theletus; and I have never met τελετός, 'perfect'. But you have θελητόν in 1 Kings [1 Samuel] 15:22: 'whether it is pleasing to the Lord'. So the translators would better have rendered it 'sought by will' than, as Cornarius in his version of Epiphanius, 'will', or another 'voluntary'." Thus far Fronton du Duc. The one Irenaeus calls Theletos, Tertullian, ch. 9, calls Philetus. Some indeed suspect that Theleton should be read for Philetum, and I too would suspect it, were it not that the same name Philetus occurs in chs. 30 and 32. I would rather believe, therefore, that these were two names of one and the same Aeon.

(printed under page 231)

(9) ‹anchor: Triginta annis› · call in col 450

Triginta annis. Alias, per triginta annos.

Triginta annis ("in thirty years"). Elsewhere, per triginta annos ("for thirty years").

(printed under page 231)

(1) ‹anchor: Fiunt› · call in col 451

Fiunt. Al. sunt.

Fiunt ("become"). Elsewhere sunt ("are").

(printed under page 232)

(2) ‹anchor: Manifestari› · call in col 451

Manifestari. Clarom. manifestare.

Manifestari ("to be made manifest"). The Clermont manuscript has manifestare ("to make manifest").

(printed under page 232)

(3) ‹anchor: Quid eorum, quae dicuntur in Scripturis› · call in col 451

Quid eorum, quae dicuntur in Scripturis. Graece, εἴ πού τι τῶν ἐν πλήθει εἰρημένων ἐν ταῖς Γραφαῖς. Vetus interpres, Billius et Cornarius omiserunt ἐν πλήθει, in multitudine. Gallasius: Eorum quae multa dicuntur in Scripturis. Melius Petavius: ac si quid aliud est, quod in Scripturis certo numero comprehensum. Vide cap. 18 et lib. II, cap. 24.

Quid eorum, quae dicuntur in Scripturis ("anything of what is said in the Scriptures"). In Greek, "if anywhere anything of what is said in the Scriptures in a number". The old translator, Billius and Cornarius omitted ἐν πλήθει, "in a multitude". Gallasius: "of the many things said in the Scriptures". Petau better: "and if there is anything else in the Scriptures comprised in a definite number". See ch. 18 and Book II, ch. 24.

(printed under page 232)

(4) ‹anchor: Cognosci soli› · call in col 451

Cognosci soli. Cognosci habent Clarom. Arund. et Voss. ex Graeco, γινώσκεσθαι: edita vero cognitum. At solo pro soli legitur in Clarom. Arund. et Merc. 2.

Cognosci soli ("to be known to [him] alone"). The Clermont, Arundel and Vossius manuscripts have cognosci, from the Greek γινώσκεσθαι; but the printed editions have cognitum. And solo for soli is read in the Clermont, Arundel and second Mercerus.

(printed under page 232)

(5) ‹anchor: Reliquis quoque Aeonibus participare› · call in col 451

Reliquis quoque Aeonibus participare. Editt. Eras. et Gallas. reliquos quoque Aeonas participare; quam lectionem ex veteri cod. et Graeco textu immutasse se ait Feuard. substituendo: reliquis quoque Aeonibus communicare. Et quidem ms. Feuardentii exemplar habuisse, reliquis quoque Aeonibus, non dubitem; an autem et habuerit, communicare, paulo incertius. Quare cum cunctis mss. Arund. Voss. Merc. 2, Clarom. et Pass. legatur, reliquis quoque Aeonibus participare, et aliunde participare non semel ab interprete usurpetur pro communicare, tutius visum est ita restituere.

Reliquis quoque Aeonibus participare ("to share with the other Aeons too"). The editions of Erasmus and Gallasius have reliquos quoque Aeonas participare; Feuardent says he changed this reading from the old manuscript and the Greek text, substituting reliquis quoque Aeonibus communicare. And I would not doubt that Feuardent's manuscript copy had reliquis quoque Aeonibus; whether it also had communicare is somewhat less certain. Since, then, all the manuscripts — Arundel, Vossius, second Mercerus, Clermont and Passionei — read reliquis quoque Aeonibus participare, and since participare is besides used more than once by the translator for communicare, it seemed safer to restore it so.

(printed under page 232)

(6) ‹anchor: Τῶν› · call in col 451

Τῶν. C. R. et Feuard. Colon. editio an. 1596, τῆς.

Τῶν. The Royal manuscript and Feuardent's Cologne edition of 1596 have τῆς.

(printed under page 232)

(7) ‹anchor: Γινώσκεσθαι μόνῳ λέγουσι τῷ… Μονογενεῖ… τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς πᾶσιν› · call in col 451

Γινώσκεσθαι μόνῳ λέγουσι τῷ… Μονογενεῖ… τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, etc. Cum hac exceptione intelligendus Theodoretus, dum generalius ex Valentini sententia dicit, Βυθὸν ἀνέφικτον εἶναι πᾶσι τοῖς ἐξ αὐτοῦ, Bythum ab iis qui ex ipso nati sunt Aeonibus percipi non posse. Eadem exceptio sequentibus verbis adhibenda: φύντα καὶ ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν κατέσχεν ἡ Σιγή.

"They say he is known only to the … Only-begotten … but to all the rest," etc. Theodoret is to be understood with this exception when, speaking more generally, he says that in Valentinus's view Bythos is unreachable by all who come from him: "that Bythos cannot be apprehended by the Aeons born of him". The same exception is to be applied to the following words: "Sige restrained them, once born, from seeing him."

(printed under page 232)

(8) ‹anchor: Διενοεῖτο καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς Αἰῶσιν ἀνακοινώσασθαι› · call in col 451

Διενοεῖτο καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς Αἰῶσιν ἀνακοινώσασθαι. Reliquis etiam Aeonibus magnitudinem Patris exponere cogitabat. Memoria itaque lapsus est Theodoretus, dum Aeonibus omnibus indiscriminatim ascribit, quod Monogeni soli ex Irenaeo et Tertulliano cap. 9 competere certum est. Φύντα, inquit Theodoretus, καὶ ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν (Βυθὸν), καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις δηλῶσαι, κατέσχεν ἡ Σιγή· Ex Bytho natos Aeonas, ne ipsum viderent cognoscerentve, et aliis manifestarent, coercuit Sige. Qui enim reliqui Aeones ignotum sibi Bythum aliis manifestare potuissent? Et quibus aliis declarassent, cum soli tunc exstarent?

"He intended to share with the other Aeons too." "He was thinking of setting out the greatness of the Father to the other Aeons as well." Theodoret, therefore, made a slip of memory in ascribing to all the Aeons without distinction what, from Irenaeus and Tertullian ch. 9, certainly belongs to the Only-begotten alone. "Sige," says Theodoret, "restrained them, once born, from seeing him (Bythos) and from making him known to the others." [Latin:] "Sige restrained the Aeons born of Bythos from seeing or knowing him and from making him manifest to others." For how could the remaining Aeons have made manifest to others a Bythos unknown to themselves? And to what others would they have declared him, when they alone then existed?

(printed under page 232)

(1) ‹anchor: Προβεβλημένος› · call in col 454

Προβεβλημένος. Mallem cum interprete et Tertulliano cit. legi προβεβλημένης, scil. δωδεκάδος. Hic enim: Ex illis duodecim Aeonibus, quos Homo et Ecclesia ediderant, novissima natu Aeon.

Προβεβλημένος ("emitted", masculine). I would rather read, with the translator and Tertullian as cited, προβεβλημένης, namely of the Dodecad. For he has: "of those twelve Aeons which Man and Church had brought forth, the Aeon youngest by birth."

(printed under page 233)

(2) ‹anchor: Ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιπλοκῆς τοῦ ζυγοῦ› · call in col 454

Ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιπλοκῆς τοῦ ζυγοῦ. Legendum esse συζύγου merito contendit Fronto Duc.; vertit enim interpres, sine complexu conjugis Theleti. Quod et idem repetitur lib. II, cap. 12, n. 3, sine permistione conjugis, quem Theletum vocant. Tertullianus similiter cap. 9, sine conjugis Phileti societate. Quem postremum locum L. Latinius dum emendare satagit, depravat scribens, sine conjugis Phileti satietate.

Ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιπλοκῆς τοῦ ζυγοῦ ("without the embrace of the yoke"). Fronton du Duc rightly contends that συζύγου ("consort") should be read; for the translator renders "without the embrace of her consort Theletus". The same is repeated in Book II, ch. 12, no. 3: "without the intermingling of her consort, whom they call Theletus". Tertullian similarly, ch. 9: "without the fellowship of her consort Philetus". In trying to emend this last passage, L. Latinius corrupts it, writing "without the satiety of her consort Philetus".

(printed under page 233)

(3) ‹anchor: Πρόφασιν› · call in col 454

Πρόφασιν. Legisse videtur interpres et, quidem melius, προφάσει.

Πρόφασιν ("pretext", accusative). The translator seems to have read, and better, προφάσει ("on the pretext").

(printed under page 233)

(4) ‹anchor: Incapabilis› · call in col 454

Incapabilis. Id est, qui capi animo non possit. In Ottobon. invisibilis.

Incapabilis ("incomprehensible"). That is, who cannot be grasped by the mind. In the Ottoboni manuscript, invisibilis ("invisible").

(printed under page 233)

(5) ‹anchor: Patris sui› · call in col 454

Patris sui. Sic in omnibus editt. mss. cum Tertull. Juxta Graecum vero: τοῦ προειρημένου Προπάτορος αὐτῶν, praedicti primi Patris, seu, ut vertere amat interpres, Propatoris eorum.

Patris sui ("of his Father"). So in all the editions and manuscripts, with Tertullian. But according to the Greek: "of their aforesaid Forefather", "of the aforesaid first Father", or, as the translator likes to render it, "of their Propator".

(printed under page 233)

(6) ‹anchor: Exorsa› · call in col 454

Exorsa. Mss. codd. cum Eras. et Gallas. perperam, exsors; quam pravam lectionem ex Graeco textu Feuardentius emendavit. Graecis omnino consonat Tertullianus c. 9: Genus contrahit vitii, quod exorsum quidem fuerat, etc.

Exorsa ("having begun"). The manuscripts, with Erasmus and Gallasius, wrongly have exsors ("without share"); Feuardent corrected this bad reading from the Greek text. Tertullian, ch. 9, accords entirely with the Greek: "She contracts a kind of fault which had indeed begun," etc.

(printed under page 233)

(7) ‹anchor: Qui sunt erga Nun› · call in col 454

Qui sunt erga Nun. Eras. Feuard. et mss. codd., quae sunt erga Nun, manifesta librariorum oscitantia. Quare quod Feuardentio nota superiori licuit, idem et nobis licere arbitrati sumus, depravatam scilicet lectionem ex Graeco textu et Tertulliano restituere. Ille siquidem: ἐν τοῖς περὶ τὸν Νοῦν, ubi τοῖς non neutraliter accipi, sed ad Aeonas a Nu et Alethia productos referri liquet. Tertullianus vero: qui circa Νοῦν, quod totidem verbis Graeco respondet. Pessime autem et nullo prorsus sensu, pro erga Nun, habet Gallasius viterga, typographi forsan culpa.

Qui sunt erga Nun ("who are about Nous"). Erasmus, Feuardent and the manuscripts have quae sunt erga Nun ("the things that are about Nous"), an evident slip of drowsy copyists. So what Feuardent was allowed in the previous note, we judged ourselves allowed too: to restore the corrupt reading from the Greek text and Tertullian. For the Greek has "among those about Nous", where it is clear that τοῖς is not taken as neuter but refers to the Aeons produced by Nous and Aletheia. And Tertullian: "who are about Nous", which answers the Greek word for word. But Gallasius, very badly and with no sense at all, has viterga for erga Nun — perhaps the printer's fault.

(printed under page 233)

(8) ‹anchor: Aeonem, id est Sophiam› · call in col 454

Aeonem, id est Sophiam. Haec cum a Graeco absint, explicationis ergo addita videntur.

Aeonem, id est Sophiam ("the Aeon, that is, Sophia"). Since these words are absent from the Greek, they seem to have been added for explanation.

(printed under page 233)

(9) ‹anchor: Demutatam› · call in col 454

Demutatam. Mallem cum Billio vertisset interpres depravatam, vel cum Petavio, aberrantem.

Demutatam ("changed"). I would rather the translator had rendered, with Billius, "depraved", or, with Petau, "straying".

(printed under page 233)

(10) ‹anchor: Sub occasione› · call in col 454

Sub occasione. Melius Tertullianus, sub praetexto: πρόφασις enim hic non occasionem, sed praetextum significat.

Sub occasione ("on the occasion"). Better Tertullian: "under the pretext"; for πρόφασις here means not occasion but pretext.

(printed under page 233)

(11) ‹anchor: Dilectionis› · call in col 454

Dilectionis. Feuard. in marg. et Pass. delectationis. Perperam; ut enim caeteros cum editt. tum mss. omittam, Graecus textus et Tertull. habent, dilectionis.

Dilectionis ("of love"). Feuardent in the margin and the Passionei have delectationis ("of delight"). Wrongly; for, to pass over the others, both editions and manuscripts, the Greek text and Tertullian have "of love".

(printed under page 233)

(12) ‹anchor: Forte absorptum fuisse› · call in col 454

Forte absorptum fuisse. Male cod. Voss. Pass. et Feuard. in marg., vero pro forte. Nec melius idem Voss. cod. Eras. et Gall., fuisset. Rectius cod. Clarom. Feuardentius in textu, et Grabius, forte absorptum fuisse; quam lectionem secuti sumus, licet cum Pamelio in cap. 9 Tertull. fere pro forte legi mallemus, si suffragarentur mss. codd. Scribit enim Tertull. modico abfuit devorari, id est, fere devoratus fuit. Et expressius lib. de Praescript. (continues)

Forte absorptum fuisse ("had perhaps been swallowed up"). Wrongly the Vossius and Passionei manuscripts and Feuardent in the margin have vero ("but") for forte ("perhaps"). No better, the same Vossius manuscript, Erasmus and Gallasius have fuisset. More correctly the Clermont manuscript, Feuardent in his text, and Grabe: forte absorptum fuisse; we have followed this reading, though, with Pamelius on Tertullian ch. 9, we would rather read fere ("almost") for forte, if the manuscripts supported it. For Tertullian writes "she came within a little of being devoured", that is, she was almost devoured. And more expressly in De praescriptione … (continues)

(printed under page 233)

(1) ‹anchor: Quae confirmat, et extra› · call in col 456

Quae confirmat, et extra, etc. Particulam et, in editis omnibus perperam in sequens comma trajectam, bene suo loco restituit editor Anglus, ductus auctoritate cod. Voss. et Graeci textus, στηριζούσῃ, καὶ ἐκτός, etc., quibus consonant et codd. Clarom. et Pass.

Quae confirmat, et extra ("which strengthens, and outside"), etc. The particle et, wrongly moved into the following clause in all the printed editions, the English editor rightly restored to its place, guided by the authority of the Vossius manuscript and the Greek text, "strengthening, and outside", etc., with which the Clermont and Passionei manuscripts also agree.

(printed under page 234)

(2) ‹anchor: Abstentum› · call in col 456

Abstentum. Hac voce utitur interpres infra lib. III, cap. 4, n. 3; utuntur et auctores Ecclesiastici ac Concilia passim, sed alio sensu. Hic vero significat, repressum, cohibitum, ab incepto revocatum.

Abstentum ("held back"). The translator uses this word below, Book III, ch. 4, no. 3; Church writers and Councils also use it throughout, but in another sense. Here it means "checked, restrained, called back from what it had begun".

(printed under page 234)

(3) ‹anchor: Pater› · call in col 456

Pater. Deest in Eras. Gall. et cod. Ottobon.

Pater ("Father"). Missing in Erasmus, Gallasius and the Ottoboni manuscript.

(printed under page 234)

(4) ‹anchor: Velut fabulam narrant› · call in col 456

Velut fabulam narrant. Gr. μυθολογοῦσιν, quod male ab interprete redditum. Fabulam quidem narrabant illi, sed non velut fabulam habebant. Vertere igitur debuisset interpres, comminiscuntur, vel cum Tertull. somniaverunt.

Velut fabulam narrant ("they tell as a fable"). Greek μυθολογοῦσιν, which the translator rendered badly. They did indeed tell a fable, but they did not regard it as a fable. The translator ought therefore to have rendered "they invent", or, with Tertullian, "they dreamed".

(printed under page 234)

(5) ‹anchor: Qualem naturam habebat femina parere› · call in col 456

Qualem naturam habebat femina parere. Θήλεια, non θήλειαν legit interpres, et cum eo Billius et Cornarius; huncque sensum Irenaei verbis affingunt: informem substantiam, qualem scilicet naturam femina sine complexu mariti parere poterat, a Sophia procreatam fuisse. At nodum in scirpo quaerunt illi. Planus est Graecorum sensus, si cum Frontone Duc. distinguas: οἵαν φύσιν εἶχε, θήλειαν τεκεῖν. Qualem naturam ipsa habebat, femineam scilicet, peperisse; vel ut Petavius probe reddidit: ejusdemque, quam habebat, naturae feminam peperisse. Nec necesse est verbum τεκεῖν quasi superfluum expungere, ut vult Fronto, non enim incommodum est. Certum est autem cum ex Tertull. cap. 10, tum ex Irenaeo ipso infra cap. 5, et lib. II, cap. 20, informem illum, et invalidum Sophiae fructum, femineum, seu feminam exstitisse: adeo ut dubium non sit, quin hoc loco θήλειαν scripserit sanctissimus martyr.

Qualem naturam habebat femina parere ("such a nature as a female had, to bring forth"). The translator read θήλεια ("female", nominative), not θήλειαν (accusative), and with him Billius and Cornarius; and they foist this sense on Irenaeus's words: that a formless substance — such a nature, that is, as a female could bring forth without a husband's embrace — was procreated by Sophia. But they look for a knot in a bulrush. The sense of the Greek is plain if, with Fronton du Duc, you punctuate: "of such a nature as she had, she bore a female" — that is, she bore one of the nature she herself had, namely female; or, as Petau rightly rendered it: "and she bore a female of the same nature as she had". Nor is it necessary to strike out the verb τεκεῖν as superfluous, as Fronton would; for it is not awkward. It is certain, both from Tertullian ch. 10 and from Irenaeus himself below, ch. 5, and Book II, ch. 20, that that formless and feeble fruit of Sophia was female, or a woman: so that there is no doubt that in this place the most holy martyr wrote θήλειαν.

(printed under page 234)

(6) ‹anchor: Timuisse, ne hoc ipsum finem habeat› · call in col 456

Timuisse, ne hoc ipsum finem habeat. Legisse videtur interpres: μὴ καὶ αὐτὸ τέλος ἔχῃ, nec male quidem, si vertisset: ne hoc ipsum (ἀτελές videlicet, inconsummatus fetus) perfectionem (sibi debitam) non habeat. Interpretem secutus Tertullianus scripsit: metuere postremo, ne finis quoque insisteret. In eo lapsus est uterque, quod τέλος finem verterit, cum hic significet perfectionem, consummationem, etc. Billius vero, et Petavius legendum volunt in Graeco: μὴ καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ εἶναι τέλος ἔχῃ. Grabius autem vulgatam lectionem Graecam retinet. At particula μηδέ rejicienda videtur, et commutanda in μὴ καί· de caetero parum interest, utrum legatur τέλος, an τελείως· idem quippe sensus erit. Nempe modo dixerat Irenaeus fetum informem, inconsummatum et invalidum, uno verbo femineum (quem prae masculo sexu imperfectum judicant physici) a Sophia in lucem emissum. Id ubi conspexit illa, contristata est; deinde timuit, ne ipsum etiam esse, quod pepererat, perfectionem non haberet sibi natura debitam, seu ne ipsum etiam esse non plene ac perfecte haberet imperfectior ille sexus; ne scilicet invalidi hujus sexus natura in deformi ista prole non esset integra.

Timuisse, ne hoc ipsum finem habeat ("she feared lest this very thing should have an end"). The translator seems to have read μὴ καὶ αὐτὸ τέλος ἔχῃ ("lest it too should have an end"), and not badly either, had he rendered: "lest this very thing (the imperfect thing, that is, the unfinished offspring) should not have (its due) perfection". Following the translator, Tertullian wrote: "lastly she feared lest an end also should come upon her." Both slipped in rendering τέλος as "end", when here it means perfection, completion, etc. Billius and Petau would read in the Greek "lest its very being too should have an end". Grabe keeps the received Greek reading. But the particle μηδέ seems to be rejected and changed into μὴ καί; for the rest, it matters little whether τέλος or τελείως is read, for the sense will be the same. Irenaeus had just said, that is, that a formless offspring, unfinished and feeble — in a word, female (which the natural philosophers judge imperfect compared with the male sex) — had been brought forth by Sophia. When she saw it, she was saddened; then she feared lest the very being of what she had borne should lack the perfection due to it by nature, or lest that more imperfect sex should not have even its being fully and perfectly; lest, that is, the nature of this feeble sex should not be whole in that misshapen offspring.

(printed under page 234)

(7) ‹anchor: Ὅρον› · call in col 456

Ὅρον. Finem, terminum: quia singulos Aeonas intra Pleromatis fines coercebat.

Ὅρον (Horos). "End, limit": because he kept each of the Aeons within the bounds of the Pleroma.

(printed under page 234)

(8) ‹anchor: Πῶς› · call in col 456

Πῶς. Hanc particulam ut interrogationis notam hic accipit Petavius; vertit enim: Sed istorum quidam illam sapientiae perturbationem ac restitutionem quibus nugis involvunt? nimirum, etc. Crediderim ego aut ornatus causa duntaxat additam, aut significare hoc modo, ita, etc., non hujusmodi, ut vertit interpres.

Πῶς ("how"). Petau takes this particle here as a mark of a question; for he renders: "But with what trifles do some of them wrap up that disturbance and restoration of Wisdom? Why," etc. I would think it was either added merely for ornament, or that it means "in this way, thus", etc., not "of this kind", as the translator rendered it.

(printed under page 234)

(9) ‹anchor: Τεκεῖν οὐσίαν ἄμορφον› · call in col 456

Τεκεῖν οὐσίαν ἄμορφον. Bene animadvertit hoc loco Grabius, Tertullianum perperam οὐσίαν ἄμορφον non partui, sed parienti matri per appositionem adscripsisse. Scribit enim: Post irritos conatus, et spei dejectionem, deformatam eam pallore credo, et macie, et incuria formae. Contra Irenaeus tam hic quam lib. II, cap. 20, n. 3: Illorum Aeon substantiam informem peperit.

Τεκεῖν οὐσίαν ἄμορφον ("to bear a formless substance"). Grabe rightly notices at this place that Tertullian wrongly attached "formless substance" by apposition not to the offspring but to the mother bearing it. For he writes: "After her vain efforts and the dashing of her hope, disfigured, I suppose, by pallor and leanness and neglect of her looks." Irenaeus, on the contrary, both here and in Book II, ch. 20, no. 3: "Their Aeon bore a formless substance."

(printed under page 234)

(10) ‹anchor: Θήλειαν› · call in col 456

Θήλειαν. Sic omnes editt. cum cod. Reg. Billius vero cum veteri interprete legit θήλεια. Sed de his supra ad textum Latinum, not. 5.

Θήλειαν ("a female"). So all the editions, with the Royal manuscript. But Billius, with the old translator, reads θήλεια. On this see above, on the Latin text, note 5.

(printed under page 234)

(11) ‹anchor: Μηδ' αὐτὸ τὸ εἶναι τελείως ἔχειν› · call in col 456

Μηδ' αὐτὸ τὸ εἶναι τελείως ἔχειν. Legendum (continues)

Μηδ' αὐτὸ τὸ εἶναι τελείως ἔχειν ("not to have even its very being perfectly"). We should read … (continues)

(printed under page 234)

(1) ‹anchor: τὸ γεγονός› · call in col 457

Τὸ γεγονός. Sic ex codice Regio restituimus, pro γενός, quod in editt. omnibus tum Epiphanii, tum Irenaei legitur. Et quidem γεγονός dudum malebat Billius, ratus veterem interpretem ita legisse, necnon Tertullianum, qui cap. 10, casum, non genus dixit. De Tertulliano facile consentit Grabius; de veteri interprete repugnat. At litem dirimere debet codex Regius, quem neuter viderat.

Τὸ γεγονός ("what had come to pass"). We have restored this from the Royal manuscript, in place of γενός, which is read in all the editions both of Epiphanius and of Irenaeus. Billius indeed long ago preferred γεγονός, thinking that the old translator read so, and also Tertullian, who in chapter 10 said casum ("the event"), not genus ("the offspring"). Grabe readily agrees about Tertullian; about the old translator he objects. But the Royal manuscript, which neither of them had seen, ought to settle the dispute.

(printed under page 235)

(2) ‹anchor: τὴν οὐσίαν› · call in col 457

Τὴν οὐσίαν. Legendum, ut probe monet Billius, τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ὕλης, quemadmodum legit vetus interpres; τῆς ὕλης siquidem hic oscitantia scribarum omissum, paulo inferius additur: οὐσίαν τῆς ὕλης γεγενῆσθαι λέγουσιν.

Τὴν οὐσίαν ("the substance"). We should read, as Billius rightly advises, τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ὕλης ("the substance of matter"), as the old translator read; for τῆς ὕλης, omitted here through the carelessness of the scribes, is added a little below: "they say that the substance of matter came into being."

(printed under page 235)

(3) ‹anchor: ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον› · call in col 457

Ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον. Vid. Not. 9 infra.

Ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον ("without consort, un-effeminate"). See note 9 below.

(printed under page 235)

(1) ‹anchor: Τὸ γεγονός› · call in col 457

Τὸ γεγονός. Sic ex codice Regio restituimus, pro γενός, quod in editt. omnibus tum Epiphanii, tum Irenaei legitur. Et quidem γεγονός dudum malebat Billius, ratus veterem interpretem ita legisse, necnon Tertullianum, qui cap. 10, casum, non genus dixit. De Tertulliano facile consentit Grabius; de veteri interprete repugnat. At litem dirimere debet codex Regius, quem neuter viderat.

Τὸ γεγονός ("what had happened"). So we have restored it from the Royal manuscript, for γενός ("kind"), which is read in all the editions both of Epiphanius and of Irenaeus. Billius indeed long ago preferred γεγονός, thinking that the old translator read it so, and also Tertullian, who in ch. 10 said casum ("the event"), not genus. About Tertullian Grabe readily agrees; about the old translator he objects. But the Royal manuscript, which neither had seen, ought to settle the dispute.

(printed under page 235)

(2) ‹anchor: Τὴν οὐσίαν› · call in col 457

Τὴν οὐσίαν. Legendum, ut probe monet Billius, τὴν οὐσίαν τῆς ὕλης, quemadmodum legit vetus interpres; τῆς ὕλης siquidem hic oscitantia scribarum omissum, paulo inferius additur: οὐσίαν τῆς ὕλης γεγενῆσθαι λέγουσιν.

Τὴν οὐσίαν ("the substance"). We should read, as Billius rightly advises, "the substance of matter", as the old translator read; for "of matter", omitted here through the carelessness of scribes, is added a little below: "they say the substance of matter came into being".

(printed under page 235)

(3) ‹anchor: Ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον› · call in col 457

Ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον. Vid. Not. 9 infra.

Ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον ("without consort, unfeminised"). See note 9 below.

(printed under page 235)

(4) ‹anchor: Id est confusum› · call in col 458

Id est confusum. Haec explicationis gratia addidit quispiam.

Id est confusum ("that is, confused"). Someone added these words for the sake of explanation.

(printed under page 235)

(5) ‹anchor: Patris› · call in col 458

Patris. In editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. legitur Patri, sed contra omnium mss. et Graeci textus fidem.

Patris ("of the Father"). In the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent Patri ("to the Father") is read, but against the witness of all the manuscripts and of the Greek text.

(printed under page 235)

(6) ‹anchor: Maxime autem Nun› · call in col 458

Maxime autem Nun. Cod. Clarom., maxime autem et Nun. Vocem autem Nun in editt. Eras. et Gall. male omissam apposuit Feuard. ex Graeco, Rigaltius etiam addendam monuerat in cap. 10 Tertull.

Maxime autem Nun ("and most of all Nous"). The Clermont manuscript: maxime autem et Nun ("and most of all Nous too"). The word Nun, wrongly omitted in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, Feuardent supplied from the Greek; Rigault too had advised that it be added, on Tertullian ch. 10.

(printed under page 235)

(7) ‹anchor: Super haec› · call in col 458

Super haec. Ἐπὶ τούτοις, ut recte notat Grab. simpliciter significat post haec, sive postea, uti Billius in sua versione posuit. Tertullianus cap. 10 reddit, in haec. Petavius autem perperam sub τούτοις intellexit Aeones, et apud Epiphanium vertit: post illos omnes produxit, etc.

Super haec ("upon these things"). Ἐπὶ τούτοις, as Grabe rightly notes, simply means "after these things", or "afterwards", as Billius put it in his version. Tertullian, ch. 10, renders "to these ends". Petau wrongly understood the Aeons under τούτοις, and in Epiphanius translates "after all of them he produced", etc.

(printed under page 235)

(8) ‹anchor: Praemittit› · call in col 458

Praemittit. Gr. προβάλλεται, quod vertendum fuisset, emittit, non praemittit.

Praemittit ("sends forth before"). Greek προβάλλεται, which should have been rendered "emits", not "sends forth before".

(printed under page 235)

(9) ‹anchor: Sine conjuge masculo-femina› · call in col 458

Sine conjuge masculo-femina. In editt. Eras. et Gall. corrupte legitur sive pro sine. Id emendavit Feuard. consentientibus mss. Clarom. Pass. Arund. et Merc. 1. At facilius de hujusce commatis lectione, quam de sensu convenit inter editores. Billius et Fronto Duc. contendunt, in Graeco non ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον, in Accusativo legendum esse, sed ἀσυζύγῳ, ἀρρενοθήλει (pro ἀθηλύντῳ) in Ablativo: ut scilicet ἀσυζύγῳ, ἀρρενοθήλει, referatur non ad Ὅρον, sed ad εἰκόνι, quasi Ὅρος ad imaginem ἀσύζυγον, ἀρρενόθηλυν effictus esset. Et sic quidem legisse videtur interpres; vertit enim: in imagine sua, sine conjuge masculo-femina. Ita pariter Tertullianus cap. 10: In imagine femina-mare. Quos secutus Billius: in imagine sua conjugis experte, ac masculo-femina. Sed cum recta ratione pugnat, id imagini tribui, quod personis dumtaxat convenit. Quis enim ferat imaginem dici conjugis expertem, et masculo-feminam? Malim igitur cum editore Anglo diligentiam interpretum, quam Graeci textus sinceritatem incusare. Proinde lego, ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον. Sed ἀθήλυντον haud cum Grabio verterim, masculo-feminam, seu femina-marem; neque enim ea est vocis hujus significatio. Non femineum, non effeminatum significare, vel ipsa Lexica vulgata docent. Quid sit autem, Horon non femineum, non effeminatum esse, docebit Theodoretus: Τὸν Ὅρον προβάλλεται, οὐ μετὰ συζύγου θηλείας· Terminum, inquit, producit sine femina conjuge, id est, nulla cum femina conjugii vinculo copulatum. Exceptio erat, τῶν γὰρ Αἰώνων ἕκαστος τῷ θήλει συνέζευκται, nam aliorum Aeonum unusquisque cum femina conjunctus est; seu, ut loquitur Irenaeus, ἀρρενόθηλυς erat: id est, singuli eorum bini et bini, masculus cum femina, conjugii nexu copulati erant. Itaque Horon apud Irenaeum ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον esse, nihil aliud est, quam eumdem apud Theodoretum esse οὐ μετὰ συζύγου θηλείας, nullo conjugii nexu cum femina, ut caeteros Aeones, colligatum: adeo ut vox ἀθήλυντον sit prioris ἀσύζυγον paulo distinctior duntaxat explicatio, hicque sonet, feminae non illigatum. Et id sequentibus Irenaei verbis perfecte respondet. Dixerat Horon ad ipsam Patris imaginem, nullo conjugii nexu cum femina copulatum, effictum esse. Quod quidem statim explicat: Quia, inquit, Patrem aliquando quidem cum conjuge Sige copulant, modo vero supra maris, ac supra feminae conditionem extollunt Valentiniani. Et in hoc similem sibi Horon effecit, quod hic a conjugii legibus, quibus caeteri tenentur Aeones, liber sit, quemadmodum et ipse Pater ab iis liber interdum exhibetur.

Sine conjuge masculo-femina ("without consort, male-female"). In the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius sive ("or") is corruptly read for sine ("without"). Feuardent corrected it, with the Clermont, Passionei, Arundel and first Mercerus manuscripts agreeing. But the editors agree more easily on the reading of this clause than on its sense. Billius and Fronton du Duc contend that in the Greek one should read not ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον in the accusative, but ἀσυζύγῳ, ἀρρενοθήλει (for ἀθηλύντῳ) in the ablative: so that "without consort, male-female" refers not to Horos but to "image", as if Horos had been fashioned after an image without consort and male-female. And so indeed the translator seems to have read; for he renders "in his image, without consort, male-female". So too Tertullian, ch. 10: "in an image female-male". Following them, Billius: "in his image, without a consort and male-female". But it conflicts with right reason to attribute to an image what fits only persons. For who would bear an image being called "without a consort" and "male-female"? I would rather, therefore, with the English editor, fault the care of the translators than the soundness of the Greek text. Accordingly I read ἀσύζυγον, ἀθήλυντον. But I would not render ἀθήλυντον with Grabe as "male-female" or "female-male"; for that is not the meaning of this word. That it means "not feminine, not effeminate", even the common lexicons teach. What it is for Horos to be not feminine, not effeminate, Theodoret will teach: "He produces Horos, not with a female consort" — "He produces the Limit," he says, "without a female consort", that is, joined by the bond of marriage with no female. This was an exception, "for each of the Aeons is yoked to the female" — "for each of the other Aeons is joined with a female"; or, as Irenaeus puts it, was "male-female": that is, each of them, in pairs, male with female, was coupled by the bond of marriage. So for Horos to be "without consort, unfeminised" in Irenaeus is nothing other than for him, in Theodoret, to be "not with a female consort", bound to a female by no bond of marriage, as the other Aeons are: so that the word ἀθήλυντον is merely a somewhat more precise explanation of the preceding ἀσύζυγον, and here means "not bound to a female". And this answers perfectly to Irenaeus's following words. He had said that Horos was fashioned after the very image of the Father, coupled with a female by no bond of marriage. He explains this at once: "Because," he says, "the Valentinians sometimes couple the Father with his consort Sige, but at other times exalt him above the condition of male and above that of female." And in this he made Horos like himself: that Horos is free of the laws of marriage by which the other Aeons are held, just as the Father himself is at times shown as free of them.

(printed under page 235)

(10) ‹anchor: Cum conjuge Sige› · call in col 458

Cum conjuge Sige. Vertendum fuisset, cum conjugio, seu conjugatione Siges, juxta Graecum, μετὰ συζυγίας τῆς Σιγῆς. Et infra, τὸ ἀποκαταστῆναι τῇ συζυγίᾳ, reddi debuisset cum Tertull. cap. 10, restitutam conjugio, non conjugi; vel quemadmodum paulo post eadem omnino verba reddidit ipsemet interpres, redintegratam suae conjugationi. (continues)

Cum conjuge Sige ("with his consort Sige"). It should have been rendered "with the marriage", or "the conjugation, of Sige", according to the Greek "with the syzygy of Sige". And below, "to be restored to the syzygy" ought to have been rendered, with Tertullian ch. 10, "restored to the marriage", not "to the consort"; or, as the translator himself rendered the very same words a little later, "reintegrated into her conjugation". (continues)

(printed under page 235)

(1) ‹anchor: Masculo, et pro› · call in col 459

Masculo, et pro. Tres istae voces in editt. Eras. et Gall. necnon in mss. Arund. et Merc. 2 desunt. Priores duas restituit Feuard. ex vet. cod.; tertiam Grabius ex cod. Voss. et Graeco, ubi ὑπὲρ bis legitur. Grabio favet et cod. Clarom. habens, et pro masculo, et pro femina. At vero cum in Graeco praepositio ὑπὲρ Accusativum regat, verti debuisset non pro sed super; super masculum, et super feminam esse volunt, ut scilicet utriusque conditioni longe praecellat Propator.

Masculo, et pro ("male, and for"). These three words are wanting in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, and also in the Arundel and second Mercer manuscripts. Feuardent restored the first two from the old codex; Grabe the third from the Vossian codex and from the Greek, where ὑπέρ is read twice. The Clermont codex also favours Grabe, having et pro masculo, et pro femina. But since in the Greek the preposition ὑπέρ governs the accusative, it ought to have been rendered not pro but super: "they will have it that he is above male and above female", so that the Propator, that is, far surpasses the condition of both.

(printed under page 236)

(2) ‹anchor: Intentione› · call in col 459

Intentione. Gr. Ἐνθυμήσεως, quam vocem inferius concupiscentiam, alibi passim Enthymesin vertit interpres.

Intentione ("intention"). Greek Ἐνθυμήσεως, a word which the translator renders lower down concupiscentia, and elsewhere throughout Enthymesis.

(printed under page 236)

(3) ‹anchor: Cum appendice passione› · call in col 459

Cum appendice passione. Sic totidem verbis et Tertullianus. Mallem tamen Graeca σὺν τῷ ἐπιγινομένῳ πάθει uterque reddidisset, cum ea passione, quae supervenerat, aut in quam inciderat.

Cum appendice passione ("with the attached passion"). So too Tertullian, in as many words. Yet I would rather both had rendered the Greek "with the passion that came upon her" as "with the passion which had supervened", or "into which she had fallen".

(printed under page 236)

(4) ‹anchor: Infra Pleroma perseverasse› · call in col 459

Infra Pleroma perseverasse. Infra hic pro intra, quod mediae et infimae Latinitatis auctoribus non inusitatum.

Infra Pleroma perseverasse ("remained below the Pleroma"). Infra here stands for intra ("within"), which is not unusual in authors of middle and late Latinity.

(printed under page 236)

(5) ‹anchor: Crucifixam› · call in col 459

Crucifixam. Ἀποσταυρωθῆναι hic potius reddendum fuisset, inquit optime Grabius, quasi vallo cinctam, et a Pleromate disjunctam esse. Sic apud Thucydidem lib. IV, c. 69, ἀπεσταύρουν Scholiastes explicat, χαρακώματα ἐποίουν. In hunc sensum sequentia Clementis Alexand. verba lib. II, Strom. p. 407, A, interpretor: Ἑκάστη ἡδονή τε καὶ λύπη προσπασσαλοῖ τῷ σώματι ψυχὴν τοῦ γε μὴ ἀφορίζοντος, καὶ ἀποσταυροῦντος ἑαυτὸν τῶν παθῶν, unaquaeque voluptas, vel moestitia corpori clavo velut affigit animam ejus, qui ab animi commotionibus sese non separat, nec quasi interposito vallo disjungit. Neque enim alibi apud Irenaeum legitur Enthymesin cruci affixam fuisse.

Crucifixam ("crucified"). Ἀποσταυρωθῆναι, says Grabe very well, should rather have been rendered here "to be as it were girt with a palisade, and cut off from the Pleroma". So in Thucydides IV, ch. 69, the scholiast explains ἀπεσταύρουν ("they fenced off") as "they made palisades". In this sense I interpret the following words of Clement of Alexandria, Stromata II, p. 407 A: "Every pleasure and pain nails to the body the soul of him who does not separate himself and fence himself off from the passions" — "every pleasure or sorrow as it were fastens with a nail to the body the soul of him who does not separate himself from the commotions of the mind, nor cut himself off as by an interposed palisade." For nowhere else in Irenaeus is Enthymesis read to have been fixed to a cross.

(printed under page 236)

(6) ‹anchor: Extra eum› · call in col 459

Extra eum. Eum hic neutraliter pro id; quod barbaris scriptoribus haud insuetum.

Extra eum ("outside it"). Eum here stands as a neuter for id; which is not unusual in barbarous writers.

(printed under page 236)

(8) ‹anchor: Καρπιστήν› · call in col 460

Καρπιστήν. Id est, inquit Grabius, vindicem, sive assertorem libertatis. Ita redditur in veteri Glossario Graeco-Lat. Exemplum affert vir doctus ex Arriano lib. III De Epicteti disputationibus, cap. 26, p. 369, edit Cantabrig., quod quidem probat eam esse interdum vocis hujus significationem, sed non semper, et in hoc praesertim Irenaei loco. Ut enim apud Jurisperitos vindicatur libertas, sic et apud eosdem vindicatur servitus, l. 1, ff. De remiss., l. 14, ff. De op. no. nunt. Vindex ergo servitutis peraeque ac libertatis dici potest. Sed neutra significatio in Valentinianorum Καρπιστήν cadit. Quid enim huic cum libertate, vel servitute conveniat, non video. Censeam potius hic ἀπὸ καρπιστείας, a vindiciis, Carpisten dici. Vindicia vero correpta manu, seu καρπῷ (hinc καρπιστοῦ etymon) in re atque loco praesenti apud praetorem, ex XII Tabulis, fiebat, inquit Aulus Gell. lib. XX, cap. 9 vel 10. Inde et sententiae, seu assertiones, et adjudicationes rei controversae potiorem probanti auctoritatem a Judice decretae, dictae vindiciae, teste Ascensio in cit. A. Gellii caput. Quidni et Praetor, seu judex vindicias decernens appellari potuerit vindex; et illinc judicibus quibusvis, arbitris, seu moderatoribus aptari vindicis, seu Καρπιστοῦ nomen, quod vindicias interdum decernant? Καρπιστής igitur hic paulo latius accipitur, idemque sonat atque judex, arbiter, seu moderator. Eam in rem optime faciunt ea Arnobii lib. IV adv. Gent. verba, pag. 158 edit. Lugd. Batav. 1651: Quis quaesitor, quis arbiter cervicibus tantis erit, qui inter personas hujusmodi aut vindicias justas dare, aut sacramenta conetur pronuntiare non justa? Jam vero hanc Καρπιστοῦ acceptionem in Valentinianorum Horon exacte quadrare, satis patet. Horos enim velut politicam universi Pleromatos disciplinam tuebatur, omnia fulciebat, atque extra inenarrabilem magnitudinem custodiebat omnia, proprii muneris oblitos coercebat, a Pleromate digressos revocabat, huicque vindicabat, asserebatque, unumquemque Aeonem intra proprios fines continebat, syzygiamque deserentes restituebat. Uno verbo λυτρωτής, id est, redemptor erat, ὁριστής sive ὁροθέτης, finitor, constitutor juris, et arbiter conditionum: quae judicis, arbitri, et moderatoris partes sunt.

Καρπιστήν (Karpistes). That is, says Grabe, vindex, or asserter of liberty. So it is rendered in the old Graeco-Latin Glossary. The learned man brings an example from Arrian, book III On the Discourses of Epictetus, chapter 26, p. 369 of the Cambridge edition, which indeed proves that this is sometimes the meaning of the word, but not always, and especially not in this passage of Irenaeus. For as among the jurists liberty is claimed, so also among the same servitude is claimed, l. 1, ff. De remiss., l. 14, ff. De op. no. nunt. A vindex, therefore, may be spoken of for servitude equally as for liberty. But neither meaning fits the Καρπιστής of the Valentinians. For what agreement this one should have with liberty or servitude, I do not see. I should rather judge that he is here called Carpistes from καρπιστεία, from vindiciae. For the vindicia "was made with the hand laid on", or καρπῷ (hence the etymon of καρπιστής), "upon the thing and in the place, in the presence of the praetor, according to the Twelve Tables", says Aulus Gellius, book XX, chapter 9 or 10. Hence also the sentences, or assertions, and adjudications of a disputed thing, decreed by the Judge to the one proving the stronger title, were called vindiciae, as Ascensius witnesses on the cited chapter of A. Gellius. Why could not the Praetor too, or the judge decreeing vindiciae, have been called vindex; and thence the name of vindex, or Καρπιστής, be applied to any judges, arbiters, or moderators whatever, because they sometimes decree vindiciae? Καρπιστής, therefore, is here taken somewhat more broadly, and means the same as judge, arbiter, or moderator. To this purpose those words of Arnobius, book IV Against the Gentiles, p. 158 of the Leiden edition of 1651, serve excellently: "What inquisitor, what arbiter will there be for necks so great, who between persons of this kind would attempt either to give just vindiciae, or to pronounce oaths not just?" Now it is plain enough that this acceptation of Καρπιστής fits exactly the Horos of the Valentinians. For Horos guarded, as it were, the civil discipline of the whole Pleroma, propped up all things, and "kept all things outside the unspeakable greatness", restrained those forgetful of their proper office, recalled those who had strayed from the Pleroma, and claimed and asserted them for it, held each Aeon within its own bounds, and restored those deserting their syzygy. In a word he was λυτρωτής, that is, redeemer, ὁριστής or ὁροθέτης, boundary-setter, establisher of right, and arbiter of conditions: which are the parts of a judge, an arbiter, and a moderator.

(printed under page 236) <!-- note: Page-foot notes of page 236 (cols 459–460). Notes (1)–(6) are called in the Latin of col 459 and printed under it; (7)–(11) are called in the Greek of col 460. Note (8) is called in col 460 and begins at the foot of col 459; it is kept here whole because n460 has a gap in its middle (from "ἀπὸ καρπιστείας" to "Καρπιστής igitur"), which n460 should take from here; that middle stretch stands at the top of the right foot column, above the foot images, and was checked here only by its visible line-starts (Q4b, UNSURE). For n460 (not written here): its "(?) … vertit interpres." is the end of note (2) above; its notes (3)–(6) are called in col 459, not 460; in its note (5) the page prints mœstitia (moestitia), not maestitia. Q4b moved (1)–(2) from Editors' prose to Footnotes, added (3)–(6) from the page, and removed italic markup. Ligatures æ/œ set as ae/oe. -->

[GAP: the rendered foot images begin below the top of this page's footnote block. Above the crop lie the rest of note (10) of p. 235 and notes (1)–(2) of this page; only their last words, "vertit interpres.", are visible. The right column's opening lines (the middle of note (8)) are likewise above the crop. Re-render the page foot from higher up and set the missing text from the page.] (?) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 460 […] vertit interpres.

[…] the translator renders.

(printed under page 236)

(3) ‹anchor: Cum appendice passione› · call in col 460

Cum appendice passione. Sic totidem verbis et Tertullianus. Mallem tamen Graeca σὺν τῷ ἐπιγινομένῳ πάθει uterque reddidisset, cum ea passione, quae supervenerat, aut in quam inciderat.

Cum appendice passione ("with the attached passion"). So too Tertullian, in as many words. Yet I would rather both had rendered the Greek "with the passion that came upon her" as "with the passion which had supervened", or "into which she had fallen".

(printed under page 236)

(4) ‹anchor: Infra Pleroma perseverasse› · call in col 460

Infra Pleroma perseverasse. Infra hic pro intra, quod mediae et infimae Latinitatis auctoribus non inusitatum.

Infra Pleroma perseverasse ("remained below the Pleroma"). Infra here stands for intra ("within"), which is not unusual in authors of middle and late Latinity.

(printed under page 236)

(5) ‹anchor: Crucifixam› · call in col 460

Crucifixam. Ἀποσταυρωθῆναι hic potius reddendum fuisset, inquit optime Grabius, quasi vallo cinctam, et a Pleromate disjunctam esse. Sic apud Thucydidem lib. IV, c. 69, ἀπεσταύρουν Scholiastes explicat, χαρακώματα ἐποίουν. In hunc sensum sequentia Clementis Alexand. verba lib. II, Strom. p. 407, A, interpretor: Ἑκάστη ἡδονή τε καὶ λύπη προσπασσαλοῖ τῷ σώματι ψυχὴν τοῦ γε μὴ ἀφορίζοντος, καὶ ἀποσταυροῦντος ἑαυτὸν τῶν παθῶν, unaquaeque voluptas, vel maestitia corpori clavo velut affigit animam ejus, qui ab animi commotionibus sese non separat, nec quasi interposito vallo disjungit. Neque enim alibi apud Irenaeum legitur Enthymesin cruci affixam fuisse.

Crucifixam ("crucified"). Ἀποσταυρωθῆναι, says Grabe very well, should rather have been rendered here "to be as it were girt with a palisade, and cut off from the Pleroma". So in Thucydides IV, ch. 69, the scholiast explains ἀπεσταύρουν ("they fenced off") as "they made palisades". In this sense I interpret the following words of Clement of Alexandria, Stromata II, p. 407 A: "Every pleasure and pain nails to the body the soul of him who does not separate himself and fence himself off from the passions" — "every pleasure or sorrow as it were fastens with a nail to the body the soul of him who does not separate himself from the commotions of the mind, nor cut himself off as by an interposed palisade." For nowhere else in Irenaeus is Enthymesis read to have been fixed to a cross.

(printed under page 236)

(6) ‹anchor: Extra eum› · call in col 460

Extra eum. Eum hic neutraliter pro id; quod barbaris scriptoribus haud insuetum.

Extra eum ("outside it"). Eum here stands as a neuter for id; which is not unusual in barbarous writers.

(printed under page 236)

(7) ‹anchor: Καὶ Συλλυτρωτήν› · call in col 460

Καὶ Συλλυτρωτήν. In Graeco corrupte legitur συλλυτρωτήν, pro quo reponendum ex vet. interp. σταυρὸν καὶ λυτρωτήν. Porro λυτρωτής, id est redemptor vel liberator, dicebatur Horos, quia Sophiae in universam substantiam prope resolvendae ruinam stitit, ejusque motibus intempestivis limites constituit. Σταυρός vero, id est, vallum, non crux, quia Sophiae Enthymesin cum passione separatam, et quasi vallo cinctam a Pleromate disjunxit.

Καὶ Συλλυτρωτήν ("and co-redeemer"). In the Greek συλλυτρωτήν is corruptly read; in its place should be put back, from the old translator, σταυρὸν καὶ λυτρωτήν ("Stauros and Redeemer"). Horos was called λυτρωτής, that is, redeemer or liberator, because he halted the ruin of Sophia, who was all but dissolving into the whole substance, and set bounds to her untimely motions. And Σταυρός — that is, palisade, not cross — because he separated Sophia's Enthymesis together with her passion and cut it off from the Pleroma, as if girt with a palisade.

(printed under page 236)

(8) ‹anchor: Καρπιστήν› · call in col 460

Καρπιστήν. Id est, inquit Grabius, vindicem, sive assertorem libertatis. Ita redditur in veteri Glossario Graeco-Lat. Exemplum affert vir doctus ex Arriano lib. III De Epicteti disputationibus, cap. 26, p. 369, edit Cantabrig., quod quidem probat eam esse interdum vocis hujus significationem, sed non semper, et in hoc praesertim Irenaei loco. Ut enim apud Jurisperitos vindicatur libertas, sic et apud eosdem vindicatur servitus, l. 1, ff. De remiss., l. 14, ff. De op. no. nunt. Vindex ergo servitutis peraeque ac libertatis dici potest. Sed neutra significatio in Valentinianorum Καρπιστήν cadit. Quid enim huic cum libertate, vel servitute conveniat, non video. Censeam potius hic […] igitur hic paulo latius accipitur, idemque sonat atque judex, arbiter, seu moderator. Eam in rem optime faciunt ea Arnobii lib. IV adv. Gent. verba, pag. 158 edit. Lugd. Batav. 1651: Quis quaesitor, quis arbiter cervicibus tantis erit, qui inter personas hujusmodi aut vindicias justas dare, aut sacramenta conetur pronuntiare non justa? Jam vero hanc Καρπιστοῦ acceptionem in Valentinianorum Horon exacte quadrare, satis patet. Horos enim velut politicam universi Pleromatos disciplinam tuebatur, omnia fulciebat, atque extra inenarrabilem magnitudinem custodiebat omnia, proprii muneris oblitos coercebat, a Pleromate digressos revocabat, huicque vindicabat, asserebatque, unumquemque Aeonem intra proprios fines continebat, syzygiamque deserentes restituebat. Uno verbo λυτρωτής, id est, redemptor erat, ὁριστής sive ὁροθέτης, finitor, constitutor juris, et arbiter conditionum: quae judicis, arbitri, et moderatoris partes sunt.

Καρπιστήν (Karpistes, "emancipator"). That is, says Grabe, the vindicator or asserter of liberty. So it is rendered in the old Greek–Latin glossary. The learned man brings an example from Arrian, Discourses of Epictetus III, ch. 26, p. 369 of the Cambridge edition, which indeed proves that this is sometimes the meaning of the word, but not always, and especially not in this passage of Irenaeus. For as among the jurists liberty is claimed, so among the same servitude is claimed: Digest, De remissionibus, law 1, and De operis novi nuntiatione, law 14. One can therefore be called the vindicator of servitude just as much as of liberty. But neither meaning suits the Karpistes of the Valentinians; for what he would have to do with liberty or servitude I do not see. I would rather think here […] is therefore taken here somewhat more broadly, and means the same as judge, arbiter, or governor. To this point the words of Arnobius, Adversus gentes IV, p. 158 of the Leiden edition of 1651, serve excellently: "What examiner, what arbiter will there be for such great necks, who would try, between persons of this kind, either to grant just claims or to pronounce oaths not just?" And now it is plain enough that this sense of Karpistes fits the Horos of the Valentinians exactly. For Horos guarded, as it were, the civil order of the whole Pleroma, propped up all things, and "kept all things outside the unspeakable greatness"; he restrained those who forgot their own office, called back those who strayed from the Pleroma and claimed and asserted them for it, kept each Aeon within its own bounds, and restored those who deserted their syzygy. In a word, he was λυτρωτής, that is, redeemer; ὁριστής or ὁροθέτης, the definer, the establisher of right and the arbiter of conditions — which are the parts of a judge, an arbiter and a governor.

(printed under page 236)

(9) ‹anchor: Μεταγωγέα› · call in col 460

Μεταγωγέα. Circumductorem dixit Tertullianus, et Petavius in versione Epiphanii, Traductorem Cornarius. Ego potius cum Grabio redderem Deductorem. Sed omissa istius conjectura, ex qua Reductorem, non vero Deductorem dicendum esse consequens esset, vocis hujus significationem, ut et Καρπιστοῦ, a jurisconsultis repeterem. Nempe rem in judicium deducere, frequens apud eos loquendi modus. Inter personas autem quae rem in judicium deducere solent, l. IV ff. De except. rei jud. recensentur l. II, 57. Cod., procurator cui mandatum est, tutor, curator furiosi vel pupilli, actor municipum . . . . defensor. Illi ergo Deductores a deducendo recte dici possunt. Et hoc sensu Horon Deductorem a Valentinianis cognominatum fuisse conjicio; utpote tutorem junioris Aeonis, aetate nondum confirmata, suiipsius incontinentis, ut loquitur Tertullianus; aut, si velis, procuratorem, seu defensorem, qui partes ipsius tuebatur, causam agebat, impetum coercebat, conservationi ejus ac saluti invigilabat.

Μεταγωγέα (Metagogeus, "conveyor"). Tertullian called him "Circumductor" ("leader-round"), and Petau in his version of Epiphanius; Cornarius "Traductor" ("transferrer"). I would rather render, with Grabe, "Deductor" ("conductor"). But setting aside his conjecture, from which it would follow that "Reductor", not "Deductor", should be said, I would seek the meaning of this word, as of Karpistes, from the jurists. "To bring (deducere) a matter into court" is a frequent turn of speech among them. And among the persons who are wont to bring a matter into court are listed, in the Digest, De exceptione rei judicatae, law IV, and Code II, 57: "an agent who has been given a mandate, a guardian, a curator of a madman or a ward, the agent of townships … a defender". These, then, may rightly be called "Deductores", from deducere. And in this sense I conjecture that Horos was surnamed "Deductor" by the Valentinians: as being the guardian of the younger Aeon, whose age was not yet settled, "without self-control", as Tertullian puts it; or, if you like, her agent or defender, who protected her interests, pleaded her case, checked her impulse, and watched over her preservation and safety.

(printed under page 236)

(10) ‹anchor: Εἶναι› · call in col 460

Εἶναι. Legendum potius, inquit Grabius, μεῖναι, quia interpres habet perseverasse, et Tertull. remansisse.

Εἶναι ("to be"). Rather, says Grabe, read μεῖναι ("to remain"), because the translator has "persevered" and Tertullian "remained".

(printed under page 236)

(11) ‹anchor: Ἀποστερηθῆναι› · call in col 460

Ἀποστερηθῆναι. Legendum vult Billius ἀποσταυρωθῆναι. Ita siquidem legerunt vetus interpres, et Tertullianus, crucifixam vertentes, non (continues)

Ἀποστερηθῆναι ("to be deprived"). Billius would read ἀποσταυρωθῆναι ("to be fenced off"). For so the old translator and Tertullian read, rendering "crucified", not … (continues)

(printed under page 236)

(1) ‹anchor: Χριστὸν διδάξαι› · call in col 462

Χριστὸν διδάξαι, etc. Obscurus omnino locus, quem elucidare dum plerique student interpretes, nebulas offundunt. At densiores nullus, quam Tertullianus: Christi erat inducere (vel, ut Pamelius legendum conjicit, docere) Aeonas naturam conjugiorum, et innati conjectationem, et idoneos efficere generandi in se agnitionem Patris; quae neque cum Graeco, neque cum Latino veteris interpretis textu consentiunt. Billius legit: Καὶ ἀγεννήτου κατάληψιν γινώσκοντας ἑαυτοῖς ἱκανοὺς εἶναι. Sed modicum inde lumen; nec plenius ex Gallasii, Cornarii et Petavii versionibus eruitur. Prope est ut credam, mendum huc irrepsisse (antiquum quidem, quo deceptus fuerit Latinus ipsemet interpres) et pro ἀγεννήτου, legendum esse γεννητοῦ, scilicet Μονογενοῦς. Haec enim opponere videtur Irenaeus, hinc γεννητοῦ κατάληψιν γινώσκειν, illinc τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐπίγνωσιν, ὅτι τε ἀχώρητός ἐστι καὶ ἀκατάληπτος. Priori contentos esse debere reliquos Aeonas docuit Christus, utpote sat eruditos, si Filii, seu Monogenis comprehensionem noverint; eam enim esse conjugationis naturam, ut Filius solus ab iis comprehendi valeat; at vero Patris comprehensionem mentis eorum captum superare; frustraque ab iis exquiri, utpote cujus ea duntaxat haberi possit notitia, nempe quod nec percipi, nec intelligi, nec denique cerni, aut audiri, nisi Monogenis beneficio, possit. Quae posteriora Irenaei verba, quod scilicet ἀκατάληπτος suapte natura cum sit Pater, οὐκ ἔστιν οὔτε ἰδεῖν οὔτε ἀκοῦσαι αὐτὸν, ἢ διὰ μόνου τοῦ Μονογενοῦς, firmare videntur nostram conjecturam, scilicet γεννητοῦ κατάληψιν, utpote solam sibi attemperatam, γινώσκειν satis esse Aeonibus; ac proinde legendum γεννητοῦ. Si enim ἀγεννήτου legas, quis sensus? Aeonas comprehensionem Patris edoctos, sat eruditos esse? atqui Pater iis prorsus ἀκατάληπτος dicitur, nec etiam videre, aut audire fas est, nisi per Monogenem. Qui ergo κατάληψιν ejus edoceri potuerant? Vult Grabius hic per κατάληψις Filium ipsum intelligi, utpote in quo ingenitus Pater, in se incomprehensibilis, comprehendi queat. Ingeniose quidem excogitatum, sed vero paulo minus simile. Filium enim ἀγεννήτου κατάληψιν dici posse, haud abnuo; sed quidpiam vel praecedat, vel addatur, quod vocem κατάληψιν, id ex sese haud significantem eo trahat, necesse est. Hic autem nihil videas. In hoc tamen eruditi viri conjectura ad nostram accedit, quod in priori periodi parte, Filium intelligi velit ab Aeonibus comprehendi, non Patrem. Quare illi subscribat Lector, nostram deserat, si minus probanda videatur, per me licet: modo ἀγεννήτου κατάληψιν γινώσκοντας ad Filium quoquo modo referat.

"That Christ should teach," etc. A thoroughly obscure passage, over which most translators, while striving to clear it up, cast fogs. But none thicker than Tertullian: "It was Christ's part to bring in (or, as Pamelius conjectures should be read, to teach) the Aeons the nature of marriages, and the conjecture of the unbegotten, and to make them fit for generating in themselves the knowledge of the Father"; which agrees neither with the Greek nor with the Latin text of the old translator. Billius reads: "and that those who know the comprehension of the Unbegotten are sufficient for themselves". But little light comes from that; nor is more drawn from the versions of Gallasius, Cornarius and Petau. I am close to believing that a fault has crept in here (an ancient one, by which the Latin translator himself was deceived), and that for ἀγεννήτου ("of the Unbegotten") one should read γεννητοῦ ("of the Begotten"), namely of the Only-begotten. For Irenaeus seems to set these against each other: on one side, to know the comprehension of the Begotten; on the other, "the knowledge of the Father, that he is uncontainable and incomprehensible". Christ taught the remaining Aeons that they ought to be content with the former, as being learned enough if they knew the comprehension of the Son, or Only-begotten; that the nature of the conjugation was such that the Son alone could be comprehended by them; but that the comprehension of the Father surpassed the grasp of their minds and was sought by them in vain, since the only knowledge that can be had of him is this: that he can be neither perceived, nor understood, nor indeed seen or heard, except by the gift of the Only-begotten. These later words of Irenaeus — that since the Father is by his own nature incomprehensible, "it is not possible either to see him or to hear him, except through the Only-begotten alone" — seem to confirm our conjecture: namely, that for the Aeons it is enough to know the comprehension of the Begotten, as alone suited to them; and therefore γεννητοῦ should be read. For if you read ἀγεννήτου, what sense is there? That the Aeons, taught the comprehension of the Father, are learned enough? But the Father is said to be altogether incomprehensible to them, and it is not even lawful for them to see or hear him, except through the Only-begotten. How then could they have been taught the comprehension of him? Grabe would have the Son himself understood here by κατάληψις, as the one in whom the unbegotten Father, incomprehensible in himself, can be comprehended. Ingeniously thought out indeed, but a little less likely to be true. That the Son can be called "the comprehension of the Unbegotten" I do not deny; but something must either precede or be added to draw the word κατάληψις to that meaning, since it does not of itself mean it. Here, however, you see nothing of the kind. Yet in this the learned man's conjecture comes close to ours, that in the first part of the sentence he would have it understood that the Son, not the Father, is comprehended by the Aeons. So let the reader subscribe to his view and abandon ours, if ours seem less acceptable; I have no objection — provided he refers "knowing the comprehension of the Unbegotten" to the Son in some way or other.

(printed under page 237)

(2) ‹anchor: Quidem› · call in col 462

Quidem. Ita recte edit. Angl. ex Arund. codice, et Graeco μέν. Astipulatur et cod. Clarom. sed male caet. editt. habent quamdam.

Quidem ("indeed"). So rightly the English edition, from the Arundel manuscript and the Greek μέν. The Clermont manuscript also agrees; but the other editions wrongly have quamdam ("a certain").

(printed under page 237)

(3) ‹anchor: Ut naturalem quemdam› · call in col 462

Ut naturalem quemdam, etc. Sic ad verbum Tertull. et edit. Angl. ex codd. Arund. et Merc. 2. Reliqui minus bene, et naturalem.

Ut naturalem quemdam ("as a certain natural"), etc. So word for word Tertullian, and the English edition from the Arundel and second Mercerus manuscripts. The rest, less well, et naturalem ("and natural").

(printed under page 237)

(4) ‹anchor: Ejus invalidum› · call in col 462

Ejus invalidum. Ejus, scilicet Sophiae, seu Aeonis proxime memorati. Melius forte dixisset interpres, eum, juxta Graecum αὐτόν, scil. καρπόν: at maluit pronomen ad Aeonem, quam ad fructum referre; quod satis indifferens est.

Ejus invalidum ("its feeble [fruit]"). Ejus, that is, of Sophia, or of the Aeon just mentioned. The translator would perhaps better have said eum ("it"), after the Greek αὐτόν, namely the fruit; but he preferred to refer the pronoun to the Aeon rather than to the fruit, which makes little difference.

(printed under page 237)

(5) ‹anchor: Christum, et Spiritum sanctum› · call in col 462

Christum, et Spiritum sanctum. Hic mutila versio Latina. Neque enim ea reddidit interpres, quae praecedunt Christum et Spiritum sanctum, haec scilicet, ἵνα μὴ ὁμοίως ταύτῃ πάθῃ τις τῶν Αἰώνων· nec quae immediate sequuntur, εἰς πῆξιν καὶ στηριγμὸν τοῦ Πληρώματος. Haec omnia non male sic expressit Tertullianus cap. 11: Nus de Patris cura, atque prospectu, solidandis rebus, et Pleromati muniendo, jamque figendo (εἰς πῆξιν καὶ στηριγμὸν τοῦ Πληρώματος), ne qua ejusmodi rursus concussio incurreret, vel, ut alii legere malunt, inculeret (ἵνα μὴ ὁμοίως ταύτῃ πάθῃ τις τῶν Αἰώνων), novam excludit copulationem, Christum et Spiritum sanctum. Exactius ad Graeca verti posset: Ne cui Aeonum id accideret, quod Sophiae, ue Patris consilio, atque providentia, novum par, quo fixus ac fundatus deinceps maneret Pleromatis status, rursus emittit Monogenes.

Christum, et Spiritum sanctum ("Christ and the Holy Spirit"). Here the Latin version is mutilated. For the translator did not render what precedes "Christ and the Holy Spirit", namely "so that none of the Aeons might suffer as she did"; nor what immediately follows, "for the fixing and strengthening of the Pleroma". Tertullian expressed all this not badly, ch. 11: "Nous, by the Father's care and foresight, for making things solid and fortifying the Pleroma and now fixing it (for the fixing and strengthening of the Pleroma), lest any such shock should strike again" — or, as others prefer to read, "should be stamped in" (so that none of the Aeons might suffer as she did) — "hatches a new couple, Christ and the Holy Spirit." It could be rendered more exactly to the Greek: "So that the same thing that befell Sophia should not befall any of the Aeons, the Only-begotten, by the counsel and providence of the Father, emits again a new pair, by which the state of the Pleroma might thereafter remain fixed and founded." [ue as printed, for ut]

(printed under page 237)

(6) ‹anchor: Sive idoneos esse› · call in col 462

Sive idoneos esse. Ita recte Clarom. Voss. et Grab.; caeteri vitiose, sive illos idoneos esse.

Sive idoneos esse ("or that they are fit"). So rightly the Clermont and Vossius manuscripts and Grabe; the rest wrongly have sive illos idoneos esse ("or that they are fit").

(printed under page 237)

(1) ‹anchor: Et causam quidem aeternae perseverationis… Filius est› · call in col 464

Et causam quidem aeternae perseverationis….. Filius est. Ex ea versione liquet interpretem legisse, ἀκατάληπτον τοῦ Πατρὸς, et ὁ δὴ Υἱός ἐστι, pro κατάληπτον τοῦ Πατρὸς, et ᾧ δὴ ἴσος ἐστί, quae hodiernus habet textus Graecus. Omittit etiam τὸ πρῶτον, et prius αὐτοῦ mutare videtur in αὐτῶν. Veteri interpreti pro more consentit Tertullianus: Docebantur, inquit, incomprehensibile quidem Patris causam esse perpetuitatis ipsorum; comprehensibile vero ejus, generationis illorum et formationis illorum, esse rationem… Filium autem constituunt apprehensibilem Patris. Consentiunt et recentiores, Billius, Fronto Duc. et Petavius; Cornarius vero, et Gallasius ex parte duntaxat; retinent enim ᾧ δὴ ἴσος ἐστί. Sed eorum omnium nullus scopum attingit. Et pro modo suo dum quisque vertit, aenigma proponit potius, quam solvit. Nec felicior Grabius (pace ipsius dixerim), ne unam quidem, ut ait, litteram in Graeco textu mutandam censet; sed dum τοῦ Πατρὸς, Patris nomine hic non Propatora ingenitum, sed Unigenitum potius intelligi vult, textui vim infert. Unigenitum quidem a Valentinianis vocari Patrem, et Principium omnium, notum est; sed voce τοῦ Πατρὸς, quae in proxime praecedenti periodo, et in sequentibus de solo Propatore intelligi potest, hic Unigenitum venire, nulla alia praemissa, aut addita voce, quae prioris illius significatum coerceat ad Filium, abhorret a verosimili. Itaque nisi Graeco textui medicam manum admoveas, incassum de sensu laboras; rectus occurret nullus. Lege ergo cum veteri interprete, et Tertulliano, ἀκατάληπτον ὑπάρχειν τοῦ Πατρός, id enim exigit cum sermonis contextus, tum ipsa Valentinianorum hypothesis, ad quae non satis attenderunt interpretes; et inde prima mali labes. Altera quod, τῆς γενέσεως αὐτοῦ, καὶ μορφώσεως vocibus, Unigenitum designari haud adverterunt, qui dicatur γένεσις, καὶ μόρφωσις τοῦ Πατρός. Γένεσις quidem, quod genitum est, productio, soboles, proles; quo sensu dicitur Prov. XXX, 11: Generatio, quae patri suo maledicit; et quae matri suae non benedicit, id est, proles, quae patri suo maledicit, etc.; μόρφωσις vero, id est, forma, species. Quibus positis, caeteris textus Graeci vocibus manentibus intactis, sponte fluit sensus, si praemissorum memineris. Paulo superius dixerat Irenaeus, incomprehensam Propatoris naturam temere scrutatum Aeonem paene periisse. Addit, ne cui aliorum Aeonum id accideret, quod imprudenti illi, Christum a Patre productum, qui doceret eos Unigeniti solius menti pervium esse Patrem, caeteris penitus incomprehensum. Tum (quod hujus consectarium videtur) longe meliorem esse Unigeniti, quam aliorum Aeonum conditionem; et caeteris quidem Aeonibus praecipuam aeternae perseverationis causam, qua scilicet dissolutionem, quae incauto Aeoni paene contigit, a se amoliantur, esse Patris incomprehensibile, si nimirum persuasum habentes, incomprehensum esse Patrem, ipsum temere scrutari non nitantur; prolis autem ejus, ac formae, Monogenis videlicet, perseverationis aeternae causam esse comprehensibile illius, cui utique aequalis est; nempe quod Patrem, cui aequalis est, comprehendat. Sic unius duntaxat α additione difficilem nodum facile, ni fallor, et apposite cum ad sermonis seriem, tum ad Valentinianorum hypothesim, solvimus.

"And the cause of eternal continuance … is the Son." From this version it is plain that the translator read "the incomprehensible of the Father" and "which is the Son", instead of "the comprehensible of the Father" and "to whom he is equal", which the present Greek text has. He also omits "first", and seems to change the first αὐτοῦ ("his") into αὐτῶν ("their"). Tertullian, as usual, agrees with the old translator: "They were taught," he says, "that what is incomprehensible in the Father is the cause of their perpetuity, but what is comprehensible in him is the ground of their generation and formation … And they make the Son what is apprehensible of the Father." The more recent translators agree too — Billius, Fronton du Duc and Petau; but Cornarius and Gallasius only in part, for they keep "to whom he is equal". Yet none of them all hits the mark; and while each translates in his own way, he sets a riddle rather than solving one. Nor is Grabe happier (be it said with his leave): he holds that not even one letter, as he says, of the Greek text is to be changed; but in wanting "the Father" here to be understood not as the unbegotten Forefather but rather as the Only-begotten, he does violence to the text. That the Only-begotten is called by the Valentinians Father and Beginning of all things is well known; but that the word "the Father", which in the sentence immediately preceding and in those following can be understood of the Forefather alone, should here stand for the Only-begotten, with no other word set before or added to restrict its earlier meaning to the Son, is improbable. So unless you apply a healing hand to the Greek text, you labour in vain over the sense; no right one will appear. Read, then, with the old translator and Tertullian, "that the Father is incomprehensible"; for both the context and the very system of the Valentinians require it — things the translators did not attend to closely enough, and hence the first source of the trouble. The second is that they did not notice that the words "his generation and formation" designate the Only-begotten, who is called the generation and formation of the Father. Γένεσις, that is, what is begotten: production, offspring, progeny; in which sense Proverbs 30:11 says, "A generation that curses its father and does not bless its mother", that is, offspring that curses its father, etc.; and μόρφωσις, that is, form, appearance. With these points set down, and the other words of the Greek text left untouched, the sense flows of itself, if you remember what went before. A little above, Irenaeus had said that the Aeon who rashly searched into the incomprehensible nature of the Forefather all but perished. He adds that, lest what befell that imprudent one should befall any of the other Aeons, Christ was produced by the Father, to teach them that the Father is accessible to the mind of the Only-begotten alone and wholly incomprehensible to the rest. Then (which seems to follow from this) that the condition of the Only-begotten is far better than that of the other Aeons: and that for the other Aeons the chief cause of eternal continuance — by which, that is, they ward off from themselves the dissolution that almost befell the incautious Aeon — is the incomprehensibility of the Father, if, namely, being persuaded that the Father is incomprehensible, they do not rashly try to search into him; whereas for his offspring and form, the Only-begotten, the cause of eternal continuance is the comprehensibility of him to whom he is indeed equal — namely, that he comprehends the Father, to whom he is equal. Thus by the addition of a single α we have untied a hard knot easily, unless I am mistaken, and aptly both to the run of the sentence and to the system of the Valentinians.

(printed under page 238)

(2) ‹anchor: Spiritus vero sanctus› · call in col 464

Spiritus vero sanctus. Addit textus Graecus, ἕν, unus, quod omisit interpres. Id etiam neque Tertullianus, neque Theodoretus legunt. Adjectum suspicatur Grabius, ut innueretur ratio, quare Spiritus sanctus Aeones omnes aequales reddiderit, ac unitatem Pleromati induxerit, quod nempe et ipse esset unus; vel ut insinuaretur, Christos quidem duos esse, superiorem alium, alium inferiorem, de quo mox; Spiritum vero sanctum, unum.

Spiritus vero sanctus ("but the Holy Spirit"). The Greek text adds ἕν, "one", which the translator omitted. Neither Tertullian nor Theodoret reads it. Grabe suspects it was added to hint at the reason why the Holy Spirit made all the Aeons equal and brought unity into the Pleroma — namely, that he himself was one; or to suggest that there are indeed two Christs, one higher and the other lower, of whom presently, but one Holy Spirit.

(printed under page 238)

(3) ‹anchor: Γινώσκεται› · call in col 464

Γινώσκεται. Hoc verbum expungi vult Billius. Satis quidem inutile: servari tamen potest. Et tunc vertendum erit: Neque videri, neque audiri potest, nisi quantum Monogenis beneficio, seu per Monogenem cognoscitur.

Γινώσκεται ("is known"). Billius would strike out this word. It is indeed rather useless; but it can be kept. And then it will have to be translated: "He can be neither seen nor heard, except in so far as he is known by the gift of the Only-begotten, or through the Only-begotten."

(printed under page 238)

(4) ‹anchor: Τὸ πρῶτον καταληπτόν… ᾧ δὴ ἴσος ἐστί› · call in col 464

Τὸ πρῶτον καταληπτόν, etc., ᾧ δὴ ἴσος ἐστί. De his disseruimus in not. 1 supra. Caeterum ἀκατάληπτον non legunt modo, sed et scribunt Gallasius et Feuard, non codicis alicujus, sed solius, ut puto, veteris interpretis auctoritate ducti.

"The first comprehensible," etc., "to whom he is equal." We discussed these words in note 1 above. Gallasius and Feuardent, moreover, not only read ἀκατάληπτον but write it, led not by the authority of any manuscript but, I think, by that of the old translator alone.

(printed under page 238)

(5) ‹anchor: Στηριχθέντα› · call in col 464

Στηριχθέντα. Vid. Tertull., cap. 12.

Στηριχθέντα ("having been established"). See Tertullian, ch. 12.

(printed under page 238)

(none) <!-- note: footnotes (1)-(7) are called in this column (Προβλήματα, προσαγορευθῆναι, κατὰ Πάντα, δορυφόρους τε αὐτῶν, ὁμογενεῖς ἀγγέλους, μετὰ, Στύλου); the page's footnotes (1)-(12) are set once under col 466 (Q2a pointer). -->

(1) ‹anchor: Προβλήματα› · call in col 466

Προβλήματα. Legendum esse cum veteri interprete πρόβλημα, non immerito censet Billius. Neque enim hic agitur nisi de Jesu. Confer, si lubet, Tertullianum cap. cit., ubi haec Valentinianorum figmenta salse deridet.

Προβλήματα ("emissions"). Billius not without reason holds that πρόβλημα ("an emission") should be read, with the old translator. For only Jesus is in question here. Compare, if you like, Tertullian in the chapter cited, where he wittily mocks these fictions of the Valentinians.

(printed under page 239)

(2) ‹anchor: Προσαγορευθῆναι› · call in col 466

Προσαγορευθῆναι. Vocatur etiam inferius Paracletus.

Προσαγορευθῆναι ("to be called"). Below he is also called the Paraclete.

(printed under page 239)

(3) ‹anchor: Καὶ κατὰ πάντα› · call in col 466

Καὶ κατὰ πάντα. Delendum esse κατά recte monet Billius; sensum enim turbat. Neque eam praepositionem legere vetus interpres, et Tertullianus. Quin Irenaeus ipse paulo post, Jesum, ex Valentinianorum mente, vocat τὸ πᾶν, omne. Et lib. II, cap. 20 de eodem: quem, inquit, et Omnia nuncupant. Ubique eamdem appellationis rationem affert, eo quod sit ex omnibus. Quae ratio vel sola probat expungendum esse κατά.

Καὶ κατὰ πάντα ("and in all respects"). Billius rightly advises that κατά be deleted, for it disturbs the sense. Neither the old translator nor Tertullian read that preposition. Indeed Irenaeus himself a little later, in the Valentinians' mind, calls Jesus τὸ πᾶν, "the All". And in Book II, ch. 20, of the same: "whom," he says, "they also name All Things." Everywhere he gives the same reason for the name: "because he is from all." This reason alone proves that κατά should be struck out.

(printed under page 239)

(4) ‹anchor: Δορυφόρους τε αὐτῶν› · call in col 466

Δορυφόρους τε αὐτῶν. Legendum esse αὐτῷ, non αὐτῶν, jure censent Billius, et Fronto Duc.; sic enim legerunt vetus interpres, et Tertullianus: uterque habet, satellites ei, non eis. Theodoretus quoque δορυφόρους αὐτοῦ scripsit.

Δορυφόρους τε αὐτῶν ("and their bodyguards"). Billius and Fronton du Duc rightly hold that αὐτῷ ("for him") should be read, not αὐτῶν ("their"); for so the old translator and Tertullian read: both have "attendants to him", not "to them". Theodoret too wrote "his bodyguards".

(printed under page 239)

(5) ‹anchor: Ὁμογενεῖς ἀγγέλους› · call in col 466

Ὁμογενεῖς ἀγγέλους. Ejusdem generis angelos: ambigue positum, inquit Tertullianus: vix scias enim an ejusdem inter se, an cum Salvatore generis essent. Athanasius orat. 2 cont. Arian., tom. I, nov. edit., p. 461, scribit Valentinum dixisse ἀγγέλους ὁμογενεῖς τῷ Χριστῷ. Et quidem ὁμογενεῖς τῷ Χριστῷ angelos facile concesserim, sed non ejusdem cum Christo generis. Satellites ejus erant, non proinde ejusdem generis cum illo Pleromatis sidere. Si enim Soteri consubstantivi, ait optime Tertullianus, quae erit eminentia ejus inter satellites? Congenitos ergo, seu potius coaevos, non ejusdem generis, vertere debuisset interpres. Irenaeus enim inferius vocat eosdem angelos, Soteris ἡλικιώτας, coaevos. Quo eodem nomine appellat eos Athanasius in prima ad Serapionem epistol. p. 659, tom. I, nov. edit.

Ὁμογενεῖς ἀγγέλους ("angels of the same kind"). "Angels of the same kind: put ambiguously," says Tertullian; for you could hardly tell whether they were of the same kind as one another or as the Saviour. Athanasius, Oration 2 against the Arians, vol. I of the new edition, p. 461, writes that Valentinus said "angels ὁμογενεῖς with Christ". I would readily grant angels ὁμογενεῖς ("born together") with Christ, but not of the same kind as Christ. They were his attendants, and not therefore of the same kind as that star of the Pleroma. "For if they are consubstantial with the Saviour," says Tertullian very well, "what will his pre-eminence be among his attendants?" The translator ought therefore to have rendered "born together", or rather "of the same age", not "of the same kind". For Irenaeus below calls these same angels the Saviour's ἡλικιῶται, "coevals". By the same name Athanasius calls them in his first letter to Serapion, p. 659, vol. I of the new edition.

(printed under page 239)

(6) ‹anchor: Μετά› · call in col 466

Μετά. Existimat Billius legendum κατά, vel παρά, non μετά.

Μετά ("with"). Billius thinks κατά or παρά should be read, not μετά.

(printed under page 239)

(7) ‹anchor: Στύλου› · call in col 466

Στύλου. Lege σταυροῦ, vertit enim interpres crucis, non styli, aut columnae. Et crucem jam vocavit Horon illum; nusquam vero columnam appellat.

Στύλου ("of the pillar"). Read σταυροῦ ("of the cross"), for the translator renders crucis ("of the cross"), not styli or columnae ("of the pillar"). And he has already called that Horos a cross; but nowhere does he call him a pillar.

(printed under page 239)

(8) ‹anchor: Et Spiritu› · call in col 466

Et Spiritu. Omisit interpres, quae sequuntur verba Graeca, τοῦ δὲ Πατρὸς αὐτῶν συνεπισφραγιζομένου, atque eorum Patre calculum suum adjiciente, uti bene reddidit Billius; quae omisit et Tertullianus.

Et Spiritu ("and the Spirit"). The translator omitted the Greek words that follow, "and their Father setting his seal with them", "and their Father adding his vote", as Billius rendered it well; Tertullian also omitted them.

(printed under page 239)

(9) ‹anchor: Et in honorem et gloriam› · call in col 466

Et in honorem et gloriam. Sic cod. Clarom. et Pass.; vetus codex, quem secutus est Feuard. habet quidem in, sed ante gloriam, non ante honorem. In caeteris cum mss. tum editt., ipsa etiam edit. Anglicana, omnino deficit haec particula

Et in honorem et gloriam ("and to the honour and glory"). So the Clermont and Passionei manuscripts. The old manuscript Feuardent followed has in indeed, but before gloriam, not before honorem. In the rest, both manuscripts and editions, even the English edition itself, this particle is missing altogether.

(printed under page 239)

(10) ‹anchor: Satellites quoque ei in honorem ipsorum› · call in col 466

Satellites quoque ei in honorem ipsorum. Codd. Pass. et Clarom. Satellites quoque et in honorem ipsorum; nec ita male.

Satellites quoque ei in honorem ipsorum ("attendants also for him, in their honour"). The Passionei and Clermont manuscripts: Satellites quoque et in honorem ipsorum ("attendants also, and in their honour"); and not so badly.

(printed under page 239)

(11) ‹anchor: Ipsorum› · call in col 466

Ipsorum. Vertere debuisset interpres, ab ipsis justa Graecum ὑπ' αὐτῶν.

Ipsorum ("of them"). The translator ought to have rendered "by them", according to the Greek ὑπ' αὐτῶν. [justa as printed, for juxta]

(printed under page 239)

(12) ‹anchor: Et quasi› · call in col 466

Et quasi. Expunge et; deest enim in Graeco, et sensum intercidit.

Et quasi ("and as it were"). Strike out et; for it is wanting in the Greek, and breaks the sense.

(printed under page 239)

(⁴) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 468 Sup. cap. 1.

Above, ch. 1.

(printed under page 240) (⁵) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 468 Matth. XX, 2.

Matthew 20:2.

(printed under page 240) (⁶) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 468 Eph. III, 21.

Ephesians 3:21.

(printed under page 240)

(1) ‹anchor: Hexaeonia compago› · call in col 467

Hexaeonia compago. Ita fere Merc. alter, nisi quod una vox in duas dividatur, omissa littera h, ex Aeonia. Nec procul distat Claromont. in quo lex Aeona, haud dubie quin pro hexaeona vel sexaeona. In Voss. lex Aeonum, pro sex Aeonum. In caeteris corrupte, ex Aeone, ut in Arund. et Merc. 1; et Aeonum, ut in Ottobon. Pass. et editt. Eras. Gallas. et Feuard.; vel ex agonia, ut aliis pejus habet edit. Oxon. Vide notata ad textum Graecum.

Hexaeonia compago ("the six-Aeon structure"). So, nearly, the second Mercerus manuscript, except that the one word is split in two, with the letter h left out: ex Aeonia. Not far off is the Clermont, which has lex Aeona, no doubt for hexaeona or sexaeona. In the Vossius, lex Aeonum, for sex Aeonum. In the rest it is corrupt: ex Aeone, as in the Arundel and first Mercerus; et Aeonum, as in the Ottoboni and Passionei and the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent; or, worse than the others, ex agonia, as the Oxford edition has. See the notes on the Greek text.

(printed under page 240)

(2) ‹anchor: Postrema Aeonum genesis› · call in col 467

Postrema Aeonum genesis. Melius a Billio, quam a veteri interprete redditur, Aeonum ortu posterior nativitas. Et ipse interpres infra lib. II, cap. 19, n. 9, eadem repetens, habet: quem et posteriorem reliquis Aeonibus factum esse dicunt.

Postrema Aeonum genesis ("the last genesis of the Aeons"). Billius renders it better than the old translator: "a birth later than the origin of the Aeons". And the translator himself, repeating the same below, Book II, ch. 19, no. 9, has: "who, they say, was also made later than the remaining Aeons."

(printed under page 240)

(3) ‹anchor: Capiunt› · call in col 467

Capiunt. Sic Clar. cod. et Ottob. In caeteris minus bene, capiant,

Capiunt ("they grasp"). So the Clermont manuscript and the Ottoboni. In the rest, less well, capiant.

(printed under page 240)

(4) ‹anchor: Sic› · call in col 467

Sic. Haec particula in Graeco praecedens colon claudit. Sed perinde est ad sensum, modo comma praeponas particulae οὕτως: additur enim explicationis, non comparationis gratia.

Sic ("thus"). In the Greek this particle closes the preceding clause. But it comes to the same for the sense, provided you put a comma before the particle οὕτως; for it is added for explanation, not for comparison.

(printed under page 240)

(5) ‹anchor: Ἐξ ἀγῶνος σύμπηξις› · call in col 468

Ἐξ ἀγῶνος σύμπηξις. Difficilis locus, in cujus obscura suam quisque confert operam, sed inanem, ni fallor. Nec enim hic (quod alibi solet) sibi mutuo suppetias ferunt textus Graecus et Latinus, nec quidquam juvant codices cum editi, tum mss. Quot enim codices, tot variae lectiones. Alii una voce scribunt ἐξάγωνος, ut Petavius, Gallasius et Feuard.; alii divisis, ἐξ ἀγῶνος, ut Grabius. E codicibus Latinis, editt. Gallas. Eras. et Feuard. habent et Aeonum compago; edit. Anglic. ex agonia compago; Voss. lex Aeonum compago; Claromont. lex Aeona compago; Arund. et Merc. 1, ex Aeone compago; Merc. 2, ex Aeonia compago; quod posterius dubio procul scriptum putat Grabius pro ex agonia compago, id est, post agoniam compago; ut excudi curavit in versione Latina: unde et in Graeco consequenter legi vult ἐξ ἀγῶνος, divisim; ut sit sensus, Sophiam post agoniam ab Horo consolidatam fuisse, ne scilicet in universum resoluta difflueret. Sed praeterquam quod ἡ τοῦ Ὅρου ἐξ ἀγῶνος σύμπηξις, significaret potius, Horum ipsum post agoniam consolidatum fuisse, quam Sophiam ab eo consolidatam, scribendumque fuisset, ἡ διὰ τοῦ Ὅρου σύμπηξις, id vero minus simile videtur, hic Horo respectu Sophiae figendi, seu consolidandi virtutem ascribi, quae solis Christo, et Spiritui sancto, respectu Pleromatis paulo superius tribuitur. Horo quidem attribuitur στηρίζουσα δύναμις, sed συμπηγνῦσα nusquam. Mea vero haec est opinio, imo haud dubitem quin legendum sit, in Graeco quidem ἑξαιώνιος σύμπηξις, in Latino vero, hexaeonia compago; quod posterius excudi feci. Hanc lectionem satis aperte exprimunt plerique codd. Latini, quorum alii habent lex Aeonum, alii lex Aeona, alii ex Aeona, alii ex Aeonia compago, procul dubio pro sex aeonum, sexaeona, sexaeonia, vel hexaeona, vel hexaeonia compago; quod cum minus intelligerent scribae, depravarunt; sic tamen ut verae lectionis vestigia retinuerint. Porro Hori, Crucis, Redemptoris, Carpistae, Horothetae, et Metagogei hexaeonia compago ab Irenaeo dicitur, quia cum unus et idem Aeon sex nominibus gaudeat, quibus totidem proprietates respondent, sex Aeonum personam sustinet. Unde sex illorum nominum coagmentatio ingeniose ab Irenaeo vocatur hexaeonia compago, quasi sex Aeonum in unum et eumdem Aeonem confluxus. Sic nulla fere mutatione facta textum utrumque restituo.

Ἐξ ἀγῶνος σύμπηξις ("the consolidation after the struggle"). A difficult passage, on whose obscurities each brings his own effort — but a vain one, unless I am mistaken. For here the Greek and Latin texts do not (as they do elsewhere) come to each other's aid, nor do the manuscripts, printed or written, help at all: as many manuscripts, so many readings. Some write it as one word, ἐξάγωνος ("six-cornered"), as Petau, Gallasius and Feuardent; others as two, ἐξ ἀγῶνος ("from the struggle"), as Grabe. Of the Latin copies, the editions of Gallasius, Erasmus and Feuardent have et Aeonum compago; the English edition ex agonia compago; the Vossius lex Aeonum compago; the Clermont lex Aeona compago; the Arundel and first Mercerus ex Aeone compago; the second Mercerus ex Aeonia compago — which last Grabe thinks was without doubt written for ex agonia compago, that is, "the consolidation after the agony", as he had it printed in the Latin version; from which, consistently, he would also read in the Greek ἐξ ἀγῶνος as two words, so that the sense would be that Sophia was consolidated by Horos after her agony, so that she should not be wholly dissolved and flow away. But besides the fact that "the consolidation of Horos after the struggle" would rather mean that Horos himself was consolidated after the agony than that Sophia was consolidated by him — and it would have had to be written "the consolidation through Horos" — it seems unlikely that the power of fixing or consolidating, in respect of Sophia, should be ascribed here to Horos, when a little above it is attributed to Christ and the Holy Spirit alone, in respect of the Pleroma. To Horos is indeed attributed a "strengthening" power, but nowhere a "consolidating" one. My opinion, rather — indeed I would not doubt it — is that one should read in the Greek ἑξαιώνιος σύμπηξις, and in the Latin hexaeonia compago, which latter I have had printed. Most of the Latin manuscripts express this reading plainly enough: some have lex Aeonum, others lex Aeona, others ex Aeona, others ex Aeonia compago, beyond doubt for sex aeonum, sexaeona, sexaeonia, or hexaeona, or hexaeonia compago; which the scribes, not understanding it, corrupted, yet so that they kept traces of the true reading. Further, Irenaeus calls the "six-Aeon structure" that of Horos, Cross, Redeemer, Carpistes, Horothetes and Metagogeus, because, since one and the same Aeon enjoys six names, to which as many properties answer, he bears the person of six Aeons. Hence the joining of those six names is ingeniously called by Irenaeus "the six-Aeon structure", as it were the flowing together of six Aeons into one and the same Aeon. Thus, with almost no change made, I restore both texts.

(printed under page 240)

(6) ‹anchor: Τῶν αἰώνων τοῦ αἰῶνος› · call in col 468

Τῶν αἰώνων τοῦ αἰῶνος. Ordo verborum perperam inversus est. Lege ex Apostolo, cujus haec verba sunt Ephes., III, 21, τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων. Sic enim legit interpres, et sic legendum esse satis monet ipsa Valentinianorum hypothesis, qui non tantum Aeonas ab Apostolo nominatos, sed etiam et ordinem ipsorum, primi scil. Aeonis singulariter et κατ' ἐξοχὴν dicti, et sequentium inferiorum, servatum esse effutiebant.

Τῶν αἰώνων τοῦ αἰῶνος ("of the ages of the age"). The order of the words has been wrongly inverted. Read, from the Apostle, whose words these are, Ephesians 3:21, "of the age of the ages". For so the translator read, and the very system of the Valentinians shows clearly enough that so it must be read: they babbled that not only were the Aeons named by the Apostle, but their order too was kept — namely, of the first Aeon, named in the singular and par excellence, and of the lower ones that follow.

(printed under page 240)

(⁷) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 470 Luc. II, 42 seqq.

Luke 2:42 ff.

(printed under page 241) (⁸) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 470 Luc. VI, 13.

Luke 6:13.

(printed under page 241) (⁹) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 470 Matth. V, 18.

Matthew 5:18.

(printed under page 241)

(1) ‹anchor: Ἐπὶ τῆς εὐχαριστίας› · call in col 470

Ἐπὶ τῆς εὐχαριστίας. Ταῖς εὐχαριστίαις legit interpres; sed minus bene. Hic enim sermo est, non de quibuscunque gratiarum actionibus, sed de ipsa sacra Eucharistia, seu de solemni illa gratiarum actione, quae in divinorum mysteriorum celebratione fiebat; ubi ex veterum Liturgiarum praescripto frequens audiebatur ea cum ἐκφωνήσεων, tum εὐχῶν clausula: εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. Ex quibus obiter concludes, antiquissimos esse plurimos, qui in iis, quae sub quorumdam apostolorum nomine circumferuntur, Liturgiis, ritus exstant, et Valentinianorum aevo vetustiores, ac proinde apostolis ipsis coaevos. In ea, quae Jacobi nomen prae se fert, quamque Basilius, et Chrysostomus, si Proclo fides, in compendium redegerunt, formula ex qua argumentum ducebant Valentiniani, non semel occurrit. Et bene se res habet, quod Grabius suis candidior fateatur, illos, qui in omnibus istis Liturgiis (Apostolicis) exprimuntur, quique jam olim ubique inter sacra mysteria usitati fuere, ritus, ex apostolica traditione fluxisse. Ecclesias enim ab apostolis institutas formam aliquam, et ritum offerendi sacrificium, cui tam arcta sit et praecipua cum religione connexio, non accepisse, quis sanus sibi persuadeat? Non quod tamen Liturgias omnes apostolicas iis, quorum nomine insigniuntur, adjudicare velim. Sufficiat Liturgiarum antiquiorum, si non scriptores, saltem primos auctores esse apostolos.

Ἐπὶ τῆς εὐχαριστίας ("at the Eucharist"). The translator read ταῖς εὐχαριστίαις ("in thanksgivings"), but less well. For the reference here is not to any thanksgivings whatever, but to the holy Eucharist itself, that is, to that solemn thanksgiving made in the celebration of the divine mysteries; where, by the prescription of the ancient liturgies, this close of both the exclamations and the prayers was often heard: "unto the ages of the ages". From this you may conclude in passing that very many of the rites found in the liturgies circulated under the names of certain apostles are most ancient, older than the age of the Valentinians, and therefore of the same age as the apostles themselves. In the liturgy that bears the name of James — which Basil and Chrysostom, if Proclus is to be believed, reduced to an abridgement — the formula from which the Valentinians drew their argument occurs more than once. And it is well that Grabe, more candid than his own party, admits that "the rites expressed in all those (Apostolic) liturgies, which were long ago in use everywhere among the sacred mysteries, flowed from apostolic tradition". For who in his right mind could persuade himself that the churches founded by the apostles did not receive some form and rite of offering the sacrifice, which has so close and so chief a connection with religion? Not that I would assign all the apostolic liturgies to those whose names they bear. Let it suffice that the apostles are, if not the writers, at least the first authors of the more ancient liturgies.

(printed under page 241)

(2) ‹anchor: Ὅπου ἄν› · call in col 470

Ὅπου ἄν. Particulam ἄν, quam habent cod. R. et omnes editi, nescio cur omiserunt Petavius et Grabius.

Ὅπου ἄν ("wherever"). The particle ἄν, which the Royal manuscript and all the printed editions have, Petau and Grabe omitted — I do not know why.

(printed under page 241)

(3) ‹anchor: Δεκαοκτὼ μησί› · call in col 470

Δεκαοκτὼ μησί. Idem antea commenti fuerant Gnostici, ut patet ex cap. 30 hujus libri, et ab iis acceperant Valentiniani. Utrosque confutat Lucas Act. I, asserens Christum per dies quadraginta apparuisse discipulis, quibus elapsis in coelum conscendit. Sed minoris apud eos haereticos ponderis erant Scripturae Novi Testamenti, quam spurium illud scriptum, quod veritatis Evangelium dicebant Valentiniani, Irenaeo teste lib. III, cap. 11, n. 8, ex quo commenta sua hauriebant.

Δεκαοκτὼ μησί ("for eighteen months"). The Gnostics had invented the same before, as is plain from ch. 30 of this book, and the Valentinians received it from them. Luke refutes both, Acts 1, affirming that Christ appeared to the disciples "for forty days", after which he ascended into heaven. But among those heretics the Scriptures of the New Testament weighed less than that spurious writing which the Valentinians called the Gospel of Truth, as Irenaeus attests, Book III, ch. 11, no. 8, from which they drew their inventions.

(printed under page 241)

(4) ‹anchor: Τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ› · call in col 470

Τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ. Ἰησοῦ scilicet, cujus prima littera, Graecis est ι, X; secunda η, VIII.

Τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ ("of his name"). Of Jesus, that is, whose first letter in Greek is iota, 10, and the second eta, 8.

(printed under page 241)

(5) ‹anchor: Εὐσήμως› · call in col 470

Εὐσήμως. Cod. R. ἐν σήμῳ.

Εὐσήμως ("clearly"). The Royal manuscript has ἐν σήμῳ.

(printed under page 241)

(6) ‹anchor: Σημαίνουσι λέγεσθαι› · call in col 470

Σημαίνουσι λέγεσθαι. Lege σημαίνεσθαι λέγουσι. Evidens enim scribae sphalma.

Σημαίνουσι λέγεσθαι ("they signify to be said"). Read σημαίνεσθαι λέγουσι ("they say is signified"). It is an evident slip of the scribe.

(printed under page 241)

(7) ‹anchor: Τὸ δὲ περὶ τὸν δωδέκατον αἰῶνα› · call in col 470

Τὸ δὲ περὶ τὸν δωδέκατον αἰῶνα, etc. Hic cum Graeca, tum Latina corrupta sunt. Sic utraque exprimuntur ut passio et caetera, quae Salvatoris propria sunt, de Juda enuntientur; quod quam absurdum sit, nemo non videt. Quidpiam igitur in utrisque deest; sed et in Graeco quidpiam superest. At uterque textus facile emendari potest ex iis, quae habet Irenaeus lib. II, c. 20, n. 1. Ibi enim ex integro et iisdem omnino verbis repetit quae cap. 3 lib. I, dixerat. Sic autem illic habet: Illam enim, quam erga (continues)

"And what concerns the twelfth Aeon," etc. Here both the Greek and the Latin are corrupt. Both are so expressed that the passion and the other things proper to the Saviour are stated of Judas; and no one fails to see how absurd that is. Something, then, is wanting in both; but in the Greek something is also superfluous. Yet both texts can easily be corrected from what Irenaeus has in Book II, ch. 20, no. 1. For there he repeats in full, and in exactly the same words, what he had said in Book I, ch. 3. He has it there thus: "For that which concerning …" (continues)

(printed under page 241)

(8) ‹anchor: Per praecedentes… manifestari› · call in col 470

Per praecedentes…. manifestari. Sic ex cod. Pass. et Clarom. reponimus. Prior quidem habet per, posterior vero, manifestari, ex quibus genuina lectio Graeco textui, et antecedentibus consentanea eruitur. In caeteris deest per, et legitur manifestare.

Per praecedentes … manifestari ("to be shown through the preceding"). So we restore it from the Passionei and Clermont manuscripts. The former has per, the latter manifestari; from them the genuine reading, consistent with the Greek text and with what precedes, is drawn out. In the rest per is wanting and manifestare is read.

(printed under page 241)

(9) ‹anchor: Litteram, quod praecedit› · call in col 470

Litteram, quod praecedit. Lege, litteram quae praecedit. Ad nominis Graeci, γράμματος, magis quam ad Latini genus attendit interpres.

Litteram, quod praecedit ("the letter, which [neuter] precedes"). Read litteram quae praecedit. The translator attended to the gender of the Greek noun, γράμματος, rather than of the Latin.

(printed under page 241)

(10) ‹anchor: Praeteribit› · call in col 470

Praeteribit. Sic codd. Voss. Pass. et Feuard. in marg. cum Vulgata nostra, et veteri Italica. Caeteri cum editt. tum mss., praeteriet.

Praeteribit ("shall pass away"). So the Vossius and Passionei manuscripts and Feuardent in the margin, with our Vulgate and the old Itala. The rest, both editions and manuscripts, have praeteriet.

(printed under page 241)

(11) ‹anchor: Hanc autem passionem› · call in col 470

Hanc autem passionem, etc. Depravatam hanc periodum in notis ad textum Graecum restituimus. Vide ibi observata. Si tamen Latina haec absolute retinere velis, lege saltem, vitandae amphibologiae causa: Et quoniam duodecimo mense passus est Salvator.

Hanc autem passionem ("but this passion"), etc. We have restored this corrupt sentence in the notes on the Greek text. See what is observed there. If, however, you want to keep this Latin as it stands, at least read, to avoid ambiguity: "And since the Saviour suffered in the twelfth month."

(printed under page 241)

(1) ‹anchor: Quod factum esset inter› · call in col 472

Quod factum esset inter. Ita Voss. Pass. et Feuard. in margine. Claromont., quod factum esset et inter, etc. Caeteri, quod factum est.

Quod factum esset inter ("which had happened among"). So the Vossius and Passionei manuscripts and Feuardent in the margin. The Clermont: quod factum esset et inter, etc. The rest: quod factum est.

(printed under page 242)

(2) ‹anchor: Hoc est, illius Filii, Veritatis primae tetradis› · call in col 472

Hoc est, illius Filii, Veritatis primae tetradis. Ita codd. Ottobon. et Merc. 2. In posterioribus Feuard. editt: Hoc est, illius Filii, qui est Veritas; in Oxon.: Illius Filii, hoc est, Veritatis; sed utrumque contra codd. omnium fidem. Nam praeter jam allegatos, Eras. Gall. et prior Feuard. edit. una cum Clarom. Pass. Arund. et Voss. habent: Hoc est, illius Filii, qui est Veritatis. At expunctis auctoritate Ottobon. et Merc. 2 codd. vocibus, qui est, quae sensum conturbant, sic explicandus videtur Irenaeus: Nisi tetigisset vestimentum, hoc est illius Filii vestimentum, Veritatem scilicet primae tetradis, etc. Vertere siquidem debuisset interpres Veritatem, non Veritatis; cum verbum tango accusativum regat apud Latinos, non genitivum, ut apud Graecos. Lege ergo Veritatem, hancque vocem per appositionem accipe, quasi explicationem vocis vestimentum. Neque enim passus Aeon vestimentum Veritatis tetigisse dicitur, sed Veritatem ipsam (quae vestimentum Filii dicebatur a Valentinianis), per fimbriam mystice significatam: quod id esset respectu primae tetradis, quod fimbria respectu vestimenti, infima pars scilicet. Vide quae ad Graeca hujus loci observavimus.

Hoc est, illius Filii, Veritatis primae tetradis ("that is, of that Son, of the Truth of the first Tetrad"). So the Ottoboni and second Mercerus manuscripts. In Feuardent's later editions: "that is, of that Son, who is Truth"; in the Oxford: "of that Son, that is, of Truth"; but both against the witness of all the manuscripts. For besides those already cited, Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent's first edition, together with the Clermont, Passionei, Arundel and Vossius manuscripts, have: "that is, of that Son, who is of Truth". But with the words qui est ("who is"), which confuse the sense, struck out on the authority of the Ottoboni and second Mercerus manuscripts, Irenaeus seems to be explained thus: "Had she not touched the garment, that is, the garment of that Son — namely the Truth of the first Tetrad," etc. For the translator ought to have rendered Veritatem, not Veritatis, since the verb tango governs the accusative in Latin, not the genitive as in Greek. Read, then, Veritatem, and take this word in apposition, as an explanation of the word "garment". For the suffering Aeon is not said to have touched the garment of Truth, but Truth itself (which the Valentinians called the garment of the Son), mystically signified by the hem: because it was, in relation to the first Tetrad, what the hem is in relation to the garment — its lowest part, that is. See what we observed on the Greek of this passage.

(printed under page 242)

(3) ‹anchor: Advenisse› · call in col 472

Advenisse. Suppl. dicunt, quod superius praemittitur.

Advenisse ("to have come"). Supply "they say", which is set earlier.

(printed under page 242)

(4) ‹anchor: Ὅτι τῷ δωδεκάτῳ μηνὶ ἔπαθεν· ἐνιαυτῷ γὰρ ἐνὶ βούλονται› · call in col 472

Ὅτι τῷ δωδεκάτῳ μηνὶ ἔπαθεν· ἐνιαυτῷ γὰρ ἐνὶ βούλονται, etc. In hoc errore versatos fuisse Valentinianos Scripturarum corruptores, et novorum Evangeliorum fabricatores, non adeo mirum; sed in eumdem impegisse clarissimos Patres, saltem Clement. Alexand. lib. I Strom., p. 340; Origen. lib. IV Periarch. c. 1, et Tertull. lib. adv. Jud. c. 18, qui Evangelia debita cum veneratione et legebant, et suscipiebant, nullus non miretur. Una est istorum sententia, Christum, anno XV imperii Tiberii, quo baptizatum fuisse scribit Lucas, passum esse, anno aetatis 30, ac proinde anno uno duntaxat post baptismum, et ante mortem suam, publicas apud Judaeos habuisse conciones: cum tamen Evangeliorum lectione vel levissima imbutus quisque facile deprehendat, tria ut minimum a baptismo ad mortem Christi intercessisse Paschata.

"That He suffered in the twelfth month; for they will have it that for one year," etc. That the Valentinians, corrupters of the Scriptures and fabricators of new Gospels, were caught in this error is not so surprising; but that the most illustrious Fathers fell into the same — at least Clement of Alexandria, Stromata I, p. 340; Origen, De principiis IV, ch. 1; and Tertullian, Adversus Judaeos ch. 18 — who read and received the Gospels with due reverence, everyone must wonder. Their common view is that Christ suffered in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius, in which Luke writes He was baptized, at thirty years of age, and so held public preaching among the Jews only for one year after His baptism and before His death: whereas anyone with even the slightest acquaintance with the reading of the Gospels easily finds that at least three Passovers passed between Christ's baptism and His death.

(printed under page 242)

(5) ‹anchor: Ἔτι τε› · call in col 472

Ἔτι τε. Cod. R. ἔτι τά.

Ἔτι τε ("and further"). The Royal manuscript has ἔτι τά.

(printed under page 242)

(6) ‹anchor: Ἐκείνη ἡ δύναμις› · call in col 472

Ἐκείνη ἡ δύναμις. Sophia scilicet, seu passus Aeon, qui ab eodem Irenaeo lib. II, cap. 18 et 23 ex Valentinianorum sententia, vocatur virtus extensa, duodecima virtus passa, id est, inquit, duodecimus Aeon. Hinc Billius, de sensu sollicitior quam de vocibus, δύναμιν hic reddidit Aeonem, quod, licet minus accuratum, re tamen idem est.

Ἐκείνη ἡ δύναμις ("that power"). Sophia, that is, or the suffering Aeon, who by the same Irenaeus, Book II, chs. 18 and 23, following the Valentinians' view, is called "the power stretched out", "the twelfth power that suffered, that is," he says, "the twelfth Aeon". Hence Billius, more concerned with the sense than with the words, rendered δύναμιν here as "Aeon", which, though less accurate, is the same in substance.

(printed under page 242)

(7) ‹anchor: Ἐκτεινομένης αὐτῆς› · call in col 472

Ἐκτεινομένης αὐτῆς. Cur αὐτῇ, non αὐτῆς, hic legi velit Billius, non novi. Genitivum enim casum postulat constructionis ordo.

Ἐκτεινομένης αὐτῆς ("she being stretched out"). Why Billius would have αὐτῇ read here, not αὐτῆς, I do not know. For the order of the construction requires the genitive.

(printed under page 242)

(8) ‹anchor: Εἰ μή› · call in col 472

Εἰ μή. Ante εἰ μή particulam copulativam καί, ex veteri interprete ponendam vult idem Billius. Sed non advertit vir doctus, veterem interpretem, addito verbo significatur, periodum Graecam in duas secuisse, quarum unam cum conclusisset ad quemadmodum dicunt, alteram ut inciperet et cum priori connecteret, necesse videbatur addere particulam, et; in Graeco vero cum ἐκείνη ἡ δύναμις per appositionem accipiatur, suspensusque maneat sensus ad ea usque verba, εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτῆς, hunc perperam interturbaret copula καί.

Εἰ μή ("had not"). The same Billius would set the copulative particle καί before εἰ μή, following the old translator. But the learned man did not notice that the old translator, by adding the verb significatur ("is signified"), cut the Greek sentence in two; having closed the first at "as they say", it seemed necessary to add the particle et in order to begin the second and join it to the first. But in the Greek, since "that power" is taken in apposition, and the sense remains suspended up to the words "into her substance", the copula καί would wrongly disturb it.

(printed under page 242)

(9) ‹anchor: Φορήματος αὐτοῦ› · call in col 472

Φορήματος αὐτοῦ. Si sana sint mss. Latina, legendum cum vet. interprete, φορήματος, τοῦτ' ἔστι, αὐτοῦ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, vestimentum, hoc est, ipsius (continues)

Φορήματος αὐτοῦ ("of His garment"). If the Latin manuscripts are sound, we should read with the old translator "of the garment, that is, of the Son Himself": "the garment, that is, of the very …" (continues)

(printed under page 242)

(¹¹) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 474 Exod. XIII, 2, et Luc. II, 23.

Exodus 13:2, and Luke 2:23.

(printed under page 243) (¹²) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 474 Coloss. III, 11.

Colossians 3:11.

(printed under page 243) (¹³) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 474 Rom. XI, 36.

Romans 11:36.

(printed under page 243) (¹⁴) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 474 Coloss. II, 9.

Colossians 2:9.

(printed under page 243) (¹⁵) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 474 Ephes. I, 10.

Ephesians 1:10.

(printed under page 243)

(1) ‹anchor: Εἶναι καὶ ταύτης› · call in col 474

Εἶναι καὶ ταύτης. Lege cum veteri interp. et Billio ταύτην. Id enim exigit sensus.

Εἶναι καὶ ταύτης ("and to be of this"). Read ταύτην, with the old translator and Billius. For the sense requires it.

(printed under page 243)

(2) ‹anchor: Ἐχώρισεν› · call in col 474

Ἐχώρισεν. Sic Petavius et Grabius. At in cod. R. Basileensi Epiphanii, et caeteris Irenaei editionibus, ἐχώρησεν, repugnante veteri interprete, qui vertit, separavit, non abscessit.

Ἐχώρισεν ("separated"). So Petau and Grabe. But in the Royal manuscript, the Basel Epiphanius and the other editions of Irenaeus, ἐχώρησεν ("withdrew"), against the old translator, who renders "separated", not "withdrew".

(printed under page 243)

(3) ‹anchor: Τὸ δέ› · call in col 474

Τὸ δέ. Cod. Reg. τὸν δέ.

Τὸ δέ. The Royal manuscript has τὸν δέ.

(printed under page 243)

(4) ‹anchor: Διήνοιξε τὴν μήτραν τῆς Ἐνθυμήσεως› · call in col 474

Διήνοιξε τὴν μήτραν τῆς Ἐνθυμήσεως. Non quod ex ea prognatus sit, sed quia eam fecundavit, et per ipsam variam peperit prolem, ut inferius explicat Irenaeus.

"He opened the womb of Enthymesis." Not that he was born of her, but because he made her fruitful and through her brought forth varied offspring, as Irenaeus explains below.

(printed under page 243)

(5) ‹anchor: Καὶ ἐξορισθείσης… ὕστερον ἐροῦμεν› · call in col 474

Καὶ ἐξορισθείσης… ὕστερον ἐροῦμεν. Haec tametsi in veteri interpretatione exstent, delenda tamen vult Billius. Nec enim, inquit, quidquam ad rem faciunt, nec sententiam absolutam faciunt. Imo ad rem faciunt quam maxime. Breviter siquidem hic colligit Irenaeus, quae fusius paulo post enarraturum se promittit. Sententiam vero absolutam habebunt, si expungas copulam καί (hanc licet legerit vetus interpres), quae sensum turbat, perperamque suspendit, ut nimirum ἐξορισθείσης referatur ad Ἐνθυμήσεως, quae revera extra Pleroma separata fuerat. Quod addit idem Billius, falsum esse Valentinianos Enthymesin secundam Ogdoadem appellare, paulo longius abest a vero, ut recte ostendit clariss. Grab. Exciderat sane viro docto, matrem Achamoth, quae Enthymesis est, bis, ex Valentinianorum hypothesi infra cap. 5, Ogdoada nuncupari. Et expressius adhuc lib. II, cap. 14: Eam, quae est extra Pleroma, matris ipsorum enarrant dispositionem (seu affectionem, vel Enthymesin), secundam Ogdoadem vocantes eam. Secundam autem Ogdoadem vocabant, quia, ut aiunt cap. 5 cit., volens in honorem Aeonum omnia facere, imagines fecerat ipsorum, servans numerum primogenitae et primariae Pleromatis Ogdoadis.

"And when she had been banished … we shall tell later." Although these words stand in the old translation, Billius would have them deleted. "For," he says, "they contribute nothing to the matter, nor do they make a complete sentence." On the contrary, they contribute very much to the matter. For Irenaeus here briefly sums up what he promises to relate more fully a little later. And they will make a complete sentence if you strike out the copula καί (though the old translator read it), which disturbs the sense and wrongly suspends it, so that "banished" is referred to Enthymesis, who had in fact been separated outside the Pleroma. As for what the same Billius adds — that it is false that the Valentinians call Enthymesis the second Ogdoad — that is rather far from the truth, as the most distinguished Grabe rightly showed. It had surely slipped the learned man's mind that the mother Achamoth, who is Enthymesis, is twice called an Ogdoad, on the Valentinians' system, below in ch. 5. And more expressly still in Book II, ch. 14: "That which is outside the Pleroma they relate as the disposition of their mother" (or affection, or Enthymesis), "calling her the second Ogdoad." And they called her the second Ogdoad because, as they say in ch. 5 cited, "wishing to do all things in honour of the Aeons, she had made images of them, keeping the number of the first-begotten and primary Ogdoad of the Pleroma."

(printed under page 243)

(6) ‹anchor: Ὑπὸ τοῦ Παύλου› · call in col 474

Ὑπὸ τοῦ Παύλου. Scilicet Coloss. III, 2, ubi Apostolus scribit, τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐν πᾶσι Χριστός.

Ὑπὸ τοῦ Παύλου ("by Paul"). Namely Colossians 3:2 [as printed; the words are 3:11], where the Apostle writes, "Christ is all, and in all."

(printed under page 243)

(7) ‹anchor: Πάντα εἰς αὐτόν› · call in col 474

Πάντα εἰς αὐτόν, etc. Aliquantulum immutata Apostoli verba. Sic enim habet Rom. XI, 36: Ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ, καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ, καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν τὰ πάντα.

Πάντα εἰς αὐτόν ("all things unto him"), etc. The Apostle's words are somewhat altered. For Romans 11:36 has: "For of him, and through him, and unto him are all things."

(printed under page 243)

(8) ‹anchor: Τῆς θεότητος› · call in col 474

Τῆς θεότητος. Vocem σωματικῶς, quae exstat in nostris codicibus, quamque legerunt Patres omnes Graeci, et e Latinis plerique, ideo forte omittunt Valentiniani, quia minus ad institutum faciebat. Ea enim duntaxat e Scripturis corradere hic mens erat, in quibus occurrerent voces, omnis, omne, omnia. Forte etiam in Irenaei codice deerat, ut et defuisse videtur in Cypriani, et Archelai codd.; uterque enim, ut observat Grab., hic in Disput. cum Manete, § 25, ille init. lib. De bono patient., citata D. Pauli verba legit, omisso adverbio σωματικῶς.

Τῆς θεότητος ("of the Godhead"). The word σωματικῶς ("bodily"), which stands in our manuscripts and which all the Greek Fathers and most of the Latin read, the Valentinians perhaps omit because it served their purpose less. For their intention here was to scrape together from the Scriptures only those passages in which the words "all", "every", "all things" occurred. Perhaps too it was missing from Irenaeus's copy, as it also seems to have been missing from those of Cyprian and Archelaus; for both, as Grabe observes — the latter here in the Disputation with Manes, § 25, the former at the beginning of De bono patientiae — read St Paul's words as cited, with the adverb σωματικῶς omitted.

(printed under page 243)

(9) ‹anchor: Quod autem Salvatorem› · call in col 474

Quod autem Salvatorem. Τό hic perperam vertit interpres quod. Lege, istud autem, Salvatorem, etc., vel post quod autem, subintellige, attinet.

Quod autem Salvatorem ("but that the Saviour"). The translator wrongly renders τό here as quod. Read istud autem, Salvatorem ("but this: that the Saviour"), etc.; or after quod autem understand attinet ("as regards").

(printed under page 243)

(10) ‹anchor: Et separata ea› · call in col 474

Et separata ea. Cod. Pass. et separat ea, caeteris omnibus reclamantibus tum editt. tum mss. in quibus (continues)

Et separata ea ("and she having been separated"). The Passionei manuscript has et separat ea ("and he separates them"), with all the others, both editions and manuscripts, protesting, in which … (continues)

(printed under page 243)

(11) ‹anchor: De qua› · call in col 474

De qua. Cod. Pass. de quo.

De qua ("from which", feminine). The Passionei manuscript has de quo (masculine).

(printed under page 243)

(¹⁶) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 476 Luc. XIV, 27.

Luke 14:27.

(printed under page 244) (¹⁷) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 476 Marc. X, 21.

Mark 10:21.

(printed under page 244) (¹⁸) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 476 Matth. X, 34.

Matthew 10:34.

(printed under page 244) (¹⁹) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 476 Luc. III, 17.

Luke 3:17.

(printed under page 244)

(1) ‹anchor: Sic interpretantur dicta› · call in col 476

Sic interpretantur dicta. Ita cod. Voss. et Clarom. In editt. autem Eras. Gall. et Feuard. perperam et post sic additum. Dictum autem, non dicta legendum vult Grabius; sed nihil necesse est, modo dicta referas ad praecedentia omnia citata testimonia, non tantum ad illud.

Sic interpretantur dicta ("thus they interpret the sayings"). So the Vossius and Clermont manuscripts. But in the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent et is wrongly added after sic. Grabe would read dictum ("the saying"), not dicta; but there is no need, provided you refer dicta to all the preceding testimonies cited, not only to the last one.

(printed under page 244)

(2) ‹anchor: Plurimis nominibus› · call in col 476

Plurimis nominibus. Edit. Anglic. pluribus.

Plurimis nominibus ("by very many names"). The English edition has pluribus ("by several").

(printed under page 244)

(3) ‹anchor: Secundum id vero, quod dividit› · call in col 476

Secundum id vero, quod dividit. Ita recte Clarom. Arund. et Merc. 2, sed perverso ordine in editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. secundum id quod vero dividit.

Secundum id vero, quod dividit ("but in so far as he divides"). So rightly the Clermont, Arundel and second Mercerus manuscripts; but in the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent in perverse order, secundum id quod vero dividit.

(printed under page 244)

(4) ‹anchor: Et iterum› · call in col 476

Et iterum. Feuard. et item. Sed in Graeco nihil est quod huic particulae respondeat.

Et iterum ("and again"). Feuardent has et item ("and likewise"). But in the Greek there is nothing to answer to this particle.

(printed under page 244)

(5) ‹anchor: Emundare› · call in col 476

Emundare. Sic omnes codd. Feuard. vero Frontonis Duc. monitis morem gerens scripsit emundabit, quia in Graeco habetur, διακαθαριεῖ, in futuro. Sed fatetur ipse Fronto, emundare ἑλληνιστικῶς acceptum, eumdem habere sensum.

Emundare ("to cleanse"). So all the manuscripts. Feuardent, however, following Fronton du Duc's advice, wrote emundabit ("he will cleanse"), because the Greek has διακαθαριεῖ, in the future. But Fronton himself admits that emundare, taken in the Greek manner, has the same sense.

(printed under page 244)

(6) ‹anchor: Per hoc› · call in col 476

Per hoc. Edita, per haec.

Per hoc ("by this"). The printed editions: per haec ("by these things").

(printed under page 244)

(7) ‹anchor: Διὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ› · call in col 476

Διὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Haec non leguntur in nostris Nov. Test. codicibus Graecis, nec in Vulgata.

Διὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ ("through God"). These words are not read in our Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, nor in the Vulgate.

(printed under page 244)

(8) ‹anchor: Ἑρμηνεύουσιν› · call in col 476

Ἑρμηνεύουσιν. Praemittenda particula οὕτως, quam in suo exemplari legebat interpres Latinus.

Ἑρμηνεύουσιν ("they interpret"). The particle οὕτως ("thus") should be set before it; the Latin translator read it in his copy.

(printed under page 244)

(9) ‹anchor: Καθό› · call in col 476

Καθό. Sic cod. R. Editi male καθά, nam sequitur καθὸ δέ.

Καθό ("in so far as"). So the Royal manuscript. The printed editions wrongly have καθά; for καθὸ δέ follows.

(printed under page 244)

(10) ‹anchor: Σταυρόν› · call in col 476

Σταυρόν. Pro Σταυρόν, lege cum veteri interprete, Σωτῆρα. Id enim exigit sensus.

Σταυρόν ("the Cross"). For Σταυρόν read, with the old translator, Σωτῆρα ("the Saviour"). For the sense requires it.

(printed under page 244)

(11) ‹anchor: Ὃς οὐ βαστάζει› · call in col 476

Ὃς οὐ βαστάζει, etc. Verba sunt Luc. XIV, 27, excepto quod pro ἀκολουθεῖ μοι, codices nostri habeant, ἔρχεται ὀπίσω μου. Exstitisse tamen in Irenaei codicibus ἀκολουθεῖ μοι, inde conjicio, quod in vetustis quibusdam mss. in Graeca Novi Testam. edit. Oxon. an. 1675 citatis etiamnum legatur, ἀκολουθεῖ ὀπίσω μου, quod prope accedit ad Irenaei lectionem.

Ὃς οὐ βαστάζει ("whoever does not carry"), etc. The words are Luke 14:27, except that for "follows me" our manuscripts have "comes after me". Yet I conjecture that "follows me" stood in Irenaeus's manuscripts, because in certain old manuscripts cited in the Oxford Greek New Testament of 1675 "follows after me" is still read, which comes close to Irenaeus's reading.

(printed under page 244)

(12) ‹anchor: Ἄρας τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ, ἀκολούθει μοι› · call in col 476

Ἄρας τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ, ἀκολούθει μοι. Transpositus ordo verborum: nam Marci XI, 21, legitur, ἀκολούθει μοι, ἄρας τὸν σταυρόν. Quae, accentu loco moto decepti interpretes Epiphanii, male verterunt: Tollens crucem suam sequitur me: cum imperativum sonent ea verba, et cum Irenaei interprete reddenda fuissent, Tollens crucem, sequere me. Caeterum vox αὐτοῦ abest a codicibus nostris, nec eam legisse videtur Irenaei interpres. Forte in Epiphanii textum irrepsit, pro σοῦ, haec enim exstat in mss. quibusdam Novi Testam. exemplaribus. Illud etiam, ἄρας τὸν σταυρὸν, desideratur in Vulgata nostra, et in veteribus quibusdam codicibus non exstare testatur Erasmus.

"Taking up his cross, follow me." The order of the words is transposed: for in Mark 11:21 [as printed; the words are 10:21] is read "follow me, taking up the cross". The translators of Epiphanius, deceived by an accent moved from its place, rendered this wrongly, "Taking up his cross he follows me", whereas the words are imperative and should have been rendered, with Irenaeus's translator, "Taking up the cross, follow me." Further, the word αὐτοῦ ("his") is absent from our manuscripts, and Irenaeus's translator does not seem to have read it. Perhaps it crept into the text of Epiphanius for σοῦ ("your"), which stands in certain manuscript copies of the New Testament. The words "taking up the cross" are also wanting in our Vulgate, and Erasmus attests that they are not found in certain old manuscripts.

(printed under page 244)

(13) ‹anchor: Ἐκεῖνον› · call in col 476

Ἐκεῖνον. Ἐκεῖνο legit vetus interpres; et sic legere praestat, quam ἐκεῖνον referre ad σταυρόν.

Ἐκεῖνον ("that", masculine). The old translator read ἐκεῖνο (neuter); and it is better to read so than to refer ἐκεῖνον to σταυρόν.

(printed under page 244)

(20) ‹anchor: virtus Dei› · call in col 478

I Cor. I, 18.

1 Corinthians 1:18.

(printed under page 245)

(21) ‹anchor: et ego mundo› · call in col 478

Gal. VI, 14.

Galatians 6:14.

(printed under page 245)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 477

Ἐν μηδενί. Haec in nostris Novi Testamenti exemplaribus, cum Graecis, tum vulgatis Latinis, non exstant.

"In nothing." These words are not found in our copies of the New Testament, either the Greek or the Latin Vulgate.

(printed under page 245)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 477

Τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Sic cod. Reg. cum veteri interprete; caeteri τοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

"Of Christ." So the Royal manuscript, with the old translator; the others read "of Jesus."

(printed under page 245)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 477

Πάντες... ἐφορμίζειν. Lege cum veteri interprete, πάντων... ἐφαρμόζειν.

"All ... to bring into harbour." Read, with the old translator, "of all ... to fit."

(printed under page 245)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 477

Εἰς πολλὰ ἕλκειν δυναμένων. Auctoritate cod. Regii deleo καί, quod praepositioni εἰς praemittebatur. Tum legendum censeo, ἕλκεσθαι δυνάμενον, pro ἕλκειν δυναμένων. In omnibus siquidem cum editt. tum mss. legitur trahi; et in cod. Clarom. cujus lectionem Latinam sequor, habetur possit, in singulari.

"Able to draw in many directions." On the authority of the Royal manuscript I delete the καί that stood before the preposition εἰς. Then I think we should read ἕλκεσθαι δυνάμενον ("able to be drawn") for ἕλκειν δυναμένων. For in all copies, printed editions and manuscripts alike, "trahi" ("to be drawn") is read; and in the Clermont manuscript, whose Latin reading I follow, "possit" ("can") stands, in the singular.

(printed under page 245)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 477

Ἕτεροι δὲ δεινῶς. Voces ἕτεροι δὲ, delendas censet Billius, utpote redundantes, et a veteri interp. haudquaquam agnitas. At non frustra retineas, si modo punctum praecedens, in editis omnibus perperam interpositum deleas, haecque continenter et absque divisione legas: εἰς πολλὰ ἕλκειν δυναμένων [leg. ἕλκεσθαι δυνάμενον] τὸ ἀμφίβολον διὰ τῆς ἐξηγήσεως ἕτεροι δὲ δεινῶς τῷ πλάσματι αὐτῶν, καὶ δολίως ἐφαρμόζοντες, etc. Sententiae ambiguitatem (cui multiplex subesse potest sensus) per expositionem suam alii solerter et dolose figmento suo accommodantes, etc. Quod vero δεινῶς vertit interpres, propensius, ex Latini sermonis imperitia factum est. Cum enim δεινῶς aliquando Graecis sonet vehementer, fortiter, id ille ad animum traducens perperam reddidit propensius; vertere debuisset solerter.

"But others cleverly." Billius thinks the words ἕτεροι δέ ("but others") should be deleted as redundant and not recognized at all by the old translator. But you may keep them to good purpose, provided you delete the full stop wrongly put before them in all the printed editions, and read the words continuously without a break: "able to draw [read: able to be drawn] in many directions the ambiguity through the exposition, others cleverly and deceitfully fitting it to their fiction," etc. — that is, "others, by their exposition, cleverly and deceitfully fitting to their own fiction the ambiguity of the sentence (under which a manifold sense may lie)," etc. That the translator rendered δεινῶς by "propensius" ("more eagerly") came of his ignorance of Latin. For since δεινῶς sometimes means to the Greeks "vehemently, strongly," he transferred it to the mind and wrongly rendered it "propensius"; he should have translated "solerter" ("cleverly").

(printed under page 245)

(6) ‹anchor: Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ› · call in col 477

Τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ. Sic cod. Reg. In aliis deest τόν.

"The Son of God." So the Royal manuscript. In the others τόν ("the") is missing.

(printed under page 245)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 478

Iis autem, qui salvantur. Antiquam Italicam versionem secutus est interpres, quam eodem modo habuisse, ex Cypriani lib. III Testimoniorum adversus Judaeos, num. 69, et Ambrosiastri Comment. in hunc locum demonstrat Grabius. Graecus autem Pauli et Irenaei textus habet: Nobis autem, qui salvamur. Nec procul abest Vulgata: Iis autem qui salvi fiunt, id est nobis.

"But to those who are being saved." The translator followed the ancient Italic version, which Grabe shows read the same way, from Cyprian's Testimonies against the Jews, book III, no. 69, and from Ambrosiaster's commentary on this place. But the Greek text of Paul and of Irenaeus has: "But to us, who are being saved." Nor is the Vulgate far off: "But to those who are saved, that is, to us."

(printed under page 245)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 478

Talia igitur de Pleromate. Mss. Arund. Voss. Merc. 2 et Clarom., talia igitur tam de Pleromate. Mss. sequi maluit Grabius, nos editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. cum textu Graeco, in quibus particula tam hic omnino superflua non legitur.

"Such things, then, about the Pleroma." The Arundel, Voss, Mercer 2 and Clermont manuscripts read "such things, then, both about the Pleroma." Grabe preferred to follow the manuscripts; we follow the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, with the Greek text, in which the particle "tam" ("both"), wholly superfluous here, is not read.

(printed under page 245)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 478

Et in multa trahi possit ambiguum. Ita Clarom. cod. cujus lectionem, utpote clariorem, sequi maluimus. In aliis legitur: Et in multa trahi possunt, ambiguum.

"And the ambiguity can be drawn in many directions." So the Clermont manuscript, whose reading, as being clearer, we have preferred to follow. In the others is read: "And [they] can be drawn in many directions, the ambiguity."

(printed under page 245)

<!-- Latin column taken as 479 (left): the page top is not in the foot images, but pp. 248, 250-264 show the Latin on the left of even pages and on the right of odd ones. --> (printed under page 246)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

In umbrae vacuitatis locis defervisse. Sic mss. omnes, nisi quod Ottobon. Pass. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2, vitio scribarum habeant deseruisse, vel deservisse, pro defervisse. Feuardentius ex veteri codice, Graeca littera, et R. P. Frontonis judicio restituisse se dicit: in umbrae et vacuitatis locis deferbuisse; sed incertum quid ex Graeco et Frontonis Ducaei conjectura, quid vero ex veteri cod. restituerit. In editt. Eras. et Gallas. vitiose omnino: in umbratae vanitatis locis deseruisse; nec multo melius in edit. Oxon. in umbrae et vanitatis locis deservisse. Nulli enim mss. codd. habent vanitatis; omnes etiam omittunt particulam et. Nostram vero lectionem genuinam esse, demonstratur ex ipso Irenaeo, qui infra lib. II, cap. 8, n. 3, scribit: Falsus autem apparuit, et qui est de umbra cenomatis, id est, vacui, ipsorum sermo. Umbram cenomatis seu vacui dicit, non umbram et cenoma, seu vacuum; minus adhuc umbram et vanitatem. Quod vero spectat ad verbum fervisse, non dubitat ipse Grabius quin ἐκβεβράσθαι ita verterit interpres, quamvis hunc sequi noluerit. Defervisse autem accepit ille in Latina lingua haud satis versatus interpres, non pro fervescere desiisse, ut accipiunt optimi quique auctores Latini; sed pro efferbuisse seu aestuasse. Cum enim non nesciret simplex βεβράσθαι significare fervisse, existimavit compositum ἐκβεβράσθαι verti posse defervisse; perperam ratus particulam ἐκ, ut in aliis bene multis compositis verbis, ita et hic vertendam esse de, et defervisse idem apud Latinos valere ac fervisse.

"Boiled out into the places of the shadow of emptiness." So all the manuscripts, except that the Ottoboni, Passionei, Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2, by scribal error, have "deseruisse" or "deservisse" ("deserted," "served") for "defervisse." Feuardent says that from an old manuscript, the Greek text and the judgement of the Reverend Father Fronton he restored: "boiled out into the places of shadow and of emptiness"; but it is uncertain what he restored from the Greek and the conjecture of Fronton du Duc, and what from the old manuscript. The editions of Erasmus and Gallasius are wholly corrupt: "deserted in the places of shadowy vanity"; nor is the Oxford edition much better: "served in the places of shadow and of vanity." For no manuscripts have "vanitatis"; all also omit the particle "et." That our reading is genuine is shown from Irenaeus himself, who writes below, book II, ch. 8, n. 3: "Their talk, too, has shown itself false, the one about the shadow of the cenoma, that is, of the void." He says "shadow of the cenoma," or of the void, not "shadow and cenoma," or void; still less "shadow and vanity." As to the verb "fervisse," Grabe himself does not doubt that the translator so rendered ἐκβεβράσθαι, although he would not follow him. The translator, not well versed in Latin, took "defervisse" not as "to have ceased boiling," as all the best Latin authors take it, but as "to have boiled over" or "seethed." For since he knew that the simple βεβράσθαι means "to have boiled," he thought the compound ἐκβεβράσθαι could be rendered "defervisse," wrongly supposing that the particle ἐκ should here too be rendered "de," as in a great many other compound verbs, and that "defervisse" meant the same in Latin as "fervisse."

(printed under page 246)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Recurrere. Vertere debuisset interpres, recurrisse.

"To run back." The translator should have rendered "to have run back."

(printed under page 246)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Passionem quae erga illam esset. Hellenismus interpreti familiaris. Id est, passionem propriam, seu quae illi accidisset.

"The passion which was towards her." A Hellenism familiar to the translator. That is, "her own passion," or "the passion which had befallen her."

(printed under page 246)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Qui est erga Christum. Id est, qui est cum Christo.

"Who is towards Christ." That is, "who is with Christ."

(printed under page 246)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Ἀχαμώθ. Nomen Tertulliano ininterpretabile. Feuardentius vero recte deducit a חכמה Hhochma, sapientia, cujus radix חכם Hhacham, sapiens fuit. Inde Sapientiae Enthymesis, sive cogitatio, Achamoth dicta.

"Achamoth." A name Tertullian found untranslatable. But Feuardent rightly derives it from חכמה, Hhochma, "wisdom," whose root is חכם, Hhacham, "he was wise." Hence Wisdom's Enthymesis, or thought, was called Achamoth.

(printed under page 246)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Τοῦ Πληρώματος. Τοῦ ἄνω Πληρώματος legisse videtur interpres.

"Of the Pleroma." The translator seems to have read "of the Pleroma above."

(printed under page 246)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Σκιαῖς καὶ σκηνώματος τόποις. Lege cum interprete, σκιᾶς, et cum eodem, ac Theodoreto, et Tertulliano, pro σκηνώματος, repone κενώματος. Scribit enim Theodoretus lib. I Haeret. Fab., cap. 7, pag. 199: Matrem Achamoth ἐν σκιᾷ τινι, καὶ κενώματι διάγειν, in umbra quadam, et inani degere; Tertullianus, explosam in vacuum, atque inane illud Epicuri. Quin et Irenaeus ipse paulo post, καταλελεῖφθαι μόνην ἐν τῷ σκότει, καὶ κενώματι. Vide et lib. II, cap. 8 et 14.

"In shadows and the places of the tabernacle." Read with the translator σκιᾶς ("of shadow"), and with him, and Theodoret, and Tertullian, put κενώματος ("of the void") in place of σκηνώματος. For Theodoret writes, Haereticarum fabularum book I, ch. 7, p. 199, that the Mother Achamoth "lives in a kind of shadow and void," "in umbra quadam, et inani degere"; Tertullian, "thrust out into the void, that famous empty space of Epicurus." Indeed Irenaeus himself a little later: "was left alone in the darkness and the void." See also book II, chs. 8 and 14.

(printed under page 246)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Τὸν Χριστόν. Lege cum interp. τὸν ἄνω Χριστόν.

"Christ." Read with the translator "the Christ above."

(printed under page 246)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Διὰ τοῦ Σταυροῦ. Theodoretus habet, διὰ τοῦ Ὅρου καὶ Σταυροῦ: Tertullianus vero, educitur per Horon; et Irenaeus lib. III, cap. 18: superextensus Horo, id est, fini. Quo concludas, τοῦ Σταυροῦ hic non Crucem significare, sed Hori epitheton esse.

"Through the Cross." Theodoret has "through Horos and Cross"; Tertullian, "he is led out through Horos"; and Irenaeus, book III, ch. 18: "stretched out over Horos, that is, the Limit." From which you may conclude that τοῦ Σταυροῦ here does not mean the Cross but is an epithet of Horos.

(printed under page 246)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Καταλιπεῖν. Adde αὐτήν cum veter. interp.

"To leave." Add αὐτήν ("her"), with the old translator.

(printed under page 246)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Αὐτὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Lege ex veteri interprete, αὐτῇ ὑπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ.

"Her ... of Christ." Read, from the old translator, "for her, by Christ."

(printed under page 246)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 479

Ἀοράτου. Lege cum interprete, ἀοράτως.

"Invisible." Read with the translator ἀοράτως ("invisibly").

(printed under page 246)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Ἰαώ. Ipsum Dei nomen ineffabile tetragrammaton יהוה est, quod Graecos legisse Ἰαώ, res notior est quam ut argumentis indigeat.

"Iao." It is the ineffable four-letter name of God itself, יהוה; that the Greeks read it as Ἰαώ is too well known to need proof.

(printed under page 247)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ δὲ τὰ πάντα. Καὶ οὐ καθάπερ, etc. Sic lego, nec legendum censeo cum Billio, ἀγνοοῦσα δὲ τὰ πάντα, οὐ καθάπερ, etc.: quasi ita legerit vetus interpres. Virum eruditum deceperunt, ut scite observat Grabius, vitiosae Erasmi et Gallasii editiones, quas et imprudens secutus est Feuardentius, contra mss. codicum fidem. Habent enim, ignorans autem omnia, non quemadmodum mater ejus, etc. Verum haec, ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ δὲ τὰ πάντα, ad praecedentia referenda sunt, λύπην nimirum, φόβον et ἀπορίαν, ut sit sensus, varias illas, quarum aestu jactata est Enthymesis, passiones, omnes in ignorantia, seu cum ignorantia conjunctas fuisse. Id ipsemet Irenaeus paulo inferius sic explicat: Καὶ τὴν ἄγνοιαν τοῖς τρισὶ πάθεσιν ἐγκεκρύφθαι διδάσκουσι, et ignorantiam tribus passionibus (supra dictis) inabsconsam docent. Quare novam periodum ab his verbis incipias, Καὶ οὐ καθάπερ, etc.

"And all in ignorance. And not as," etc. So I read; nor do I think we should read with Billius "but being ignorant of all things, not as," etc., as if the old translator had read so. The learned man was misled, as Grabe aptly observes, by the faulty editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, which Feuardent also followed unawares against the testimony of the manuscripts. For they have "but ignorant of all things, not as her mother," etc. But these words, "and all in ignorance," must be referred to what precedes, namely grief, fear and perplexity, so that the sense is that those various passions, on whose surge the Enthymesis was tossed, were all in ignorance, or joined with ignorance. Irenaeus himself explains it so a little below: "and they teach that ignorance is hidden in the three passions" (those named above). Therefore begin a new sentence with the words "And not as," etc.

(printed under page 247)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Πᾶσαν. Καὶ πᾶσαν legi volunt Billius et Petavius, quasi vetus interpres ita legerit. At nulla editio, nullus etiam ms. codex hic particulam et ante omnem usquam exhibuit; sed nec exhibere debuit; πᾶσα siquidem ψυχή hic ad mundum et Demiurgum refertur, sensusque est, a conversione omnem mundi, et Demiurgi animam genesin accepisse. Sicque Tertullianus cap. 15, intellexit, expressitque: Ex hac (conversione) omnis anima hujus mundi dicitur constitisse, etiam ipsius Demiurgi. Caeterum quae hic paulo obscurius, quia brevius, de mundi constitutione, ex Valentinianorum hypothesi, tradit Irenaeus, fusiori stylo prosequetur inferius.

"All." Billius and Petavius want "and all" read, as if the old translator had read so. But no edition, and no manuscript either, has ever shown the particle "et" before "omnem" here; nor ought it to; for πᾶσα ψυχή ("every soul") here refers to the world and the Demiurge, and the sense is that from the conversion every soul of the world, and of the Demiurge, took its origin. So Tertullian understood and expressed it, ch. 15: "From this (conversion) every soul of this world is said to have come into being, even that of the Demiurge himself." For the rest, what Irenaeus delivers here somewhat obscurely, because briefly, on the constitution of the world according to the Valentinian hypothesis, he will pursue at greater length below.

(printed under page 247)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Et sic. Legendum puto, et hic; Graece siquidem, ἐνταῦθα, non οὕτως.

"And so." I think we should read "and here"; for the Greek is ἐνταῦθα ("here"), not οὕτως ("so").

(printed under page 247)

(5) ‹anchor: Iao› · call in col 482

Iao. Vetus Feuard. codex, Voss. et Pass. Ioath; Arund. et Clarom. Iaoth; editt. Eras. et Gall. Iaioth: sed vera lectio est, Iao, quam habet Graecus Irenaei textus, quamque secuti sunt Tertullianus et Theodoret., et post eos Feuard. et Grab.

"Iao." Feuardent's old manuscript, the Voss and the Passionei have "Ioath"; the Arundel and Clermont "Iaoth"; the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius "Iaioth"; but the true reading is "Iao," which the Greek text of Irenaeus has, and which Tertullian and Theodoret followed, and after them Feuardent and Grabe.

(printed under page 247)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Cum non posset. Et ab Erasmo (quem secuti sunt reliqui editores) solius connexionis gratia praefixum particulae cum expunximus, quia deest in omnibus mss. et in Graeco textu, et ab his verbis, cum non posset, novam periodum incepimus. Vellem tamen particulam adversativam inseruisset interpres, cum autem non posset, etc.

"Since she could not." We have struck out the "et" ("and") that Erasmus (whom the other editors followed) put before the particle "cum" merely for the sake of connection, because it is missing in all the manuscripts and in the Greek text, and we have begun a new sentence with the words "since she could not." I could wish, however, that the translator had inserted an adversative particle: "but since she could not," etc.

(printed under page 247)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Super haec. Al. super hoc.

"Besides these things." Other copies: "besides this."

(printed under page 247)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Ignorantia autem omnia. Et non. Ita Clarom. Ottob. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2. Legendum tamen puto, In (vel cum) ignorantia autem omnia, juxta Graecum: ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ δὲ τὰ πάντα. Vide ibi observata. Caeterum in editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. male, ignorans autem omnia, non, etc.

"But all things ignorance. And not." So the Clermont, Ottoboni, Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2. Yet I think we should read "but all in (or with) ignorance," according to the Greek ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ δὲ τὰ πάντα. See what is observed there. In the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, wrongly, "but ignorant of all things, not," etc.

(printed under page 247)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Vivificavit. Subintellige ipsam, nempe Enthymesin, sive matrem Achamoth. Tertull. c. 14, a quo vivificata fuerat.

"He gave life." Understand "her," namely the Enthymesis, or the Mother Achamoth. Tertullian, ch. 14: "by whom she had been given life."

(printed under page 247)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Eam collectionem. Ea collectio, de qua hic Irenaeus, passionum, quibuscum conflictabatur Enthymesis, collectio est, tristitiae scilicet, timoris, consternationis, conversionis demum ad eum qui vivificavit ipsam, quas omnes substantiam fuisse materiae, seu a quibus materiae substantiam originem sumpsisse dicebant Valentiniani, ut mox explicatur. Ἐκ τῶν δὲ παθῶν, inquit Theodoretus, τόνδε συστῆναι κόσμον φασίν. Ex his affectionibus mundum hunc conditum dicunt.

"This collection." The collection of which Irenaeus speaks here is the collection of the passions with which the Enthymesis struggled: of grief, that is, of fear, of consternation, and finally of conversion to him who gave her life. All these, the Valentinians said, were the substance of matter, or the things from which the substance of matter took its origin, as is explained shortly. "From the passions," says Theodoret, "they say this world came to be." "From these affections they say this world was made."

(printed under page 247)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 482

Mundi et Demiurgi omnem animam. Graeca ad verbum secutus interpres, obscurior evasit. Haec tu sic legas et intelligas: omnem mundi et Demiur- (continues)

"All the soul of the world and of the Demiurge." By following the Greek word for word, the translator has become rather obscure. Read and understand it thus: "every [soul] of the world and of the Demiur- (continues)

(printed under page 247)

(22) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version, §3)› · call in col 483

Matth. X, 8.

Matthew 10:8.

(printed under page 248)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

Et quidem enim. Non abs re putat Grabius veterem interpretem ex Graeco scripsisse, Et quid enim? juxta illud, Καὶ τί γάρ;

"And indeed for." Grabe thinks, not without reason, that the old translator wrote from the Greek "And what then?", answering to Καὶ τί γάρ;

(printed under page 248)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

Graviter. Graec. σοβαρῶς, arroganter, cum fastu.

"Gravely." Greek σοβαρῶς, "arrogantly, with disdain."

(printed under page 248)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

In manifesto. Al. manifesto; quidam, manifeste.

"In the open." Other copies: "manifesto"; some, "manifeste" ("openly").

(printed under page 248)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

Dicunt. Hoc verbum de suo addidit interpres; neque enim in Graeco legitur. Vertendum erat, haec sunt. Non enim jam haec sunt similia illis.

"They say." The translator added this word of his own; for it is not read in the Greek. It should have been rendered "these are": "For these are no longer like those."

(printed under page 248)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

Separata. Vocem ἀνακεχωρηκότα melius cum Gallasio vertisset interpres, abstrusa, vel abdita, ab hominum notitia semota. Hunc enim sensum interdum habet ea vox: hic certe habere debet. Apud Suidam ἀνακεχωρηκότα βιβλία dicuntur esse ἀντὶ ἀποκρύφων.

"Set apart." The translator would have done better, with Gallasius, to render the word ἀνακεχωρηκότα as "abstruse," or "hidden," "withdrawn from men's knowledge." For the word sometimes has this sense, and here it certainly must. In Suidas, "withdrawn books" are said to stand for "apocryphal."

(printed under page 248)

(6) ‹anchor: ex passione Aeonis› · call in col 483

Quae est ex passione Aeonis. Verbum est in editt. omnibus omissum addidimus ex cod. Clarom. Jam apertus est sensus, Enthymeseos, quae est ex passione Aeonis, id est quae ex passione Aeonis, Sophiae scilicet, nata est. Graeca tamen, τῆς Ἐνθυμήσεως τοῦ πεπονθότος Αἰῶνος, simplicius verti potuissent, Enthymeseos passi Aeonis. Sed idem est utrobique sensus. Hunc vero funditus evertit Gallasius dum vertit, ἀπὸ τῶν δακρύων τῆς Ἐνθυμήσεως τοῦ πεπονθότος Αἰῶνος, a lacrymis Aeonis cogitatione perturbati; quae a Graecis et Irenaei mente procul aliena sunt.

"Which is from the passion of the Aeon." The word "est," omitted in all the editions, we have added from the Clermont manuscript. The sense is now plain: "of the Enthymesis, which is from the passion of the Aeon," that is, which was born of the passion of the Aeon, namely Sophia. The Greek, "of the Enthymesis of the Aeon who suffered," could however have been rendered more simply, "of the Enthymesis of the suffering Aeon." But the sense is the same either way. Gallasius overturns it entirely when he renders "from the tears of the Enthymesis of the Aeon who suffered" as "from the tears of the Aeon troubled in thought," which is far removed from the Greek and from Irenaeus's meaning.

(printed under page 248)

(7) ‹anchor: et inconstabilitate› · call in col 483

Inconstabilitate. Gr. ἀμηχανίας, anxietate, animi consternatione.

"Instability." Greek ἀμηχανίας, "anxiety, consternation of mind."

(printed under page 248)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 483

Μόνους ἐκείνους. In cod. Reg. deest ἐκείνους.

"Those alone." In the Royal manuscript ἐκείνους ("those") is missing.

(printed under page 248)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Τὴν γένεσιν μὴ ἐσχηκέναι ἀπὸ τῶν δακρύων αὐτῆς. In Basileensi Epiphanii edit. et Gall. ac Feuard. Irenaei editt. ut et in cod. Reg., deest δακρύων. Legitur duntaxat, ἀπὸ τῶν αὐτῆς. Δακρύων vero addidit Petavius, ut puto, ex cod. Vat.; sed Graeca hoc loco mendosa esse monet Billius, legendumque censet, γένεσιν ἐσχηκέναι ἀπὸ τῶν ἱδρώτων αὐτῆς. Et quidem sic legisse veterem interpretem certum est. Sic etiam legisse videtur Nilus Asceta epist. 124 ad Carpionem Valentinianum, lib. I edit. Allat. Cum enim catholicorum quispiam a Carpione quaesiisset an aquae omnes, tam dulces quam salsae, a lacrymis Achamothae originem haberent, et hic responsionem cunctaretur; iisdem salibus, et tantum non iisdem verbis, quibus Valentinianos Irenaeus, vesanum hominem perfricat Nilus: Ἐχρῆν σε ἀπαντῆσαι λέγοντα, ὅτι τὰ μὲν πικρὰ τῆς ἀνυπάρκτου Ἀχαμωθ δάκρυα τὰς ἁλμυρὰς θαλάσσας ὑπέστησεν, ὡς ἐξ ὀδύνης καὶ δριμυγμοῦ ἱκανοῦ προχυθέντα· ὁ δὲ ἱδρὼς τῆς ταλαιπώρου γυναικὸς πηγὰς ἐξηρεύξατο, καὶ ποταμοὺς, καὶ φρέατα, λίμνας τε, καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς γλυκέα. Ταῦτα πρὸς τὸν σὸν λῆρον γελοιωδῶς λέγομεν. Respondendum tibi erat, amaras Achamothae, quae revera nulla est, lacrymas salsa maria progenerasse, utpote quae ex dolore et magna acerbitate effusae essent; sed ex sudore misellae illius mulieris fontes, et fluvios, et puteos, et lacus, et reliquas dulces aquas prorupisse. Haec ad tuas ineptias non sine risu dicimus. Haec momenta persuadent cum Billio legendum esse, γένεσιν ἐσχηκέναι ἀπὸ τῶν ἱδρώτων αὐτῆς. Graeca quidem, ut nunc sunt, perfectum fundunt sensum, sed praesenti argumento non aeque conveniens, nec praecedentibus adeo cohaerens.

"Had not their origin from her tears." In the Basel edition of Epiphanius and in the editions of Irenaeus by Gallasius and Feuardent, as also in the Royal manuscript, δακρύων ("tears") is missing; only "from her [things]" is read. Petavius added δακρύων, I think from the Vatican manuscript; but Billius warns that the Greek is corrupt at this place, and thinks we should read "had their origin from her sweat." And it is certain that the old translator read so. Nilus the Ascetic too seems to have read so, letter 124 to Carpio the Valentinian, book I of Allacci's edition. For when one of the catholics had asked Carpio whether all waters, sweet as well as salt, had their origin from the tears of Achamoth, and he hesitated to answer, Nilus rubs the madman down with the same wit, and almost the same words, with which Irenaeus treats the Valentinians: "You ought to have met it by saying that the bitter tears of the non-existent Achamoth produced the salt seas, as having been poured out from pain and great smarting, while the sweat of the wretched woman gushed out springs and rivers and wells and lakes and the other sweet waters. This we say in mockery of your nonsense." (Then the Latin rendering of the same.) These considerations persuade us to read, with Billius, "had their origin from her sweat." The Greek as it now stands does yield a complete sense, but one less suited to the present argument and less coherent with what precedes.

(printed under page 249)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Ἐπειδὴ καί. Lege cum Billio, ex veteri interp. ἐπεὶ δὲ καί.

"Since also." Read with Billius, from the old translator, "but since also."

(printed under page 249)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Κατελθεῖν. Hinc recte colligit Billius emendandum esse Theodoretum, lib. I Haeret. Fab. c. 7, apud quem in omn. editt. legitur μετελθεῖν pro κατελθεῖν.

"To come down." From this Billius rightly infers that Theodoret, Haereticarum fabularum book I, ch. 7, should be corrected, where all the editions read μετελθεῖν ("to go after") for κατελθεῖν.

(printed under page 249)

(4) ‹anchor: ἐξέπεμψεν αὐτήν› · call in col 486

Αὐτήν. Lege cum Billio, αὐτῇ, vel πρὸς αὐτήν.

"Her." Read with Billius αὐτῇ ("to her"), or πρὸς αὐτήν ("towards her").

(printed under page 249)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Ut fontes. Sic recte edit. Oxon. ex mss. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2, concinunt Clarom. et Pass.; sed male caeterae editt. et fontes.

"Such as springs." So, rightly, the Oxford edition from the Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2 manuscripts, with which the Clermont and Passionei agree; but the other editions wrongly have "and springs."

(printed under page 249)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Et talia. Al. et alia.

"And such." Other copies: "and others."

(printed under page 249)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

In inconstantia. Quod hic vertit interpres, inconstantia, superius reddidit, inconstabilitate, Graec. ἀμηχανίας.

"In inconstancy." What the translator renders here "inconstantia" he rendered above "inconstabilitas," Greek ἀμηχανίας.

(printed under page 249)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Debes. Sic codd. Clarom. Pass. Voss. ac textus Graecus cum edit. Oxon. et Feuardentio in marg. haud dubie ex veteri cod. Sed hic in textu, perinde ut Eras. et Gall. debemus. Verba haec ad eum dirigi, in cujus gratiam libros suos scripsit Irenaeus, nemo non videt.

"You must." So the Clermont, Passionei and Voss manuscripts and the Greek text, with the Oxford edition and Feuardent in his margin, doubtless from the old manuscript. But in his text Feuardent, like Erasmus and Gallasius, has "we must." Everyone sees that these words are addressed to the man for whose sake Irenaeus wrote his books.

(printed under page 249)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 486

Vix cum elata esset. Gr. μόγις ὑπερκύψασαν, aegre tandem emersa, ut melius vertit Petavius.

"When she had scarcely been lifted up." Greek μόγις ὑπερκύψασαν, "having at last emerged with difficulty," as Petavius better renders it.

(printed under page 249)

(23) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version)› · call in col 487

Coloss. I, 16.

Colossians 1:16.

(printed under page 250)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Patre. Ita cod. Clarom. et editt. Feuard. ac Oxon. In Eras. autem, Gall. et Ottobon. vitiose, Patris. Codices Anglicanos hic mendosos esse monet Grabius.

"By the Father." So the Clermont manuscript and the editions of Feuardent and Oxford. But in Erasmus, Gallasius and the Ottoboni, wrongly, "of the Father." Grabe notes that the English manuscripts are faulty here.

(printed under page 250)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Reveritam eum.... coopertionem. Ex Graeca lectione et R. P. Frontonis judicio reveritam eum pro eam, et coopertionem pro cooperationem substituit Feuardentius. Priorem emendationem confirmat cod. Pass., posteriorem Arund., utramque Voss. et Clarom.

"Having reverenced him ... a covering." From the Greek reading and the judgement of the Reverend Father Fronton, Feuardent substituted "reveritam eum" for "eam," and "coopertionem" ("covering") for "cooperationem" ("co-operation"). The Passionei manuscript confirms the first correction, the Arundel the second, and the Voss and Clermont both.

(printed under page 250)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Imposuisse. Editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. addunt ei. Sed hanc vocem delemus, quia deest in Claromont. Voss. et Merc. 2, necnon in Graeco textu, et Valentinianorum sensui repugnat. Scripsit Tertull. c. 16, Velamen sibi obduxit, melius quidem, si suffragarentur mss. Neque enim Jesus Achamothae, sed ipsa sibi Achamotha velamen imposuit. Saltem igitur sibi post imposuisse subintelligas.

"Put on." The editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent add "ei" ("on him"). But we delete this word, because it is missing in the Clermont, Voss and Mercer 2, and also in the Greek text, and it is contrary to the Valentinians' meaning. Tertullian wrote, ch. 16, "she drew a veil over herself," which would indeed be better if the manuscripts supported it. For it was not Jesus who put a veil on Achamoth, but Achamoth who put it on herself. At least, then, understand "sibi" ("on herself") after "imposuisse."

(printed under page 250)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Eum neglexisse. Sic omnes mss. cum editt. Eras. et Gall. At Graecam lectionem secutus Feuardentius pro eum substituit eas. Sed frustra: quidvis enim legerit interpres, sive αὐτόν, sive αὐτῶν, eas satis subintelligitur. Sensus igitur est: et non eum neglexisse eas, scilicet passiones.

"That he neglected." So all the manuscripts, with the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius. But Feuardent, following the Greek reading, substituted "eas" ("them") for "eum" ("he"). In vain: for whatever the translator read, αὐτόν or αὐτῶν, "eas" is sufficiently understood. The sense, then, is: "and that he did not neglect them," namely the passions.

(printed under page 250)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Prioris. Sic mss. Clarom. Arund. et Merc. 2 cum editt. Eras. Gall. Oxon. et textu Graeco; mirum autem quod scribit Feuard. loco prioris reposuisse se priores ex veteri cod. et Graeca lectione. Veterem quidem codicem habuisse priores, non negaverim; nam ita habet cod. Pass. At in Graeco distincte legitur τὰ τῆς προτέρας, non τὰ πρότερα. Vide notam 10 infra.

"Of the former." So the Clermont, Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts, with the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Oxford and the Greek text; and it is strange that Feuardent writes that in place of "prioris" he put back "priores" ("the former [passions]") from the old manuscript and the Greek reading. I would not deny that the old manuscript had "priores," for the Passionei manuscript has it. But in the Greek is read distinctly "those of the former [Sophia]," not "the former things." See note 10 below.

(printed under page 250)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Eo quod jam habilia et possibilia essent. Si Graecis minus haesisset interpres, et ad vocis Latinae passiones genus attendisset, scripsisset saltem, habiles et possibiles. Sed nec sic Graecorum sensum assecutus fuisset. Vertendum erat, eo quod in habitum jam cessissent, ac robur contraxissent.

"Because they were already habitual and possible." Had the translator clung less to the Greek and attended to the gender of the Latin word "passiones," he would at least have written "habiles et possibiles" (feminine). But even so he would not have caught the Greek sense. It should have been rendered: "because they had already passed into a settled state and gathered strength."

(printed under page 250)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

In incorporalem. Sic cum Grabio restituimus, codd. Arund. Clarom. et textum Graecum secuti. In caeteris editis perperam habetur in corporalem. Vid. not. 12 infra.

"Into incorporeal [matter]." So we have restored it with Grabe, following the Arundel and Clermont manuscripts and the Greek text. In the other printed copies it is wrongly "into corporeal." See note 12 below.

(printed under page 250)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Καὶ τῶν Αἰώνων δεόμενος. Lege cum Billio et Petavio, καὶ τῶν Αἰώνων δὲ ὁμοίως, sic enim vetus interpres: et Aeonibus autem similiter, scilicet virtutem omnem Jesu tradentibus. Haec autem verba, inquit optime Grabius, minus recte Tertullianus ita accepit, quasi Jesu Paracleto suprema potestas omnium, etiam Aeonum, non autem ab Aeonibus data fuerit; unde cap. 16 reddidit: Largito ei Patre universorum Aeonum summam potestatem, subjiciendis eis omnibus, ut in ipso, etc. Ubi tamen legi mallem, subjiciendis ei omnibus, etc.

"And asking the Aeons." Read with Billius and Petavius "and the Aeons too likewise," for so the old translator: "and the Aeons too likewise," namely handing over all power to Jesus. But Tertullian, as Grabe says very well, took these words less correctly, as though supreme power over all things, even over the Aeons, had been given to Jesus the Paraclete, rather than given by the Aeons; hence he rendered, ch. 16: "the Father granting him the supreme power over all the Aeons, all things to be subjected to them, so that in him," etc. Where, however, I would rather read "all things to be subjected to him," etc.

(printed under page 250)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Θεότητες. Hanc vocem Apostoli verbis addidere Valentiniani. Id satis significat Theodoretus, subjungens, ὡς αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν, ut ipsi dicunt: quibus ostendit a solis istis haereticis sic lecta fuisse Pauli verba. Porro Θεοτήτων nomine intelligebant, tum Demiurgum ipsum, tum angelos et archangelos inferioris ogdoadis; quos cum ad imaginem superiorum Aeonum factos esse vellent, ut infra explicat Irenaeus, et veluti secundarios quosdam Aeonas, illis et deitatem affingebant.

"Deities." The Valentinians added this word to the Apostle's words. Theodoret indicates this clearly enough by adding "as they themselves say," showing that Paul's words were read so by these heretics alone. By the name "Deities" they understood both the Demiurge himself and the angels and archangels of the lower Ogdoad; since they held these to have been made after the image of the higher Aeons, as Irenaeus explains below, and as a kind of secondary Aeons, they ascribed deity to them as well.

(printed under page 250)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Τῆς προτέρας. Σοφίας scilicet matris ejus. Tertull. cap. 16: Ab omnibus injuriis passionis expumicat, non eadem negligentia in exterminium discretis, quae acciderat in casibus matris.

"Of the former." That is, of Sophia, her mother. Tertullian, ch. 16: "He scours her clean of all the injuries of passion, these not being separated for extermination with the same neglect as had befallen in the misfortunes of her mother."

(printed under page 250)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Χωρήσει τοῦ συγχέαι. Recte monet Billius, cum veteri interp. legendum esse, χωρὶς συγχέαι, separatim commiscuisse. Sic certe intellexit Tertull. cap. 16; Massaliter solidata defixit seorsum.

"By the advance of mixing." Billius rightly advises that we read, with the old translator, χωρὶς συγχέαι, "mixed them together separately." So certainly Tertullian understood it, ch. 16: "solidified into a mass, he fixed them apart."

(printed under page 250)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 487

Ἀσώματον τὴν ὕλην. Legendum vult Billius ἐνσώματον, ex veteri, inquit, interp. et Tertulliano. Hunc quidem ita legisse facile concesserim; scribit enim, in materiae corporalem paraturam. At non ita vetus interpres. Billium deceperunt edita, in quibus habetur, in corporalem materiam. Sed restituendum ex melioris notae codd. mss. in incor- (continues)

"Incorporeal matter." Billius wants ἐνσώματον ("corporeal") read, from the old translator, he says, and Tertullian. I would readily grant that Tertullian read so, for he writes "into the corporeal outfit of matter." But not so the old translator. Billius was misled by the printed copies, in which "into corporeal matter" is found. But it must be restored, from manuscripts of better repute, as "into incor- (continues)

(printed under page 250)

<!-- IMAGE GAP: the rendered foot images begin below the top of the footnote block. The opening lines of the continuation of note (12) from p. 250, all of notes (4) and (5), and the opening of note (6) are cut off in both images. Re-render this page foot higher and complete before counting as done. --> (printed under page 251)

(4) Congregationes. Graece Συγκρίματα, quae Billius melius vertit, concretiones.

(4) Congregationes [gatherings]. In the Greek, Συγκρίματα, which Billius renders better as concretiones [concretions].

(5) Passibilis. Sic ex Graeca lectione Feuardentius edidit, monita secutus Front. Ducaei. Mss. vero omnes, cum editt. Eras. et Gall. habent passibile. Feuardentii lectionem confirmat Tertull. scribens c. 17, de conversione passionali, id est passionibus obnoxia.

(5) Passibilis [passible]. So Feuardent printed it from the Greek reading, following the advice of Fronton du Duc. But all the manuscripts, together with the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, have passibile. Feuardent's reading is confirmed by Tertullian, who writes in ch. 17 de conversione passionali [of the passional conversion], that is, subject to the passions.

(6) Virtute Salvatorem fabricasse. Sic iterum ex Graeco restituit Feuardentius a Frontone monitus, pro virtutem, quod perperam exstat in editt. Eras. et Gall. et in omnibus mss. nostris. Neque enim virtutem Salvator, sed virtute, seu potentia sua fabricasse omnia dicebatur a Valentinianis.

(6) Virtute Salvatorem fabricasse [that the Saviour fashioned by power]. So again Feuardent, on Fronton's advice, restored it from the Greek, in place of virtutem, which stands wrongly in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and in all our manuscripts. For the Valentinians did not say that the Saviour fashioned a power, but that He fashioned all things by power, that is, by His own might.

<!-- note: The images show the page carrying cols 489/490 (margin letters A–D). Notes (4)–(6) stand in the right-hand note column under col 490, whose Latin text carries their calls; (6) is complete on this page, ending before (7). Note (12) does not appear on this page (the notes here run (1)–(10), (10) running over to the next page), so nothing of it is set. Not set, as not requested: the run-over note at the head of the left note column ("poralem materiam ..."), notes (1)–(3), notes (7)–(10), and the "Billii interpretatio" band (Billius's Latin version of the Greek, a translation, not editors' prose). Italics marked with asterisks; æ written ae. -->

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Τὴν φαύλην τῶν παθῶν, etc. Lego τὴν φαύλην ἐκ τῶν παθῶν, ut legisse videtur interpres, et eamdem particulam ex membro sequenti addo, τήν τε ἐκ τῆς ἐπιστροφῆς, quamvis non legerit interpres. Sed saltem subintelligere debuit.

"The base [substance] of the passions," etc. I read "the base [substance] from the passions," as the translator seems to have read, and I add the same particle in the following clause, "and that from the conversion," although the translator did not read it. But at least he ought to have understood it.

(printed under page 251)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Δεδημιουργηκέναι. Subintellige τὰ πάντα, vel similem vocem, inquit Grabius.

"To have fashioned." Understand "all things," or a similar word, says Grabe.

(printed under page 251)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Τήν τε Ἀχαμώθ, etc. Ex Billio lege, τὴν δὲ Ἀχαμώθ, et linea seq. σὺν αὐτῷ pro ἐν αὐτῷ.

"And Achamoth," etc. Following Billius read "but Achamoth," and in the next line "with him" for "in him."

(printed under page 251)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

[not in the image]

[not in the image]

(printed under page 251)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

[not in the image]

[not in the image]

(printed under page 251)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

[… opening not in the image …] pro virtutem, quod perperam exstat in editt. Eras. et Gall. et in omnibus mss. nostris. Neque enim virtutem Salvator, sed virtute, seu potentia sua fabricasse omnia dicebatur a Valentinianis.

[… opening not in the image …] for "virtutem" ("power," as object), which stands wrongly in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and in all our manuscripts. For the Valentinians did not say that the Saviour fashioned power, but that he fashioned all things by his power, or might.

(printed under page 251)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Concepisse de gratulatione. Sic recte Grabius edidit ex editt. Eras. et Gall. necnon ex mss. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2, concinit et Clarom. In edit. vero Feuard. male inserta particula et ante de, quae sensum omnino turbat. Caeterum Graeca haud feliciter reddidit interpres, nec mirum, cum Billius ipse, vir Graece doctus, fateatur se diutius hic haesisse. Cum enim id primum existimaret, συλλαβεῖν hoc loco idem esse quod concipere, non videbat quaenam esset haec contemplationis angelorum conceptio; cum maxime Achamoth aliquanto inferius non contemplationem peperisse, sed κατὰ τὴν εἰκόνων θεωρίαν fetum edidisse scribatur. Accedebat quod si hic συλλαβεῖν idem esset quod concipere, conceptio congressum antecederet; id quod vel cogitare absurdum est. Sed demum deprehendit vir eruditus, hoc loco συλλαβεῖν τὴν θεωρίαν, nihil aliud significare, quam θεωρεῖν, videre, contemplari, visu assequi seu percipere; quod verissimum est. Quare interpreti vertendum erat: Hanc autem Achamoth a perturbatione liberam, prae gaudio (et non barbare, de gratulatione) lumina ea, quae cum ipso erant, hoc est angelos, quos ipse comites habebat, contemplatam, seu visu apprehendentem, etc.

"Conceived from rejoicing." So Grabe rightly printed it from the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and from the Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2 manuscripts, with which the Clermont also agrees. In Feuardent's edition the particle "et" is wrongly inserted before "de," which wholly confuses the sense. For the rest, the translator rendered the Greek none too happily; no wonder, since Billius himself, a man learned in Greek, admits that he was long stuck here. For as he first thought that συλλαβεῖν here was the same as "to conceive," he could not see what this conception of the contemplation of the angels might be, especially since a little below Achamoth is written to have given birth not to a contemplation but to offspring "according to the contemplation of the images." Besides, if συλλαβεῖν here were the same as "to conceive," the conception would come before the union, which is absurd even to think. But at last the learned man discovered that here συλλαβεῖν τὴν θεωρίαν means nothing other than θεωρεῖν: to see, to contemplate, to grasp or perceive by sight; and this is most true. So the translator should have rendered: "But this Achamoth, freed from perturbation, for joy (and not, barbarously, 'from rejoicing') having contemplated, or grasping by sight, those lights which were with him, that is, the angels whom he had as companions," etc.

(printed under page 251)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Quae cum eo sunt. Sic partim ex Graeco, partim ex codd. Clarom. et Arund. restituimus, pro quaecunque sunt luminum, ut perperam exstat in omnibus aliis cum mss. tum editis. In Graeco siquidem legendum esse σὺν αὐτῷ, ex Billio diximus. In codd. vero Clarom. et Arund. habetur, quae cum sunt, voce eo procul dubio per incuriam scribae omissa. Quare hanc ex Graeco supplere non dubitavimus, id exigente sensu.

"Which are with him." So we have restored it, partly from the Greek, partly from the Clermont and Arundel manuscripts, in place of "whatever there are of lights," which stands wrongly in all the others, manuscript and printed alike. For we have said, following Billius, that in the Greek σὺν αὐτῷ ("with him") should be read. In the Clermont and Arundel manuscripts "quae cum sunt" is found, the word "eo" ("him") beyond doubt omitted through the scribe's carelessness. We have therefore not hesitated to supply it from the Greek, as the sense requires.

(printed under page 251)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Luminum visionem. Mss. Clarom. et Pass. luminum visione.

"The sight of the lights." The Clermont and Passionei manuscripts: "by the sight of the lights."

(printed under page 251)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 490

Delectatam in conspectu eorum. Codd. Clarom. Pass. et Voss. pro conspectu habent conceptu. Sed prior lectio praeferenda videtur. Id enim sibi vult Irenaeus, Achamotham, libidinose aspicientem angelos, concepisse: ἐγκισσήσασαν αὐτούς, quod vertit interpres, delectatam in conspectu eorum; modeste quidem, quamvis non satis ἐνεργῶς, nam paulo major vis verbi ἐγκισσάω. Tertullianus cap. 17: Prae gaudio enim tanti ex infelicitate successus concale- (continues)

"Delighted at the sight of them." The Clermont, Passionei and Voss manuscripts have "conceptu" ("conception") for "conspectu" ("sight"). But the former reading seems preferable. For Irenaeus means that Achamoth conceived while gazing lustfully at the angels: "having conceived a craving for them," which the translator renders "delighted at the sight of them" — modestly, indeed, though not forcefully enough, for the verb ἐγκισσάω has a somewhat stronger force. Tertullian, ch. 17: "For for joy at so great a success out of misfortune, grow- (continues)

(printed under page 251)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Secundum illius imaginem. Vel dele vocem illius, cui nihil prorsus in Graeco respondet; vel ejus loco scribe, illorum. Ad imaginem ipsam dixit Tertullianus.

"According to his image." Either delete the word "illius" ("his"), to which nothing at all answers in the Greek, or write "illorum" ("their") in its place. Tertullian said "after the image itself."

(printed under page 252)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Quoniam ejusdem substantiae ei erat. Fere enim paria et consubstantiva, in alterutrum valere societas naturae negavit, ait Tertull. c. 18.

"Since it was of the same substance with her." "For the fellowship of nature denied that things nearly equal and consubstantial could prevail over one another," says Tertullian, ch. 18.

(printed under page 252)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Et Salvatorem. Expunge has voces quae non exstant in Graeco.

"And the Saviour." Strike out these words, which are not found in the Greek.

(printed under page 252)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Quas dextras..... quas sinistras. Ita editt. Eras. Gall. et Oxon. cum mss. Clarom. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2. Subintellige autem substantias, vel res; seu melius ex Graeco lege, quae dextra .... quae sinistra; et non cum Feuardentio vitiose omnino, quas dextra.... quas sinistra.

"Which [they call] right ..... which left." So the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Oxford, with the Clermont, Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2 manuscripts. Understand "substances" or "things"; or better, from the Greek, read "which [things] right .... which left"; and not, with Feuardent, quite wrongly, "quas dextra .... quas sinistra."

(printed under page 252)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Ea enim quae post eum sunt. Ex Graeco et Tertull. omnia enim quae post eum sunt.

"For the things which are after him." From the Greek and Tertullian: "for all the things which are after him."

(printed under page 252)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Et Apatorem. Hae voces desunt in Clarom. cod. Idem Apatoris cognomen non memorat Tertull. cap. 18.

"And Fatherless." These words are missing in the Clermont manuscript. Tertullian, ch. 18, likewise does not mention the surname "Fatherless."

(printed under page 252)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Patrem. Ita recte ex Voss. (cui consentit Clarom.) et Graeco posuit Grabius pro fratrem.

"Father." So Grabe rightly put it, from the Voss (with which the Clermont agrees) and the Greek, in place of "brother."

(printed under page 252)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Γεγονότων. Sic cod. Reg. et Basileensis Epiphanii editio, cum Gall. et Feuard. Irenaei editt. Unde mirum a Petavio et Grabio scriptum γεγονότως, quod longe pejus est quam γεγονότων. Neutrum quidem bonum est, sed legendum esset cum vet. interp. γεγονός· at donec suffragentur mss. codd., legere praestat γεγονότων.

"Of the things that came to be." So the Royal manuscript and the Basel edition of Epiphanius, with the editions of Irenaeus by Gallasius and Feuardent. Hence it is strange that Petavius and Grabe wrote γεγονότως, which is far worse than γεγονότων. Neither is good; we ought to read, with the old translator, γεγονός ("what came to be"); but until the manuscripts support it, it is better to read γεγονότων.

(printed under page 252)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Μὴ δεδυνῆσθαι αὐτῇ. Mallem cum Petavio, μὴ δεδυνῆσθαι αὐτήν.

"Not to have been able for her." I would prefer, with Petavius, "that she had not been able."

(printed under page 252)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Προβαλεῖν τε τὰ παρὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος μαθήματα. Ut scilicet, ait Grabius, haec formatio non esset tantum κατ' οὐσίαν, sed et κατὰ γνῶσιν, ut supra formatio matris Achamoth distinguebatur.

"And to put forth the teachings from the Saviour." So that, says Grabe, this formation should be not only according to substance but also according to knowledge, as above the formation of the mother Achamoth was distinguished.

(printed under page 252)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Δεξιὰ καλοῦσι... ἀριστερὰ καλοῦσι. Haec a Pythagoreis accepta, qui Plutarcho teste in lib. De Isi et Os. duplex rerum naturalium principium distinguebant; alterum bonum, quod dextrum et lucidum, alterum malum, quod sinistrum et tenebrosum vocabant. Cum enim animalis substantia ex conversionis motu ortum duxisset, hanc bonam et dextram putabant Valentiniani, utpote quae ex bono motu initium duceret; cum vero materia ex passione, id est ex anxietate, tristitia et metu orta esset, hanc malam et sinistram existimabant, quod conturbati, nec sui compotis animi motibus originem acceptam referret. Dextra siquidem pars felix et bene ominata, sinistra infelix et infausta a veteribus dicebatur. Quid tam dextro pede concipis, ut te conatus non poeniteat? Juvenal., sat. X.

"They call right ... they call left." This was taken from the Pythagoreans, who, as Plutarch testifies in the book On Isis and Osiris, distinguished a twofold principle of natural things: one good, which they called right and bright, the other evil, which they called left and dark. For since the animal substance had taken its origin from the movement of conversion, the Valentinians thought it good and "right," as beginning from a good movement; but since matter had arisen from passion, that is, from anxiety, grief and fear, they considered it evil and "left," because it owed its origin to the movements of a troubled mind not master of itself. For the right side was called lucky and of good omen by the ancients, the left unlucky and ill-starred. "What do you undertake on so right a foot that you do not repent of the attempt?" Juvenal, Satire X.

(printed under page 252)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Τὰ κατ' αὐτόν. Τὰ μετ' αὐτόν legi volunt Billius et Petavius; τὰ κάτω αὐτόν, Grabius. Quin vetus interpres et Tertullianus legerint, μετ' αὐτόν, dubitari non potest; scribit enim uterque, post illum.

"The things according to him." Billius and Petavius want "the things after him" read; Grabe, "the things below him." That the old translator and Tertullian read "after him" cannot be doubted; for both write "post illum."

(printed under page 252)

(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Μεμορφωκέναι. Hinc mendum irrepsisse putat Billius in ea Theodoreti verba edit. Sirmond. p. 200, πάντα γὰρ αὐτὸν τὰ ὁρώμενα ἰδιοποιῆσαί φασι, ac pro ἰδιοποιῆσαι legendum esse εἰδοποιῆσαι. At non repugnat vox ἰδιοποιῆσαι Valentinianorum hypothesi, qui paulo post apud Irenaeum dicunt, Demiurgum existimantem omnia se a semetipso in totum fabricasse, sibi finxisse se solum omnia esse; quod est πάντα ἰδιοποιῆσαι, omnia sibi vindicasse, seu omnium creationem sibi tribuisse.

"To have formed." Billius thinks a fault crept in from this into the words of Theodoret, Sirmond's edition p. 200, "for they say he appropriated all visible things," and that for ἰδιοποιῆσαι ("appropriated") we should read εἰδοποιῆσαι ("gave form to"). But the word ἰδιοποιῆσαι does not conflict with the Valentinian hypothesis; for a little later in Irenaeus they say that the Demiurge, thinking he had fashioned all things wholly of himself, imagined that he alone was all things; which is πάντα ἰδιοποιῆσαι, to have claimed all things for himself, or ascribed the creation of all things to himself.

(printed under page 252)

(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 491

Μητροπάτορα καὶ Ἀπάτορα. Μητροπάτορα· (continues)

"Mother-father and Fatherless." "Mother-father": (continues)

(printed under page 252)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Ἐν εἰκόνι, etc. Hic εἰκόνα, et consequenter in textu Latino imaginem pro in imagine, legi vult Pamelius ad c. 19 Tert. adv. Val.; sed frustra. Modo in priori hoc commate subintelligas, ἑαυτήν, in Latino seipsam, in sequentibus vero, ἐν εἰκόνι τετηρηκέναι, in imagine conservasse, apertus est sensus: scilicet, Enthymesin in imagine invisibilis Patris conservasse seipsam incognitam a Demiurgo; Demiurgum autem conservasse in imagine unigeniti Filii, angelos vero et archangelos conservasse in imagine reliquorum Aeonum.

"In the image," etc. Here Pamelius, on ch. 19 of Tertullian Against the Valentinians, wants εἰκόνα ("the image," as object) read, and consequently in the Latin text "imaginem" for "in imagine"; but in vain. Provided that in this first clause you understand ἑαυτήν, in the Latin "seipsam" ("herself"), and in what follows "to have preserved in the image," the sense is plain: namely, that the Enthymesis preserved herself in the image of the invisible Father, unknown to the Demiurge; that she preserved the Demiurge in the image of the only-begotten Son; and the angels and archangels in the image of the remaining Aeons.

(printed under page 253)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Τούτων. Τούτου legit Billius ex veteri interprete, et Tertulliano.

"Of these." Billius reads "of this," from the old translator and Tertullian.

(printed under page 253)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Τοῦ ἀρχεγόνου. Lege cum interprete, τῆς ἀρχεγόνου.

"Of the first-begotten (masc.)." Read with the translator τῆς ἀρχεγόνου (feminine).

(printed under page 253)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Πρώτης. Sic cod. Reg. cum editt. Gall. et Feuard., et sic etiam legit interpres. In caeteris cum Epiphanii, tum Irenaei editt., vitiose πρὸ τῆς.

"First." So the Royal manuscript with the editions of Gallasius and Feuardent, and so too the translator read. In the other editions, of Epiphanius and of Irenaeus alike, wrongly, πρὸ τῆς ("before the").

(printed under page 253)

(5) ‹anchor: οὐκ εἶναι νοητούς› · call in col 494

Οὐκ εἶναι νοητούς. Lege, οὓς εἶναι νοερούς, sic enim legisse videtur interpres; nam vertit, quos intellectuales (non intelligibiles) esse dicunt. Et quidem vocem νοερούς, quae Billio prae νοητούς jure merito arridet, a Tertulliano lectam fuisse perspicuum est: Coelos autem, inquit cap. 20, noeros deputant, et interdum angelos eos faciunt. Hancque lectionem cum apud Irenaeum, tum apud Tertullianum exigit ipsa Valentinianorum hypothesis. Volebant enim coelos intellectuales esse, non eo sensu quod intelligentia tantum comprehenderentur, sed quod sensu et intelligentia praediti essent, utpote qui angeli essent, id est ab angelis regerentur. Hinc paradisum supra tertium coelum existentem, virtute archangelum quartum esse statuebant. Id commentum iterum acceperant a Platonicis, qui coelos anima intellectuali praeditos esse sentiebant. Legantur Plotinus Ennead. II, lib. II, et ea quae in prima Dissertatione nostra de haeresi Valentiniana diximus.

"That they are not intelligible." Read "which are intellectual," for so the translator seems to have read; for he renders "which they say are intellectual" (not "intelligible"). And it is evident that the word νοερούς ("intellectual"), which with full right pleases Billius more than νοητούς, was read by Tertullian: "The heavens," he says, ch. 20, "they account noeric, and sometimes make them angels." The Valentinian hypothesis itself requires this reading, both in Irenaeus and in Tertullian. For they held the heavens to be intellectual, not in the sense that they are grasped by the intellect only, but that they are endowed with sense and intellect, as being angels, that is, governed by angels. Hence they laid down that paradise, existing above the third heaven, was in power a fourth archangel. This invention too they had taken from the Platonists, who held the heavens to be endowed with an intellectual soul. Read Plotinus, Enneads II, book II, and what we have said in our first Dissertation on the Valentinian heresy.

(printed under page 253)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Imagines. Ita Feuard. ex Graeco et Tertulliano. Male autem editt. Eras. et Gall. nec non mss. omnes habent imaginem.

"Images." So Feuardent, from the Greek and Tertullian. But the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, and all the manuscripts too, wrongly have "image."

(printed under page 253)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Hunc autem unigeniti Filii. Scil. in imagine. Sic restituit Feuard. ex cod. vet. et lectione Graeca; delevit vero, hunc autem unigenitum. Codd. omnes mss. recte habent, hunc autem unigeniti; sed male Filium pro Filii.

"But him [in the image] of the only-begotten Son." That is, "in the image." So Feuardent restored it from the old manuscript and the Greek reading, deleting "but him the only-begotten." All the manuscripts rightly have "but him of the only-begotten," but wrongly "Son" (accusative) for "of the Son."

(printed under page 253)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Patrem itaque, etc. Lege ex Graeco, itaque Patrem eum et Deum dicunt factum esse eorum, etc.

"The Father therefore," etc. Read, from the Greek: "therefore they say he became Father and God of those," etc.

(printed under page 253)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Pleroma. In mss. omnibus ac editt. Eras. et Gall. male, Pleromata. Pleroma reposuit Feuardentius ex Graeco.

"Pleroma." In all the manuscripts and the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, wrongly, "Pleromata." Feuardent restored "Pleroma" from the Greek.

(printed under page 253)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 494

Fabricatorem esse, etc. Deleto esse, lege, utpote fabricatorem omnium psychicorum, etc.

"To be the maker," etc. Delete "esse" and read: "as being the maker of all the psychic," etc.

(printed under page 253)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Deo autem similem. Expunge particulam autem, hic repugnante Graeco insertam, ac cum Billio verte, atque item Demiurgum ipsum angelum Deo similem.

"But like God." Strike out the particle "autem" ("but"), inserted here against the Greek, and render with Billius: "and likewise the Demiurge himself an angel like God."

(printed under page 254)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Virtute archangelum quartum. Sic ex Graeco restitui, id nimirum licere mihi arbitratus, quod non semel in praeced. pagina, improbante nemine, sibi sumpsit Feuardentius: cum maxime codices omnes cum editi, tum mss. depravati sint, nec secum invicem consentiant. Omnes quidem habent virtutem, sed manifesto scribarum errato, quorum primi oscitantes cum apice perperam notassent e (quod sphalmatis genus non raro occurrit in mss.), secuti alteri scripserunt virtutem, repugnante licet sensu, et textu Graeco, in quo habetur δυνάμει, non δύναμιν. In caeteris dissentiunt codd. In Feuard. edit. et in ms. Pass. legitur, virtutem archangelum quartum; in Eras. vero pejus, virtutem archangeli Nun, forte quia in cod. ms. quo usus est Erasmus, scriptum erat IVum, quod perperam legit Nun. In Gallas. virtutem archangeli IIII. In codd. Clarom. Voss. Arund. et Merc. 2 habetur duntaxat, virtutem archangelum, deest vero quartum. Caeterum haec longe aliter legisse videtur Tertullianus, apud quem transposita vox virtute, clariorem efficit sensum. Interdum, inquit cap. 20, angelos eos (coelos) faciunt, sicut et ipsum Demiurgum, sicut et paradisum, archangelum quartum, quoniam et hunc supra coelum tertium pangunt, ex cujus virtute sumpserit Adam diversatus illic, etc.

"In power a fourth archangel." So I have restored it from the Greek, judging this permissible for me because Feuardent took the same liberty more than once on the preceding page, with no one objecting: the more so since all the copies, printed and manuscript, are corrupt and do not agree with one another. All indeed have "virtutem" ("power," accusative), but by an evident scribal error: the first copyists carelessly marked the "e" with a stroke above (a kind of slip not seldom met in manuscripts), and the next wrote "virtutem," against both the sense and the Greek text, which has δυνάμει ("in power"), not δύναμιν. In other respects the copies disagree. In Feuardent's edition and the Passionei manuscript is read "virtutem archangelum quartum"; in Erasmus, worse, "virtutem archangeli Nun," perhaps because in the manuscript Erasmus used "IVum" was written, which he wrongly read as "Nun." In Gallasius, "virtutem archangeli IIII." In the Clermont, Voss, Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts there is only "virtutem archangelum," "quartum" being missing. Tertullian, however, seems to have read this quite differently; in him the word "virtute" is transposed, which makes the sense clearer. "Sometimes," he says, ch. 20, "they make them (the heavens) angels, as also the Demiurge himself, as also paradise, a fourth archangel, since they place this too above the third heaven, from whose power Adam took something while he sojourned there," etc.

(printed under page 254)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

In totum. Vel has voces de suo addidit interpres, vel quidpiam iis respondens in textu Graeco omissum est.

"Wholly." Either the translator added these words of his own, or something answering to them has been omitted in the Greek text.

(printed under page 254)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Achamoth. Hic mutila versio. Lege ex Graeco, τῆς Ἀχαμὼθ προβαλλούσης, Achamoth producente.

"Achamoth." The translation is defective here. Read from the Greek, "Achamoth putting forth," "with Achamoth producing."

(printed under page 254)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Semetipsum autem putasse. Ita ex Arund. et Voss. (consentientibus Clarom. et Pass.) juxta Graecum reposuit Grabius, pro et semetipsum putasse, ut in aliis editis legitur. Sed adde ex Graeco, semetipsum autem unum putasse.

"But that he thought himself." So Grabe restored it from the Arundel and Voss (the Clermont and Passionei agreeing), according to the Greek, for "and that he thought himself," as is read in the other printed copies. But add from the Greek: "but that he thought himself alone."

(printed under page 254)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Opinationis. Sic restituo, juxta Graecum τῆς οἰήσεως. Neque enim, quod ait Billius, persuadere mihi possum, interpretem legisse ποιήσεως, quod verterit, operationis. Crediderim potius recte legentem eum scripsisse, opinationis; quod oscitantes scribae mutaverunt in operationis, tum ob utriusque vocis affinitatem, tum etiam quod statim sequatur operationis. Certe legendum esse opinationis, non dubitaverit quisquis attenderit ad ea quae praecedunt, semetipsum autem putasse omnia esse.

"Of the opinion." So I restore it, according to the Greek τῆς οἰήσεως. For I cannot persuade myself, as Billius says, that the translator read ποιήσεως ("making") because he rendered "operationis." I would rather believe that he read correctly and wrote "opinationis," which careless scribes changed to "operationis," both because of the likeness of the two words and because "operationis" follows immediately. That "opinationis" must certainly be read no one will doubt who attends to what precedes: "but that he thought himself to be all things."

(printed under page 254)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 495

Ἠγνοηκέναι αὐτῶν τὰς ἰδέας. Αὐτόν cum veteri interprete legendum esse monent Fronto Duc. et Petavius. Sed αὐτόν, vel αὐτῶν legas, parum interesse puto, cum idem sit utrobique sensus.

"To have been ignorant of their forms." Fronton du Duc and Petavius advise that αὐτόν ("he") should be read, with the old translator. But whether you read αὐτόν or αὐτῶν, I think it matters little, since the sense is the same either way.

(printed under page 254)

(24) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version, §4)› · call in col 498

Isai. XLV, 5, 6; et XLVI, 9.

Isaiah 45:5–6; and 46:9.

(printed under page 255)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Ἐκ δὲ τῆς λύπης. Sic recte in editt. Gall. Feuard. et Oxon. Male vero in Epiphanii editione Parisiensi et Basileensi legitur λοιπῆς, unde et vitiosa versio ibi nata.

"But from the grief." So rightly in the editions of Gallasius, Feuardent and Oxford. But in the Paris and Basel editions of Epiphanius λοιπῆς ("remaining") is wrongly read, from which a faulty translation arose there too.

(printed under page 255)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Υἱόν. Ψυχικὸν υἱόν legit interpres.

"Son." The translator read "psychic son."

(printed under page 255)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Ἅτε ψυχικὸν ὑπάρχοντα. Sic recte cod. Reg. et ita legerunt vetus interpres et Tertull. In omnibus editt. male ψυχικά.

"As being psychic." So rightly the Royal manuscript, and so the old translator and Tertullian read. In all the editions wrongly ψυχικά (neuter plural).

(printed under page 255)

(4) ‹anchor: εἰς τὸν ὑπερουράνιον τόπον› · call in col 498

Εἰς τὸν ὑπερουράνιον τόπον. Postremam vocem, quam legit interpres, ex cod. Reg. addidi. Sed quod spectat ὑπερουράνιον, censet Billius legendum esse ὑπουράνιον, ut opponatur τῷ ὑπερουρανίῳ, in quo mater Achamoth sedem habet. Ast recte observat Fronto Duc. ὑπουράνιον repugnare tum verbis immediate sequentibus, τουτέστιν ἐν τῇ ἑβδομάδι, hoc est in hebdomade, qua voce septem coeli designantur: tum superius dictis, super septem coelos esse Demiurgum. Non stat ergo cum Valentinianorum hypothesi, Demiurgum, quem in septem coelis, vel super septem coelos habitare fin- (continues) <!-- The page prints "gebant" alone, right-aligned, below the last line of the left half: a catchword for the note's continuation on p. 256, which begins "gebant". -->

"Into the place above the heavens." The last word, which the translator read, I have added from the Royal manuscript. But as to ὑπερουράνιον ("above the heavens"), Billius thinks we should read ὑπουράνιον ("below the heavens"), in contrast to the "place above the heavens" in which the mother Achamoth has her seat. But Fronton du Duc rightly observes that ὑπουράνιον conflicts both with the words immediately following, "that is, in the Hebdomad," by which word the seven heavens are meant, and with what was said above, that the Demiurge is above the seven heavens. It is not consistent, then, with the Valentinian hypothesis for the Demiurge, whom they im- (continues)

(printed under page 255)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Usque ad finem. In consummatione enim dicebant, ipsorum matrem, relicto medietatis loco, Pleroma subituram, ut ait Irenaeus infra cap. 7, et lib. II, cap. 29.

"Until the end." For they said that at the consummation their mother would leave the place of the Midst and enter the Pleroma, as Irenaeus says below, ch. 7, and book II, ch. 29.

(printed under page 255)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Quoniam quidem. Vertendum erat, quoniam ergo.

"Since indeed." It should have been rendered "since therefore."

(printed under page 255)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Animalia. Adjective intellige, juxta Graecum ψυχικά.

"Animal." Understand it as an adjective, according to the Greek ψυχικά ("psychic").

(printed under page 255)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Substantiam mutorum animalium, et hominum. Nec accurata, nec integra versio est. Graeca sic reddenda erant: substantiam, ut animas brutorum animantium, et ferarum, et hominum.

"The substance of dumb animals, and of men." The translation is neither accurate nor complete. The Greek should have been rendered thus: "the substance, as the souls of brute animals, and of wild beasts, and of men."

(printed under page 255)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Superiorem eum existentem praescire. Graeca male legit interpres: non mirum si male reddiderit. Legit enim, ut observant Billius et Fronto Duc., ἀνώτερον αὐτὸν ὑπάρχοντα προγιγνώσκειν, cum tamen Epiphanii lectio sensui et hypothesi Valentinianorum magis conveniat. Nam paulo post scribit Irenaeus, Demiurgum ignorare quae sunt supra eum, cum sit animalis. Sic ergo Graeca Epiphanii cum Billio reddenda sunt: Ac propterea eum, quia imbecillior sit, quam ut quae spiritalia sunt cognoscere queat, se solum esse Deum existimasse. Sic accepit Tertullianus cap. 21: Adeo rerum non erat compos, de animali scilicet sensu, invalidus spiritalia accedere, ut se solum ratus concionaretur: Ego Deus et absque me non est.

"That he, being higher, foreknew." The translator misread the Greek; no wonder he rendered it badly. For he read, as Billius and Fronton du Duc observe, "that he, being higher, foreknew," whereas Epiphanius's reading suits the sense and the Valentinian hypothesis better. For a little later Irenaeus writes that the Demiurge is ignorant of what is above him, since he is psychic. So the Greek of Epiphanius should be rendered with Billius: "And therefore, because he is too weak to know the things that are spiritual, he thought that he alone was God." So Tertullian took it, ch. 21: "So little was he master of things, with his animal sense, too feeble to approach spiritual things, that, thinking himself alone, he declaimed: I am God, and beside me there is none."

(printed under page 255)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Et daemonia. Adde ex Graeco: et angelos, malos scilicet.

"And demons." Add from the Greek: "and angels," evil ones, that is.

(printed under page 255)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Creaturam Demiurgi. Ita legendum esse recte censuit Feuardentius, quia Graec. κτίσμα, et Tertullianus, opus Demiurgi, habent. In veteri vero cod. Feuard., in Clarom., Pass. et Ottobon., cum editt. Eras. et Gall. perperam exstat, creatorem.

"The creature of the Demiurge." Feuardent rightly judged that this should be read, because the Greek has κτίσμα ("creature") and Tertullian "the work of the Demiurge." But in Feuardent's old manuscript, in the Clermont, Passionei and Ottoboni, with the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, "creatorem" ("creator") stands wrongly.

(printed under page 255)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 498

Spiritalis malitia. Vertendum erat, spiritus nequitiae.

"Spiritual malice." It should have been rendered "spirit of wickedness."

(printed under page 255)

(13) ‹anchor: in coelestis locus› · call in col 498

Coelestis locus. Leg. ex Graeco, supercoelestis locus; id exigit Valentinianorum hypothesis.

"The heavenly place." Read from the Greek "the place above the heavens"; the Valentinian hypothesis requires it.

(printed under page 255)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Vesaniori. Graece ἀσημοτέρου, quam vocem melius reddidisset interpres, ignobiliori, passione scilicet, non stirpe, ut minus bene scripsit Billius. Hinc Fronto Duc. monet emendandum esse Tertullianum cap. 23, et pro, ex Sophiae utilissimis casibus, legendum vilissimis casibus.

"More insane." Greek ἀσημοτέρου, a word the translator would have rendered better as "more ignoble" — that is, in passion, not in descent, as Billius less well wrote. Hence Fronton du Duc advises that Tertullian, ch. 23, should be emended, and for "from Sophia's most useful misfortunes" read "most worthless misfortunes."

(printed under page 256)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Moestitiae fixionem. Sic ex Graeco et Tertulliano restituo, pro, materiae fixionem, quod perperam habent cum editt. omnes, tum mss. Tertullianus siquidem, cap. 23, recte scribit, si non et istum (aerem) Sophiae moestitia colasset. Existimat Billius ὕλης pro λύπης perperam legisse interpretem. Ego vero censeo interpretem recte et legisse et scripsisse; sed imperitos vel oscitantes scribas male legentes, moestitiae, propter similitudinem litterarum, perperam commutasse in materiae. Quare auctoritate cum textus Graeci, tum Tertulliani motus, evidens sphalma emendare non dubitavi.

"The fixing of grief." So I restore it, from the Greek and Tertullian, in place of "the fixing of matter," which all the editions and manuscripts alike wrongly have. For Tertullian, ch. 23, rightly writes: "if Sophia's grief had not strained this (air) as well." Billius thinks the translator wrongly read ὕλης ("of matter") for λύπης ("of grief"). But I hold that the translator both read and wrote correctly, and that unskilled or careless scribes, misreading "moestitiae" because of the likeness of the letters, wrongly changed it to "materiae." Moved therefore by the authority both of the Greek text and of Tertullian, I have not hesitated to correct an evident slip.

(printed under page 256)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Psychicum. Id est, animalem hominem. Duas enim hominis partes hic statuunt Valentiniani, alteram terrenam, quam ex effusibili et fluida materia condiderat Demiurgus; alteram animalem, quam insufflaverat. Hinc Tertullian. cap. 24: Figulat ita hominem Demiurgus et de afflatu suo animat.

"The psychic." That is, the animal man. For the Valentinians here posit two parts of man: one earthly, which the Demiurge had made from pourable and fluid matter; the other animal, which he had breathed in. Hence Tertullian, ch. 24: "So the Demiurge moulds man and animates him with his breath."

(printed under page 256)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Et hunc esse secundum imaginem, etc. Non attendit interpres ad articulum τόν, qui in Graeco legitur ante κατ' εἰκόνα. Vertendum igitur erat: et hunc esse eum, qui ad imaginem et similitudinem factus sit. Tum vitandae ambiguitatis causa legendum: hylicum quidem secundum imaginem esse..... psychicum vero secundum similitudinem.

"And that this one is according to the image," etc. The translator did not attend to the article τόν, which is read in the Greek before κατ' εἰκόνα. It should therefore have been rendered: "and that this is he who was made after the image and likeness." Then, to avoid ambiguity, read: "the hylic being according to the image ..... but the psychic according to the likeness."

(printed under page 256)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Παντοκράτορα. Lege cum veteri interprete et Tertull. Κοσμοκράτορα: Diabolum enim intelligit Irenaeus.

"Almighty." Read with the old translator and Tertullian "Cosmocrator" ("world-ruler"): for Irenaeus means the devil.

(printed under page 256)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Ἀμηχανίας. Ἀπορίας legit interpres.

"Of helplessness." The translator read "of perplexity."

(printed under page 256)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Τὴν μέν. Lege γῆν μέν cum veteri interp. et Tertull. Similitudine litterarum Γ et T deceptus imperitus scriba, posteriorem scripsit pro priori.

"The one." Read "the earth," with the old translator and Tertullian. Misled by the likeness of the letters Γ and T, an unskilled scribe wrote the latter for the former.

(printed under page 256)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Τοῦ φόβου τῶν δακρύων. Τῶν δακρύων deleri volunt Billius et Petavius. Existimat vero Grabius delendum potius τοῦ φόβου, quoniam, inquit, ex metu, non humida, sed animalis substantia ortum traxisse modo dicebatur; ex lacrymis autem Achamothae omnia humida profluxisse dictum est c. 4. At hic de metu sermo est, non quatenus passio est a tristitia, aporia, et conversione distincta; sed quatenus ipsius ἐκπλήξεως καὶ ἀμηχανίας, consternationis affectio est. Duae enim hic memorantur passionis hujus affectiones, φόβος scilicet et λύπη, quibuscum nihil commune habent τὰ δάκρυα. Quare cum Billio et Petavio, imo et cum vet. interp. omitto τῶν δακρύων, et cum iisdem lego τὴν τοῦ φόβου κίνησιν.

"Of the fear of the tears." Billius and Petavius want "of the tears" deleted. Grabe, however, thinks "of the fear" should rather be deleted, because, he says, it was just said that from fear not the moist but the animal substance took its rise, whereas it was said in ch. 4 that all moist things flowed from the tears of Achamoth. But here fear is spoken of not as a passion distinct from grief, perplexity and conversion, but as an affection of the consternation and helplessness itself. For two affections of this passion are mentioned here, fear and grief, with which the tears have nothing in common. Therefore, with Billius and Petavius, and indeed with the old translator, I omit "of the tears," and with them read "the movement of fear."

(printed under page 256)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Ἐκπεφυκέναι. Lege cum interp. ἐμπεφυκέναι. Hinc Tertullianus cap. 23: His omnibus elementis atque corporibus ignis inflabellatus est.

"To have grown out." Read with the translator ἐμπεφυκέναι ("to be implanted"). Hence Tertullian, ch. 23: "Into all these elements and bodies fire has been fanned."

(printed under page 256)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Ἀπὸ τοῦ κεχυμένου. Legit interpres, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ κεχυμένου. Rectum tamen absque conjunctione καί habere possunt Graeca sensum, si haec, ἀπὸ τοῦ κεχυμένου, etc., per appositionem accipiantur.

"From the poured-out." The translator read "and from the poured-out." Yet the Greek can have a correct sense without the conjunction καί, if the words "from the poured-out," etc., are taken in apposition.

(printed under page 256)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 499

Εἰς τοῦτον ἐμφυσῆσαι τὸν ψυχικόν. Addit Clemens ex Orientali Valentinianorum Didasc. (continues)

"Breathed into him the psychic [man]." Clement adds, from the Eastern Teaching of the Valentinians, (continues)

(printed under page 256)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Ἐκ πνευματικῆς. Legisse videtur interpres, ἅτε ἐκ πνευματικῆς.

"From a spiritual." The translator seems to have read "as being from a spiritual."

(printed under page 257)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Μητρὸς αὐτῆς. Αὐτῶν legit vetus interpres.

"Her mother." The old translator read "their."

(printed under page 257)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Ὁ κατὰ τὴν θεωρίαν τῶν περὶ τὸν Σωτῆρα ἀγγέλων, etc. Notat Grab. quod ex Clemente in Excerptis pag. 789 et 797, partus ille spiritalis Achamothae esset σπέρμα ἀρρενικόν, semen masculinum, ἀπόρροια τοῦ ἄρρενος καὶ ἀγγελικοῦ, utpote effluvium masculini et angelici generis; σπέρμα πνευματικὸν, τῷ Ἀδὰμ ἀδήλως ἐναπαρὲν εἰς τὴν ψυχὴν, semen spiritale a Sophia animae Adami clanculum insitum, ἵνα ᾖ ἡ λογικὴ καὶ οὐρανία ψυχὴ μὴ κενὴ, ἀλλὰ μυελοῦ γέμουσα πνευματικοῦ, ut anima rationalis atque coelestis non esset vacua, sed spiritualis medullae plena. Confer loca si lubet.

"That which [she bore] according to the contemplation of the angels about the Saviour," etc. Grabe notes that according to Clement in the Excerpts, pp. 789 and 797, that spiritual offspring of Achamoth was "a male seed," "an emanation of the male and angelic," as being an outflow of the male and angelic kind; "a spiritual seed, sown unseen into the soul of Adam," a spiritual seed secretly planted by Sophia in Adam's soul, "so that the rational and heavenly soul might not be empty, but full of spiritual marrow." Compare the places if you like.

(printed under page 257)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Τελείου. Adde λόγου ex vet. interp. et Tertull.

"Perfect." Add λόγου ("word," "reason"), from the old translator and Tertullian.

(printed under page 257)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Πνευματικὸς ἀνθρώπων ἀῤῥήτῳ προνοίᾳ. Ex veteri interpr. lege, πνευματικὸς ἄνθρωπος ἀῤῥήτῳ δυνάμει καὶ προνοίᾳ.

"Spiritual of men by ineffable providence." From the old translator read: "the spiritual man by ineffable power and providence."

(printed under page 257)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Καὶ τότε εἶναι τὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἀξιοῦσιν. Sic post veterem interpretem cum Billio lege: καὶ τοῦτον εἶναι τὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς ἄνθρωπον ἀξιοῦσιν.

"And then they hold that the one in them is." Following the old translator, read with Billius: "and they hold that this is the man within them."

(printed under page 257)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Defluitione. Ita Grab. ex codd. Arund. et Merc. 2. Consentit Clarom. In Eras. et Gall. male, definitione. In Feuardentio autem ex vet. cod. satis bene, defluxione; licet prior vox interpretis esse videatur.

"Outflowing." So Grabe, from the Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts; the Clermont agrees. In Erasmus and Gallasius, wrongly, "definitione" ("definition"). In Feuardent, from the old manuscript, well enough, "defluxione"; although the former word seems to be the translator's.

(printed under page 257)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Dermatinam tunicam. Ita ex Graeco reposuit Feuardentius, pro adamantinam, quod perperam legitur non modo in editt. Eras. et Gall., sed et in omnibus mss. Recte vero Tertull. c. 24, reddidit, pelliceam tunicam.

"A tunic of skin." So Feuardent restored it from the Greek, in place of "adamantinam" ("of adamant"), which is wrongly read not only in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius but in all the manuscripts. Tertullian, ch. 24, rightly rendered it "a tunic of hide."

(printed under page 257)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Inspectionem. Sic codd. Clarom. Pass. Arund. et Merc. 2, editt. inspectationem.

"Inspection." So the Clermont, Passionei, Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts; the editions have "inspectationem."

(printed under page 257)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Matri suae spiritalem. Ita reposuit Feuard. a Frontone Duc. monitus. In editt. autem Eras. et Gall. et in mss. codd. Clarom. et Pass. perperam legitur, matris suae spiritalis. Codd. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2 hic accuratos non esse monet Grabius.

"Spiritual like his mother." So Feuardent restored it, on Fronton du Duc's advice. But in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and in the Clermont and Passionei manuscripts "of his spiritual mother" is wrongly read. Grabe notes that the Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2 manuscripts are not accurate here.

(printed under page 257)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Perfectae rationis. Merc. 1, perfectionis, Tertull. pro ratione dixit sermonem; hunc secutus est Billius. Sed praeferenda videtur vet. interpretis lectio, quam habent codices omnes cum editt. tum mss.

"Of perfect reason." Mercer 1 has "of perfection"; Tertullian said "word" for "reason," and Billius followed him. But the old translator's reading seems preferable, which all the copies, printed and manuscript, have.

(printed under page 257)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Insufflationi ejus. Ita Clarom. Pass. et Arund. juxta Graecum τῷ ἐμφυσήματι αὐτοῦ. Merc. 2, insubflationi ejus. At editt. Eras. Gall. et Feuard. minus bene in subflatione ejus; Graecorum sensum obscurius hic reddidit interpres; clarius Billius: Ergo ineffabili, ut ipsi aiunt, virtute ac providentia factum est, ut spiritualis homo, insciente Demiurgo, una cum ipsius insufflatione a Sophia inspersus sit.

"With his inbreathing." So the Clermont, Passionei and Arundel, according to the Greek "with his inbreathing." Mercer 2 has "insubflationi ejus." But the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, less well, "in his breathing-under." The translator rendered the Greek sense rather obscurely here; Billius more clearly: "So it came about by an ineffable power and providence, as they say, that the spiritual man was sprinkled in by Sophia together with the Demiurge's own inbreathing, without his knowing."

(printed under page 257)

(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 502

Ecclesiae. Suae addit Voss., site Pass., forte pro sitae aut suae. Sed nihil ejusmodi habet Graecum.

"Of the Church." The Voss adds "suae" ("his"), the Passionei "site," perhaps for "sitae" or "suae." But the Greek has nothing of the kind.

(printed under page 257)

(25) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version, cap. VI §1)› · call in col 503

Matth. V, 13, 14.

Matthew 5:13–14.

(printed under page 258)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Et hunc esse in semetipsis... uti habeant. Pamelius in cap. 25 Tertull. legi vult: et hunc esse ex semetipsis... uti habeat; sed frustra, repugnat enim textus Graecus.

"And that this is in themselves ... so that they have." Pamelius, on ch. 25 of Tertullian, wants it read "and that this is from themselves ... so that he has"; but in vain, for the Greek text is against it.

(printed under page 258)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Carneum. Ita recte Grabius ex Voss. Merc. 2, et Graeco reposuit. Consentit Clarom. Caet. editt. male carnem.

"Fleshly." So Grabe rightly restored it from the Voss, Mercer 2 and the Greek. The Clermont agrees. The other editions wrongly have "carnem" ("flesh").

(printed under page 258)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Cum sint igitur tria. Sic restituit Feuard. ex veteri codice, uti conjicio, et textu Graeco; consentit Ottobon. In editt. Eras. et Gall. necnon mss. Clarom. Pass. Arund. et Merc. 2, male cum sint igitur tres.

"Since then there are three things." So Feuardent restored it, from the old manuscript, I suppose, and the Greek text; the Ottoboni agrees. In the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, and in the Clermont, Passionei, Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts, wrongly "tres" (masculine/feminine).

(printed under page 258)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Spirationem. Sic edit. Oxon. ex codd. Arund. et Merc. 2, consentiente Clarom.; caeteri cum editi tum mss. inspirationem. Prior lectio praeferenda videtur.

"Breath." So the Oxford edition, from the Arundel and Mercer 2 manuscripts, the Clermont agreeing; the others, printed and manuscript, have "inspiration." The former reading seems preferable.

(printed under page 258)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Illuc redigi quocunque, etc. In Feuard. edit. perperam exstat, illud; in caeteris recte illuc. Sed mallem haec cum Billio clarius vertisset interpres: eo abire, quocunque se inflexerit.

"To be brought back there, wherever," etc. In Feuardent's edition "illud" ("that") stands wrongly; in the others rightly "illuc" ("there"). But I would rather the translator had rendered this more clearly, with Billius: "to go off in whichever direction it has inclined."

(printed under page 258)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Sal. In Feuard. edit. salem; in Eras. et Gall. et ms. Arund. solem.

"Salt." In Feuardent's edition "salem"; in Erasmus and Gallasius and the Arundel manuscript "solem" ("sun").

(printed under page 258)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Animale. In Eras. Gall. et Feuard. editt. Animalem, id est Salvatorem. Sed priorem lectionem confirmat quod immediate sequitur, ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτεξούσιόν ἐστιν, quia suae potestatis est, id est arbitrii libertate praeditum; neque enim hoc ad aliud quam τὸ ψυχικόν referri potest. Tertullianus quidem cap. 26, scripsit, animalem, sed phrasin paulo aliter construxit: in hoc et veterem animalem in mundo repraesentatum, in salutem scilicet animalis. Quae paulo obscuriorum veteris interpr. verborum sensum aperiunt, scilicet, Salvatorem ad hoc animale, utpote arbitrii libertate praeditum venisse, ut ipsi salutem afferret.

"The animal [element]." In the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent "the animal [one]" (masculine), that is, the Saviour. But the former reading is confirmed by what immediately follows, "since it also is its own master," that is, endowed with freedom of choice; for this can refer to nothing but the psychic. Tertullian, ch. 26, did write "animalem," but built the phrase a little differently: "for this purpose too the old animal [Christ] was set forth in the world, namely for the salvation of the animal." This opens the sense of the old translator's somewhat obscure words: that the Saviour came to this animal element, as endowed with freedom of choice, to bring it salvation.

(printed under page 258)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Primitias. Apud Tertull. c. 26, pro primitias legitur prospicientias. Sed monet Latinius, aut Petrus Ciaconius, legendum esse prosicias. Prosicia autem ex Glossario, ut observat Fronto Duc., idem quod ἀκροθίνια. Prositiae, αἱ τῶν θυμάτων ἀπαρχαί, quae significationes interpretis nostri primitiis respondent.

"First-fruits." In Tertullian, ch. 26, "prospicientias" is read for "primitias." But Latinius, or Pedro Chacón, advises that "prosicias" should be read. "Prosicia," according to the Glossary, as Fronton du Duc observes, is the same as ἀκροθίνια ("choice first-portions"); "prositiae," "the first-portions of sacrifices" — meanings that answer to our translator's "first-fruits."

(printed under page 258)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

A dispositione. Sic Graecam vocem οἰκονομία reddere amat interpres, ut passim videre est. Mallem tamen cum caeteris Latinis vertisset, dispensatio. Hic enim sermo est de iis quae Servator in terris gessit ad procurandam humani generis salutem, quorum caput ac principium est Incarnatio; quae Graecis una voce dicuntur οἰκονομία, Latinis dispensatio.

"From the disposition." So the translator likes to render the Greek word οἰκονομία, as may be seen everywhere. I would rather, however, that he had rendered it, with the other Latins, "dispensation." For the subject here is what the Saviour did on earth to procure the salvation of the human race, whose head and beginning is the Incarnation; things which the Greeks call by the one word οἰκονομία, the Latins "dispensatio."

(printed under page 258)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Ἐπιδείξασθαι. Lege cum vet. interp. ἐπιδέξασθαι, non ἐπιδείξασθαι.

"To display." Read with the old translator ἐπιδέξασθαι ("to receive"), not ἐπιδείξασθαι.

(printed under page 258)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Τῶν ψυχικῶν. Legit interpres τῷ ψυχικῷ. Sic etiam legit Tertull. cap. 26, indiguisse enim animalem etiam sensibilium disciplinarum.

"Of the psychic [things]." The translator read "for the psychic [man]." So too Tertullian read, ch. 26: "for the animal [man] needed sensible teachings also."

(printed under page 258)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 503

Δι' ὧν. Διό legi volunt Billius et Petavius. Sed cum δι' ὧν eamdem habeat significationem, retineri nihil vetat.

"Through which." Billius and Petavius want διό ("therefore") read. But since δι' ὧν has the same meaning, nothing forbids keeping it.

(printed under page 258)

(10) ‹anchor: ἐπιδείξασθαι› · call in col 504

Ἐπιδείξασθαι. Lege cum vet. interp. ἐπιδέξασθαι, non ἐπιδείξασθαι.

Ἐπιδείξασθαι ("to show forth"). Read, with the old translator, ἐπιδέξασθαι ("to receive"), not ἐπιδείξασθαι.

(printed under page 258)

(11) ‹anchor: τῶν ψυχικῶν› · call in col 504

Τῶν ψυχικῶν. Legit interpres τῷ ψυχικῷ. Sic etiam legit Tertull. cap. 26, indiguisse enim animalem etiam sensibilium disciplinarum.

Τῶν ψυχικῶν ("of psychical"). The translator read τῷ ψυχικῷ ("the psychical [had need]"). So too Tertullian read, chapter 26: "for the animal had need also of perceptible disciplines."

(printed under page 258)

(12) ‹anchor: Δι' ὧν› · call in col 504

Δι' ὧν. Διό legi volunt Billius et Petavius. Sed cum δι' ὧν eamdem habeat significationem, retineri nihil vetat.

Δι' ὧν ("through which"). Billius and Petau would have Διό ("wherefore") read. But since δι' ὧν has the same meaning, nothing forbids keeping it.

(printed under page 258)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Ἀόρατον καὶ ἀψηλάφητον καὶ παθητόν. Παθητόν quidem recte reposuit Petavius ex cod. Reg. et Epiphanii edit. Basileensi, pro ἀπάθητον, quod perperam exstat in Irenaei editt. Gall. et Feuard. Sed legendum etiam cum vet. interp. ut scite observant Billius et Petav. ὁρατὸν καὶ ψηλαφητόν. Sic enim inferius eadem repetens scribit Irenaeus cap. 9, n. 3, πρὸς τὸ ὁρατὸν γενέσθαι καὶ ψηλαφητόν. Sic legit et Tertullianus cap. 26, corpus Salvatoris ita constructum dicens, quo congressui, et conspectui, et contactui et defunctui (id est vel morti, vel functioni cuilibet, quam exercet homo) ingratis subjaceret. Sic pariter Theodoretus lib. I Haeret. fabul., c. 7, ubi Valentinianorum de Christo sententiam iisdem fere cum Irenaeo verbis describens ait: Ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς οἰκονομίας περιθέσθαι σῶμα ψυχικὴν ἔχον οὐσίαν, ἀῤῥήτῳ δὲ σοφίᾳ πεποιημένον πρὸς τὸ ἁπτὸν καὶ ὁρατὸν γενέσθαι καὶ παθητόν. A dispensatione autem circumpositum ei corpus, animalem habens substantiam, et ineffabili sapientia paratum, ut et tangi et cerni et pati posset.

"Invisible and impalpable and passible." Petavius rightly restored παθητόν ("passible") from the Royal manuscript and the Basel edition of Epiphanius, in place of ἀπάθητον ("impassible"), which stands wrongly in the editions of Irenaeus by Gallasius and Feuardent. But we must also read, with the old translator, as Billius and Petavius aptly observe, "visible and palpable." For Irenaeus, repeating the same thing below, ch. 9, n. 3, writes "so as to become visible and palpable." So too Tertullian read, ch. 26, saying that the Saviour's body was so constructed that it would be subject, against its will, to meeting, to sight, to touch and to "defunctus" (that is, either death or any function a man performs). So likewise Theodoret, Haereticarum fabularum book I, ch. 7, who, describing the Valentinians' opinion of Christ in almost the same words as Irenaeus, says: "From the dispensation a body was put around him, having a psychic substance, but made by ineffable wisdom so as to become tangible and visible and passible." (Then the Latin rendering of the same.)

(printed under page 259)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Καὶ τῆς Ἀχαμώθ, etc. Sic Graeca haec ex vet. interp. emendanda esse censet Billius: Καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς Ἀχαμὼθ μεμυημένους τὰ μυστήρια· ἑαυτοὺς δὲ εἶναι τούτους ὑποτίθενται· Grabius e contrario Latina ad normam Graeci textus corrigenda putat. Sed praeferenda Billii emendatio, utpote quae Valentinianorum haeresi magis accommodata sit. Isti enim spiritales sese jactabant, perfectos et semina electionis, ut paulo inferius scribit Irenaeus, ut qui a matre Achamoth spiritale semen participassent, καὶ ἰδιόκτητον ἄνωθεν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀῤῥήτου καὶ ἀνονομάστου συζυγίας συγκατεληλυθυῖαν ἔχειν τὴν χάριν, seque gratiam ab ineffabili et omni nomine praestantiori conjugatione coelitus directam proprie possidere, qua scilicet a matre sua accepta, mysteriis ejus initiati fuerant. Hinc subditur: διὸ καὶ ἐκ παντὸς τρόπου δεῖν αὐτοὺς ἀεὶ τὸ τῆς συζυγίας μελετᾶν μυστήριον: quapropter ex omni modo oportere eos semper syzygiae meditari mysterium, ut vertit vetus interpres.

"And of Achamoth," etc. Billius thinks this Greek should be emended from the old translator thus: "and initiated into the mysteries by Achamoth; and they suppose that they themselves are these." Grabe, on the contrary, thinks the Latin should be corrected to the standard of the Greek text. But Billius's emendation is preferable, as better suited to the Valentinian heresy. For these men boasted themselves spiritual, "perfect, and the seeds of election," as Irenaeus writes a little below, as having shared in the spiritual seed from the mother Achamoth, "and having grace as their own possession, come down from above from the unspeakable and unnameable syzygy" — that they properly possess grace sent down from heaven from the conjugation ineffable and higher than every name, having received which from their mother they had been initiated into her mysteries. Hence it is added: "therefore they must in every way always practise the mystery of the syzygy," as the old translator renders it.

(printed under page 259)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Ἀγαθήν. Deest in cod. Reg.

"Good." Missing in the Royal manuscript.

(printed under page 259)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Διὰ τὸ φύσει πνευματικοὺς εἶναι σωθήσεσθαι. Utpote qui spiritalem hominem, corruptionis expertem, a matre Achamoth procreatum in seipsis haberent, ut superius dictum est et mox subjicitur. Hinc, Augustino teste lib. De haeres., cap. 6, Gnosticorum omnium hoc erat perversissimum dogma, animarum substantiam, Dei esse naturam. Confer Clementem Alex. lib. II Strom., p. 363, et in Excerptis, p. 798, col. 1.

"That they will be saved because they are spiritual by nature." As having within themselves the spiritual man, free from corruption, begotten of the mother Achamoth, as was said above and is added shortly. Hence, as Augustine testifies, De haeresibus ch. 6, this was the most perverse dogma of all the Gnostics: that the substance of souls is the nature of God. Compare Clement of Alexandria, Stromata book II, p. 363, and the Excerpts, p. 798, col. 1.

(printed under page 259)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Θέλουσιν οἱ αὐτοὶ εἶναι. Lege cum interprete, ὃ θέλουσιν αὐτοὶ εἶναι.

"They wish the same to be." Read with the translator: "which they wish themselves to be."

(printed under page 259)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Ἀδύνατον φθορὰν καταδέξασθαι, κἂν ὁποίαις. Portentosum dogma, quod sceleribus omnibus viam sternebat. Ex eo principio sponte fluebat, ut recte observat Clem. Alexand., l. III Strom., p. 427, quod salutem non operibus ascriberent, sed soli γνώσει operibus destitutae, seu seminis electi privilegio, quae sibi innata esse jactabant; unde sequebatur, eos quidvis agerent, a salute nunquam excidere posse, πάντως γε σωθησομένων φύσει, utpote qui natura salvi futuri essent. Animas enim natura bonas, alias natura malas statuebant, ut inferius scribit Irenaeus; et immutabilem et irreformabilem naturae naturam pronuntiaverunt, inquit Tertull., c. 29. Adde quod principium illud quod Carpocratianis speciatim tribuit Epiphanius haer. 27, post Irenaeum infra c. 25, et Simonianis Irenaeus cap. 24, Gnosticorum omnium fuerit commune, actiones humanas ex se, naturaque sua bonas aut malas non esse, sed ex hominum opinione duntaxat. Ex quo duplici principio caetera quae hic et capp. 25 et seqq. refert Irenaeus, opinionum monstra manant. Sed vide Dissert. nostram 1.

"Cannot receive corruption, in whatever [deeds]." A monstrous dogma, which paved the way for every crime. From this principle it followed of itself, as Clement of Alexandria rightly observes, Stromata book III, p. 427, that they ascribed salvation not to works but to knowledge alone, without works, or to the privilege of the elect seed, which they boasted was inborn in them; from which it followed that, whatever they did, they could never fall from salvation, "as being by all means to be saved by nature," since they would be saved by nature. For they held some souls good by nature and others evil by nature, as Irenaeus writes below; "and they declared the nature of nature unchangeable and unreformable," says Tertullian, ch. 29. Add that the principle which Epiphanius, Heresy 27, following Irenaeus below, ch. 25, ascribes specially to the Carpocratians, and Irenaeus, ch. 24, to the Simonians, was common to all the Gnostics: that human actions are not good or bad of themselves and by their own nature, but only by men's opinion. From this twofold principle flow the monstrous opinions that Irenaeus relates here and in chs. 25 and following. But see our Dissertation 1.

(printed under page 259)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Hoc est homines. Adde spirituales, ex Graeco πνευματικοί.

"That is, men." Add "spiritual," from the Greek πνευματικοί.

(printed under page 259)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 506

Esse autem hos semetip. Clarom. et Pass. esse autem hoc semetip.

"But that these are themselves." The Clermont and Passionei: "but that this is themselves."

(printed under page 259)

(26) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version, §3)› · call in col 507

Gal. V, 21.

Galatians 5:21.

(printed under page 260)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 507

Pro voluptate in honore idolorum, etc. Sic auctoritate Graeci textus et clarissimi Cotelerii in notis ad lib. II Constit. apostol., cap. 61, judicio restitui, pro eo quod in omnibus codd. vitiose legitur: pro voluntate, etc. Haud dubitem enim, quin interpres scripserit voluptate; sed cum veteres non infrequenter scriberent volumptas, volumptate, etc., adeo ut interdum dubites utrum voluntas, voluntate, an voluptas, voluptate, legendum sit; qui secuti sunt, hanc vocem volumptate in Irenaei codd. nacti, imprudenter commutarunt in voluntate. In codd. Clarom. et Ottob. pro in honore idolorum, legitur, in honore eorum, fortasse pro in honore deorum; quae postrema lectio Frontoni Ducaeo magis arrideret. Monet vero laudatus Cotelerius post verbum, abstineant, addendum esse ab eo. Quod autem Graecas voces duas θηριομάχων καὶ μονομαχίας, bestiariorum et gladiatorum, unica voce muneris reddiderit interpres, Latinos auctores secutus est, quibus munus non raro significat spectaculum gladiatorium, aut bestiarum quibuscum homines depugnarent. Sic Sueton. in Caesare: Bestias quoque ad munus populi comparatas trucidaverant. Et ibid.: Edidit spectacula varii generis, munus gladiatorium, ludos etiam regionatim urbe tota. Hinc munerarii dicebantur, qui ejusmodi spectacula exhibebant. Addit denique Grabius interpretem vitioso codice usum, non legisse duas ultimas hujus periodi voces, ἐνίους αὐτῶν. Ut itaque lector rectum plenumque verborum Irenaei sensum percipiat, sequentem eorum dat versionem vir eruditus: ad omnia festiva gentilium oblectamenta, quae in honorem idolorum instituuntur, primi confluunt: adeo ut nonnulli eorum ne quidem abstineant ab eo quod Deo hominibusque maxime invisum est, spectaculo eorum qui cum bestiis pugnant, vel cum hominibus bello congressi eos caedunt.

"For pleasure, in honour of idols," etc. So I have restored it, on the authority of the Greek text and the judgement of the most distinguished Cotelier in his notes on book II of the Apostolic Constitutions, ch. 61, in place of what is wrongly read in all the copies: "pro voluntate" ("for will"), etc. For I would not doubt that the translator wrote "voluptate"; but since the ancients not infrequently wrote "volumptas," "volumptate," etc., so that one sometimes doubts whether "voluntas, voluntate" or "voluptas, voluptate" should be read, later copyists, coming upon the word "volumptate" in the manuscripts of Irenaeus, carelessly changed it to "voluntate." In the Clermont and Ottoboni manuscripts, for "in honour of idols" is read "in their honour," perhaps for "in honour of the gods"; this last reading would please Fronton du Duc more. The Cotelier just praised advises that after the verb "abstineant" ("abstain") "ab eo" ("from that") should be added. That the translator rendered the two Greek words θηριομάχων καὶ μονομαχίας, "of beast-fighters and of gladiators," by the single word "munus," he followed the Latin authors, for whom "munus" not seldom means a gladiatorial show, or one of beasts with which men fought. So Suetonius in the Caesar: "They had also slaughtered the beasts procured for the people's show." And in the same place: "He gave spectacles of various kinds, a gladiatorial show, and also games ward by ward through the whole city." Hence those who put on such spectacles were called "munerarii." Lastly Grabe adds that the translator used a faulty manuscript and did not read the last two words of this sentence, "some of them." So that the reader may grasp the right and full sense of Irenaeus's words, the learned man gives this translation of them: "they are the first to flock to all the festive entertainments of the heathen that are instituted in honour of idols, so that some of them do not even abstain from what is most hateful to God and men, the spectacle of those who fight with beasts, or who meet men in combat and kill them."

(printed under page 260)

(2) ‹anchor: ab iis suasae› · call in col 507

Ab iis suasae. Gr. ὑπ' ἐνίων αὐτῶν ἐξαπατηθεῖσαι, a quibusdam ipsorum circumventae.

"Persuaded by them." Greek: "deceived by some of them," "circumvented by certain of them."

(printed under page 260)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 507

Καὶ γὰρ εἰδωλόθυτα, etc. Id a Nicolaitis Gnosticorum omnium parentibus acceperant Valentiniani. Illi siquidem, August. teste lib. De haer., cap. 5, nec ab iis quae idolis immolantur, cibos suos separabant; et alios ritus gentilium superstitionum non aversabantur. Jam pridem S. Joannes Apocal. II, 14, 20, id crimen in iis haereticis reprehendit, ut observat Irenaeus infra cap. 27.

"For things sacrificed to idols too," etc. The Valentinians had taken this from the Nicolaitans, the parents of all the Gnostics. For these, as Augustine testifies, De haeresibus ch. 5, "did not separate their food from what is sacrificed to idols, and did not shun other rites of the heathen superstitions." Long before, St John, Apocalypse 2:14, 20, rebuked this crime in those heretics, as Irenaeus observes below, ch. 27.

(printed under page 260)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 507

Διαφόρως. Legendum cum interp. ἀδιαφόρως.

"Differently." Read with the translator ἀδιαφόρως ("indifferently").

(printed under page 260)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 507

Οἱ δὲ καὶ ταῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἡδοναῖς, etc. Turpissima Gnosticorum flagitia fusius describit Epiphan., haer. 26. Si quis miretur in tot facinorum putido coeno altius immersos homines mente praeditos volutari potuisse, illius meminerit quod scribit Hieronymus in cap. IX Oseae: difficile haereticum inveniri qui diligat castitatem.

"And others to the pleasures of the flesh," etc. Epiphanius, Heresy 26, describes the foulest outrages of the Gnostics at greater length. If anyone wonders that men endowed with reason could wallow, sunk so deep, in the stinking mire of so many crimes, let him remember what Jerome writes on Hosea ch. 9: "it is hard to find a heretic who loves chastity."

(printed under page 260)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Ἐν χρήσει. Opponitur, inquit Billius, τῇ κτήσει.

"In use." It is opposed, says Billius, to "possession."

(printed under page 261)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Ἀφαιρεθήσεσθαι... προστεθήσεσθαι αὐτοῖς. His verbis, inquit idem vir doctus, alludit ad illud Luc. XIX, 26: Omni habenti dabitur, et abundabit; ab eo autem qui non habet, et quod habet auferetur ab eo.

"Will be taken away ... will be added to them." In these words, says the same learned man, he alludes to Luke 19:26: "To everyone who has it will be given, and he will abound; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away from him."

(printed under page 261)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Ἐν κόσμῳ γενόμενος, et postea, ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ κόσμου γενόμενος. Haec verba, in mundo et de mundo, inquit idem, a Valentinianis petita esse videntur ex cap. XVII Joannis, ubi Christus discipulos suos, in mundo, sed non de mundo esse ait. Quae quidem verba impurissimi homines falso de se usurpabant.

"Having come to be in the world," and later, "but he who came to be from the world." These words, "in the world" and "of the world," says the same, seem to have been taken by the Valentinians from John ch. 17, where Christ says that his disciples are in the world but not of the world. Words which these most impure men falsely applied to themselves.

(printed under page 261)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Κρατηθεὶς γυναικὶ διὰ τὸ ἐν ἐπιθυμίᾳ κρατηθῆναι, etc. Sic recte Gallas. et Feuard. ediderunt. Caeteri, repugnante tum vet. interp. tum ipso sensu, μὴ κρατηθεὶς γυναικὶ... διὰ τὸ μὴ ἐν ἐπιθυμίᾳ κρατηθῆναι, bis addendo particulam negativam μή, quae utrobique delenda erat. Nimirum sensus est, ut probe observat Billius, Valentinianos, licet libidinibus parerent, concupiscentia tamen minime vinci, nec quidquam ex venereo congressu spurcitiei contrahere, quo ipsis aditus ad veritatem intercluderetur; quod spiritales essent, et semina electionis, nec de mundo, quamvis in mundo degerent; reliquos autem, utpote animales, et spiritali semine destitutos, ac de mundo, inquinari, ac per concupiscentiam, a mulieribus, quibuscum rem haberent, victos, ac velut constrictos sic teneri, ut ad veritatem pervenire non possent: his proinde necessarium esse continentiae ac bonarum actionum studium, sibi autem minime, ut mox subjicitur.

"Mastered by a woman, because mastered in desire," etc. So Gallasius and Feuardent rightly printed it. The others, against both the old translator and the sense itself, have "not mastered by a woman ... because not mastered in desire," twice adding the negative particle μή, which should be deleted in both places. The sense, as Billius well observes, is that the Valentinians, though they obeyed their lusts, were in no way overcome by concupiscence, nor contracted from sexual union any defilement by which access to the truth would be shut against them, because they were spiritual and seeds of election, and not of the world, though they lived in the world; whereas the rest, as being psychic, without the spiritual seed, and of the world, were defiled, and, overcome through concupiscence by the women with whom they had to do, were held as if bound, so that they could not reach the truth: for these, therefore, the pursuit of continence and good works was necessary, but not at all for themselves, as is added shortly.

(printed under page 261)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Timemus. Graec. φυλασσομένων, cavemus.

"We fear." Greek φυλασσομένων, "we beware."

(printed under page 261)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Semetipsos autem proprie possidere, etc. Haec, ni fallor, melius verti sic potuissent: semetipsos autem velut suum habere proprium, coelitus ab ineffabili et omni nomine praestantiori devectam gratiam.

"But that they themselves properly possess," etc. Unless I am mistaken, this could better have been rendered: "but that they themselves have as their own property the grace brought down from heaven from the [conjugation] ineffable and higher than every name."

(printed under page 261)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Meditari. Graec. μελετᾶν, hic accipitur pro exercere; quae significatio Latinis haud infrequens est. Sic apud Plautum in Sticho, IV, 34: Simulque ad cursuram meditabor me ad ludos Olympiae. Et Cicero II, De divinat.: Multi etiam naturae vitium meditatione atque exercitatione sustulerunt. Plinius denique lib. XVII, c. 19, de ramo oleae loquens ait, omni tempore edomari meditatione curvandi.

"To meditate." The Greek μελετᾶν is taken here for "to practise"; a meaning not infrequent in Latin. So in Plautus, Stichus IV, 34: "And at the same time I will practise myself at running for the Olympic games." And Cicero, De divinatione II: "Many too have removed a defect of nature by practice and exercise." Finally Pliny, book XVII, ch. 19, speaking of an olive branch, says it is "tamed at all times by the practice of bending."

(printed under page 261)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Insensibilibus. Supp. hominibus. Sed vertendum erat, stolidis, vel rudioribus hominibus.

"To the insensible." Supply "men." But it should have been rendered "to dull," or "to rather unlearned, men."

(printed under page 261)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 510

Ut ei conjungatur. Tum, mistus mulieri, et mox in concupiscentia mistus est mulieri. Videtur interp. legisse, αὐτῇ κερασθῆναι, et κερασθείς, iterumque κερασθῆναι, non κρατηθῆναι, et κρατηθείς. Sed utrumvis legerit, sensum non male reddidit. Graeca tamen sic verti possent: ita ut ea potiatur; et, mulieris amore victus; ac denique, quoniam in concupiscentia mulieri succubuit.

"So as to be joined to her." Then "mixed with a woman," and shortly "he was mixed with a woman in concupiscence." The translator seems to have read "to be mixed with her," and "mixed," and again "to be mixed," not "to be mastered" and "mastered." But whichever he read, he rendered the sense not badly. The Greek, however, could be rendered thus: "so as to possess her"; and "overcome by love of a woman"; and finally "since he succumbed to a woman in concupiscence."

(printed under page 261)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Et hoc esse sponsum et sponsam. De quibus in Scripturis, et speciatim Matth. XXV, 6, Exite obviam sponso. Quotiescunque enim in Scripturis sponsi et sponsae mentio occurrit, id statim ad Salvatorem et Sophiam trahebant nugaces isti.

"And that this is the bridegroom and the bride." Of whom the Scriptures speak, and specially Matthew 25:6, "Go out to meet the bridegroom." For whenever the bridegroom and bride are mentioned in the Scriptures, these triflers at once dragged it to the Saviour and Sophia.

(printed under page 262)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Nymphonem. In Graeco νυμφῶνα, id est thalamum nuptialem, vel cubiculum nuptiale. Tertullianus cap. 31: Hic erit in Scripturis sponsus: et sponsalis Pleroma. Existimat Billius allusisse Valentinianos ad illud Matth. IX, 15: Μὴ δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ νυμφῶνος πενθεῖν, etc. Nunquid possunt filii thalami nuptialis (vulg. sponsi) jejunare?

"The nymphon." In the Greek νυμφῶνα, that is, the nuptial chamber, or bridal bedroom. Tertullian, ch. 31: "This will be the bridegroom in the Scriptures, and the Pleroma the bridal [chamber]." Billius thinks the Valentinians alluded to Matthew 9:15: "Can the sons of the bridal chamber mourn," etc.; "Can the children of the bridal chamber (Vulgate: of the bridegroom) fast?"

(printed under page 262)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Exspoliatos animas. Animales scilicet a Demiurgo animali insufflatas, ut superius dictum est. Nihil enim animale intra Pleroma transibit, ut mox subjicitur. Confer Tertullian. cap. 32.

"Stripped of their souls." That is, of the animal souls breathed in by the animal Demiurge, as was said above. "For nothing animal will pass within the Pleroma," as is added shortly. Compare Tertullian, ch. 32.

(printed under page 262)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Inapprehensibiliter. Id est, ita ut a superioribus potestatibus nec detineri, nec videri queant, ut inferius explicabitur.

"Ungraspably." That is, so that they can be neither held back nor seen by the higher powers, as will be explained below.

(printed under page 262)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Ἡμᾶς καλοὺς ψυχικούς, etc. Haec ita emendanda esse censet Billius: ἡμῖν μὲν, οὓς ψυχικοὺς ὀνομάζουσι, καὶ ἐκ κόσμου εἶναι λέγουσιν, ἀναγκαίαν τὴν ἐγκράτειαν, etc. Sic quidem legisse videtur vetus interpres. Ast Grabius existimat nulla haec emendatione indigere, excepto uno verbo, καλούς, quod omittendum est; nisi forte, inquit, tanquam appositum ad ἡμᾶς accipere, et ita interpretari velis, quod Valentiniani non omnes promiscue catholicos, sed probos solum, psychicorum titulo dignati fuerint. Sed veterem interp. cum Billio sequi praestat.

"Us, good psychics," etc. Billius thinks this should be emended thus: "for us, whom they name psychics and say are of the world, continence is necessary," etc. So indeed the old translator seems to have read. But Grabe thinks it needs no emendation except for the one word καλούς ("good"), which should be omitted; unless, he says, you choose to take it as in apposition to ἡμᾶς and interpret it so: that the Valentinians did not honour all catholics indiscriminately with the title of psychics, but only the upright. But it is better to follow the old translator with Billius.

(printed under page 262)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Ἐνθάδε. Sic cod. Reg. cum omnibus editt. tum Epiphanii, tum Irenaei, excepta Oxoniensi, in qua perperam legitur ἐκθάδε. Legisse tamen videtur interpres, ἔνθα δέ.

"Here." So the Royal manuscript, with all the editions of Epiphanius and of Irenaeus alike, except the Oxford, in which ἐκθάδε is wrongly read. The translator, however, seems to have read "but there."

(printed under page 262)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Μεταβῆναι. Cod. Reg. μεταστῆναι. Epiphanii edit. Basileensis, μεταθῆναι.

"To pass over." The Royal manuscript has μεταστῆναι ("to be removed"); the Basel edition of Epiphanius, μεταθῆναι ("to be transferred").

(printed under page 262)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 511

Εἰσελθόντας, νύμφας. Cod. Reg. εἰσελθεῖν τὰς νύμφας.

"Having entered, brides." The Royal manuscript: "that the brides enter."

(printed under page 262)

(9) ‹anchor: μητρὸς Σοφίας› · call in col 511

Σοφίας. Inferioris scilicet σοφίας, quae ita vocatur πατρωνυμικῶς; a matre ejus Sophia, ut superius dictum est.

"Of Sophia." That is, of the lower Sophia, who is so called patronymically, from her mother Sophia, as was said above.

(printed under page 262)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Διὰ Μαρίας διοδεύσαντα. Vetus hic error, cujus meminit Joannes apost. Epist. I, cap. IV, et quem in omnibus pene epistolis perstringit martyr Ignatius. Communis is fuit plerisque e veteribus haereticis, de quibus fuse disserit Petavius tom. IV Theolog. dogm., edit. Paris. 1650, lib. I, cap. 2 et 4. Legesis. Horum omnium, aut plerorumque saltem, fundamentum id erat, quod ex Valentinianis superius cap. 6 retulit Irenaeus, materiale corpus malum esse, et salutis incapax, ac propterea a Christo assumi non potuisse, qui ea tantum susceperit, quae salvaturus erat.

"Passed through Mary." An old error, which John the Apostle mentions in his first Epistle, ch. 4, and which the martyr Ignatius censures in almost all his letters. It was common to most of the ancient heretics, of whom Petavius treats at length in volume IV of his Theologica dogmata, Paris edition of 1650, book I, chs. 2 and 4. Read it. The foundation of all of them, or at least of most, was what Irenaeus reported from the Valentinians above, ch. 6: that the material body is evil and incapable of salvation, and therefore could not be assumed by Christ, who took up only what he was going to save.

(printed under page 263)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Ὃ ἦν κατεσκευασμένον. Hic Grabius subintelligit σῶμα, ego indefinitum πρᾶγμα. Id enim refertur ad ἐκ τεσσάρων τούτων, scilicet πραγμάτων.

"Which had been constructed." Here Grabe understands σῶμα ("body"); I understand an indefinite πρᾶγμα ("thing"). For it refers to "from these four," namely things.

(printed under page 263)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Ὃ ἦν κατελθοῦσα. In cod. Reg. deest ὃ ἦν.

"Which was, having come down." In the Royal manuscript ὃ ἦν ("which was") is missing.

(printed under page 263)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἀπαθῆ. Legit interpres, καὶ τοῦτον, scilicet Σωτῆρα.

"And this, impassible." The translator read "and him," namely the Saviour.

(printed under page 263)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Refrigerare. Sic mss. omnes, Clarom. Arund. Voss. et Merc. 2, cum Eras. Gall. et Grabio. Feuardentius vero, refrigerari. At interpres refrigerare passive accepit, ut recte observat Grabius, ut patet ex iis quae paulo post sequuntur: Hominem animalem, si meliora elegerit, in loco medietatis refrigeraturum. Et illic quidem futurum pro Graeco praesenti posuit; hic vero contra, praesens pro futuro ἀναπαύσεσθαι.

"To be refreshed." So all the manuscripts, Clermont, Arundel, Voss and Mercer 2, with Erasmus, Gallasius and Grabe. Feuardent, however, has "refrigerari." But the translator took "refrigerare" in a passive sense, as Grabe rightly observes, as is clear from what follows shortly: "that the animal man, if he chooses the better things, will be refreshed in the place of the Midst." And there he put a future for the Greek present; here, on the contrary, a present for the future ἀναπαύσεσθαι ("will rest").

(printed under page 263)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Et comprehendens. Ἐξαφθέν male reddidit interpres, comprehendens, quasi ex ἐξάπτομαι, attingo, attrecto, etc., descenderet: cum tamen ab ἐξάπτομαι, accendo, succendo vel succendor, veniat. Caetera quae sequuntur non felicius ab interprete reddita sunt. Quare haec tu cum Billio vertas: quae cum ad hunc modum contigerint, tum vero docent fore, ut ignis ille qui in mundo delitescit, effulgeat et accendatur, confectaque universa materia, simul quoque cum ea consumatur, atque in nihilum redigatur. Tertull. cap. 32: Tunc, credo, ignis ille erumpet, et universam substantiam depopulatus, ipse quoque decineratis omnibus, in nihilum finietur.

"And laying hold." The translator rendered ἐξαφθέν badly as "comprehendens" ("laying hold"), as though it came from ἐξάπτομαι in the sense "I touch, I handle," etc., whereas it comes from ἐξάπτομαι, "I kindle, I set alight," or "I am set alight." The rest that follows is rendered no more happily by the translator. So render this with Billius: "when these things have happened in this way, then, they teach, that fire which lies hidden in the world will blaze out and be kindled, and, having consumed all matter, will itself be consumed together with it and reduced to nothing." Tertullian, ch. 32: "Then, I suppose, that fire will break out and, having laid waste the whole substance, will itself too, all things reduced to ash, end in nothing."

(printed under page 263)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Et Christum Filium suum, sed et animalem. Ita recte Clarom. cod. juxta Graec. ubi duplex καί legitur. Porro sed et animalem, id est ipsum animalem, utpote ab animali emissum.

"And Christ his Son, but also animal." So rightly the Clermont manuscript, according to the Greek, where καί is read twice. Further, "but also animal" means "himself animal," as having been put forth by the animal [Demiurge].

(printed under page 263)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 514

Primogenitae et primae quaternationis. Sic ex cod. Clarom. restituimus, pro quaternionis, quod in aliis omnibus cum editt. tum mss. legitur. Legendum esse quaternationis jam dudum conjecerat Fronto Duc.

"Of the first-born and first Quaternation." So we have restored it from the Clermont manuscript, in place of "quaternionis," which is read in all the others, printed and manuscript. Fronton du Duc had long since conjectured that "quaternationis" should be read.

(printed under page 263)

(27) ‹anchor: not visible (Billius's version, §3)› · call in col 515

Vide sup. cap. 4.

See above, ch. 4.

(printed under page 264)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Cum traheretur. Feuardentium sequimur, qui sic, monente Frontone Duc., ex Graeco προσαγομένου emendavit. Emendationi suffragatur Ottob. cod. In caeteris cum editt. tum mss. perperam legitur, cum traderetur, male transformata a festinantibus scribis h in d. Hos tamen, errantes licet, sequi Grabio placuit; quamvis tamen in multis aliis locis Feuardentio, ex solo textu Graeco Latinum emendanti, adhaerere non dubitaverit.

"When he was dragged." We follow Feuardent, who on Fronton du Duc's advice emended it so from the Greek προσαγομένου ("being brought"). The Ottoboni manuscript supports the emendation. In the others, printed and manuscript, "when he was handed over" is wrongly read, the h having been badly changed to d by hurrying scribes. Grabe, however, chose to follow these, though they err; although in many other places he did not hesitate to side with Feuardent when he emended the Latin from the Greek text alone.

(printed under page 264)

(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Passus est autem. Graecam vocem λοιπόν praetermisit interpres. Vertendum erat cum Petavio: restat igitur, ut passus sit, etc.

"But he suffered." The translator passed over the Greek word λοιπόν ("it remains"). It should have been rendered with Petavius: "it remains, then, that he suffered," etc.

(printed under page 264)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Distribuebat eas. Ἔτασσεν melius reddidit Billius constituebat. Ms. codex a Frontone Duc. citatus, et Pass. pro eas habent eos, sicut et Graece αὐτούς.

"He distributed them." Billius rendered ἔτασσεν better as "he appointed." The manuscript cited by Fronton du Duc, and the Passionei, have "eos" (masculine) for "eas," as the Greek too has αὐτούς.

(printed under page 264)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

De hoc semine. Lege ab hoc semine. Vide infra notam 11.

"About this seed." Read "by this seed." See note 11 below.

(printed under page 264)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Cum altioris naturae esset. Melius forte legeretur, cum altioris naturae essent.

"Since it was of a higher nature." Perhaps it would better be read "since they were of a higher nature."

(printed under page 264)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Per hunc. Supp. Demiurgum multa de superioribus dicta esse dicunt, et per eas, quae a Demiurgo factae sunt animae, spiritales scilicet, et spiritali semine imbutae, ut mox explicatur. Haec tamen non ad Demiurgum, sed ad semen, de quo mentio proxime facta est, refert Cornarius; et minus bene. Ea vero sic exprimit Petavius, ut Graecorum sensum haudquaquam assequatur: Quin etiam de coelestibus multa disputasse matrem, deque animis, quos vel ille, vel qui ab illo oriundi sunt, produxerunt. Quae si quis cum Graecis contulerit, ab Irenaei sensu aliena esse deprehendet.

"Through him." Supply: "they say that through the Demiurge many things were spoken about the higher [beings], and through those souls which were made by the Demiurge" — spiritual ones, that is, and imbued with the spiritual seed, as is explained shortly. Cornarius, however, refers this not to the Demiurge but to the seed, mentioned just before; and less well. Petavius expresses it in a way that by no means catches the sense of the Greek: "Indeed the mother discoursed much about heavenly things, and about the souls which either he, or those sprung from him, produced." Anyone who compares this with the Greek will find it foreign to Irenaeus's meaning.

(printed under page 264)

(7) ‹anchor: aliquid quidem [per] Salvatorem› · call in col 515

Per Salvatorem. Particulam per, incuria scribarum omissam, auctoritate Graeci textus supplevi, hamulis tamen inclusam. Haud dubium enim quin ἀπὸ τοῦ Σωτῆρος verterit interpres vel per Salvatorem, vel a Salvatore.

"Through the Saviour." The particle "per" ("through"), omitted through the scribes' carelessness, I have supplied on the authority of the Greek text, but enclosed in brackets. For there is no doubt that the translator rendered ἀπὸ τοῦ Σωτῆρος either "per Salvatorem" or "a Salvatore."

(printed under page 264)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ πνευματικόν. Lege cum vet. interpr. καὶ αὐτὸ, ἅτε πνευματικόν.

"And the spiritual itself." Read with the old translator: "and it, as being spiritual."

(printed under page 264)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Ἐπιδείξῃ αὐτοῦ. Lege ἐπιδείξῃ δι' αὐτοῦ.

"Display of him." Read "display through him."

(printed under page 264)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Ἔτασσεν αὐτούς. Αὐτάς cum vet. interpr. et Tertull. cap. 29, melius legeris.

"He appointed them (masc.)." You will do better to read αὐτάς (feminine), with the old translator and Tertullian, ch. 29.

(printed under page 264)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Ὑπὸ τοῦ σπέρματος τούτου. Legendum vult Petavius, ad marginem Epiphanii p. 192, ὑπέρ, non ὑπό, deceptus scilicet veteri interpretatione: multa de hoc semine dicta per prophetas exponunt; quam interpretationem secuti sunt Billius et Gallasius. Sed genuinam esse lectionem ὑπό, demonstrant quae mox subjicit Irenaeus: Dividunt prophetias, aliquid quidem a matre dictum (per prophetas) docentes, aliquid a semine, τὸ δέ τι ἀπὸ τοῦ σπέρματος, aliquid autem ab ipso Demiurgo. Adeo ut certum sit, ex mente Valentinianorum, prophetas non de semine locutos fuisse; sed semen, spiritales scilicet animas iis infusas, per eos interdum vaticinia fudisse.

"By this seed." Petavius, in the margin of Epiphanius p. 192, wants ὑπέρ ("about") read, not ὑπό ("by"), misled of course by the old translation, "they set out many things said about this seed through the prophets"; a translation that Billius and Gallasius followed. But that ὑπό is the genuine reading is shown by what Irenaeus adds shortly: "They divide the prophecies, teaching that some part was spoken by the mother (through the prophets), some by the seed" — "and some from the seed" — "and some by the Demiurge himself." So it is certain that, in the Valentinians' mind, the prophets did not speak about the seed; rather the seed, that is, the spiritual souls infused into them, at times poured out prophecies through them.

(printed under page 264)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 515

Ὑπαρχούσας. Ὑπάρχοντος legi volunt Billius et Petavius, nec dissentit Fronto Duc. Hic tamen suspicatur scriptum ab Irenaeo fuisse, ἅτε ὑψηλοτέρας φύσεως ὑπαρχούσας, ut referatur ad animas spiritali semine imbutas, quae ideo in prophetas, et sacerdotes, et reges constituebantur, quod essent naturae sublimioris; et quae de dictis a semine adduntur, inserta fuisse per parenthesim. Quae quidem doctissimi viri conjectura aliis forsan certa ratio videbitur.

"Being (fem. pl.)." Billius and Petavius want ὑπάρχοντος (masc. sing.) read, and Fronton du Duc does not dissent. He suspects, however, that Irenaeus wrote "as being of a higher nature" (feminine plural), so that it refers to the souls imbued with the spiritual seed, which were therefore appointed prophets, priests and kings because they were of a more sublime nature; and that what is added about the sayings of the seed was inserted as a parenthesis. This conjecture of a most learned man will perhaps seem to others a sure reasoning.

(printed under page 264)

(28) ‹anchor: (Billius's interpretation, under both columns)› · call in col 517-518

Matth. VIII, 9; Luc. VII, 8.

Matt. 8:9; Luke 7:8.

(printed under page 265)

(1) · call in col 518

Χειρῶν. Leg. cum interpr. χειρόνων.

Χειρῶν: read, with the translator, χειρόνων [of the worse].

(printed under page 265)

(2) · call in col 518

Διατετελεκέναι. Legisse videtur interpr. διατετηρηκέναι, sed minus apposite ad auctoris sensum.

Διατετελεκέναι: the translator seems to have read διατετηρηκέναι, but this suits the author's sense less well.

(printed under page 265)

(3) · call in col 518

Προσχωρήσαντα. Commodius forte legeretur προσχωρῆσαι, inquit Fronto Duc.

Προσχωρήσαντα: it would perhaps be better read προσχωρῆσαι, says Fronton du Duc.

(printed under page 265)

(4) · call in col 518

Καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ὑπὸ τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω, etc. Sensum duntaxat, non verba ipsa, sive Matthaei, sive Lucae, citavit Irenaeus.

"For I too have under my own authority," etc.: Irenaeus has quoted only the sense, not the very words, of either Matthew or Luke.

(printed under page 265)

(5) · call in col 518

Τὴν κατὰ τὸν κόσμον οἰκονομίαν. Legisse videtur interpres, τὴν κατ' αὐτὸν κόσμου οἰκοδομίαν, sed perperam.

Τὴν κατὰ τὸν κόσμον οἰκονομίαν [the dispensation in the world]: the translator seems to have read τὴν κατ' αὐτὸν κόσμου οἰκοδομίαν, but wrongly.

(printed under page 265)

(6) ‹anchor: Σὴθ· καὶ ἐκ τούτων› · call in col 518

Καὶ ἐκ τούτων. Lege cum vet. interp. ἵν' ἐπιδείξωσι καὶ ἐκ τούτων.

Καὶ ἐκ τούτων: read, with the old translator, ἵν' ἐπιδείξωσι καὶ ἐκ τούτων [so that they may show from these too].

(printed under page 265)

(7) · call in col 518

Quam Spiritus qui prophetat, etc. Haec ab interprete perperam omnino reddita, verte: sive (non quam, Graece ἢ) spiritum qui prophetat, qui et ipse proprium aliquem motum habeat, sive hominem, sive complexionem (non perplexionem, Graece προσπλοκὴν) pejorum.

"Than the Spirit who prophesies," etc.: this is quite wrongly rendered by the translator; translate: "either (not 'than'; Greek ἢ) the spirit who prophesies, which itself also has some motion of its own, or a man, or the combination (not 'entanglement'; Greek προσπλοκήν) of the worse."

(printed under page 265)

(8) · call in col 518

Ignorantem conservasse. In ed. Oxon. ignoranter conservasse, repugnantibus textu Graeco, mss. nostris, et omnibus aliis editt.; sed forte typographorum lapsus est. Caeterum interpres verbum διατετελεκέναι (si ita legerit, et non διατετηρηκέναι) male reddidit, conservasse; vertendum erat, perstitisse vel perseverasse.

"Ignorant, had kept on": the Oxford edition has "had ignorantly kept," against the Greek text, our manuscripts and all other editions; but perhaps it is a printers' slip. For the rest, the translator rendered the verb διατετελεκέναι (if he read that, and not διατετηρηκέναι) badly as "had kept"; it should have been translated "had persisted" or "had persevered."

(printed under page 265)

(9) · call in col 518

In gaudium ei cessisse. Gr. ἀσμένον αὐτῷ προσχωρήσαντα (forte προσχωρῆσαι), quod vertendum erat, libenti animo ad eum accessisse, vel saltem in gaudio ei accessisse.

"Had gone over to him into joy": Greek ἀσμένον αὐτῷ προσχωρήσαντα (perhaps προσχωρῆσαι), which should have been translated "had gone over to him gladly," or at least "had gone over to him in joy."

(printed under page 265)

(10) · call in col 518

Perfecturum autem eum, etc. Hic iterum culpanda interpretis diligentia. Verte ad literam: Perfecturum autem eum mundi administrationem, non creationem. Sed clarius totam hanc periodum reddidit Billius: eum autem in mundi administrandi munere, quandiu par erit, versaturum; idque praesertim, ut Ecclesiae commodis cura sua atque diligentia consulat, atque ob id etiam quod quidnam sibi praemii paratum sit, perspectum et exploratum habeat, hoc est ut ad matris regionem perveniat.

"And that he would complete," etc.: here again the translator's care is at fault. Translate literally: "and that he would complete the administration of the world," not "the creation." But Billius rendered this whole period more clearly: "that he would be occupied in the office of administering the world as long as is fitting; and this chiefly so that by his care and diligence he may look to the Church's interests, and also because he has seen and ascertained what reward is prepared for him, namely, that he should come to the mother's region."

(printed under page 265)

(11) ‹anchor: spiritale› · call in col 518

Spiritale... animale vero. Sic ex Graeco reposui pro spiritalem, quod in omn. cum editt. tum mss. irrepserat, manifesta scribarum incuria. Interpres enim eadem repetens inferius recte scripsit, animale, spiritale.

"Spiritual ... but the animal": so I have restored from the Greek, in place of "spiritalem," which had crept into all the editions and manuscripts alike through the plain carelessness of scribes. For the translator, repeating the same words further on, wrote correctly "animale, spiritale."

(printed under page 265)

(1) · call in col 519

Jam non secundum unumquemque. Nam, ut observat Grabius, supra cap. 5, tres has naturas, spiritalem, animalem et terrestrem, in Adamo et consequenter in singulis hominibus (quamvis non in eodem gradu) reperiri dixerant Valentiniani. Hinc Tertull. cap. 29: Triformem naturam primordio professi, et tamen inunitam in Adam, inde jam dividunt per singulares generum proprietates; nacti occasionem distinctionis ejusmodi ex posteritate ipsius Adae moralibus quoque differentiis tripartitae.

"No longer one by one": for, as Grabe observes, above in ch. 5 the Valentinians had said that these three natures, the spiritual, the animal and the earthly, are found in Adam and consequently in each man (though not in the same degree). Hence Tertullian, ch. 29: "Having professed a threefold nature at the beginning, and yet united in Adam, they then divide it by the particular properties of the kinds, taking the occasion for such a distinction from the posterity of Adam himself, divided into three by moral differences as well."

(printed under page 266)

(2) · call in col 519

Transire. Gr. χωρήσειν, transiturum.

"To pass over": Greek χωρήσειν, "will pass."

(printed under page 266)

(3) · call in col 519

Spiritalia vero. Sic mss. omnes, cum editt. Eras. Gall. et Oxon. juxta Graecum τὰ δὲ πνευματικά. Feuard. vero perperam, spiritalem. Caetera male reddidit interpres, quia male legit; omisit enim ἃ ἄν, et pro δικαίαις ψυχαῖς παιδευθέντα, legit διὸ καὶ ψυχαὶ παιδευθήσονται, ut alia taceam. Nec accuratae sunt recentiores Billii, Frontonis Duc. et Petavii versiones. Haec ego sic redderem: spiritalia vero, quae ex illo tempore usque nunc animabus justis inseminaverit Achamoth, hic erudita et enutrita, quod pusilla emissa fuerint, post deinde perfectione digna habita, sponsas redditum iri Salvatoris angelis docent.

"But the spiritual": so all the manuscripts, with the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Oxford, following the Greek τὰ δὲ πνευματικά. Feuardent wrongly has "spiritalem." The rest the translator rendered badly because he read badly: he left out ἃ ἄν, and for δικαίαις ψυχαῖς παιδευθέντα he read διὸ καὶ ψυχαὶ παιδευθήσονται, to say nothing of other things. Nor are the more recent versions of Billius, Fronton du Duc and Petau accurate. I would render it thus: "but the spiritual seeds, which from that time until now Achamoth has sown in just souls, having been taught and nourished here, because they were sent out small, and afterwards counted worthy of perfection, they teach will be given as brides to the Saviour's angels."

(printed under page 266)

(4) ‹anchor: abundantius› · call in col 519

Abundantius. Graece περὶ ὅλων, de rebus omnibus, universim. Id est, se prae caeteris mortalibus rerum omnium scientiam perceptam habere gloriantur, ut melius reddidit Billius.

"More abundantly": Greek περὶ ὅλων, "about all things, universally." That is, "they boast that they have grasped the knowledge of all things beyond the rest of mortals," as Billius rendered it better.

(printed under page 266)

(5) · call in col 519

Ἐν μεσότητι. Expunge ambas has voces parenthesi inclusas; frustra enim ab oscitante scriba repetitae sunt.

Ἐν μεσότητι [in the Middle]: strike out both these words enclosed in parentheses; for they were pointlessly repeated by a drowsy scribe.

(printed under page 266)

(6) · call in col 519

Τὰς ψυχικάς. Leg. cum interpr. τὰς ψυχάς.

Τὰς ψυχικάς [the animal ones]: read, with the translator, τὰς ψυχάς [the souls].

(printed under page 266)

(7) · call in col 519

Τοιαύτης δὲ τῆς ὑποθέσεως, etc. Notat Grabius integram hanc sectionem, exceptis ultimis verbis, καὶ ὅσα μὲν ἐν τοῖς, etc., capitulo 8 tractatus De virtute insertam fuisse ab Ephraem Syro, haud expresso quidem Irenaei, sed sub indefinito Sancti cujusdam nomine, sequentem in modum: Καλῶς καὶ μεγάλως ἀπεφήνατό τις τῶν ἁγίων, οὕτω διδάξας, καί φησιν· Τοιαύτης, etc. Quoniam vero Graecus hujus libelli textus nondum lucem vidisse ait vir eruditus, varias lectiones observatione dignas excerpsit ex Bibliothecae Bodleianae cod. Laud., c. 97, quas adnotavit. Idem Ephraemi Tractatus exstat in cod. Bibliothecae Colbertinae optimae notae, inter varia alia Patrum opuscula, cum quo etiam Graeca Irenaei contulimus.

Τοιαύτης δὲ τῆς ὑποθέσεως [such being their system], etc.: Grabe notes that this whole section, except the last words, καὶ ὅσα μὲν ἐν τοῖς, etc., was inserted by Ephrem the Syrian in chapter 8 of his treatise On Virtue, not indeed with Irenaeus named, but under the indefinite name of "a certain saint," as follows: "Finely and grandly did one of the saints declare, teaching thus, and he says: Such," etc. And since that learned man says the Greek text of this little book had not yet seen the light, he extracted from the Bodleian Library's Laud manuscript, c. 97, the variant readings worth noting, and recorded them. The same treatise of Ephrem exists in a manuscript of the Colbertine Library of excellent quality, among various other short works of the Fathers, and with it we too have collated the Greek of Irenaeus.

(printed under page 266)

(8) ‹anchor: σχοινία πλέκειν› · call in col 519

Ἐξ ἄμμου σχοινία πλέκειν. Ex arena funiculos nectere: vulgare proverbium est in eos dictum, qui id frustra conantur, quod nulla ratione possit effici. Quod Valentinianis apprime conveniebat, qui Scripturas obtorto, ut aiunt, collo in suum sensum adducere nitebantur.

"To plait ropes out of sand": a common proverb said of those who attempt in vain what can by no means be done. It fitted the Valentinians exactly, who strove to drag the Scriptures, by the scruff of the neck as they say, into their own sense.

(printed under page 266)

(1) · call in col 522

Τὴν μὲν τάξιν. Ephraem Syrus legit λέξιν.

Τὴν μὲν τάξιν [the order]: Ephrem the Syrian reads λέξιν [the wording].

(printed under page 267)

(2) · call in col 522

Ἀληθείας. In cod. Ephraem Colbert. Ἐκκλησίας.

Ἀληθείας [of the truth]: in the Colbertine manuscript of Ephrem, Ἐκκλησίας [of the Church].

(printed under page 267)

(3) · call in col 522

Λογίων. Colbert. λόγων.

Λογίων [oracles]: the Colbertine has λόγων [words].

(printed under page 267)

(4) · call in col 522

Σοφίᾳ. In Ephraem Colbert. et Bodlei. φαντασίᾳ, nec procul distat vetus interpres, qui legisse videtur φαντάσματι, id est spectro: quod vocabulum, inquit Billius, optime quadrat in hos detortorum Scripturae locorum consarcinatores, qui non solidum quoddam utilis doctrinae corpus afferunt, sed velut spectrum inane confingunt.

Σοφίᾳ [by wisdom]: in Ephrem, Colbertine and Bodleian, φαντασίᾳ [by fancy]; nor is the old translator far off, who seems to have read φαντάσματι, that is, "by a phantom": a word, says Billius, that fits these patchers-together of twisted passages of Scripture perfectly, who bring forward no solid body of useful teaching but fashion a kind of empty phantom.

(printed under page 267)

(5) · call in col 522

Εἰκόνος καλῆς κατεσκευασμένης. Εἰκόνα καλὴν κατεσκευασμένην, addito adverbio ἐπιμελῶς, habet cod. Bodlei. Consentit Colbert., nisi quod pro καλῆς, habet καλῶς.

Εἰκόνος καλῆς κατεσκευασμένης [a fine image having been made]: the Bodleian manuscript has Εἰκόνα καλὴν κατεσκευασμένην, with the adverb ἐπιμελῶς [carefully] added. The Colbertine agrees, except that for καλῆς it has καλῶς.

(printed under page 267)

(6) · call in col 522

Μετενέγκῃ. Sic Petav. et Grabius. Basileensis vero Epiphanii editio, cum aliis Irenaei editt. et Ephraem Bodlei. μετενέγκει. God. Reg. et Colbert. μετενέγκοι.

Μετενέγκῃ [should transfer]: so Petau and Grabe. But the Basel edition of Epiphanius, with other editions of Irenaeus and the Bodleian Ephrem, has μετενέγκει; the Royal manuscript and the Colbertine, μετενέγκοι.

(printed under page 267)

(7) · call in col 522

Μεθαρμόσοι. Ephr., Bodlei. et Colbert. μεθαρμόσει.

Μεθαρμόσοι [should rearrange]: Ephrem, Bodleian and Colbertine, μεθαρμόσει.

(printed under page 267)

(8) · call in col 522

Καὶ ποιήσει. Ephr., Colbert. et Bodlei. καὶ ποιήσας.

Καὶ ποιήσει [and will make]: Ephrem, Colbertine and Bodleian, καὶ ποιήσας [and having made].

(printed under page 267)

(9) · call in col 522

Ταύτην φαύλως κατεσκευασμένην. Ephr., Colbert. et Bodlei. ταύτης φαύλως κατεσκευασμένης.

Ταύτην φαύλως κατεσκευασμένην [this, badly made]: Ephrem, Colbertine and Bodleian, the genitive ταύτης φαύλως κατεσκευασμένης.

(printed under page 267)

(10) · call in col 522

Συντεθείσας. Ephr. Bodl. συντελεσθείσας.

Συντεθείσας [put together]: Ephrem, Bodleian, συντελεσθείσας [completed].

(printed under page 267)

(11) · call in col 522

Ὑπὸ τοῦ ὑστέρου. Ephr., Bodl. et Colb. ὑπὸ τοῦ δευτέρου.

Ὑπὸ τοῦ ὑστέρου [by the later one]: Ephrem, Bodleian and Colbertine, ὑπὸ τοῦ δευτέρου [by the second].

(printed under page 267)

(12) · call in col 522

Fide digne. Sic Clarom., Pass. et Voss. et edit. Oxon. juxta Graecum ἀξιοπίστως. Caeter. editt. fide digna. Cod. Arund. fide dignas.

"Credibly": so the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts and the Oxford edition, following the Greek ἀξιοπίστως. The other editions, "fide digna"; the Arundel manuscript, "fide dignas."

(printed under page 267)

(13) · call in col 522

Supergredientes. Ita in Clarom. Pass. et margine Feuard. melius quam in caeteris, supergradientes.

"Overstepping": so in the Clermont and Passerat manuscripts and Feuardent's margin, better than "supergradientes" in the rest.

(printed under page 267)

(14) · call in col 522

Ex iis quae aptant, etc. Haec ita construe: phantasmati (pro phantasmate) male composito ex iis quae aptant ex Dominicis eloquiis, suae scilicet hypothesi.

"From the things they fit," etc.: construe it thus: "by a phantom (phantasmati for phantasmate) badly put together from what they fit out of the Lord's sayings," namely to their own system.

(printed under page 267)

(15) · call in col 522

Imaginem bonam fabricatam diligenter. Legendum juxta Graecum, imagine bona fabricata diligenter, in ablativo absoluto.

"A fine image carefully made": following the Greek, read "imagine bona fabricata diligenter," in the ablative absolute.

(printed under page 267)

(16) · call in col 522

In regis imaginem. Sic Grabius recte reposuit ex Voss. et Graec. εἰκόνα pro imagine ut reliqua exemplaria habent.

"Into the king's image": so Grabe rightly restored from the Voss manuscript and the Greek εἰκόνα, in place of "imagine," which the other copies have.

(printed under page 267)

(17) · call in col 522

Per gemmarum phantasiam. Melius vertisset interpres, per gemmarum speciem.

"By the fancy of the gems": the translator would have done better to render "by the look of the gems."

(printed under page 267)

(18) · call in col 522

Et suadeat. Male in Feuard. edit. suadet.

"And should persuade": wrongly "suadet" in Feuardent's edition.

(printed under page 267)

(19) ‹anchor: fabulas assuentes› · call in col 522

Fabulas assuentes. Sic recte Clarom. Juxta Graec. μύθους συγκαττύσαντες. In caeteris omnibus tum editt. tum mss. perperam, fabulas assumentes.

"Stitching fables together": so rightly the Clermont manuscript, following the Greek μύθους συγκαττύσαντες. In all the others, editions and manuscripts alike, wrongly "fabulas assumentes" [taking up fables].

(printed under page 267)

(9) · call in col 523

Luc. VIII, 41.

Luke 8:41.

(printed under page 268)

(10) · call in col 523

I Cor. XV, 8.

1 Cor. 15:8.

(printed under page 268)

(11) ‹anchor: propter angelos› · call in col 523

I Cor. XI, 10.

1 Cor. 11:10.

(printed under page 268)

(1) · call in col 523

Auferentes. Sic Feuard. in marg. cum edit. Oxon., Clarom., Pass., Arund. et Voss. juxta Graec. ἀποσπῶντες. Male vero caeterae editt. afferentes.

"Taking away": so Feuardent in the margin, with the Oxford edition and the Clermont, Passerat, Arundel and Voss manuscripts, following the Greek ἀποσπῶντες [tearing away]. The other editions wrongly have "afferentes" [bringing].

(printed under page 268)

(2) · call in col 523

Adaptare volunt. Ita ex Clarom. restituimus juxta Gr. ἐφαρμόζειν βούλονται, pro ut aptare volunt, quod perperam exstat in omnibus aliis cum editt. tum mss.

"They wish to adapt": so we have restored from the Clermont manuscript, following the Greek ἐφαρμόζειν βούλονται, in place of "ut aptare volunt," which stands wrongly in all the others, editions and manuscripts alike.

(printed under page 268)

(3) · call in col 523

Iis qui sunt intra Pleroma. Mallem, iis quae sunt intra Pleroma.

"To those (masc.) who are within the Pleroma": I would prefer "to the things which are within the Pleroma."

(printed under page 268)

(4) · call in col 523

De iis, qui extra Pleroma sunt ipsorum, ad suos insinuare conantur. Legendum ex Graec. iis, quae sunt extra Pleroma ipsorum, adaptare conantur. Pro ad suos, cod. Clarom. habet ad suas.

"Concerning those who are outside their Pleroma, they try to insinuate to their own": read from the Greek, "they try to adapt to the things which are outside their Pleroma." For "ad suos" the Clermont manuscript has "ad suas."

(printed under page 268)

(5) · call in col 523

Novissimum Aeonum. Clarom., Pass. et Ottob. novissimum Aeonem.

"The last of the Aeons": the Clermont, Passerat and Ottobonian manuscripts, "the last Aeon."

(printed under page 268)

(6) · call in col 523

Et per hunc finem. Exitum scilicet vitae Salvatoris. Vide sup. cap. 3.

"And through this end": that is, the close of the Saviour's life. See above, ch. 3.

(printed under page 268)

(7) · call in col 523

Quae est circa Aeonas dispositionis. Vertendum fuerat, quod est circa Aeonas negotii.

"Of the disposition concerning the Aeons": it should have been translated "of the business concerning the Aeons."

(printed under page 268)

(8) · call in col 523

Insistens. Gr. ἐπιστάς, accedens.

"Standing over": Greek ἐπιστάς, "coming up."

(printed under page 268)

(9) · call in col 523

Achamoth quam. Ita recte Clarom. et Arund. cum edit. Oxon. juxta Gr. ἥν, scilicet Achamotham; male vero caet. editt. habent quem.

"Achamoth, whom": so rightly the Clermont and Arundel manuscripts with the Oxford edition, following the Greek ἥν (feminine), namely Achamoth; the other editions wrongly have "quem" (masculine).

(printed under page 268)

(10) · call in col 523

Figuravit. Gr. ἐμόρφωσε, efformavit.

"Figured": Greek ἐμόρφωσε, "formed."

(printed under page 268)

(11) · call in col 523

In abortionis partu. Recte monet Fronto Duc. legendum esse, in abortionis parte; Gr. μοίρᾳ, sorte, id est, instar abortivi fetus. Vid. sup. cap. 4.

"In the birth of an abortion": Fronton du Duc rightly advises reading "in the part of an abortion"; Greek μοίρᾳ, "lot," that is, like an untimely fetus. See above, ch. 4.

(printed under page 268)

(12) · call in col 523

Novissime autem. Cod. Clarom. et editt. Eras. et Gall. novissimo autem.

"But last": the Clermont manuscript and the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, "novissimo autem."

(printed under page 268)

(13) ‹anchor: Et quoniam› · call in col 523

Et quoniam. Al. Quoniam et.

"And since": others, "Since also."

(printed under page 268)

(14) · call in col 523

Ἔπειτα ῥήματα, etc. In Ephr., Bodl. et Colb. legitur: διά τε ῥημάτων, καὶ λέξεων, καὶ παραβολῶν, etc.

Ἔπειτα ῥήματα [then sayings], etc.: in Ephrem, Bodleian and Colbertine, it reads: "through sayings, and words, and parables," etc.

(printed under page 268)

(15) · call in col 523

Μύθοις αὐτῶν. Ephr., Colb. et Bodl. μύθοις ἑαυτῶν.

Μύθοις αὐτῶν [to their fables]: Ephrem, Colbertine and Bodleian, μύθοις ἑαυτῶν [to their own fables].

(printed under page 268)

(16) · call in col 523

Ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πληρώματος. Lege cum interp. τοῖς ἐντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος.

Ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πληρώματος: read, with the translator, τοῖς ἐντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος [to the things within the Pleroma].

(printed under page 268)

(17) · call in col 523

Ὁ Χριστὸς αὐτόν. Lege cum interp. ὁ Χριστὸς αὐτῶν.

Ὁ Χριστὸς αὐτόν: read, with the translator, ὁ Χριστὸς αὐτῶν [their Christ].

(printed under page 268)

(18) · call in col 523

Ἐκτὸς οὔσης. Legendum vult Billius, ἐκτὸς οὔσῃ.

Ἐκτὸς οὔσης [being outside, genitive]: Billius would read ἐκτὸς οὔσῃ (dative).

(printed under page 268)

(19) · call in col 523

Ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κορ. Lege cum interp. ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ πρὸς Κορ.

Ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κορ. [in the letter to the Corinthians]: read, with the translator, ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ πρὸς Κορ. [in the First to the Corinthians].

(printed under page 268)

(20) · call in col 523

Δεῖ τὴν γυναῖκα κάλυμμα ἔχειν. In nostris codicibus I Cor. XI, 10, legitur, ὀφείλει ἡ γυνὴ ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς. At Irenaei codices habere potuisse κάλυμμα, inde conjicio, (continues)

"The woman must have a veil": in our manuscripts of 1 Cor. 11:10 it reads, "the woman ought to have authority on her head." But that Irenaeus's manuscripts could have had "veil," I infer from this, (continues)

(printed under page 268)

(12) · call in col 526

Matth. XXVII, 46.

Matt. 27:46.

(printed under page 269)

(13) · call in col 526

Matth. XXVI, 38.

Matt. 26:38.

(printed under page 269)

(14) · call in col 526

Ibid. v, 39.

Ibid., v. 39.

(printed under page 269)

(15) · call in col 526

Joan. XII, 27.

John 12:27.

(printed under page 269)

(16) · call in col 526

Luc. IX, 57, 58.

Luke 9:57–58.

(17-18) · call in col 526 Ibid. v, 61, 62.

Ibid., vv. 61–62.

(printed under page 269)

(1) · call in col 526

Ὁ Θεός μου. Repetendum cum interp. et sacro Evang. textu, Matth. XXVII, 46: Ὁ Θεός μου, ὁ Θεός μου, εἰς τί, etc.

Ὁ Θεός μου [My God]: repeat it, with the translator and the sacred text of the Gospel, Matt. 27:46: "My God, my God, why," etc.

(printed under page 269)

(2) · call in col 526

Ἕως θανάτου. Haec vel non legit, vel omisit Irenaei interpres.

Ἕως θανάτου [unto death]: Irenaeus's translator either did not read these words or left them out.

(printed under page 269)

(3) · call in col 526

Οὐκ οἶδα. Istae duae voces in hodierno S. Joannis textu non exstant. Forte a Valentinianis Scripturarum corruptoribus ad erroris confirmationem additae fuerant.

Οὐκ οἶδα [I do not know]: these two words are not found in the present text of St John. Perhaps they had been added by the Valentinians, corrupters of the Scriptures, to confirm their error.

(printed under page 269)

(4) · call in col 526

Ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ μου. Εἰς τὸν οἶκόν μου, nostra habent N. Test. exemplaria; sicut et mox, εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, pro, ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ οὐρανῶν. Sed haec forsan ex memoria citabat Irenaeus.

Ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ μου [in my house]: our copies of the New Testament have εἰς τὸν οἶκόν μου [to my house]; as also just after, "for the kingdom of God" instead of "in the kingdom of heaven." But Irenaeus was perhaps quoting these from memory.

(printed under page 269)

(5) · call in col 526

Velamen imposuit Achamoth. Hic deficit interpretatio Latina in omnibus tum editt. tum mss. Ex Graeco lege: Velamen imposuit Achamoth: Mosen id perspicuum fecisse, dum velamen imposuit in faciem suam. Nempe vocum istarum, velamen imposuit, repetitio, festinantibus scribis occasio fuit intermedias omittendi.

"Achamoth put on a veil": here the Latin version is defective in all editions and manuscripts alike. From the Greek read: "Achamoth put on a veil: Moses made this plain when he put a veil on his face." Clearly the repetition of the words "put on a veil" gave hurrying scribes the occasion to leave out what lay between.

(printed under page 269)

(6) · call in col 526

Significasse Dominum dicunt; in hoc quidem, etc. Haec perturbata sunt. Expunge primum haec verba, in hoc quidem quod derelicta est a lumine, quae male huc transtulit oscitans scriba. Tum lege ex Graeco: significasse Dominum dicunt in cruce. Et in hoc quidem, quod dicit: Deus meus, etc.

"They say the Lord signified; in this indeed," etc.: this is in disorder. First strike out the words "in this indeed, that she was forsaken by the light," which a drowsy scribe wrongly moved here. Then read from the Greek: "they say the Lord signified on the cross. And in this indeed, that he says: My God," etc.

(printed under page 269)

(7) · call in col 526

Taedium autem ejus. Melius vertisset interpres, tristitiam autem ejus, Achamothae scilicet.

"And her weariness": the translator would have done better to render "and her sorrow," that is, Achamoth's.

(printed under page 269)

(8) · call in col 526

Quam tristis. Scripsisse videtur interpres, quoniam; sed hanc vocem compendio scriptam male legentes scribae, reposuerunt quam.

"How sorrowful": the translator seems to have written "quoniam" [since]; but scribes, misreading this word written in abbreviation, put "quam."

(printed under page 269)

(9) · call in col 526

Calix. Iste, additum in editt. omnibus, delemus cum Grabio, quia deest in Clarom. Arund. Voss. et Merc. I, neque in Graeco Irenaei textu legitur τοῦτο.

"Cup": "iste" [this], added in all the editions, we delete with Grabe, because it is missing in the Clermont, Arundel, Voss and first Mercier manuscripts, nor is τοῦτο read in Irenaeus's Greek text.

(printed under page 269)

(10) · call in col 526

Et quid dicam nescio. Edit. Oxon. male, et quid faciam nescio.

"And what I shall say I do not know": the Oxford edition wrongly has "and what I shall do I do not know."

(printed under page 269)

(11) · call in col 526

In eo quod responderit dicenti. Vertendum erat: in eo quod responderit interroganti (Graec. τῷ ἐρωτήσαντι) sequar te? vel clarius: in eo quod interroganti; sequar te? responderit. Haec quidem, sequar te, interrogando non proferuntur, neque Luc. IX, 57, neque Matth. VIII, 19. Sed, ut observat Fronto Duc., perperam ista citare potuerunt haeretici, ex quorum myrotheciis proferuntur.

"In that he answered one who said": it should have been translated "in that he answered one who asked (Greek τῷ ἐρωτήσαντι), Shall I follow you?" or more clearly, "in that he answered one asking, Shall I follow you?" These words, "I will follow you," are not put as a question either in Luke 9:57 or in Matt. 8:19. But, as Fronton du Duc observes, the heretics, from whose perfume-boxes they are brought out, may have quoted them wrongly.

(printed under page 269)

(12) · call in col 526

Ire et renuntiare. Ire et, non est in Graec. sive Epiphan. sive S. Lucae textu; sed in hoc, ante, ἀποτάξασθαι, legitur πρῶτον, primum, quod omisit interpres. Caeterum Graeca hujus Evangelii loci perperam vertit Gallasius: permitte mihi ut prius constituam de iis, quae sunt domui meae. Melius vertuntur a vet. Evangelii et Irenaei interpret. renuntiare domesticis; vel iis, qui domi sunt. Nam, inquit Fronto Duc., altera lectio Vulgatae Luc. IX, 61, hinc confirmatur, et illo Tertulliani lib. iv contra Marc. c. 23: Prius suis valedicere parantem prohibet retro spectare. Si vel vulgata Lexica consuluisset Gallasius, didicisset, ἀποτάσσεσθαι, frequenter significare, dimittere, valere jubere, nuntium remittere, etc.

"To go and bid farewell": "to go and" is not in the Greek, either of Epiphanius or of St Luke's text; but in the latter, before ἀποτάξασθαι, πρῶτον, "first," is read, which the translator left out. Moreover Gallasius wrongly translated the Greek of this Gospel passage: "allow me first to settle the things that belong to my house." It is better rendered by the old translator of the Gospel and of Irenaeus, "to bid farewell to my household," or "to those who are at home." For, says Fronton du Duc, the other reading of the Vulgate at Luke 9:61 is confirmed by this, and by that place of Tertullian, Against Marcion IV, 23: "The one preparing first to say farewell to his own he forbids to look back." Had Gallasius consulted even the common lexicons, he would have learned that ἀποτάσσεσθαι often means "to dismiss, to bid farewell, to send word of parting," etc.

(printed under page 269)

(19) · call in col 527

Luc. IX, 60.

Luke 9:60.

(printed under page 270)

(20) · call in col 527

Luc. XIX, 5.

Luke 19:5.

(printed under page 270)

(21) · call in col 527

I Cor. XV, 48.

1 Cor. 15:48.

(printed under page 270)

(22) · call in col 527

I Cor. II, 14.

1 Cor. 2:14.

(printed under page 270)

(23) · call in col 527

Ibid. v, 15.

Ibid., v. 15.

(printed under page 270)

(24) ‹anchor: et massa› · call in col 527

Rom. XI, 16.

Rom. 11:16.

(printed under page 270)

(1) · call in col 527

Noluisse sequi. Vertendum erat, nolentem sequi, ut Graecus textus, et constructio requirunt.

"That he had refused to follow": it should have been translated "refusing to follow," as the Greek text and the construction require.

(printed under page 270)

(2) · call in col 527

Spiritale vero. Scilicet, hominum genus. Sic editt. Eras., Gall. et Feuard. melius quam mss. codd. et editt. Oxon. spiritalem vero: in Graeco siquidem legitur, τὸ δὲ πνευματικόν, et paulo ante scripsit interpres, hylicum quidem, animale vero.

"But the spiritual": that is, the kind of men. So the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, better than the manuscripts and the Oxford edition, "spiritalem vero"; for in the Greek is read τὸ δὲ πνευματικόν, and a little before the translator wrote "the hylic indeed, but the animal."

(printed under page 270)

(3) · call in col 527

Oportet me manere. Post haec adde ex Graeco, hos namque spiritualis generis fuisse tradunt, τούτους γὰρ πνευματικοῦ γένους καταγγέλλουσι γεγονέναι.

"I must stay": after this add from the Greek, "for they relate that these were of the spiritual kind," τούτους γὰρ πνευματικοῦ γένους καταγγέλλουσι γεγονέναι.

(printed under page 270)

(4) · call in col 527

Et fermenti parabolam. In Eras. Gallas. et Feuard. male: et in fermenti parabola.

"And the parable of the leaven": in Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent wrongly, "and in the parable of the leaven."

(printed under page 270)

(5) · call in col 527

Animalis autem. Ex Graeco lege: istud vero: Animalis autem.

"But the animal man": from the Greek read, "and this: But the animal man."

(printed under page 270)

(6) ‹anchor: initia accepit› · call in col 527

Initia accepit. Melius ἀπαρχάς vertisset interpres primitias, ut et superius cap. 6 vertit, quam initia.

"Took the beginnings": the translator would better have rendered ἀπαρχάς as "first-fruits," as he also rendered it above in ch. 6, than as "beginnings."

(printed under page 270)

(7) · call in col 527

Τὸν μέσον εἶναι. Legisse videtur interpres τῶν μέσων; vel, ἐκ τῶν μέσων, sicuti paulo post scribitur, τοῦτον τοῦ ψυχικοῦ γένους γεγονέναι.

Τὸν μέσον εἶναι [that he was the middle one]: the translator seems to have read τῶν μέσων [of the middle ones], or ἐκ τῶν μέσων [from the middle ones], just as is written a little after, "that this man was of the animal kind."

(printed under page 270)

(8) · call in col 527

Ἀλεύρου σάτα. Lege cum interp. ἀλεύρου δὲ σάτα τρία, id enim non modo sensus exigit, sed et textus Graecus paulo ante ita sonat.

Ἀλεύρου σάτα [measures of meal]: read, with the translator, "and three measures of meal," for not only does the sense demand it, but the Greek text a little before also runs so.

(printed under page 270)

(9) · call in col 527

Τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. Τοῦ Θεοῦ addunt nostri Nov. Test. codices. Quod omissum est non solum hoc loco, sed et in Syriaca versione, ac Chrysost. in Comm. ad I Cor. XI. Clemens vero Alex. lib. I Strom., pag. 297, haec Apostol. verba refert, cum vocibus τοῦ Θεοῦ; at lib. v, pag. 557, eadem verba commemorans omittit τοῦ Θεοῦ. Hinc colligit Grabius has voces priori loco a recentiori forte scriba additas fuisse. Sed non satis firma videtur ea conjectura. Clemens enim lib. v Strom. Apostoli verba non ex professo, sed ex memoria citare videtur, tacito etiam Apostoli nomine, et solum quantum ad scopum conducebant, ut scilicet probaret a spiritualibus duntaxat apprehendi posse spiritalia.

Τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος [the things of the Spirit]: our New Testament manuscripts add τοῦ Θεοῦ [of God]. This is left out not only in this place but also in the Syriac version, and in Chrysostom's commentary on 1 Cor. 11. Clement of Alexandria, in Stromata I, p. 297, gives these words of the Apostle with τοῦ Θεοῦ; but in Book V, p. 557, quoting the same words, he leaves out τοῦ Θεοῦ. From this Grabe gathers that these words were perhaps added in the former place by a later scribe. But the conjecture does not seem firm enough. For in Stromata V Clement seems to quote the Apostle's words not formally but from memory, without even naming the Apostle, and only so far as they served his purpose, namely to prove that spiritual things can be grasped only by the spiritual.

(printed under page 270)

(10) ‹anchor: Ὅτι ἰδὼν› · call in col 527

Ὅτι ἰδών. Leg. ὅτι δ' ὧν

Ὅτι ἰδών [that seeing]: read ὅτι δ' ὧν [but that of those whom].

(printed under page 270)

(25) · call in col 530

Luc. XV, 4.

Luke 15:4.

(printed under page 271)

(26) · call in col 530

Ibid. v. 8.

Ibid., v. 8.

(printed under page 271)

(27) ‹anchor: tuum in pace› · call in col 530

Luc. II, 28.

Luke 2:28.

(printed under page 271)

(28) ‹anchor: cum viro vixisse› · call in col 530

Ibid. v. 36.

Ibid., v. 36.

(printed under page 271)

(1) · call in col 530

Ἦν ἡ ἀπαρχή. Sic recte Petavius et Grab.; male vero in Basileensi Epiphanii editione legebatur, ἣν ἡ ἀπαρχή. Quod Graeci codicis mendum non deprehendens Gallasius, in apertissimo loco, ait Billius, tanquam in meridiana luce hallucinatus est; vertit enim: et erant primitiae sanctae. Caeterum vulgata N. Test. exemplaria habent usitatiorem particulam εἰ.

Ἦν ἡ ἀπαρχή [the first-fruit was]: so rightly Petau and Grabe; but the Basel edition of Epiphanius wrongly read ἣν ἡ ἀπαρχή. Not catching this fault in the Greek manuscript, Gallasius, in a perfectly plain place, says Billius, went astray as if in broad daylight; for he translated "and the first-fruits were holy." For the rest, the common copies of the New Testament have the more usual particle εἰ [if].

(printed under page 271)

(2) · call in col 530

Συνεσταλκέναι. Suspicatur Billius mendosum hoc loco fuisse codicem, quo usus est vetus interpres, qui erexisse vertit, quasi in Graeco esset, συναγεστηκέναι. Suspicarer ego potius cum Grabio mendosum esse nostrum codicem, genuinamque lectionem esse συνανεστηκέναι. Id suadere videtur ratio quae continuo subjicitur, ἐπειδὴ ἦν αὐτὸς ζύμη, quoniam erat ipse fermentum; fermenti enim proprium est, non contrahere, sed potius inflare et erigere.

Συνεσταλκέναι [to have drawn together]: Billius suspects that the manuscript used by the old translator was faulty here, since he rendered "had raised up," as if the Greek were συναγεστηκέναι. I would rather suspect, with Grabe, that our manuscript is faulty and that the genuine reading is συνανεστηκέναι [to have raised up with]. The reason added straight after seems to argue for it, ἐπειδὴ ἦν αὐτὸς ζύμη, "since he himself was leaven"; for it is the nature of leaven not to contract but rather to swell and raise.

(printed under page 271)

(3) · call in col 530

Πεπλανημένον. Adde cum vet. interp. πρόβατον. Quam vocem omisit imprudens scriba, quod ab eadem sequens periodus inciperet.

Πεπλανημένον [that had strayed]: add, with the old translator, πρόβατον [sheep]. A careless scribe left out this word because the following period began with the same word.

(printed under page 271)

(4) · call in col 530

Τοῖς πάθεσι. Legit interp. τοῖς πᾶσι πάθεσι.

Τοῖς πάθεσι [in the passions]: the translator read τοῖς πᾶσι πάθεσι [in all the passions].

(printed under page 271)

(5) · call in col 530

Αὐτῷ. Legit interp. τῷ Θεῷ. Nostri vero N. Test. codices habent: Καὶ εὐλόγησε τὸν Θεόν.

Αὐτῷ [to him]: the translator read τῷ Θεῷ [to God]. Our New Testament manuscripts have: "And he blessed God."

(printed under page 271)

(6) ‹anchor: ὡς ἐλθόντος› · call in col 530

Ὡς ἐλθόντος. Leg. ὃς ἐλθόντος.

Ὡς ἐλθόντος [as, when he came]: read ὃς ἐλθόντος [who, when he came].

(printed under page 271)

(7) · call in col 530

Cujus substantiam. Vertendum erat, cujus massam.

"Whose substance": it should have been translated "whose lump."

(printed under page 271)

(8) · call in col 530

Restituitur secundum eos intra Pleroma. Quia nimirum Enthymesis, seu Achamoth a medietatis loco in ipsum Pleroma transiens, matri suae, superiori Sophiae, a qua per Horon separata fuerat, denuo conjungitur. Vid. cap. 2 et 7.

"Is restored, according to them, within the Pleroma": because, of course, the Enthymesis, or Achamoth, passing from the place of the Middle into the Pleroma itself, is joined again to her mother, the higher Sophia, from whom she had been separated by Horos. See chs. 2 and 7.

(printed under page 271)

(9) · call in col 530

Symeon. Pro Symeonem.

"Symeon": for "Symeonem" (accusative).

(printed under page 271)

(10) · call in col 530

In manus suas. Graec. εἰς τὰς ἀγκάλας, in ulnas suas.

"Into his hands": Greek εἰς τὰς ἀγκάλας, "into his arms."

(printed under page 271)

(11) ‹anchor: Nunc remittis› · call in col 530

Remittis. Sic omnes mss. pro dimittis, ut est in editt. Eras. et Gall. ac Feuard. Bibliisque vulgatis.

"You release": so all the manuscripts, for "dimittis," as in the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent and in the common Bibles.

(printed under page 271)

(12) ‹anchor: Et per Annam› · call in col 530

Et per Annam, etc. Lege juxta Graecum: et per Annam illam, quae in Evangelio prophetissa dicitur, septemque annis, etc.

"And through Anna," etc.: read, following the Greek, "and through that Anna who in the Gospel is called a prophetess, and for seven years," etc.

(printed under page 271)

(29) · call in col 531

Luc. VII, 35.

Luke 7:35.

(printed under page 272)

(30) · call in col 531

I Cor. II, 6.

1 Cor. 2:6.

(printed under page 272)

(31) · call in col 531

Ephes. V, 32.

Eph. 5:32.

(printed under page 272)

(1) · call in col 531

In uno ostendentem. Id est, inquit Grabius, unico conjugii mundani exemplo indigitantem conjugationes, ex quibus supremum consistit Pleroma.

"Showing in one": that is, says Grabe, pointing out by the single example of a worldly marriage the conjugal pairs of which the highest Pleroma consists.

(printed under page 272)

(2) · call in col 531

Et omnium generationem. Istae voces male huc translatae sunt. Caetera quae sequuntur, mutila sunt. Quare sic ex Graeco restitue: Adhuc autem Joannem discipulum Domini docent, primam Ogdoadem ipsis verbis significasse, ita dicentes: Joannes discipulus Domini omnium generationem exponere volens, juxta quam Pater omnia produxit, principium aliquod subjecit, etc.

"And the generation of all things": these words have been wrongly moved here. What follows is mutilated. So restore it thus from the Greek: "Further, they teach that John, the disciple of the Lord, indicated the first Ogdoad in so many words, saying thus: John the disciple of the Lord, wishing to set forth the generation of all things, by which the Father produced all things, laid down a certain beginning," etc.

(printed under page 272)

(3) ‹anchor: Domini vocat› · call in col 531

Quod etiam Nun vocat et Filium: et unigenitum Domini vocat. Cod. Clarom. quod etiam nunc vocat et Filium; et unigenitum Deum vocat. Quoad vocem nunc consentiunt Voss. et Merc. 2, quoad vocem Deum, Arund. Sed neque sic legendo Graecorum sensum exprimes, aut textus Latini defectibus medeberis. Lege ergo: Quod et Nun, et Filium unigenitum, et Deum vocavit. Quanquam vox Νοῦς neque in Graeco Irenaei textu, neque in hoc primo Evangelii Joannis capite occurrat.

"Which he also calls Nous and Son, and calls the Only-begotten of the Lord": the Clermont manuscript, "which he now also calls Son, and calls the Only-begotten God." As to the word "nunc," the Voss and second Mercier manuscripts agree; as to the word "Deum," the Arundel. But reading so you will neither express the sense of the Greek nor heal the defects of the Latin text. Read therefore: "Which he also called Nous, and only-begotten Son, and God." Though the word Νοῦς occurs neither in Irenaeus's Greek text nor in this first chapter of John's Gospel.

(printed under page 272)

(4) ‹anchor: Pater praemisit› · call in col 531

Praemisit. Ita Clarom., Pass., Voss. et Feuard. in marg. procul dubio ex vet. cod. At idem Feuard. in textu, cum Eras. et Gall. minus bene, dimisit. Mallem προέβαλε hic, ut alibi solet, vertisset interp., emisit.

"Sent forth beforehand": so the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts, and Feuardent in the margin, doubtless from an old manuscript. But the same Feuardent in his text, with Erasmus and Gallasius, less well, has "dimisit" [let go]. I would rather the translator had rendered προέβαλε here "emisit" [emitted], as he usually does elsewhere.

(printed under page 272)

(5) ‹anchor: Ab hoc› · call in col 531

Ab hoc. Sic Graeca secutus recte emendavit Feuard. pro adhuc, quod in omnibus cum editt. tum mss. codd. perperam legebatur.

"By this one": so Feuardent rightly corrected, following the Greek, in place of "adhuc" [further], which was wrongly read in all the editions and manuscripts alike.

(printed under page 272)

(6) · call in col 531

Καὶ διὰ τῆς Ἄννης ... κηρυσσομένης. Sic cod. Reg. cum Basileensi Epiphan. edit. et Gallas. ac Feuard. Irenaei editt. Petavius vero et Grabius perperam omiserunt τῆς Ἄννης.

"And through Anna ... proclaimed": so the Royal manuscript, with the Basel edition of Epiphanius and the editions of Irenaeus by Gallasius and Feuardent. Petau and Grabe wrongly omitted τῆς Ἄννης.

(printed under page 272)

(7) · call in col 531

Μὲν οὖσα. Lege cum interp. μένουσα unico vocabulo.

Μὲν οὖσα: read, with the translator, μένουσα [remaining], as a single word.

(printed under page 272)

(8) ‹anchor: τουτέστι› · call in col 531

Τουτέστι τοῦ Θεοῦ. Melius legas cum interp. τουτέστι τοῦ Υἱοῦ. Haec enim ad explicationem vocis ἀρχῆς subjiciuntur. Atqui mox dictum est, Filium, ex Valentinianorum hypothesi, esse principium illud, de quo loquitur Joannes ipso Evang. initio; quia in Filio Pater omnia seminali ratione procreavit; ab eo autem productum esse Verbum, a quo omnium Aeonum efformata sit essentia. Filius igitur et Verbum, sua quisque ratione, rerum omnium principium erant, a quo Joannem initium docendi fecisse volebant haeretici illi; ac proinde, ex eorum mente, legendum videtur, τουτέστι τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Λόγου.

"That is, from God": you would read better, with the translator, "that is, from the Son." For these words are added to explain the word ἀρχῆς [beginning]. But it was said just before that, on the Valentinians' system, the Son is that beginning of which John speaks at the very start of the Gospel, because in the Son the Father brought forth all things in the manner of seed; and that by him the Word was produced, by whom the substance of all the Aeons was formed. The Son and the Word therefore, each in his own way, were the beginning of all things, from which those heretics would have it that John began his teaching; and accordingly, by their meaning, it seems one should read "that is, from the Son and from the Word."

(printed under page 272)

(32) · call in col 534

Joan. I, 1, 2.

John 1:1–2.

(printed under page 273)

(33) · call in col 534

Ibid. v, 4.

Ibid., v. 4.

(printed under page 273)

(1) · call in col 534

Οὗτος. Sic recte codex Reg. cum omnibus Irenaei editt. Petavius vero Basileensem Epiphanii editionem perperam secutus scripsit, οὕτως, indeque Latine reddidit: sic erat in principio, etc. Sed mirum quod vir doctissimus hujus editionis mendum hic non deprehenderit, qui paulo post ea ipsa Joannis verba, prout in eadem recte describuntur, recte ipse scripsit: οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ, quamvis aliis intentus iterum verterit: sic erat in principio. Nusquam ita vertit vetus Irenaei interp.; nec ea Joannis verba, sed sensum duntaxat corrumpebant Valentiniani.

Οὗτος [this one]: so rightly the Royal manuscript with all the editions of Irenaeus. Petau, wrongly following the Basel edition of Epiphanius, wrote οὕτως [thus], and so rendered it in Latin "thus it was in the beginning," etc. But it is strange that so learned a man did not catch this edition's fault here, since a little later he himself rightly wrote those very words of John as they are rightly copied in the same edition, οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ, though, intent on other things, he again translated "thus it was in the beginning." Irenaeus's old translator never renders it so; and the Valentinians corrupted not John's words but only their sense.

(printed under page 273)

(2) · call in col 534

Καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἀρχῆς. Recte monent Billius et Petavius legendum esse cum interp. ἐν ἀρχῇ δὲ, καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἀρχῆς.

Καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἀρχῆς [and from the beginning]: Billius and Petau rightly advise reading, with the translator, "and in the beginning, and from the beginning."

(printed under page 273)

(3) · call in col 534

Οὐδ' ἕν. Ab his verbis hanc Joannis periodum claudebant non Valentiniani modo, sed et Macedoniani, quos refellit Chrysostomus homil. iv in Joan., pro suae quique haereseos scopo. Quin et catholici plures, sed catholico sensu, sic claudunt, ut auctor noster lib. I, cap. 22; lib. II, c. 1; lib. III, c. 8, etc.; Cyrillus Alexand. in Joan.; Augustinus Tract. 1 in Joan., et Latinorum interpretum plerique, Estio teste.

Οὐδ' ἕν [not one thing]: with these words not only the Valentinians but also the Macedonians, whom Chrysostom refutes in Homily 4 on John, closed this period of John, each for the aim of his own heresy. Indeed many Catholics too close it so, but in a Catholic sense: as our author, Book I, ch. 22; Book II, ch. 1; Book III, ch. 8, etc.; Cyril of Alexandria on John; Augustine, Tractate 1 on John; and most of the Latin interpreters, as Estius attests.

(printed under page 273)

(4) · call in col 534

Δι' αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι. Sic recte cod. Reg. In omnibus tum Epiph. tum Iren. editt. perperam δι' ἑαυτοῦ. Nam paulo ante scriptum est, δι' αὐτοῦ, et ita habet Evangel. textus.

Δι' αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι [to have come to be through him]: so rightly the Royal manuscript. In all the editions, of Epiphanius and of Irenaeus alike, wrongly δι' ἑαυτοῦ [through himself]. For a little before it is written δι' αὐτοῦ, and so the Gospel text has it.

(printed under page 273)

(5) · call in col 534

Τὴν δὲ ζωὴν ἐν αὐτῷ. Pravum hunc Valentinianorum sensum deridet Origenes, t. III. Comment. in Joan., pag. 71. Lege sis. Eumdem amplectebantur Macedoniani, ut Spiritum sanctum, quem vitam esse dicebant, in rebus creatis adnumerarent. Confutat Chrysost., loco cit.

Τὴν δὲ ζωὴν ἐν αὐτῷ [but the life in him]: Origen mocks this perverse sense of the Valentinians, Commentary on John, tome III, p. 71. Read it, if you please. The Macedonians embraced the same sense, so as to count among created things the Holy Spirit, whom they said was the life. Chrysostom refutes it in the place cited.

(printed under page 273)

(6) · call in col 534

Οἰκειοτέρα ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῷ. Dele particulam ἐν.

Οἰκειοτέρα ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτῷ [is more closely akin in him]: delete the particle ἐν.

(printed under page 273)

(7) · call in col 534

Etenim principium. Ita vetus Feuard. cod., Clarom., Pass. et Voss. cum textu Graeco. Male vero apud Eras. et Gall. etenim in principio. Sed ab his verbis colon claudere debuisset Feuard. nec ea perperam istis adjungere, et Deus erat Verbum, a quibus altera incipit periodus. Sensus autem est: et Verbum erat apud Deum, etenim principium, supp. Deus est. Unde his verbis, etenim principium, subjiciunt rationem Valentiniani, cur Verbum esset apud Deum; quia nimirum Verbum erat apud principium, Filium videlicet; etenim principium Deus est. Ex eo enim quod Verbum esset in principio et ex principio, concludebant Verbum esse apud Deum, quia principium, id est Filius, Deus est.

"For indeed the beginning": so Feuardent's old manuscript and the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts, with the Greek text. But wrongly in Erasmus and Gallasius, "for indeed in the beginning." Feuardent, however, should have closed the clause with these words and not wrongly joined to them "and the Word was God," with which another period begins. The sense is: "and the Word was with God, for indeed the beginning" (supply "is God"). Hence with the words "for indeed the beginning" the Valentinians add the reason why the Word was with God: namely because the Word was with the beginning, that is, the Son; "for indeed the beginning is God." For from the Word's being in the beginning and from the beginning, they concluded that the Word was with God, because the beginning, that is the Son, is God.

(printed under page 273)

(8) · call in col 534

Proximior est, quam. Lege juxta Graecum: proximior (melius propinquior aut familiarior) est illi quam, etc.

"Is nearer than": read, following the Greek, "is nearer (better 'closer' or 'more akin') to him than," etc.

(printed under page 273)

(9) ‹anchor: hominem autem nunc› · call in col 534

Quoniam infert, etc., hominem autem nunc, etc. Melius ex Graeco legas: Quoniam infert, etc., nunc hominem dicens; et Ecclesiam eadem voce significavit. Porro hominem pro plurali, homines (ut in caeteris exemplaribus legitur), ex cod. Voss. et Graeco recte reposuit Grabius.

"Since he adds," etc., "but now the man," etc.: you would read better from the Greek, "Since he adds," etc., "now saying 'man'; and he signified the Church by the same word." Further, Grabe rightly restored "hominem" from the Voss manuscript and the Greek, in place of the plural "homines" (as is read in the other copies).

(printed under page 273)

(34) · call in col 535

Ephes. V, 13.

Eph. 5:13.

(printed under page 274)

(35) · call in col 535

Joan. I, 14.

John 1:14.

(printed under page 274)

(1) · call in col 535

Quod est formatum et manifestatum. Fortasse scripsit interp. quod est formatum esse, et manifestatum, pro formati sunt et manifestati. Sic tu legas juxta Graecum.

"Which is formed and made manifest": perhaps the translator wrote "which is to have been formed and made manifest," for "they were formed and made manifest." Read it so, following the Greek.

(printed under page 274)

(2) · call in col 535

Quod manifestatur. Sic quidem Vulgatae Bibliorum versiones Latinae; sed, ut probe monet Grabius, cum φανερούμενον quasi participium verbi medii in significatione activa accepisse Valentinianos, immediate sequentia clare ostendant; interpres potius, quod manifestat, quam, quod manifestatur, reddere debuisset.

"That which is made manifest": so indeed the Latin versions of the Vulgate Bible; but, as Grabe rightly advises, since what immediately follows shows clearly that the Valentinians took φανερούμενον as a participle of the middle verb in an active sense, the translator ought rather to have rendered "that which makes manifest" than "that which is made manifest."

(printed under page 274)

(3) · call in col 535

Dicens intra Pleroma. Lege ex Graeco, dicit totius Pleromatis. Vide not. 10.

"Saying within the Pleroma": read from the Greek, "he says, of the whole Pleroma." See note 10.

(printed under page 274)

(4) · call in col 535

Qualis erat Unigeniti. Sic recte Clarom. cod. juxta Graec. οἵα ἦν ἡ τοῦ μονογενοῦς. Eras., Gall. et Feuard. quasi unigeniti; Oxon. ex cod. Voss. pejus, quasi erat unigeniti.

"Such as was the Only-begotten's": so rightly the Clermont manuscript, following the Greek οἵα ἦν ἡ τοῦ μονογενοῦς. Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, "as of the only-begotten"; the Oxford edition from the Voss manuscript, worse, "as was of the only-begotten."

(printed under page 274)

(5) · call in col 535

Plenum gratia. Codicem Arundel. sequimur, caeteris omnibus cum editt. tum mss. hic praeponendum. Illum quidem postposuit Grabius; quia vocem Graecam πλήρης ad δόξαν cum Billio et Petavio referre maluit, quam ad Λόγον; sed doctissimos alioqui viros Graecorum sensum hic assecutos non fuisse, in notis ad textum Graecum demonstravimus. Quare distinctionis causa, haec, cujus gloriam vidimus.... data est ei, parenthesi includimus.

"Full of grace": we follow the Arundel manuscript, to be preferred here to all the others, editions and manuscripts alike. Grabe set it aside, because with Billius and Petau he preferred to refer the Greek word πλήρης to δόξαν [glory] rather than to Λόγον [Word]; but in the notes to the Greek text we have shown that these otherwise most learned men did not grasp the sense of the Greek here. So, for clarity, we enclose these words, "whose glory we saw .... was given to him," in parentheses.

(printed under page 274)

(6) · call in col 535

Dicit autem sic, etc. usque ad, diligenter igitur. Billium, alioqui non indiligentem, in nova versione sua haec praetermisisse, cum Frontone Duc. miror. Sed paulo magis stupenda Gallasii hallucinatio; dum enim novis vocibus studet, iis repudiatis, quibus utitur Vulgata nostra, nec evangelico sensui, nec Grammaticae legibus consulit. Vertit enim; et Sermo factus est caro, et habitavit in nobis, et contemplati vidimus gloriam ut Unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis. Sive enim plenum ad vocem sermo, sive ad gloriam referat, soloecismi culpa tenetur. Atqui si vel Erasmum consuluisset, ab eo didicisset vocem Graecam πλήρης referri ad Λόγος, non ad δόξαν; ac proinde vertendum erat: et Sermo factus est caro, et habitavit in nobis, etc., plenus gratiae et veritatis.

"And he speaks thus," etc., down to "carefully therefore": with Fronton du Duc I wonder that Billius, otherwise not careless, passed over these words in his new version. But Gallasius's blunder is rather more astonishing; for in his zeal for new words, rejecting those our Vulgate uses, he respects neither the Gospel's sense nor the laws of grammar. He translated: "and the Discourse was made flesh, and dwelt in us, and having beheld we saw the glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father, full (neuter) of grace and truth." Whether he refers "plenum" to the word "sermo" or to "gloriam," he is guilty of a solecism. Yet had he consulted even Erasmus, he would have learned from him that the Greek word πλήρης refers to Λόγος, not to δόξαν; and so it should have been translated: "and the Discourse was made flesh, and dwelt in us," etc., "full (masculine) of grace and truth."

(printed under page 274)

(7) ‹anchor: plenum gratia et veritate› · call in col 535

Plenum gratia et veritate. Sic ex Graeco emendamus, imo ex ipso Irenaei interp. qui lib. v, cap. 18, sic reddidit. In caeteris autem omnibus cum editt. tum mss. legitur, plena, sed manifesto scribarum lapsu. Si enim ea gratiae veritatisque plenitudo ad gloriam referretur, in Graeco scribendum fuisset πλήρη, et in Latino plenam. Vide not. 13.

"Full of grace and truth": so we correct from the Greek, indeed from Irenaeus's own translator, who rendered it so in Book V, ch. 18. In all the others, editions and manuscripts alike, "plena" is read, but by an obvious slip of the scribes. For if that fullness of grace and truth were referred to the glory, πλήρη would have had to be written in the Greek, and "plenam" in the Latin. See note 13.

(printed under page 274)

(8) · call in col 535

Ὁμωνύμως τῷ Ἀνθρώπῳ. Τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ deleri vult Billius; sed retineri nihil vetat.

Ὁμωνύμως τῷ Ἀνθρώπῳ [by the same name as the Man]: Billius would delete τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ; but nothing forbids keeping it.

(printed under page 274)

(9) · call in col 535

Εἰρῆσθαι. Melius legas cum interp. εἴρηται.

Εἰρῆσθαι [to have been said]: you would read better, with the translator, εἴρηται [it has been said].

(printed under page 274)

(10) · call in col 535

Παντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος. Vet. interpres non παντός, sed ἐντός legisse videtur. Vertit enim, intra. Sed prior lectio praeferenda. Salvatorem enim totius Pleromatis fructum esse jam non semel dixerunt Valentiniani.

Παντὸς τοῦ πληρώματος [of the whole Pleroma]: the old translator seems to have read not παντός but ἐντός; for he translated "within." But the former reading is to be preferred. For the Valentinians have said more than once that the Saviour is the fruit of the whole Pleroma.

(printed under page 274)

(11) · call in col 535

Ἁρμόσας. Μορφώσας legi mavult Billius, quia vertit interpres, formans. Sed ἁρμόσας eodem recidit.

Ἁρμόσας [having fitted]: Billius prefers to read μορφώσας [having formed], because the translator rendered "forming." But ἁρμόσας comes to the same thing.

(printed under page 274)

(12) · call in col 535

Ὑπ' αὐτῆς. Monet Grab. interpretem recte legisse, ὑπ' αὐτῶν, quia vertit, ab eis. Sed eadem ratione legisset interpres linea praeced. ὑπ' αὐτῶν, qui vertit etiam, ab eis. Non attendebat, puto, vir doctus, ab eis utrobique referri ad tenebras, et ὑπ' αὐτῆς ad τὴν σκοτίαν.

Ὑπ' αὐτῆς [by it, feminine singular]: Grabe advises that the translator rightly read ὑπ' αὐτῶν [by them], because he rendered "by them." But by the same reasoning the translator would have read ὑπ' αὐτῶν in the preceding line, where he also rendered "by them." The learned man did not notice, I think, that "by them" in both places refers to "tenebrae" [darkness, plural in Latin], and ὑπ' αὐτῆς to τὴν σκοτίαν.

(printed under page 274)

(13) ‹anchor: πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας› · call in col 535

Πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας. Vel lege (continues)

Πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας [full of grace and truth]: either read (continues)

(printed under page 274)

(1) · call in col 538

Καὶ αὐτός. Lege αὐτάς, cum interprete.

Καὶ αὐτός [and he himself]: read αὐτάς [them], with the translator.

(printed under page 275)

(2) · call in col 538

Τὰς λέξεις. Aliquam aliam vocem cum copula καί hic legisse videtur interpres; vertit enim, astutias et dictiones.

Τὰς λέξεις [the expressions]: the translator seems to have read here some other word with the copula καί; for he translated "the cunning and the expressions."

(printed under page 275)

(3) · call in col 538

Ἐπεζεύχθη. Mallem ἐπέζευξε. Sed forte verbum ἐπιζεύγνυμαι in activa significatione accepit Irenaeus.

Ἐπεζεύχθη [was joined on]: I would prefer ἐπέζευξε [he joined on]. But perhaps Irenaeus took the verb ἐπιζεύγνυμαι in an active sense.

(printed under page 275)

(4) · call in col 538

Ptolemaeus quidem ita. Haec in Graeco desiderantur.

"Ptolemy indeed thus": these words are missing in the Greek.

(printed under page 275)

(5) · call in col 538

Constare. Gr. συνιστάνειν, quod vertendum erat, commendare seu approbare. Inde enim Scripturis calumniam struebant Valentiniani, quod fictiones suas ex eis approbare adniterentur.

"To establish": Greek συνιστάνειν, which should have been translated "to commend" or "to prove." For the Valentinians slandered the Scriptures in this, that they strove to prove their fictions from them.

(printed under page 275)

(6) ‹anchor: deinde commemoratus› · call in col 538

Deinde commemoratus. In Eras., Gall. et Ottob. de re commemoratus, forte pro dein recommemoratus; sic enim habet cod. Clarom.

"Then having remembered": in Erasmus, Gallasius and the Ottobonian manuscript, "de re commemoratus," perhaps for "dein recommemoratus" [then having recalled]; for so the Clermont manuscript has it.

(printed under page 275)

(1) · call in col 539

Cum possent et illa. Legendum puto: cum possent et illae, scilicet feminae conjuges seu Aeones feminae.

"Since those (neuter) too could": I think one should read "since those (feminine) too could," namely the female consorts, or female Aeons.

(printed under page 276)

(2) · call in col 539

Non remisisset. Gr. οὐκ ἂν ἀφῆκεν, non dimisisset.

"He would not have sent back": Greek οὐκ ἂν ἀφῆκεν, "he would not have let go."

(printed under page 276)

(3) · call in col 539

Unum Deum exponente. Adde ex Gr. unum Deum omnipotentem.

"Setting forth one God": add from the Greek, "one God almighty."

(printed under page 276)

(4) · call in col 539

Secundum verisimile. Sic ex Graeco, ita exigente sensu, restituo, pro secundum verisimilem, ut habent omnes codd. manifesto scribarum lapsu: male scilicet apice notata litera e, quod frequens in mss. occurrit.

"Plausibly": so I restore from the Greek, as the sense demands, in place of "secundum verisimilem," which all the manuscripts have by an obvious slip of the scribes: the letter e, that is, wrongly marked with a stroke, which occurs often in manuscripts.

(printed under page 276)

(5) · call in col 539

Quem scilicet. Eras., Feuard. et Gall. perperam habent, quam.

"Whom, namely": Erasmus, Feuardent and Gallasius wrongly have "quam" (feminine).

(printed under page 276)

(6) ‹anchor: alterum Christum› · call in col 539

Alterum Christum. Duas voces, id est, post Christum in praeced. editt. insertas merito delevit Grab. quia in Graeco et mss. Clarom., Arundel. atque Vossio desunt, ac falsum gignunt sensum; sed forte, id est, in mss. Erasmi et Gallasii, ex interpretatione vocis Christum, supererat; scripseratque quispiam, id est unctum, ut ante scriptum est, Monogenis, id est Unigeniti.

"Another Christ": Grabe rightly deleted the two words "id est," inserted after "Christum" in the earlier editions, because they are missing in the Greek and in the Clermont, Arundel and Voss manuscripts, and they produce a false sense; but perhaps "id est" was left over in Erasmus's and Gallasius's manuscripts from a gloss on the word "Christum," someone having written "that is, anointed," as is written before, "of Monogenes, that is, of the Only-begotten."

(printed under page 276)

(7) ‹anchor: in suam argumentationem› · call in col 539

In suam argumentationem. Graecam vocem ὑπόθεσιν, argumentationem vertere amat interp.: mallem reddidisset, institutum, sententiam.

"Into their own argument": the translator likes to render the Greek word ὑπόθεσιν as "argumentatio"; I would rather he had rendered "scheme," "doctrine."

(printed under page 276)

(8) ‹anchor: Patrem dixit› · call in col 539

Dixit. Ita Clarom. et Voss. exacte juxta Graecum εἴρηκε. Eras., Gall. et Feuard. dixisset.

"He said": so the Clermont and Voss manuscripts, exactly following the Greek εἴρηκε. Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, "dixisset" [had said].

(printed under page 276)

(9) · call in col 539

Εἰ τῶν λοιπῶν τὰς συζύγους. Legendum cum interp. ἢ εἰ τῶν λοιπῶν. Sed frustra Billius et Fronto Duc. cum eodem legi volunt, τὰς συζυγίας; et sensus enim et contextus sermonis exigunt συζύγους.

Εἰ τῶν λοιπῶν τὰς συζύγους [if the consorts of the rest]: read, with the translator, "or if of the rest." But Billius and Fronton du Duc wish in vain, with the same translator, to read τὰς συζυγίας [the pairings]; for both the sense and the context require συζύγους [consorts].

(printed under page 276)

(10) · call in col 539

Υἱὸν Θεοῦ. Λόγον Θεοῦ legisse videtur interpres.

Υἱὸν Θεοῦ [Son of God]: the translator seems to have read Λόγον Θεοῦ [Word of God].

(printed under page 276)

(11) ‹anchor: καταχρησάμενοι› · call in col 539

Καταχρησάμενοι. Lege cum interp. καὶ καταχρησάμενοι.

Καταχρησάμενοι [misusing]: read, with the translator, "and misusing."

(printed under page 276)

(12) ‹anchor: μνείαν ποιεῖσθαι› · call in col 539

Μνείαν ποιεῖσθαι. Addenda cum interpr. particula negativa μὴ vel οὐ.

Μνείαν ποιεῖσθαι [to make mention]: the negative particle μή or οὐ must be added, with the translator.

(printed under page 276)

(1) · call in col 542

Ὁ τῆς οἰκονομίας. Pro his legendum vult Billius cum interpr. ὁ ἐκ πάντων γεγονώς, quia fictitius ille Valentinianorum Servator ex omnibus Aeonibus ortum traxit. Grabius vero Epiphanii lectionem pro genuina habet, ratus hanc, utpote obscuriorem, liberiori explicationi occasionem dedisse. Sed is certe non est interpres noster, qui tantam sibi libertatem arroget. Quare utrumque textum, Graecum scilicet et Latinum, hic mutilum esse, alterumque ex altero emendandum esse ratus, et Epiphanii et interpretis lectionem amplector, legendumque censeo: ὁ ἐκ πάντων γεγονώς, καὶ τῆς οἰκονομίας, μεταγενέστερος τοῦ Λόγου, Σωτήρ. Cur autem Salvator dicatur, τῆς οἰκονομίας Σωτήρ, ratio in promptu est: quia scilicet humanae salutis procurandae causa (quae Graecis οἰκονομία est, ut supra diximus), animale corpus induit, ut paulo post subjicitur, quod quidem corpus ἐκ τῆς οἰκονομίας κατεσκευασμένον ἀρρήτῳ προνοίᾳ, ex dispensatione (id est salutis nostrae causa), constructum inenarrabili arte dicebant Valentiniani.

Ὁ τῆς οἰκονομίας [he of the dispensation]: for these words Billius would read, with the translator, ὁ ἐκ πάντων γεγονώς [he who came to be from all], because that fictitious Saviour of the Valentinians took his origin from all the Aeons. Grabe, however, holds Epiphanius's reading to be genuine, thinking that, being the more obscure, it gave occasion to a freer explanation. But our translator is certainly not one to take so much liberty. So, judging that both texts, the Greek and the Latin, are mutilated here and that each is to be corrected from the other, I embrace the reading both of Epiphanius and of the translator, and I think one should read: "he who came to be from all, and the Saviour of the dispensation, later than the Word." Why he is called Saviour "of the dispensation" is plain: because, for the sake of procuring human salvation (which in Greek is οἰκονομία, as we said above), he put on an animal body, as is added a little later; which body, "made from the dispensation by an ineffable providence," the Valentinians said was built "from the dispensation" (that is, for the sake of our salvation) "by an indescribable art."

(printed under page 277)

(2) · call in col 542

Ὁ τοῦ μόνου Θεοῦ. Legisse videtur interpres, ἀπὸ τοῦ, non ὁ τοῦ, sed utrumque eodem fere recidit.

Ὁ τοῦ μόνου Θεοῦ [he of the only God]: the translator seems to have read ἀπὸ τοῦ [from the], not ὁ τοῦ; but both come to nearly the same.

(printed under page 277)

(3) ‹anchor: τὸν λόγον ἐμπεποίηται› · call in col 542

Λόγον ἐμπεποίηται. Legendum vult Billius πεποίηται.

Λόγον ἐμπεποίηται [has made discourse]: Billius would read πεποίηται.

(printed under page 277)

(4) · call in col 542

De eo Verbo, quod ei in principio dictum est. Addendum ex Graeco: de eo Verbo, de quo supra in principio dictum est. Quod clarius vertit Billius: de eo Verbo, de quo supra in principio locutus fuerat. Quanquam tamen non immerito existimat Fronto Duc. Graecis alium subesse posse sensum (quem amplexus est Petavius), scilicet: recapitulans enim de eo Verbo, quod ab eo supra dictum est in principio fuisse. Hunc quidem sensum improbat Grabius, quia, inquit, in Graeco non est, ἐν ἀρχῇ εἶναι Λόγου. Nempe deest Verbum εἶναι, sed subintelligi nihil vetat.

"Concerning that Word which was said to him in the beginning": add from the Greek, "concerning that Word of which it was said above, in the beginning." Billius rendered this more clearly: "concerning that Word of which he had spoken above, in the beginning." Yet Fronton du Duc thinks, not without reason, that another sense may underlie the Greek (which Petau adopted), namely: "for summing up concerning that Word which he said above was in the beginning." Grabe rejects this sense because, he says, the Greek does not have "ἐν ἀρχῇ εἶναι Λόγου." True, the word εἶναι is missing, but nothing forbids understanding it.

(printed under page 277)

(5) · call in col 542

Inhabitavit in nobis. Sic codd. Clarom. et Pass., caeteri habitavit in nobis.

"Dwelt within us": so the Clermont and Passerat manuscripts; the others, "dwelt among us."

(printed under page 277)

(6) · call in col 542

Ex omnibus factus. Auctoritate cod. Clarom. deleo verbum, est, utpote superfluum.

"Made from all": on the authority of the Clermont manuscript I delete the word "est" as superfluous.

(printed under page 277)

(7) · call in col 542

Et sit posterior. Ita Claromont., Pass., Arund. et Voss. cum edit. Oxon. In caeteris vitiose, sic.

"And that he is later": so the Clermont, Passerat, Arundel and Voss manuscripts, with the Oxford edition. In the others, faultily, "sic."

(printed under page 277)

(8) · call in col 542

Salvator. Adde ex Gr. dispensationis Salvator. Lege Not. 1.

"Saviour": add from the Greek, "Saviour of the dispensation." Read note 1.

(printed under page 277)

(1) · call in col 543

Ostenditur. Codex Voss. ostendatur.

"Is shown": the Voss manuscript, "ostendatur" [let it be shown].

(printed under page 278)

(2) · call in col 543

Christus Filius Dei. Lege juxta Graecum, et Christus, et Filius Dei.

"Christ the Son of God": read, following the Greek, "both Christ and Son of God."

(printed under page 278)

(3) · call in col 543

Falso nomine. Ψευδωνύμως male legit interpres pro ψευδῶς, falso.

"By a false name": the translator wrongly read ψευδωνύμως [under a false name] for ψευδῶς, "falsely."

(printed under page 278)

(4) · call in col 543

Infamant Scripturas. Melius vertisset interpres, depraedant Scripturas. Κατατρέχειν enim (quo verbo hic utitur Irenaeus) proprie est, hostiliter excurrere, excursiones facere; quod Valentinianis apprime convenit, qui in Scripturas excurrebant, ut quidpiam ex eis corraderent, quod ad hypothesim concinnandam faceret.

"They defame the Scriptures": the translator would better have rendered "they plunder the Scriptures." For κατατρέχειν (the verb Irenaeus uses here) properly means "to make a hostile sally, to make raids"; which fits the Valentinians exactly, who made raids on the Scriptures to scrape together from them something that would serve to patch up their system.

(printed under page 278)

(5) · call in col 543

Ex eo quod est secundum naturam, etc. Id est ex genuino sensu ad adulterinam traducunt, ut recte vertit Billius.

"From that which is according to nature," etc.: that is, "they transfer from the genuine sense to a counterfeit," as Billius rightly rendered it.

(printed under page 278)

(6) · call in col 543

Controversias... quaslibet. Vertendum erat, argumenta quaelibet.

"Any disputes whatever": it should have been translated "any plots whatever."

(printed under page 278)

(7) · call in col 543

Et Homericis versibus. Lege ex Graeco, ex Homericis versibus.

"And by Homeric verses": read from the Greek, "out of Homeric verses."

(printed under page 278)

(8) · call in col 543

Meditari. Gr. μελετᾷν, quod hic verterem, solerter concinnare.

"To practise": Greek μελετᾶν, which I would render here "to put together skilfully."

(printed under page 278)

(9) · call in col 543

Ex illa temporali declamata controversia. Billius longe melius: de illo recens elaborato argumento.

"From that temporal declaimed dispute": Billius far better: "from that newly worked-up plot."

(printed under page 278)

(10) ‹anchor: et multi abducuntur› · call in col 543

Abducuntur. Leg. abducantur. Scilicet per rite compactam versuum seriem eo abducantur, ut ambigant, num haec ita digesserit Homerus.

"Are led away": read "abducantur" (subjunctive). That is, by the duly fitted sequence of verses they are led so far as to doubt whether Homer did not arrange these lines so.

(printed under page 278)

(11) ‹anchor: commemorari› · call in col 543

Commemorari. Hoc verbum plerumque active accipit interpres pro meminisse.

"To be mentioned": the translator generally takes this verb actively, for "to remember."

(printed under page 278)

(36) ‹anchor: βαρέα στενάχοντα› · call in col 544

Od. K, 76.

Odyssey 10.76.

(printed under page 278)

(37) ‹anchor: μεγάλων ἐπιίστορα ἔργων› · call in col 544

Od. Φ, 26.

Odyssey 21.26.

(printed under page 278)

(38) ‹anchor: Σθενέλοιο πάϊς Περσηϊάδαο› · call in col 544

Il. T, 123.

Iliad 19.123.

(printed under page 278)

(39) ‹anchor: στυγεροῦ Ἀΐδαο› · call in col 544

Il. Δ, 368.

Iliad 4.368 [as printed; the line is Iliad 8.368].

(printed under page 278)

(40) · call in col 545

Od. Z, 130.

Odyssey 6.130.

(printed under page 279)

(41) · call in col 545

Il. Ω, 327.

Iliad 24.327.

(printed under page 279)

(42) · call in col 545

Od. Γ, 38.

Odyssey 3.38.

(printed under page 279)

(43) · call in col 545

Il. Ω, 328.

Iliad 24.328.

(printed under page 279)

(44) · call in col 545

Od. Λ, 625.

Odyssey 11.625.

(printed under page 279)

(45) · call in col 545

Il. B, 409.

Iliad 2.409.

(printed under page 279)

(1) · call in col 546

Ἀνὰ ἄστυ. Homerus habet κατὰ ἄστυ.

Ἀνὰ ἄστυ [through the city]: Homer has κατὰ ἄστυ.

(printed under page 279)

(2) · call in col 546

Ἅμα πάντες. Sic cod. Reg. cum Homero. In editt. perperam, ἀνὰ πάντες.

Ἅμα πάντες [all together]: so the Royal manuscript, with Homer. In the editions wrongly ἀνὰ πάντες.

(printed under page 279)

(3) · call in col 546

Οἴκτρ'. Homer. πόλλ'.

Οἴκτρ' [piteously]: Homer, πόλλ' [much].

(printed under page 279)

(4) · call in col 546

Θάνατόνδε. Sic omnes editt. cum Homero. In edit. Oxon. male θάνατόν τε.

Θάνατόνδε [to death]: so all the editions, with Homer. In the Oxford edition wrongly θάνατόν τε.

(printed under page 279)

(5) · call in col 546

Ἀπέπεμψεν. Homer. μ' ἔπεμψεν.

Ἀπέπεμψεν [sent away]: Homer, μ' ἔπεμψεν [sent me].

(printed under page 279)

(6) · call in col 546

Ἐπιγνώσεται. Adde cum interp. ἐπιγνώσεται μὲν τὰ ἔπη, τὴν δὲ ὑπόθεσιν οὐκ ἐπιγνώσεται.

Ἐπιγνώσεται [he will recognize]: add, with the translator, "he will recognize the verses, but he will not recognize the plot."

(printed under page 279)

(7) · call in col 546

Τῇ ἰδίᾳ. Adde vel βίβλῳ vel τάξει. Prius legisse videtur interpres. Posteriori mox utitur Irenaeus.

Τῇ ἰδίᾳ [to its own]: add either βίβλῳ [book] or τάξει [order]. The translator seems to have read the former; Irenaeus uses the latter shortly after.

(printed under page 279)

(8) · call in col 546

Τὴν ὑπόθεσιν. Adde cum interp. παροῦσαν.

Τὴν ὑπόθεσιν [the plot]: add, with the translator, παροῦσαν [present].

(printed under page 279)

(9) · call in col 546

Τὸν κανόνα τῆς ἀληθείας ἀκλινῆ, regulam veritatis immobilem, etc. Fidem catholicam intelligit, eam maxime, ut explicat ipse, cap. seq., quae est in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem... et in unum Jesum Christum Filium Dei, incarnatum pro nostra salute; et in Spiritum Sanctum, qui per prophetas praedicavit dispositiones Dei, et adventum, et eam quae est ex Virgine generationem, et passionem, etc. Hanc fidem per baptismum accepisse nos scribit Irenaeus, ut quam ante baptismum tam accurate edocebantur catechumeni, et quam in ipso baptismo in legis suae verba profitebantur, ut loquitur Tertull. lib. De Spectaculis. Interrogatus es (ait antiquus auctor librorum De sacramentis, inter opera Ambrosii, lib. II, cap. 62), Credis in Deum Patrem omnipotentem? Dixisti, Credo; et mersisti, hoc est, sepultus es. Iterum interrogatus, Credis in Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, et in crucem ejus? Dixisti, Credo; et mersisti, etc. Tertio interrogatus es, Credis et in Spiritum sanctum? Dixisti, Credo, et tertio mersisti, etc. Ad hanc fidem in baptismo acceptam, solemniterque juratam omni aevo provocarunt quotquot fere adversus haereticos calamum strinxerunt sancti Patres, rati nihil efficacius esse ad refellendam profanorum dogmatum novitatem. Inter fidei naufragia, ait Hilarius lib. II ad Constant. Aug., § 7, tutissimum nobis est primam et solam evangelicam fidem confessam in baptismo, intellectamque retinere, nec demutare quod solum acceptum atque auditum habeo bene credere. Eo vero fidentius id argumenti genus adversus Valentinianos urgebat auctor noster, quo Symboli apostolici, quod baptizandi reddiderant, in omnibus capitibus impie ab ipsis esset temerata fides.

Τὸν κανόνα τῆς ἀληθείας ἀκλινῆ, "the unbending rule of truth," etc.: he means the Catholic faith, above all, as he himself explains in the next chapter, the faith "in one God, the Father almighty ... and in one Jesus Christ the Son of God, made flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who through the prophets proclaimed the dispensations of God, and the coming, and the birth from the Virgin, and the passion," etc. Irenaeus writes that we received this faith through baptism, being the faith in which catechumens were so carefully instructed before baptism and which in baptism itself they professed "in the words of its law," as Tertullian says in his book On the Shows. "You were asked," says the ancient author of the books On the Sacraments among the works of Ambrose (Book II, ch. 62 [as printed]), "Do you believe in God the Father almighty? You said, I believe; and you were dipped, that is, you were buried. Again you were asked, Do you believe in our Lord Jesus Christ and in his cross? You said, I believe; and you were dipped," etc. "A third time you were asked, Do you believe also in the Holy Spirit? You said, I believe; and a third time you were dipped," etc. To this faith, received in baptism and solemnly sworn, nearly all the holy Fathers of every age who drew the pen against heretics appealed, judging nothing more effective for refuting the novelty of profane doctrines. "Amid the shipwrecks of faith," says Hilary, To Constantius Augustus II, §7, "the safest thing for us is to keep the first and only Gospel faith, confessed and understood in baptism, and not to change what alone, once received and heard, I hold it good to believe." And our author pressed this kind of argument against the Valentinians all the more confidently because the faith of the Apostles' Creed, which those to be baptized had recited, had been impiously violated by them in every article.

(printed under page 279)

(10) · call in col 546

Est de Ulysse. Sic edit. Oxon. et Arund. ac Voss. consent. Clarom., Pass. et Graeco textu. In caeteris male, etiam pro est.

"Is about Ulysses": so the Oxford edition and the Arundel and Voss manuscripts, with the Clermont and Passerat manuscripts and the Greek text agreeing. In the others wrongly "etiam" [also] for "est."

(printed under page 279)

<!-- Q6a: notes (1)–(4) completed from the column images (the openings had been parked under Editors' prose after the pass-2 crop missed the top lines); the end of (3) and the opening of (4), at the top of the right column, are as read by that later pass. -->

(1) · call in col 547

Insubstantivum. Gr. ἀνυπόστατον, id est, quod consistere nequeat, quod nihil habeat firmitatis. Hanc vocem eo sensu non infrequenter usurpant Graeci Patres, dum Verbum aeternum cum eo quod mente fingimus verbo conferentes, prius ἐνυπόστατον, subsistens, posterius ἀνυπόστατον dicunt.

Insubstantial. Greek ἀνυπόστατον, that is, what cannot subsist, what has no firmness. The Greek Fathers not infrequently use this word in that sense, when, comparing the eternal Word with the word we frame in the mind, they call the former ἐνυπόστατον, subsisting, and the latter ἀνυπόστατον.

(printed under page 280)

(2) · call in col 547

Redemptio. Graec. ἀπολύτρωσις : quam quidem vocem a barbaro interp. hic pessime redditam non miror. Sed quod Billius Graece doctissimus, interpretis versionem secutus sit, et in Gallasium, quod ab ea desciverit, flagitiosae oscitantiae culpam contulerit mirari satis nequeo. Gallasius, inquit, hic toto coelo errat, quod quid haec redemptio (Valentinianorum, de qua hujus libri caput 21 late disseritur) sibi velit, non intelligat. Sed neque alius quivis, puto, facile intelliget, quid haec Valentinianorum redemptio commune habeat cum hoc Irenaei loco. Billium haud satis attentum decepit vox ἀπολύτρωσις, quae plerumque quidem redemptionem seu liberationem significat; sed quod interdum idem sit atque ἀπόλυσις, dimissio, docent Hesychii et Phavorini Lexica. Irenaeus quippe, fusius enarratis Valentinianorum deliriis, subdit, peracta jam fabula, completaque scena, nihil superesse, nisi ἀπολύτρωσιν, dimissionem, id est, ut spectatores dimittantur, abire permittantur. Idipsum est quod Tertullianus explicatis pariter Valentinianorum commentis, si non iisdem verbis, saltem eodem sensu scripsit cap. 13: Quod superest, inquit, vos valete et plaudite. Hac nimirum solemni formula, Vos valete et plaudite, claudebantur veteres comoediae, ut videre est apud Plautum et Terentium. Eodem sensu Chrysost. homil. 5, De poenit., tom. VI, pag. 792, θεάτρου ἀπόλυσιν, theatri solutionem, seu dimissionem dixit. Οὐκ ἔστι μετὰ τὴν τοῦ θεάτρου ἀπόλυσιν στεφανωθῆναι, nemo post solutum theatrum potest coronari. Vertendum igitur erat interpreti, quoniam autem post hanc scenam superest dimissio. Eodem fere modo, nisi quod paulo liberius, vertit Petavius: postremo quia jam velut in scena, peracto fabulae exordio, dimittendi tempus est.

Redemption. Greek ἀπολύτρωσις: that this word is very badly rendered here by the barbarous translator I do not wonder. But that Billius, most learned in Greek, followed the translator's version, and charged Gallasius with the fault of shameful drowsiness for departing from it, I cannot wonder at enough. "Gallasius," he says, "here errs by the whole sky, in that he does not understand what this redemption means" (the Valentinians' redemption, discussed at length in chapter 21 of this book). But no one else either, I think, will easily see what this redemption of the Valentinians has in common with this passage of Irenaeus. Billius, not attentive enough, was deceived by the word ἀπολύτρωσις, which indeed generally means "redemption" or "liberation"; but the lexicons of Hesychius and Phavorinus teach that it is sometimes the same as ἀπόλυσις, "dismissal." For Irenaeus, having narrated the Valentinians' ravings at greater length, adds that, the play now being performed and the scene completed, nothing remains but ἀπολύτρωσιν, "dismissal," that is, that the spectators be dismissed and allowed to leave. This is just what Tertullian wrote, having likewise set out the Valentinians' fictions, if not in the same words, at least in the same sense, in ch. 13: "What remains," he says, "is: farewell, and applaud." With this solemn formula, of course, "Farewell, and applaud," the old comedies were closed, as can be seen in Plautus and Terence. In the same sense Chrysostom, Homily 5 On Repentance, vol. VI, p. 792, spoke of θεάτρου ἀπόλυσιν, "the breaking-up," or "dismissal," of the theatre: "No one can be crowned after the theatre has broken up." The translator, then, should have rendered: "but since after this scene there remains the dismissal." Petau renders it in almost the same way, only a little more freely: "lastly, since now, as on the stage, the opening of the play being performed, it is time for dismissal."

(printed under page 280)

(3) · call in col 547

Mimum, id est, fabulam seu commentum. Mimus enim et actorem et poema significat. Actores illi qui dicta et facta hominum ita imitabantur, ut actionem suam gravitate sententiarum, jocis interpositis, condirent, vocabantur μῖμοι, mimi; a Graecis propterea dicti et ἠθολόγοι. Sed et mimus interdum pro fabula ponitur, quae res obscoenas repraesentet. Aristot. lib. I, c. 1, Poet., ait Sophronem et Xenarchum μίμους scripsisse. Juvenal. satir. XIII: Mimum agit ille / Urbani qualem fugitivus scurra Catulli. Et Martial. lib. II, epigramm. VII, Componis belle mimos. Dehinc usurpatum nomen pro commento quolibet. Sic Sueton. in Othone, cap. 3: Id satis visum, ut poena acrior mimum omnem divulgaret. Posteriori hoc sensu mimum hic accipit Irenaeus.

"Mime," that is, a play or a fiction. For "mimus" means both the actor and the piece. Those actors who imitated men's words and deeds in such a way as to season their performance with weighty sayings and jokes thrown in were called μῖμοι, "mimes"; and so by the Greeks they were also called ἠθολόγοι [character-painters]. But "mimus" is also sometimes used for a play that presents obscene things. Aristotle, Poetics I, 1, says that Sophron and Xenarchus wrote μίμους. Juvenal, Satire XIII: "He plays a mime / such as the runaway buffoon of witty Catullus." And Martial, Book II, epigram VII: "You compose mimes prettily." From there the word came to be used for any fiction whatever. So Suetonius, Otho, ch. 3: "It seemed enough that a sharper penalty should make the whole farce public." It is in the latter sense that Irenaeus takes mimum here.

(printed under page 280)

(4) · call in col 547

Explicans. Vertere debuisset interpres, ut quis explicito eorum mimo. Porro explicare hic idem est atque absolvere, ad finem perducere. Quo sensu dixit Cicero lib. XIII, ep. 26, ad Sulpic., explicare atque expedire negotia; Plin. Junior epist. 154, explicare iter; Caesar lib. III De Bello civ., his explicitis rebus; et Martial. lib. XI, epigr. CVIII: explicitus liber. Hinc vulgata formula, Explicit liber, id est, absolutus est. Mimum igitur explicare, nihil aliud est quam fabulam absolvere, seu fabulae narrationem ad finem perducere. Id si advertisset Billius, non scripsisset, vocem explicans, qua usus est interpres, longe a significatione verbi περαιῶσαι recedere, atque adeo hunc aliud quidpiam in textu Graeco legisse. Recte siquidem hic et legit et vertit interpres, ut probe observat Grabius. Περαιόω enim non solum significat transmeo, trajicio; sed et termino, ad finem perduco: quam significationem, subdit vir clarissimus, non quidem ex Lexicis, attamen ex sanctorum Patrum scriptis, quae alioqui sedula manu versaverat, Billius discere potuisset. Sic Justinus martyr ad Tryph. pag. 228 edit. Sylburgii: Διὰ τῶν ἀνερωτήσεων τούτων καὶ περαιωθῆναι σὺν τάχει τὸν λόγον ἀγωνιοῦμαι. Per interrogationes ejusmodi, disputationem ad finem perducere conabor. Et Trypho ad Justin., pag. 236, Περαίωσον οὖν καὶ αὐτὸν ἡμῖν, etc. Et hunc itaque explicando absolve, etc., locum scilicet Isaiae in antecedentibus citatum. Apud Clementem Alexand. quoque aliquoties haec occurrit significatio, veluti lib. VI Stromatum, pag. 683: Ἥ τε γὰρ κοσμογένεια ἐν ἓξ περαιοῦται ἡμέραις. Mundi creatio sex absolvitur diebus. Et lib. I, pag. 295, τὴν ζήτησιν εἰς εὕρεσιν περαιοῖ, inquisitionem terminat inventione.

Explicans. The translator ought to have rendered it "that someone, their farce having been played out". Further, explicare here is the same as to complete, to bring to an end. In which sense Cicero said, book XIII, letter 26, to Sulpicius, "to unfold and dispatch business"; the younger Pliny, letter 154, "to accomplish a journey"; Caesar, book III of the Civil War, "these things being accomplished"; and Martial, Book XI, epigram CVIII: "the book unrolled to its end." Hence the common formula, "Explicit liber," that is, "it is finished." "To unfold the mime," then, is nothing else than to finish the play, or to bring the telling of the play to its end. Had Billius noticed this, he would not have written that the word "explicans" used by the translator departs far from the meaning of the verb περαιῶσαι, and that the translator therefore read something else in the Greek text. For the translator both read and rendered rightly here, as Grabe well observes. Περαιόω means not only "I cross over, I carry across," but also "I bring to an end, I complete": a meaning, the distinguished man adds, which Billius could have learned, if not from the lexicons, then from the writings of the holy Fathers, which he had otherwise handled diligently. So Justin Martyr to Trypho, p. 228 of Sylburg's edition: "Through these questions I shall strive to bring the discussion quickly to its end." And Trypho to Justin, p. 236: "Complete this one too for us," etc., "and so finish this one by explaining it," etc., meaning the passage of Isaiah cited before. In Clement of Alexandria too this meaning occurs several times, as in Stromata VI, p. 683: "For the making of the world is completed in six days." And Book I, p. 295: "he brings the inquiry to its end in discovery."

(printed under page 280)

(5) · call in col 547

Destructorem sermonem. Id est confutationem, seu argumenta quibus refellantur commenta Valentinianorum.

"A destroying discourse": that is, a refutation, or the arguments by which the Valentinians' fictions are refuted.

(printed under page 280)

(6) · call in col 547

Et ex ostensione. Gr. καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἀποδείξεως, quae vertere debuisset interp. et ante demonstrationem seu argumentationem. Id est, vel ipsa Valentinianorum dissidia, haereticae doctrinae falsitatem, Catholicae vero sibi semper constantis veritatem perspicue demonstrant.

"And from the showing": Greek καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἀποδείξεως, which the translator should have rendered "and before the demonstration," or "argument." That is, even the Valentinians' own disagreements plainly demonstrate the falsity of the heretical teaching and the truth of the Catholic teaching, which is always consistent with itself.

(printed under page 280)

(7) · call in col 547

Ὑπόθεσιν ταύτην. Ὑπόθεσιν αὐτῶν legisse videtur interp.

Ὑπόθεσιν ταύτην [this system]: the translator seems to have read ὑπόθεσιν αὐτῶν [their system].

(printed under page 280)

(8) · call in col 547

Σωματείῳ. Petavius legendum suspicatur σώματι; melius vero Grabius, σωματίῳ, hoc enim posterius legisse videtur interpres.

Σωματείῳ [to the body corporate]: Petau suspects one should read σώματι [body]; but Grabe better, σωματίῳ [little body], for the translator seems to have read this latter.

(printed under page 280)

(9) · call in col 547

Ἐπειδή. Leg. vel ἐπεὶ δή divisim, vel ἐπεὶ δέ.

Ἐπειδή [since]: read either ἐπεὶ δή, as two words, or ἐπεὶ δέ.

(printed under page 280)

(10) · call in col 547

Μῖμον αὐτόν. Lege αὐτῶν cum vet. interp.

Μῖμον αὐτόν: read αὐτῶν [their mime], with the old translator.

(printed under page 280)

(11) · call in col 547

Ἐπενεγκεῖν. Legendum ἐπενέγκῃ.

Ἐπενεγκεῖν [to bring against]: read ἐπενέγκῃ.

(printed under page 280)

(12) · call in col 547

Θυμοῦ. Lege cum interp. μύθου, id enim exigit sensus.

Θυμοῦ [of anger]: read, with the translator, μύθου [of the fable], for the sense demands it.

(printed under page 280)

(none) <!-- note: no editors' prose in the column body (author's text and Billius' version only); notes (1)–(4) moved to the Footnotes above (Q6a). Italics of the print not marked. -->

(46) · call in col 550

Edit. Feuard. cap. II.

Feuardent's edition: ch. 2.

(printed under page 281)

(47) · call in col 550

Psal. CXLV, 6; Act. IV, 24, et XIV, 14.

Ps. 145(146):6; Acts 4:24 and 14:14.

(printed under page 281)

(48) · call in col 550

Ephes. I, 10.

Eph. 1:10.

(printed under page 281)

(49) · call in col 550

Philipp. II, 10 seqq.

Phil. 2:10 ff.

(printed under page 281)

(50) ‹anchor: spiritalia quidem nequitiae› · call in col 550

Ephes. VI, 12.

Eph. 6:12.

(printed under page 281)

(1) · call in col 550

Τὴν εἰς ἕνα Θεὸν... πίστιν. Symbolum apostolicum hic indigitat Irenaeus, cujus singulos pene articulos refert, ut ad eorum amussim haereticorum placita deinceps exigat. Idem Symbolum iisdem pene verbis, et in eumdem finem refert Tertull. lib. De praescript., cap. 13, et contra Prax., c. 2. Id symbolum bis ab Irenaeo referri, hoc scilicet loco, et lib. II, c. 1, sed diversis plane verbis, scribit vir clarissimus D. Elias Dupin Novae Biblioth., tom. I, p. 32 editionis Parisiensis an. 1686; sed, pace doctissimi viri, dixerim Irenaeum lib. II, cap. 1, Symboli aut articulorum ejus ne quidem verbotenus meminisse: adeo ut ex SS. episcopi testimonio concludi non possit Symbolum ab uno et eodem auctore, diversis omnino verbis interdum fuisse citatum. Nec minus falsum est quod hic ait Grabius, Symbolum ab Iren. lib. III, cap. 4, appellari veterem traditionem: agit enim eo loco Irenaeus, non de Symbolo, sed de verbo Dei non scripto, ab apostolis tradito, cujus auctoritatem commendat et in haereticos intorquet.

Τὴν εἰς ἕνα Θεὸν ... πίστιν [the faith in one God ...]: here Irenaeus points to the Apostles' Creed, giving nearly all its articles one by one, so as then to test the heretics' tenets by their rule. Tertullian gives the same Creed in almost the same words and to the same end, in the Prescription, ch. 13, and Against Praxeas, ch. 2. The distinguished Mr Elias Dupin writes in his Nouvelle Bibliothèque, vol. I, p. 32 of the Paris edition of 1686, that this creed is given twice by Irenaeus, namely in this place and in Book II, ch. 1, but in quite different words; but, with all respect to that most learned man, I would say that in Book II, ch. 1, Irenaeus does not mention the Creed or its articles even in a word; so that it cannot be concluded from the holy bishop's testimony that the Creed was sometimes quoted by one and the same author in entirely different words. Nor is it less false, what Grabe says here, that the Creed is called "the ancient tradition" by Irenaeus in Book III, ch. 4: for in that place Irenaeus is dealing not with the Creed but with the unwritten word of God handed down by the apostles, whose authority he commends and turns against the heretics.

(printed under page 281)

(2) · call in col 550

Τὰς θαλάσσας. Τὴν θάλασσαν legisse videtur interpres, juxta psalm. CXIV, 6, et Act. apost. IV, 24.

Τὰς θαλάσσας [the seas]: the translator seems to have read τὴν θάλασσαν [the sea], following Psalm 114 [as printed], 6, and Acts of the Apostles 4:24.

(printed under page 281)

(3) · call in col 550

Οἰκονομίας. Οἰκονομίας Θεοῦ legisse videtur interpr., nisi Dei vocem explicationis gratia inseruerit.

Οἰκονομίας [dispensations]: the translator seems to have read "dispensations of God," unless he inserted the word "of God" by way of explanation.

(printed under page 281)

(4) · call in col 550

Τὰς ἐλεύσεις. Legere mallem cum interp. τὴν ἔλευσιν. Duplicem enim Christi adventum hic accurate distinguit Irenaeus, alterumque ab altero secernit. Prioris tum primum meminit, singulariter proinde; posterioris paulo post.

Τὰς ἐλεύσεις [the comings]: I would rather read, with the translator, τὴν ἔλευσιν [the coming]. For Irenaeus here carefully distinguishes Christ's twofold coming and separates the one from the other. He mentions the former first, and so in the singular; the latter a little after.

(printed under page 281)

(5) · call in col 550

Ecclesia enim per. Omisit interpr. particulam Graecam καίπερ, quam Billius vertit, tametsi. Verterem ego hoc in loco, utique: ecclesia enim utique per universum: et hunc enim sensum interdum habet ea particula.

"For the Church through": the translator left out the Greek particle καίπερ, which Billius rendered "although." In this place I would render it "certainly": "for the Church, certainly, throughout the whole world"; for that particle sometimes has this sense too.

(printed under page 281)

(6) · call in col 550

Seminata. Vertendum erat, disseminata, diffusa, juxta Graec. διεσπαρμένη.

"Sown": it should have been rendered "scattered, spread abroad," following the Greek διεσπαρμένη.

(printed under page 281)

(7) · call in col 550

Dispositiones Dei. Gr. τὰς οἰκονομίας, dispensationes, ea nimirum quae Deus fecit, humanae salutis procurandae causa.

"The dispositions of God": Greek τὰς οἰκονομίας, "the dispensations," namely the things God did to bring about human salvation.

(printed under page 281)

(8) · call in col 550

Curvet. Sic mss. cum edit. Oxon. In aliis, curvetur.

"Should bend": so the manuscripts, with the Oxford edition. In others, "curvetur" [should be bent].

(printed under page 281)

(9) ‹anchor: angelos transgressos› · call in col 550

Transgressos. In cod. Arund. transgressores.

"Who transgressed": in the Arundel manuscript, "transgressores" [transgressors].

(printed under page 281)

(51) · call in col 551

Ed. Feu. cap. III.

Feuardent's edition: ch. 3.

(printed under page 282)

(1) · call in col 551

Et in dilectione ejus perseverantibus. Haec deficiunt in codd. Clarom. et Pass.

"And to those persevering in his love": these words are missing in the Clermont and Passerat manuscripts.

(printed under page 282)

(2) · call in col 551

Hanc praedicationem. Longior periodus, quae ab initio capitis coepta, hactenus continuatur.

"This preaching": a long period, begun at the start of the chapter, runs on to this point.

(printed under page 282)

(3) · call in col 551

Et quidem. Gr. Καίπερ, tametsi, vel utique: nec male, et quidem.

"And indeed": Greek καίπερ, "although," or "certainly"; and "and indeed" is not bad.

(printed under page 282) <!-- Q6a: notes (4)–(7) on the same page foot are called only in the Greek (the full-width lines and col 552) and are set under 552; see n552.md. -->

<!-- Q6a: notes (4)–(7) moved here from n551.md: they are called only in the Greek set in this column (the full-width lines and paragraph 2). -->

(4) · call in col 552

Τοῖς ἀπ' ἀρχῆς. Lege cum interp. τοῖς μὲν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς, scil. ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ αὐτοῦ διαμεμενηκόσι; ad haec enim refertur ἀπ' ἀρχῆς, non autem ad ζωὴν χαρισάμενος.

Τοῖς ἀπ' ἀρχῆς [to those from the beginning]: read, with the translator, τοῖς μὲν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς, that is, "to those who have remained in His love from the beginning"; for ἀπ' ἀρχῆς refers to these words, not to ζωὴν χαρισάμενος [granting life].

(printed under page 282)

(5) · call in col 552

Ζωὴν χαρισάμενος. Nota, inquit Grabius, vitam aeternam justis ac poenitentibus ex gratia dari. Operam ludit vir doctus. Suis nempe persuasum vellet, a Catholicis negari vitam aeternam ex gratia dari, quod falsissimum est. Sic enim asserimus post ipsum Salvatorem Matth. V, 12, Luc. VI, 23 et 35, vitam aeternam velut mercedem bonorum operum meritis rependi, ut ipsa bona opera et merita gratiae Christi accepta referamus. Nullane igitur, ait August. epist. 194, al. 105, sunt merita justorum? sunt plane, quia justi sunt. Sed ut justi fierent, merita non fuerunt. Si justis hominibus merita sunt, quibus ex justitia debeatur merces; non igitur in singulis operibus peccant. Porro, prosequitur August.: Sicut merito peccati, tanquam stipendium, redditur mors; ita merito justitiae, tanquam stipendium, vita aeterna. At bonum omne meritum non in nobis facit nisi gratia: et cum Deus coronat merita nostra, nihil aliud coronat quam munera sua... Unde et ipsa vita aeterna, quae utique in fine sine fine habebitur, et ideo meritis praecedentibus redditur; tamen quia eadem merita quibus redditur, non a nobis parata sunt per nostram sufficientiam, sed in nobis facta sunt per gratiam, etiam ipsa gratia nuncupatur; non ob aliud, nisi quia gratis datur: nec ideo quia non meritis datur, sed quia data sunt et ipsa merita, quibus datur. Haec, quibus Catholicae sententiae summa continetur, si attente meditari voluisset Grabius, ab inutili nota temperasset.

Ζωὴν χαρισάμενος [granting life]: "Note," says Grabe, "that eternal life is given to the just and the penitent by grace." The learned man wastes his effort. He would, of course, have his own people believe that Catholics deny that eternal life is given by grace, which is utterly false. For we assert, after the Saviour Himself (Matt. 5:12; Luke 6:23 and 35), that eternal life is paid as a reward to the merits of good works, in such a way that we credit the good works and merits themselves to the grace of Christ. "Are there then no merits of the just?" says Augustine, letter 194 (formerly 105). "Certainly there are, because they are just. But that they might become just, there were no merits." If just men have merits to which a reward is owed in justice, then they do not sin in each of their works. Further, Augustine continues: "As death is paid as the wage for the merit of sin, so eternal life is paid as the wage for the merit of justice. But nothing makes any good merit in us except grace; and when God crowns our merits, He crowns nothing other than His own gifts ... Hence eternal life itself, which will surely be possessed at the end without end, is therefore paid to preceding merits; yet because the very merits to which it is paid were not prepared by us through our own sufficiency but were made in us through grace, it too is called grace, for no other reason than that it is given freely: not because it is not given to merits, but because the very merits to which it is given were themselves given." Had Grabe been willing to ponder these words carefully, in which the sum of the Catholic position is contained, he would have refrained from his useless note.

(printed under page 282)

(6) · call in col 552

Καὶ γάρ. Κἂν γάρ ab interprete lectum suspicatur Grab. quia vertit ille, nam etsi. Sed cum particulam, etsi, non addiderit, nisi majoris connexionis causa, nihil impedit quin legerit, καὶ γάρ.

Καὶ γάρ [for indeed]: Grabe suspects the translator read κἂν γάρ [for even if], because he rendered "nam etsi." But since he added the particle "etsi" only for the sake of a closer connection, nothing prevents his having read καὶ γάρ.

(printed under page 282)

(7) · call in col 552

Αἱ ἐν Γερμανίαις ἱδρυμέναι Ἐκκλησίαι, κ. τ. λ. Quae hic de fide jam apud varias Occidentis nationes disseminata asserit Irenaeus, liquido confirmat Tertullianus, qui paulo post scribebat. Libro siquidem adv. Jud. c. 7, inter gentes quae jam Christo crediderant, Evangelioque colla subdiderant, enumerat, Hispaniarum omnes terminos, et Galliarum diversas nationes, et Britannorum inaccessa Romanis loca, et Sarmatarum, et Dacorum, et Germanorum, et Scytharum, etc. Sed quis primus fidem apud eas Occidentis nationes invexerit, an Irenaei temporibus latius obtineret, an plures, easque numerosas haberent Ecclesias? si quod res est fateri velimus, satis incertum. Plures quidem tum Galliarum, tum Hispaniarum, tum Germaniarum Ecclesiae, se vel ab apostolis ipsis, vel ab eorum discipulis fundatas gloriantur: sed haec tot difficultatibus scatent, ut assensum sustinere tutius sit. Scribit Historiae nostrae scriptorum antiquissimus Sulpicius Severus, Sacr. Hist. lib. II, pag. 150, edit. Antuerp. ann. 1574: Sub Aurelio Antonini filio persecutione quinta agitata, tum primum intra Gallias martyria visa, serius trans Alpes religione Dei suscepta. Consentit et vetus auctor Actorum S. Saturnini episc. et martyr. apud Ruinart. nostrum, Act. martyr. sinc. et select., p. 110, § 2, scribens, sensim et gradatim in regionibus nostris (in Galliis scilicet) apostolorum praedicationem coruscasse; et ante Decii et Grati consulatum (i. e. ante an. 250) raras in aliquibus civitatibus ecclesias, paucorum Christianorum devotione consurrexisse; sed nihilominus crebra, miserabili errore gentilium, nidoribus fetidis in omnibus locis templa fumasse. Quorum auctorum testimonia omni ex- (continues)

Αἱ ἐν Γερμανίαις ἱδρυμέναι Ἐκκλησίαι [the Churches founded in the Germanies], etc.: what Irenaeus asserts here about the faith being already spread among various nations of the West, Tertullian, who wrote a little later, clearly confirms. For in Against the Jews, ch. 7, among the peoples who had already believed in Christ and bowed their necks to the Gospel, he lists "all the borders of the Spains, and the various nations of the Gauls, and the places of the Britons inaccessible to the Romans, and those of the Sarmatians, and the Dacians, and the Germans, and the Scythians," etc. But who first brought the faith to those nations of the West, whether it prevailed widely in Irenaeus's time, whether they had several and numerous Churches, is, if we are willing to admit the truth, quite uncertain. Many Churches indeed, of the Gauls, the Spains and the Germanies alike, boast that they were founded either by the apostles themselves or by their disciples; but these claims bristle with so many difficulties that it is safer to withhold assent. Sulpicius Severus, the most ancient of the writers of our history, writes, Sacred History II, p. 150 of the Antwerp edition of 1574: "Under Aurelius, the son of Antoninus, when the fifth persecution was raging, martyrdoms were then first seen within the Gauls, the religion of God having been taken up later beyond the Alps." The old author of the Acts of St Saturninus, bishop and martyr, agrees, in our Ruinart, Genuine and Select Acts of the Martyrs, p. 110, §2, writing that "little by little and by degrees the preaching of the apostles shone out in our regions" (that is, in the Gauls); "and before the consulship of Decius and Gratus" (that is, before the year 250) "a few churches arose in some cities through the devotion of a few Christians; but nonetheless temples, many of them, smoked everywhere with foul fumes through the wretched error of the pagans." The testimonies of these authors in every (continues)

(printed under page 282)

(52) · call in col 554

Ed. Feu., cap. IV.

Feuardent's edition: ch. 4.

(printed under page 283)

(1) · call in col 554

Κατὰ μέσα τοῦ κόσμου. Ecclesiam Hierosolymitanam, aliasque in Palaestina constitutas hic intelligi, advertit unusquisque. Judaeam enim in medio mundi sitam esse censebant veteres Christiani.

Κατὰ μέσα τοῦ κόσμου [in the middle of the world]: anyone can see that the Church of Jerusalem and the others established in Palestine are meant here. For the early Christians held that Judaea lay in the middle of the world.

(printed under page 283)

(2) · call in col 554

Κατὰ σύνεσιν εἰδέναι τινάς. Legendum vellet Fronto Duc. κατὰ φρόνησιν εἰδέναι τινὰς τὴν σύνεσιν, quia vertit interpres: Secundum prudentiam nosse quosdam intelligentiam. Nam, subdit, intelligentiam nosse, phrasis est Scripturae, ut Isaiae LVI, 11, οὐκ εἰδότες σύνεσιν. Hieron. nescientes intelligentiam. Sed ut intelligentiam nosse, phrasis sit Scripturae, non sequitur Irenaei phrasim esse. Quare nihil immutandum in textu Graeco censerem. Suspicarer potius vocem Latinam, intelligentiam, e margine in textum irrepsisse. Nempe ad marginem codicis sui scripserat quis, intelligentiam, qua voce σύνεσιν melius reddi posse, quam prudentia, non immerito censebat. Imperitus alter scriba utramque textui inseruit.

Κατὰ σύνεσιν εἰδέναι τινάς [that some know by understanding]: Fronton du Duc would read κατὰ φρόνησιν εἰδέναι τινὰς τὴν σύνεσιν, because the translator rendered: "that some know understanding according to prudence." For, he adds, "to know understanding" is a phrase of Scripture, as Isaiah 56:11, οὐκ εἰδότες σύνεσιν, Jerome, "not knowing understanding." But granted that "to know understanding" is a phrase of Scripture, it does not follow that it is Irenaeus's phrase. So I would think nothing in the Greek text should be changed. I would rather suspect that the Latin word "intelligentiam" crept into the text from the margin. Someone, that is, had written "intelligentiam" in the margin of his manuscript, judging, not without reason, that σύνεσιν could be better rendered by that word than by "prudentia." Another, unskilled scribe put both into the text.

(printed under page 283)

(3) · call in col 554

Hiberis. Melius forte, Hiberiis, juxta Graec. Ἰβερίαις.

"Among the Iberians": perhaps better "Hiberiis" [in the Iberias], following the Greek Ἰβερίαις.

(printed under page 283)

(4) · call in col 554

In Oriente. Gr. κατὰ τὰς ἀνατολάς, in partibus vel regionibus Orientalibus. Neque enim hic Orientem stricte sumptum, cujus caput erat Antiochia, intelligit Irenaeus; sed totam eam plagam quae a Tigri fluvio usque ad Cyprum et Thracias versus occidentem, et a Ponto septentrionali usque ad Arabiam versus meridiem porrigitur. Sic enim Orientem veteres accipiebant. Videsis Ammian. lib. XIV, cap. 8.

"In the East": Greek κατὰ τὰς ἀνατολάς, "in the Eastern parts" or "regions." For Irenaeus does not mean here the East in the strict sense, whose capital was Antioch, but that whole tract which stretches westward from the river Tigris to Cyprus and the Thraces, and southward from the northern Pontus to Arabia. For so the ancients understood the East. See Ammianus XIV, 8.

(printed under page 283)

(5) · call in col 554

Lumen, praedicatio. Lumen vel de suo addidit interpres, comparationis elucidandae gratia (neque enim ea vox legitur in Graeco); vel, quod probabilius videtur, ea vox e margine in textum irrepsit. Scripserat quispiam ad oram codicis sui: Lumen, praedicatio veritatis, quod alter imprudens in textum transtulit.

"Light, the preaching": either the translator added "light" on his own, to make the comparison clearer (for the word is not read in the Greek); or, which seems more probable, the word crept into the text from the margin. Someone had written in the margin of his manuscript, "Light, the preaching of the truth," and another, careless, carried it into the text.

(printed under page 283)

(6) · call in col 554

Ampliat. Alludit Irenaeus ad illud quod de manna scriptum est, Exod. XVI, 18, et II Cor. VIII, 15. Nam verba Graeca τῶν Οʹ plane eadem sunt quae apud Epiphan., οὐκ ἐπλεόνασεν ὁ τὸ πολύ, καὶ ὁ τὸ ἔλαττον (vel ut habet Paulus, ὁ τὸ ὀλίγον), οὐκ ἠλαττόνησεν.

"Enlarges": Irenaeus alludes to what is written of the manna, Exod. 16:18 and 2 Cor. 8:15. For the Greek words of the Seventy are plainly the same as those in Epiphanius: "he who had much had nothing over, and he who had less" (or, as Paul has it, "he who had little") "had no lack."

(printed under page 283)

(7) · call in col 554

Intelligentiam. Redundat ea vox. Vide notam 2.

"Understanding": the word is redundant. See note 2.

(printed under page 283)

(53) · call in col 555

Rom. XI, 32.

Rom. 11:32.

(printed under page 284)

(1) · call in col 555

Nobis. Melius juxta Graec. legas, illis, quam nobis.

"To us": following the Greek you would better read "to them" than "to us."

(printed under page 284)

(2) · call in col 555

Sed in eo quod... exquirere, etc. Hellenismus est. Latine scribendum fuisset: sed in eo ut... exquirat et adjungat, sicut recte scripsit interpres, in eo ut... factam enarret: tum caetera omnia quae in infinitivo ponuntur, usque ad praeconare, in subjunctivo reponenda.

"But in this, that ... to search out," etc.: it is a Graecism. In Latin it should have been written "but in this, that ... he search out and add," just as the translator rightly wrote "in this, that ... he tell how it was done"; and then all the other verbs set in the infinitive, as far as "praeconare," should be put back into the subjunctive.

(printed under page 284)

(3) · call in col 555

Veritatis. Gr. πίστεως, fidei, non veritatis.

"Of the truth": Greek πίστεως, "of the faith," not "of the truth."

(printed under page 284)

(4) · call in col 555

Instrumentum. Gr. πραγματείαν, quod vertendum erat, molitionem, vel negotium, non instrumentum.

"Instrument": Greek πραγματείαν, which should have been rendered "undertaking" or "business," not "instrument."

(printed under page 284)

(5) · call in col 555

Magnanimus exstitit Deus. Gr. ἐμακροθύμησεν ὁ Θεός, i. e. diuturna lenitate, vel patientia tulit Deus, tum angelorum, qui ab eo recesserunt, defectionem, tum hominum inobedientiam.

"God was great-souled": Greek ἐμακροθύμησεν ὁ Θεός, that is, "God bore with long gentleness," or "with patience," both the falling-away of the angels who departed from him and the disobedience of men.

(printed under page 284)

(6) · call in col 555

Fecit. Ex Graeco adde, Deus.

"Made": add from the Greek, "God."

(printed under page 284)

(7) · call in col 555

Dei. Lege, Deus, ex Graeco Θεός.

"Of God": read "God" (nominative), from the Greek Θεός.

(printed under page 284)

(8) · call in col 555

Adesse. Perperam legit interp. συνεῖναι, cum tamen in Graeco, sit συνιεῖν, quod vertendum erat, intelligere, seu potius ut intelligat, cur scilicet aliter aliis apparuerit.

"To be present": the translator wrongly read συνεῖναι [to be with], whereas the Greek has συνιεῖν, which should have been rendered "to understand," or rather "that he understand," namely why he appeared to some in one way and to others in another.

(printed under page 284)

(9) · call in col 555

Verbum Dei. In cod. Clarom. omittitur Dei.

"The Word of God": in the Clermont manuscript "of God" is omitted.

(printed under page 284)

(10) · call in col 555

Et passus est. Scribendum erat, et passum est. Sed frequenter masculinum cum Verbo conjungit interpres, attendens scilicet ad Λόγον Graecorum, quod nomen masculini generis est. Id semel observasse sufficiat.

"And he suffered": it should have been written "et passum est" (neuter). But the translator often joins a masculine to "Verbum," looking, that is, to the Greeks' Λόγος, which is a masculine noun. Let it suffice to have noted this once.

(printed under page 284)

(11) · call in col 555

Gratias agere. Mallem vertisset interp. grata memoria recolere. Vide infra notam 15.

"To give thanks": I would rather the translator had rendered "to recall with grateful remembrance." See note 15 below.

(printed under page 284)

(12) · call in col 555

Ἀρκουμένους τούτους. Legendum vult Billius, ἀρκουμένους τούτῳ, vel certe ἀρκουμένου τούτου, tametsi hoc minus probet: ἀρκοῦντος enim, ait, potius dixisset, si significationem activam exprimere voluisset. Ἀρκουμένου τούτου edidit Gallas. et post eum Feuard., sed absque codicis ullius auctoritate. Merito censet Grab. ἀρκουμένους τούτους non incommode retineri posse, referendo scilicet τούτους ad τινάς, et subintelligendo τούτῳ.

Ἀρκουμένους τούτους [these being content]: Billius would read ἀρκουμένους τούτῳ [content with this], or at any rate ἀρκουμένου τούτου, though he approves this less: for, he says, he would rather have said ἀρκοῦντος had he wished to express an active sense. Gallasius printed ἀρκουμένου τούτου, and Feuardent after him, but without the authority of any manuscript. Grabe rightly judges that ἀρκουμένους τούτους can be kept without awkwardness, by referring τούτους to τινάς and understanding τούτῳ.

(printed under page 284)

(13) · call in col 555

Γενομένην. Sic recte cod. Reg. et ita legendum esse jam monuerat Billius, pro γινομένην, ut habent omnes editt.

Γενομένην [having come about]: so rightly the Royal manuscript, and Billius had already advised that it should be read so, in place of γινομένην [coming about], which all the editions have.

(printed under page 284)

(14) · call in col 555

Πάντα. Sic eadem Apostoli verba legit Irenaeus lib. III, c. 20, n. 2. Utrobique πάντα, omnia, non πάντας, ut habent vulgati nostri codd. In mss. etiam quibusdam N. Test. codd. habetur πάντα.

Πάντα [all things]: so Irenaeus reads the same words of the Apostle in Book III, ch. 20, n. 2. In both places πάντα, "all things," not πάντας [all men], as our common manuscripts have. In some manuscripts of the New Testament, too, πάντα is found.

(printed under page 284)

(15) · call in col 555

Εὐχαριστεῖν. Suspectum sibi esse eo loco hoc verbum ait Billius, quod parum aliis verbis, quae praecedunt, διδάσκειν, μηνύειν, ἐξερευνᾷν, ἀπαγγέλλειν, etc., respondeat. Opportunum tamen sensum haberi hic potest, si vertatur, uti recte vertit idem Billius, grato animo complectatur, vel recolat. Interdum enim εὐχαριστέω accipitur pro εὐλογέω, hoc vero pro celebro. Adde quod alludere potuit Irenaeus ad Eucharistiae sacrificium, quod passionis Christi memoriale a Patribus vocatur, utpote quo Domini mors, ut ait Apost. I Cor. XI, 26, annuntiatur, et grata memoria celebratur.

Εὐχαριστεῖν [to give thanks]: Billius says this verb is suspect to him in that place, because it corresponds poorly to the other verbs that precede, διδάσκειν, μηνύειν, ἐξερευνᾶν, ἀπαγγέλλειν [to teach, to disclose, to search out, to announce], etc. Yet a fitting sense can be had here if it is rendered, as the same Billius rightly rendered it, "embrace with a grateful heart," or "recall." For εὐχαριστέω is sometimes taken for εὐλογέω [to bless], and this for "to celebrate." Add that Irenaeus may have been alluding to the sacrifice of the Eucharist, which the Fathers call the memorial of Christ's passion, since by it the Lord's death, as the Apostle says in 1 Cor. 11:26, is proclaimed and celebrated with grateful remembrance.

(printed under page 284)

(54) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 558

I Cor. XV, 54.

1 Corinthians 15:54.

(printed under page 285)

(55) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 558

Ose. II, 23, et Rom. IX, 25.

Hosea 2:23, and Romans 9:25.

(printed under page 285)

(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 558

Isai. LIV, 1, et Gal. IV, 27.

Isaiah 54:1, and Galatians 4:27.

(printed under page 285)

(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 558

Rom. XI, 33.

Romans 11:33.

(printed under page 285)

(1) ‹anchor: Ἡ ἀρχή› · call in col 558

Ἡ ἀρχή. Legit interpres, καὶ οὐκ ἐν ἀρχῇ. Commode tamen legi potest, ἡ ἀρχή, principium, i. e. Dei Filius, quem ἀρχὴν et τέλος non semel dixit Joannes in Apocalypsi.

Ἡ ἀρχή ("the beginning"). The translator read καὶ οὐκ ἐν ἀρχῇ ("and not in the beginning"). It can, however, fittingly be read ἡ ἀρχή, the beginning, that is, the Son of God, whom John more than once called the ἀρχή and the τέλος in the Apocalypse.

(printed under page 285)

(2) ‹anchor: Τὰ ἀπεγνωσμένα ἔθνη› · call in col 558

Τὰ ἀπεγνωσμένα ἔθνη. Eas nimirum gentes, quas, ut ait D. Prosper Respons. ad object. VIII Gallorum, in praeteritis saeculis dimiserat Deus ingredi vias suas, quando Jacob elegit sibi Dominus, et non fecit taliter omni nationi, et judicia sua non manifestavit eis: quarum proinde gentium salus conclamata videbatur humanae prudentiae.

Τὰ ἀπεγνωσμένα ἔθνη ("the nations given up as lost"). That is, those nations which, as St Prosper says in his Answers to the eighth objection of the Gauls, God in past ages had let walk in their own ways, when the Lord chose Jacob for himself, and did not deal so with any other nation, and did not make his judgements known to them: nations whose salvation, accordingly, seemed to human prudence past hope.

(printed under page 285)

(3) ‹anchor: Τὸ θνητὸν τοῦτο σαρκίον› · call in col 558

Τὸ θνητὸν τοῦτο σαρκίον, etc. Apostoli verba I Cor. XV, 54, ex memoria refert Irenaeus: paulo enim aliter leguntur apud ipsum Apost.

Τὸ θνητὸν τοῦτο σαρκίον ("this mortal flesh"), etc. Irenaeus gives the Apostle's words of 1 Cor. 15:54 from memory, for in the Apostle himself they read a little differently.

(printed under page 285)

(4) ‹anchor: Πῶς τε ἐρεῖ› · call in col 558

Πῶς τε ἐρεῖ, ὁ οὐ λαός, etc. His prorsus affine est quod scribit D. Prosper loco sup. citato: Cur qui aliquando non populus, nunc autem populus Dei sit; et quorum aliquando non misertus est, nunc autem misereatur; et ubi dictum est: Non plebs mea vos; ibi vocentur filii Dei vivi: et quare quod quaerebat Israel, non sit consecutus, electio autem consecuta est, caeteri vero excaecati sunt: impossibile est comprehendere, et periculosae curiositatis est quaerere, etc.

Πῶς τε ἐρεῖ, ὁ οὐ λαός ("and how he says, that which was not a people"), etc. Closely akin to this is what St Prosper writes in the place cited above: "Why those who were once not a people are now the people of God; and why he now has mercy on those on whom he once had no mercy; and why, where it was said, You are not my people, there they are called sons of the living God; and why Israel did not obtain what it sought, but the election obtained it, and the rest were blinded: this is impossible to comprehend, and to inquire into it is a dangerous curiosity," etc.

(printed under page 285)

(5) ‹anchor: Μητέρα τούτων καὶ αὐτοῦ› · call in col 558

Μητέρα τούτων καὶ αὐτοῦ. Legit interpres, μητέρα τούτου καὶ αὐτῶν. Τούτου quidem et Billius lubens legit; insectatur enim Irenaeus eos qui Demiurgo, hoc est, summo illi rerum omnium opifici, matrem Enthymesin affingunt: sed αὐτῶν plane improbat; ad quid enim, inquit, referretur? Respondeo, ad Valentinianos, qui Achamoth matrem habere gloriabantur, quaeque ea ratione mater ipsorum, cap. 7 et alibi passim ab Irenaeo dicitur. Grabius Graecis nihil mutatis, τούτων de Valentinianis, αὐτοῦ de creatore accipit, sed minus bene: pronomen enim οὗτος demonstrativum cum sit, ad id quod immediate praecedit, non ad aliquid remotius referri debet. De Demiurgo autem, non de Valentinianis, proxime antea mentio facta. Quare cum vet. interp legere satius est, μητέρα τούτου καὶ αὐτῶν.

Μητέρα τούτων καὶ αὐτοῦ ("mother of these and of him"). The translator read μητέρα τούτου καὶ αὐτῶν ("mother of him and of them"). Billius too gladly reads τούτου, for Irenaeus is attacking those who fasten on the Demiurge, that is, on that supreme maker of all things, a mother, Enthymesis; but αὐτῶν he rejects outright: to what, he asks, would it refer? I answer: to the Valentinians, who boasted of having Achamoth as their mother, and who on that account is called their mother by Irenaeus in chapter 7 and often elsewhere. Grabe, changing nothing in the Greek, takes τούτων of the Valentinians and αὐτοῦ of the creator, but less well: since the pronoun οὗτος is a demonstrative, it must be referred to what immediately precedes, not to something more remote. And mention had just been made of the Demiurge, not of the Valentinians. It is better, therefore, to read with the old translator μητέρα τούτου καὶ αὐτῶν.

(printed under page 285)

(6) ‹anchor: Οὐδὲ τό› · call in col 558

Οὐδὲ τό. Billius legendum censet, οὐδὲ εἰς τό· Grabius vero, οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ τό. Sed nulla additione facta, οὐδὲ τό retineri posse nihil vetat, subintelligendo ἐν τῷ, quod mox praecessit.

Οὐδὲ τό ("nor the"). Billius thinks it should read οὐδὲ εἰς τό; Grabe, οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ τό. But nothing prevents keeping οὐδὲ τό with no addition, understanding ἐν τῷ, which came just before.

(printed under page 285)

(7) ‹anchor: Τὸν μὲν ἕνα, νῦν δέ› · call in col 558

Τὸν μὲν ἕνα, νῦν δέ, etc. Pro τὸν μὲν ἕνα, corrigit Billius ex vet. interp. νῦν μὲν τριάκοντα, νῦν δέ, etc. Melius vero Petavius, τότε μὲν τριάκοντα. Quod vero ἕνα, pro τριάκοντα, in textum irrepserit, id ex eo factum esse non imperite conjiciunt Fronto Duc. et Grabius, quod cum Irenaeus, vel priores ejus scribae, notam tricenarii numeri Λ cum lineola transversa, non ipsam vocem τριάκοντα reposuissent, qui eos secuti sunt, incaute Λ in Α, quae monadis nota est, transmutarunt, indeque ἕνα scriptum est: quod quidem eo facilius fieri potuit, quod Λ et Α, in mss. praesertim, maxime affines sint. Haec porro dum pro arbitrio distinguit Gallasius, in alienum omnino sensum detorquet. Sic scribit: Ὥστε τὸ ὑπὲρ ταύτην πάλιν Πλήρωμα, τὸν μὲν ἕνα, τὸν δὲ ἀνήριθμον φῦλον, etc. Quae sic vertit: Ut supra hanc rursum ementiaris Pleroma, hic quidem unum, ille vero infinitum genus Aeonum.

Τὸν μὲν ἕνα, νῦν δέ ("now one, but now"), etc. For τὸν μὲν ἕνα Billius corrects from the old translator to νῦν μὲν τριάκοντα, νῦν δέ ("now thirty, but now"), etc. Petau does better: τότε μὲν τριάκοντα ("at one time thirty"). That ἕνα crept into the text in place of τριάκοντα, Fronton du Duc and Grabe not unskilfully conjecture came about thus: Irenaeus, or his earlier copyists, had put the sign for the number thirty, Λ with a small cross-stroke, and not the word τριάκοντα itself; those who followed them carelessly changed Λ into Α, which is the sign for one, and so ἕνα came to be written. This could happen all the more easily because Λ and Α are very alike, especially in manuscripts. Gallasius, punctuating this at his own pleasure, twists it into an altogether foreign sense. He writes: Ὥστε τὸ ὑπὲρ ταύτην πάλιν Πλήρωμα, τὸν μὲν ἕνα, τὸν δὲ ἀνήριθμον φῦλον, etc., which he renders: "So that above her you again feign a Pleroma, this one indeed a single one, that other a countless race of Aeons."

(printed under page 285)

(8) ‹anchor: Et quemadmodum factus est› · call in col 558

Et quemadmodum factus est. Graeca hic paulo liberius vertit interpres. Haec, πῶς τε ἐρεῖ, reddenda erant, quomodo, seu, quo sensu dicit, scilicet Deus. Ἐρεῖ enim hic non verbum futuri temporis est, ut falso post Petavium existimavit Grabius, sed praesentis. Sic Matth. VII, 4, ἢ πῶς ἐρεῖς τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, etc., aut quomodo dicis fratri tuo, etc.

"And as he was made." Here the translator rendered the Greek somewhat freely. The words πῶς τε ἐρεῖ should have been rendered "how," or "in what sense he says," namely God. For ἐρεῖ here is not a verb of the future tense, as Grabe wrongly supposed after Petau, but of the present. So Matt. 7:4, ἢ πῶς ἐρεῖς τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, etc., "or how do you say to your brother," etc.

(printed under page 285)

(9) ‹anchor: Praeconare› · call in col 558

Praeconare. Ita melius quam praeconiare (ut est in editt.), mss. Clarom., Ottobon., Arund. et Merc. 2. Praeconare autem, vel praeconari, est praedicare, extollere, annuntiare. Sic Martianus Capella lib. XVII: Ingressuros etiam cunctos nominatim vocabat, fama praeconans. Et liber I Memorial. sanct.: Solvite divinis laudibus ora, summique Redemptoris beneficia extollentes, praeconate et dicite, etc. Et infra: Qui liber vestrorum actuum memoriam gloriosam praeconatur. Praeconari etiam dixit Honorius Augustodun., lib. III, cap. 1.

Praeconare ("proclaim"). So, better than praeconiare (as in the editions), the manuscripts of Clermont, the Ottoboni, Arundel and Mercier 2. Praeconare, or praeconari, means to preach, to extol, to announce. So Martianus Capella, book 17: "He called by name all who were about to enter, proclaiming them by report." And book 1 of the Memoriale sanctorum: "Open your mouths in divine praises, and, extolling the benefits of the supreme Redeemer, proclaim and say," etc. And below: "Which book proclaims the glorious memory of your deeds." Honorius of Autun also said praeconari, book 3, chapter 1.

(printed under page 285)

<!-- Q6a: notes (1)–(5), called in the Latin of col 559, set here from the column and foot images; the old-edition note under the Billius band set too (its superscript numeral is small and read as 53 at this resolution; UNSURE: an earlier pass read 28). -->

(53) · call in col 559

Ed. Feu., cap. VI.

Feuardent's edition: ch. 6.

(printed under page 286)

(1) · call in col 559

Mentiri. Lege, ut mentireris, sicuti paulo superius, ut adinvenires, et pervenires.

Mentiri ("to lie"). Read ut mentireris ("that you should lie"), just as a little above, ut adinvenires, et pervenires ("that you should invent, and arrive").

(printed under page 286)

(2) · call in col 559

Sententia. Graec. συνέσεως, quod melius vertisset interpres, sapientia.

Sententia ("judgement"). Greek συνέσεως ("understanding"), which the translator would better have rendered sapientia ("wisdom").

(printed under page 286)

(3) · call in col 559

Horum. Ita pro eorum ex Clarom., Arund. et Voss. juxta Graec. τούτων reponere placuit. Horum autem refero ad magistros illos divina sapientia destitutos, quorum mentio proxime facta est, sub finem capitis praecedentis.

Horum ("of these"). So we have chosen to restore it, in place of eorum, from the Clermont, Arundel and Vossius manuscripts, following the Greek τούτων. And I refer horum to those teachers destitute of divine wisdom who were mentioned just before, at the end of the preceding chapter.

(printed under page 286)

(4) · call in col 559

Antiquas in suum characterem doctrinas transferens. Vertendum erat: ab ea quae dicitur Gnostica haeresis, principia in proprium scholae suae characterem transferens, seu aptans: i. e. in peculiaris sectae formam aptans, quibusdam scilicet additis. Quamvis enim Valentinus doctrinae suae principia a vetustioribus Gnosticis accepisset, plura tamen eorum haeresi addiderat, ut Dissert. cit. ostendimus.

"Transferring ancient doctrines into his own character." It should have been rendered: "from the heresy called Gnostic, transferring, or adapting, its principles into the proper character of his own school": that is, adapting them to the form of a peculiar sect, with certain things, of course, added. For although Valentinus had received the principles of his teaching from older Gnostics, he had nonetheless added a good deal to their heresy, as we have shown in the Dissertation cited.

(printed under page 286)

(5) · call in col 559

Definivit. Al. diffinivit. Sed adde ex Graeco, esse.

Definivit ("defined"). Others read diffinivit. But add, from the Greek, esse ("to be").

(printed under page 286)

<!-- Q6a: note (6) below is a page-foot note called in the Greek of col 560 (πρῶτος (6)); it stays here only until it is filed under 560 (this check may not write n560). Italic markup and the æ ligatures removed (unit rule: no italic markup; ae/oe). --> (6) Ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, etc. Locum hunc a Blondello et Dallaeo vexatum egregie ab eorum cavillationibus vindicarunt Pearsonius in Vindic. epist. S. Ignatii, part. II, cap. 3, 4, 5, 6 et 7.; Cotelerius in Observat. ad epist. Ignat. ad Magnes., et alii SS. martyris epistolarum vindices. Nempe has viri apostolici epistolas, ac in primis eam, quae est ad Magnesianos, juniorem Ignatio auctorem redolere ex eo contendebant Blondellus et Dallaeus, quod in his ejusdem verbis, αὐτοῦ λόγος ἀΐδιος, οὐκ ἀπὸ σιγῆς προελθών, aperte perstringatur haereticorum Sige. Atqui, inquiebant, Valentinus, Irenaeo teste lib. I, c. 5, num. 11, ex Gnosticorum haeresi primus fuit, qui ex veteribus doctrinis in suum characterem, seu formam translatis et aptatis, quod subjicit dogma tradiderit, ac proinde Σιγὴν memoraverit. Plura respondent, invictisque muniunt argumentis Ignatii defensores strenuissimi, ex quibus duo duntaxat, quae ad rem nostram faciunt, observabimus. 1° Falsissimum id esse, Valentinum primum omnium copulationem Bythi et Siges tradidisse; quin potius certissimum esse, ridiculum illud commentum a vetustioribus Gnosticis haustum fuisse, ut ipsi etiam demonstravimus Dissert. 1, art. 5, n. 22 et seqq. 2° Verba haec Irenaei, ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, perperam et dolose a Blondello et Dallaeo referri ad Gnosticam haeresim, quasi Irenaei mens esset, Valentinum ex illa Gnosticorum haeresi primum fuisse, qui ex veteribus doctrinis ad suum characterem, sive peculiarem sectae formam translatis et aptatis, quod subjicit dogma tradiderit. Alio quippe referuntur ea verba, ad priorem scilicet sententiam, non ad sequentem. Ἴδωμεν νῦν καὶ τὴν τούτων ἄστατον γνώμην, δύο που καὶ τριῶν ὄντων, πῶς περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν, οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ λέγουσιν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς πράγμασι καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ἐναντία ἀποφαίνονται. Videamus nunc et horum (magistrorum scilicet illorum divina sapientia destitutorum, quorum sub finem capitis praeced. meminerat) inconstantem sententiam, cum sint duo vel tres, quemadmodum de eisdem non eadem dicunt, sed et nominibus et rebus contraria respondent: ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, qui enim primus est (ut satis fideliter reddidit vetus interpres) ex paucis scilicet illis duobus, vel tribus magistris divinae sapientiae exsortibus, Valentinus nimirum, a Gnostica haeresi antiquas in suum characterem doctrinas transferens sic definivit. Tum sequitur, Σεκοῦνδος δέ... ἄλλοι δέ. Quae perspicue demonstrant, haec, ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, referri, non ad Gnosticam haeresim, sed ad duos illos, vel tres, quorum inconstantem sententiam expositurus est Irenaeus.

(6) Ho men gar prōtos ("For the first"), etc. This passage, harassed by Blondel and Daillé, has been admirably vindicated from their cavils by Pearson in the Vindiciae epistolarum S. Ignatii, part II, chapters 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7; by Cotelier in his Observationes on the epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians; and by other champions of the holy martyr's epistles. Blondel and Daillé, namely, contended that these epistles of the apostolic man, and above all the one to the Magnesians, savour of an author later than Ignatius, on the ground that in his words there, "His eternal Word, not proceeding from silence", the heretics' Sige is openly glanced at. "But," they said, "Valentinus, on the testimony of Irenaeus, book I, chapter 5, number 11, was the first of the Gnostic heresy to hand down the doctrine that he subjoins, having transferred and adapted it from older doctrines into his own character, or form, and so to have made mention of Sige." The most strenuous defenders of Ignatius make many replies and fortify them with unanswerable arguments, of which we shall note only two that bear on our matter. First, that it is utterly false that Valentinus was the first of all to hand down the coupling of Bythos and Sige; rather, it is most certain that that ridiculous fiction was drawn from older Gnostics, as we ourselves have also shown in Dissertation 1, article 5, number 22 and following. Second, that these words of Irenaeus, ho men gar prōtos, are wrongly and deceitfully referred by Blondel and Daillé to the Gnostic heresy, as though Irenaeus's meaning were that Valentinus was the first of that heresy of the Gnostics to hand down the doctrine that he subjoins, having transferred and adapted it from older doctrines to his own character, or the peculiar form of his sect. For those words are referred elsewhere, namely to the preceding sentence, not to the following one: "Let us see now also the unstable opinion of these men, there being some two or three of them, how they do not say the same things about the same matters, but declare things contrary both in substance and in names." Let us see now also the inconstant opinion of these (that is, of those teachers destitute of divine wisdom, whom he had mentioned at the end of the preceding chapter), since they are two or three, how they do not say the same things about the same matters, but answer contrary things both in names and in substance: ho men gar prōtos, for he who is the first (as the old translator rendered it faithfully enough), that is, of those few, those two or three teachers bereft of divine wisdom, namely Valentinus, transferring ancient doctrines from the Gnostic heresy into his own character, thus defined. Then follows, "But Secundus … but others". These things show plainly that the words ho men gar prōtos are referred not to the Gnostic heresy but to those two or three whose inconstant opinion Irenaeus is about to set out.

<!-- note: page-foot notes, not editors' column prose. The page is 559 | 560; its foot notes (1)–(9) run in two columns below the full-width old-edition line. Calls (1)–(5) stand in the Latin of col 559; (6)–(9) in the Greek of col 560, so (6)–(9) belong under 560. Gutter letters B, C, D omitted. -->

(2) ‹anchor: Sententia› · call in col 560

Sententia. Graec. συνέσεως, quod melius vertisset interpres, sapientia.

Sententia ("judgement"). Greek συνέσεως ("of understanding"), which the translator would better have rendered sapientia ("wisdom").

(printed under page 286)

(3) ‹anchor: Horum› · call in col 560

Horum. Ita pro eorum ex Clarom., Arund. et Voss. juxta Graec. τούτων reponere placuit. Horum autem refero ad magistros illos divina sapientia destitutos, quorum mentio proxime facta est, sub finem capitis praecedentis.

Horum ("of these"). We have chosen to restore this in place of eorum ("of them"), from the Clermont, Arundel and Voss manuscripts, following the Greek τούτων. I refer horum to those teachers destitute of divine wisdom who were mentioned just before, at the end of the preceding chapter.

(printed under page 286)

(4) ‹anchor: Antiquas in suum characterem doctrinas transferens› · call in col 560

Antiquas in suum characterem doctrinas transferens. Vertendum erat: ab ea quae dicitur Gnostica haeresis, principia in proprium scholae suae characterem transferens, seu aptans: i. e. in peculiaris sectae formam aptans, quibusdam scilicet additis. Quamvis enim Valentinus doctrinae suae principia a vetustioribus Gnosticis accepisset, plura tamen eorum haeresi addiderat, ut Dissert. cit. ostendimus.

"Transferring ancient doctrines into his own stamp." It should have been rendered: "transferring, or adapting, the first principles from the so-called Gnostic heresy into the proper stamp of his own school," that is, adapting them to the form of a sect of his own, with certain things added. For although Valentinus had received the first principles of his teaching from the older Gnostics, he had nonetheless added a good deal to their heresy, as we showed in the Dissertation cited.

(printed under page 286)

(5) ‹anchor: Definivit› · call in col 560

Definivit. Al. diffinivit. Sed adde ex Graeco, esse.

Definivit ("defined"). Others read diffinivit. But add esse ("to be") from the Greek.

(printed under page 286)

(6) ‹anchor: Ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος› · call in col 560

Ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, etc. Locum hunc a Blondello et Dallaeo vexatum egregie ab eorum cavillationibus vindicarunt Pearsonius in Vindic. epist. S. Ignatii, part. II, cap. 3, 4, 5, 6 et 7; Cotelerius in Observat. ad epist. Ignat. ad Magnes., et alii SS. martyris epistolarum vindices. Nempe has viri apostolici epistolas, ac in primis eam, quae est ad Magnesianos, juniorem Ignatio auctorem redolere ex eo contendebant Blondellus et Dallaeus, quod in his ejusdem verbis, αὐτοῦ λόγος ἀΐδιος, οὐκ ἀπὸ σιγῆς προελθών, aperte perstringatur haereticorum Sige. Atqui, inquiebant, Valentinus, Irenaeo teste lib. I, c. 5, num. 11, ex Gnosticorum haeresi primus fuit, qui ex veteribus doctrinis in suum characterem, seu formam translatis et aptatis, quod subjicit dogma tradiderit, ac proinde Σιγὴν memoraverit. Plura respondent, invictisque muniunt argumentis Ignatii defensores strenuissimi, ex quibus duo duntaxat, quae ad rem nostram faciunt, observabimus. 1° Falsissimum id esse, Valentinum primum omnium copulationem Bythi et Siges tradidisse; quin potius certissimum esse, ridiculum illud commentum a vetustioribus Gnosticis haustum fuisse, ut ipsi etiam demonstravimus Dissert. I, art. 5, n. 22 et seqq. 2° Verba haec Irenaei, ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, perperam et dolose a Blondello et Dallaeo referri ad Gnosticam haeresim, quasi Irenaei mens esset, Valentinum ex illa Gnosticorum haeresi primum fuisse, qui ex veteribus doctrinis ad suum characterem, sive peculiarem sectae formam translatis et aptatis, quod subjicit dogma tradiderit. Alio quippe referuntur ea verba, ad priorem scilicet sententiam, non ad sequentem. Ἴδωμεν νῦν καὶ τὴν τούτων ἄστατον γνώμην, δύο που καὶ τριῶν ὄντων, πῶς περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν, οὐ τὰ αὐτὰ λέγουσιν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς πράγμασι καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασιν ἐναντία ἀποφαίνονται. Videamus nunc et horum (magistrorum scilicet illorum divina sapientia destitutorum, quorum sub finem capitis praeced. meminerat) inconstantem sententiam, cum sint duo vel tres, quemadmodum de eisdem non eadem dicunt, sed et nominibus et rebus contraria respondent: ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, qui enim primus est (ut satis fideliter reddidit vetus interpres) ex paucis scilicet illis duobus, vel tribus magistris divinae sapientiae exsortibus, Valentinus nimirum, a Gnostica haeresi antiquas in suum characterem doctrinas transferens sic definivit. Tum sequitur, Σεκοῦνδος δέ... ἄλλοι δέ. Quae perspicue demonstrant, haec, ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, referri, non ad Gnosticam haeresim, sed ad duos illos, vel tres, quorum inconstantem sententiam expositurus est Irenaeus.

Ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος ("for the first"), etc. This passage, harried by Blondel and Daillé, has been admirably vindicated from their quibbles by Pearson in his Vindiciae of the letters of St Ignatius, part 2, chapters 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7; by Cotelier in his Observations on Ignatius's letter to the Magnesians; and by other defenders of the holy martyr's letters. Blondel and Daillé contended that these letters of the apostolic man, and above all the one to the Magnesians, smack of an author later than Ignatius, on the ground that in these words of that letter, "his eternal Word, not proceeding from silence," the heretics' Sige (Silence) is plainly glanced at. But, they said, Valentinus, on the testimony of Irenaeus, book 1, chapter 5, number 11, was the first of the Gnostic heresy to hand on the doctrine he goes on to describe, from old teachings transferred and adapted into his own stamp or form, and so to have mentioned Σιγή. The very vigorous defenders of Ignatius make many replies and fortify them with unanswerable arguments; of these we shall note only two that bear on our matter. First, that it is quite false that Valentinus was the first of all to teach the coupling of Bythus and Sige; on the contrary, it is quite certain that this ridiculous fiction was drawn from the older Gnostics, as we ourselves have also shown in Dissertation 1, article 5, number 22 and following. Second, that these words of Irenaeus, ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, are wrongly and deceitfully referred by Blondel and Daillé to the Gnostic heresy, as if Irenaeus meant that Valentinus was the first of that Gnostic heresy to hand on the doctrine he describes, from old teachings transferred and adapted into his own stamp, that is, the peculiar form of his sect. For those words refer elsewhere, namely to the preceding sentence, not to the following one: "Let us now see also the unstable opinion of these men, though they are only some two or three, how they do not say the same things about the same matters, but declare contrary things in substance and in names." "Let us see now the inconstant opinion of these too" (that is, of those teachers destitute of divine wisdom whom he had mentioned at the end of the preceding chapter), "since they are two or three, how they do not say the same things about the same matters, but answer contrary things in names and in substance": ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος, "for he who is the first" (as the old translator rendered it faithfully enough), that is, of those few, those two or three teachers who have no share in divine wisdom, namely Valentinus, "transferring ancient doctrines from the Gnostic heresy into his own stamp, defined thus." Then follows, "Secundus, however ... others, however." These words show plainly that ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρῶτος refers not to the Gnostic heresy but to those two or three whose inconstant opinion Irenaeus is about to set out.

(printed under page 286)

(7) ‹anchor: Ἀρχὰς εἰς ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου› · call in col 560

Ἀρχὰς εἰς ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου, etc. Legi vult Billius cum veteri interprete, ἀρχαίας διδασκαλίας. Sed nihil in Epiphanii verbis immutare necesse est. Sensus enim est, Valentinum haustis a Gnostica haeresi principiis, ea in proprium scholae suae, διδασκαλείου, characterem transtulisse; quod certum esse dixi nota praeced. Porro ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου, phrasim Irenaeo usitatam esse, probant ejus verba de Basilidianis infra cap. 24, n. 7: Illorum (astrologorum) theoremata accipientes, in suum characterem doctrinae transtulerunt. Et de Tatiano cap. 28: Ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου συνεστήσατο, proprium characterem doctrinae constituit. In quibus locis interpres perperam vertit διδασκαλείου, doctrinae: nam διδασκαλεῖον proprie schola est, non doctrina.

Ἀρχὰς εἰς ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου ("first principles into the proper stamp of a school"), etc. Billius would read, with the old translator, ἀρχαίας διδασκαλίας ("ancient teachings"). But there is no need to change anything in Epiphanius's words. For the sense is that Valentinus, having drawn his first principles from the Gnostic heresy, transferred them into the proper stamp of his own school, διδασκαλεῖον; which I said in the preceding note is certain. Moreover, that ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου is a phrase familiar to Irenaeus is proved by his words on the Basilidians below, chapter 24, number 7: "taking up their (the astrologers') theorems, they transferred them into their own stamp of doctrine." And on Tatian, chapter 28: Ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα διδασκαλείου συνεστήσατο, "he set up his own stamp of doctrine." In these places the translator wrongly renders διδασκαλείου as "of doctrine": for διδασκαλεῖον properly means a school, not a doctrine.

(printed under page 286)

(8) ‹anchor: Μεθαρμόσας› · call in col 560

Μεθαρμόσας. Sensus non est Valentinum principia, quae a Gnosticis acceperat, mutasse, multo minus in melius correxisse, aut emendasse, quasi nihil iis addidisset. Quamvis enim interdum ea sit significatio verbi, μεθαρμόζειν, hic tamen, ut et alibi saepe, transferre aut adaptare significat: quod pluribus probat Pearson. cit. cap. 6 sub finem.

Μεθαρμόσας ("having refitted"). The sense is not that Valentinus changed the first principles he had received from the Gnostics, much less that he corrected or emended them for the better, as though he had added nothing to them. For although that is sometimes the meaning of the verb μεθαρμόζειν, here, as often elsewhere, it means to transfer or adapt: as Pearson proves at length in the chapter cited, chapter 6, towards the end.

(printed under page 286)

(9) ‹anchor: Ἐξηροφόρησεν› · call in col 560

Ἐξηροφόρησεν. Quid hic scripserit Irenaeus, haud facile est divinare. Nam ἐξηροφόρησεν barbara vox est, quae utrum ab auctore nostro profecta sit, dubium est. Pro ea legunt Hammondus et Usserius, ἐξεφόρησεν. Isaacus Vossius, leviori mutatione, ἐληροφόρησεν. Cotelerio corrigendum videtur, ἐψηφοφόρησεν, quod sensu, inquit, non discrepat a se- (continues)

Ἐξηροφόρησεν. What Irenaeus wrote here is not easy to guess. For ἐξηροφόρησεν is a barbarous word, and whether it came from our author is doubtful. In its place Hammond and Ussher read ἐξεφόρησεν ("he brought out"). Isaac Voss, with a lighter change, reads ἐληροφόρησεν ("he babbled forth"). Cotelier thinks it should be corrected to ἐψηφοφόρησεν ("he voted, decreed"), which, he says, does not differ in sense from ... (continues)

(printed under page 286)

(1) ‹anchor: Δυάδα› · call in col 562

Δυάδα. Τινά ex veteri interprete addi vult Billius. Sed parum refert.

Δυάδα ("a dyad"). Billius would add τινά ("a certain") from the old translator. But it matters little.

(printed under page 287)

(2) ‹anchor: Ὃν μίαν› · call in col 562

Ὃν μίαν. Sophiam scilicet, quae intempestiva curiositate ducta, pene periit.

Ὃν μίαν ("of which one"). Sophia, that is, who, led by untimely curiosity, almost perished.

(printed under page 287)

(3) ‹anchor: Τὴν λοιπὴν πραγματείαν› · call in col 562

Τὴν λοιπὴν πραγματείαν. Eam nimirum, quae extra Pleroma est.

Τὴν λοιπὴν πραγματείαν ("the remaining business"). That, namely, which is outside the Pleroma.

(printed under page 287)

(4) ‹anchor: Αὐτῷ› · call in col 562

Αὐτῷ. Lege αὐτῶν cum vet. interprete.

Αὐτῷ ("to him"). Read αὐτῶν ("of them") with the old translator.

(printed under page 287)

(5) ‹anchor: Γνώμην› · call in col 562

Γνώμην. Μνήμην legit Billius cum veteri interprete, non γνώμην, ut sit sensus, eam in recordatione beati illius status, quo non sine magno dolore carebat, ejusmodi fetum edidisse. At γνώμην, notitiam, eumdem habet sensum: quare nihil mutandum censeo.

Γνώμην ("knowledge"). Billius reads μνήμην ("memory") with the old translator, not γνώμην, so that the sense is that she brought forth such an offspring in remembrance of that blessed state, the loss of which she felt with no small grief. But γνώμην, "knowledge," has the same sense: so I judge that nothing should be changed.

(printed under page 287)

(6) ‹anchor: Et Pleroma› · call in col 562

Et Pleroma. Adde ex Gr. et reliquum Pleroma.

"And the Pleroma." Add from the Greek: "and the rest of the Pleroma."

(printed under page 287)

(7) ‹anchor: Determinantem› · call in col 562

Determinantem. Legi mallem, disterminantem, quam determinantem.

Determinantem ("bounding"). I would rather read disterminantem ("dividing off") than determinantem.

(printed under page 287)

(8) ‹anchor: Sed matrem foris factam... enixam esse› · call in col 562

Sed matrem foris factam... enixam esse. (Supple eum.) Sic restituimus partim ex cod. Voss., partim ex aliis. Ille habet, matrem autem foris factam... enixam esse (quam lectionem corruptae editorum lectioni longe praeponendam, Grabium haud secutum fuisse miramur): expungimus vero particulam autem, utpote superfluam, nec in omnibus eodd. exstantem, retenta particula sed, quam habent omnes editt. cum nostris mss.

"But that the mother, having been put outside ... had brought forth." (Supply eum, "him.") We have restored it so, partly from the Voss manuscript, partly from others. That manuscript has matrem autem foris factam ... enixam esse (a reading far to be preferred to the corrupt reading of the editors; we are surprised Grabe did not follow it); but we strike out the particle autem as superfluous and not found in all the manuscripts, keeping the particle sed, which all the editions have along with our manuscripts.

(printed under page 287)

(9) ‹anchor: In Pleroma› · call in col 562

In Pleroma. Ita cum Grabio reponimus ex codd. Clarom. et Voss. pro ad Pleroma, ut est in aliis editt.

"Into the Pleroma." So we restore, with Grabe, from the Clermont and Voss manuscripts, in place of ad Pleroma ("to the Pleroma"), as it stands in the other editions.

(printed under page 287)

(10) ‹anchor: Sub umbra› · call in col 562

Sub umbra. Ex Graeco lege, cum umbra.

Sub umbra ("under a shadow"). From the Greek read cum umbra ("with a shadow").

(printed under page 287)

(11) ‹anchor: omnipotentem dicit eorum› · call in col 562

Omnipotentem eorum. Melius vertisset interpres, omnipotentem in ea, vel supremum Dominum eorum.

Omnipotentem eorum ("their almighty one"). The translator would better have rendered "almighty over them," or "their supreme Lord."

(printed under page 287)

(1) ‹anchor: Similem iis qui dicentur› · call in col 564

Similem iis qui dicentur. Vetus interpres legit ὅμοιον, non ὁμοίως, sed male, inquiunt Billius et Fronto Duc., ut sensus aperte docet. Itaque vertendum, similiter iis, vel eo modo, quo ii qui dicentur.

"Like those who will be spoken of." The old translator read ὅμοιον ("like," adjective), not ὁμοίως ("likewise"); but wrongly, say Billius and Fronton du Duc, as the sense plainly shows. So it should be rendered "in like manner to those," or "in the same way as those who will be spoken of."

(printed under page 288)

(2) ‹anchor: Folia veritatis› · call in col 564

Folia veritatis. Φύλλα legit interpres, non φυτά, sed perperam. Vertendum igitur: plantas, vel stirpes veritatis.

Folia veritatis ("leaves of truth"). The translator read φύλλα ("leaves"), not φυτά ("plants"), but wrongly. It should therefore be rendered "plants," or "shoots of truth."

(printed under page 288)

(3) ‹anchor: Tradidit› · call in col 564

Tradidit. In Eras., Gallas. et Feuard. tradit.

Tradidit ("handed on"). In Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, tradit ("hands on").

(printed under page 288)

(4) ‹anchor: Et lumen et tenebras› · call in col 564

Et lumen et tenebras. Haec ab interprete paulo obscurius reddita clarius explicat textus Graecus: τετράδα δεξιὰν καὶ τετράδα ἀριστερὰν, τὴν μὲν μίαν φῶς, τὴν δὲ ἄλλην σκότος. Sensus ergo est, non lumen et tenebras aliud quiddam esse a tetrade dextra et tetrade sinistra; sed primam ogdoadem a Secundo divisam fuisse in duas tetradas, alteram scilicet dextram, alteram sinistram: priorem dictam fuisse lumen, posteriorem tenebras. Sic accepit Tertullianus cap. 38, scribens: Humanior jam Secundus, ut brevior, ogdoadem in duas tetradas dividens, in dextram et sinistram, in lumen et tenebras. Hinc explicandus Theodoretus lib. I Haeret. Fabul., c. 8: Διχῆ τὴν ὀγδοάδα διεῖλε, καὶ τὸ μὲν αὐτῆς ἐκάλεσε δεξιὸν, τὸ δὲ εὐώνυμον· καὶ προστέθεικε φῶς καὶ σκότος. Bipartito divisit ogdoadem, et unam illius partem dextram vocavit, alteram sinistram; adjecitque lumen et tenebras: i. e. quibus nomen adjecit luminis et tenebrarum.

"Both light and darkness." What the translator rendered rather obscurely the Greek text explains more clearly: "a right tetrad and a left tetrad, the one light, the other darkness." The sense, then, is not that light and darkness are something other than the right tetrad and the left tetrad, but that the first ogdoad was divided by Secundus into two tetrads, the one right, the other left, the former being called light, the latter darkness. So Tertullian took it, chapter 38, writing: "Secundus, now more human, as being briefer, dividing the ogdoad into two tetrads, into right and left, into light and darkness." From this Theodoret is to be explained, book 1 of the Haereticae fabulae, chapter 8: "He divided the ogdoad in two, and called one part of it right and the other left, and added light and darkness": that is, to which he added the names of light and darkness.

(printed under page 288)

(5) ‹anchor: Et discedentem› · call in col 564

Et discedentem. Sic recte Feuard. edidit juxta Graec. ἀποστᾶσαν, quod paulo superius reddidit interpres discedentem. Consentit cod. Clarom., nisi quod pro discedentem, scripsit incautus amanuensis descedentem. In Erasm., Gallas. caeterisque aliis mss. perperam habetur, descendentem. Melius apud Tertull. cap. 28, desultricem. Porro post autem, particulam et incuria scribarum omissam in omnibus cum editt. tum mss., addidimus tum ex Graeco, tum ex ipsomet interp. qui paulo ante, eadem, quae hic, verba Graeca reddidit, discedentem et destitutam.

"And departing." So Feuardent rightly printed, following the Greek ἀποστᾶσαν, which a little above the translator rendered discedentem. The Clermont manuscript agrees, except that for discedentem a careless copyist wrote descedentem. In Erasmus, Gallasius and all the other manuscripts it stands wrongly as descendentem ("descending"). Better, in Tertullian chapter 28, desultricem ("the deserter"). Further, after autem we have added the particle et, left out through the scribes' carelessness in all the editions and manuscripts alike, both from the Greek and from the translator himself, who a little earlier rendered the same Greek words as here by discedentem et destitutam ("departing and forsaken").

(printed under page 288)

(6) ‹anchor: Destitutam› · call in col 564

Destitutam. Deest in cod. Clarom.

Destitutam ("forsaken"). Missing in the Clermont manuscript.

(printed under page 288)

(7) ‹anchor: Alius vero quidam, qui et clarus est magister› · call in col 564

Alius vero quidam, qui et clarus est magister, etc. Recte conjicit sagacissimus Pearsonius a clariss. Dodwello Dissert. 4 in Iren., § 25, citatus, quae hic ab Epiphanio omissa sunt Graeca, sic ab Irenaeo scripta fuisse: Ἄλλος δέ τις, ὁ καὶ Ἐπιφανὴς διδάσκαλος αὐτῶν, ad hominis scilicet nomen alludente. Sed cum allusionem non intelligeret interpres, proprium nomen in appellativum male commutasse: ita ut jam ex interprete dignosci non possit, in quem conveniat ea haeresis ab auctore nostro hic descripta. Quo et errore lapsus Tertullianus veterem interp. secutus scripsit cap. 37, insignioris apud eos magistri. Epiphanem tamen hic intelligi, subdit Dodwellus, non modo inde colligitur, quod soleant veteres inter primarios Valentinianae sectae haeresiarchas Epiphanem recensere, proximumque Secundo, ut noster fecit Irenaeus, numerare, ut ex Epiphanio discimus; sed et quod quae claro illi, quem volunt, magistro tribuit Irenaeus, in Epiphanem apertissime quadrent.

"But another, who is also a distinguished teacher," etc. The most acute Pearson, cited by the most distinguished Dodwell in Dissertation 4 on Irenaeus, § 25, rightly conjectures that the Greek here omitted by Epiphanius was written by Irenaeus thus: Ἄλλος δέ τις, ὁ καὶ Ἐπιφανὴς διδάσκαλος αὐτῶν ("another, who is also their Epiphanes teacher"), Irenaeus alluding to the man's name; but that the translator, not understanding the allusion, wrongly changed the proper name into a common adjective, so that from the translator one can no longer tell to whom the heresy here described by our author belongs. Into the same error Tertullian fell, following the old translator, when he wrote in chapter 37 "of a more notable teacher among them." Yet that Epiphanes is meant here, Dodwell adds, is gathered not only from the fact that the ancients regularly list Epiphanes among the chief heresiarchs of the Valentinian sect, and number him next to Secundus, as our Irenaeus did, as we learn from Epiphanius; but also because what Irenaeus attributes to that "distinguished" teacher they mean fits Epiphanes most plainly.

(printed under page 288)

(8) ‹anchor: Ὑποκειμένων› · call in col 564

Ὑποκειμένων. Adde αὐτῷ ex vet. interprete.

Ὑποκειμένων ("of the things lying beneath"). Add αὐτῷ ("to him") from the old translator.

(printed under page 288)

(9) ‹anchor: Ἄριστον› · call in col 564

Ἄριστον. Lege ἀριστερόν cum vet. et confer cap. 31, ad quod remittit Irenaeus.

Ἄριστον ("best"). Read ἀριστερόν ("left") with the old translator, and compare chapter 31, to which Irenaeus refers.

(printed under page 288)

(10) ‹anchor: Προβεβλῆσθαί φησι› · call in col 564

Προβεβλῆσθαί φησι. Sic cod. Reg. cum Epiphanii editione Basileensi, et Irenaei editt. Gallasii et Feuard. Apud Petav. et Grab. male φασί pro φησί.

Προβεβλῆσθαί φησι ("he says was put forth"). So the Royal manuscript, with the Basel edition of Epiphanius and the editions of Irenaeus by Gallasius and Feuardent. In Petau and Grabe, wrongly, φασί ("they say") for φησί.

(printed under page 288)

(11) ‹anchor: Ὑπὸ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας› · call in col 564

Ὑπὸ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας. Recte mavult Billius cum vet. interp. legere ἀληθείας, quam Ἐκκλησίας, id enim magis quadrat ad id quod postea sequitur: ut veritatis plantas proferant.

Ὑπὸ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας ("by the Church"). Billius rightly prefers to read, with the old translator, ἀληθείας ("of truth") rather than Ἐκκλησίας, for that fits better with what follows: "that they may bring forth plants of truth."

(printed under page 288)

(12) ‹anchor: Σεκοῦνδος› · call in col 564

Σεκοῦνδος. Graecus hujus periodi textus depromptus est ex Epiphanii Haer. XXXII, § 1, ubi quamvis Irenaeum non citet, hujus tamen verba ab eo referri patet ex collatione cum veteri interpret.

Σεκοῦνδος ("Secundus"). The Greek text of this sentence is drawn from Epiphanius, Heresy 32, § 1, where, although he does not cite Irenaeus, it is clear from comparison with the old translator that it is Irenaeus's words he is reporting.

(printed under page 288)

(13) ‹anchor: Ἀλλά› · call in col 564

Ἀλλά. Scripsisse videtur Irenaeus, ἀλλὰ ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν, siquidem vertit interpres, sed a fructibus (continues)

Ἀλλά ("but"). Irenaeus seems to have written ἀλλὰ ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν ("but from their fruits"), since the translator renders "but from the fruits ... (continues)

(printed under page 288)

(14) ‹anchor: Ἄλλος› · call in col 564

Ἄλλος. Epiphanem istum vocant Theodoretus, et Epiphanius, de quo in Dissert. I diximus.

Ἄλλος ("another"). Theodoret and Epiphanius call this man Epiphanes, of whom we spoke in Dissertation 1.

(printed under page 288)

(1) ‹anchor: Εἰς ὑψηλότερον› · call in col 566

Εἰς ὑψηλότερον. Graeca quae sequuntur, desumpta sunt ex Epiphan. Haer. XXXII, § 5.

Εἰς ὑψηλότερον ("to something loftier"). The Greek that follows is taken from Epiphanius, Heresy 32, § 5.

(printed under page 289)

(2) ‹anchor: Πρώτην τετράδα› · call in col 566

Πρώτην τετράδα. Adde ex interp. ἔφη.

Πρώτην τετράδα ("the first tetrad"). Add ἔφη ("he said") from the translator.

(printed under page 289)

(3) ‹anchor: Ἐπὶ πάντων› · call in col 566

Ἐπὶ πάντων. Praepositionem ἐπί delendam vult Billius, neque enim interpres, aut Tertullianus loco cit. eam legerunt.

Ἐπὶ πάντων ("over all"). Billius would delete the preposition ἐπί, for neither the translator nor Tertullian, in the place cited, read it.

(printed under page 289)

(4) ‹anchor: Ἰοῦ ἰοῦ! καὶ φεῦ φεῦ!› · call in col 566

Ἰοῦ ἰοῦ! καὶ φεῦ φεῦ! Exclamationes poetis Graecis, tragicis praesertim usitatae. Interdum admirationis, doloris interdum et indignationis signa sunt. Dolorem hic significant, ut et cap. 15, n. 4 hujus libri: Ταῦτα ὑπὲρ τὸ ἰοῦ καὶ τὸ φεῦ, καὶ ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν τραγικὴν ἐκφώνησιν (sic lego) καὶ σχετλιασμόν ἐστι, haec super iu, iu, et super pheu, et super universam tragicam exclamationem, et doloris vociferationem sunt, ut vertit interpres noster.

Ἰοῦ ἰοῦ! καὶ φεῦ φεῦ! ("Alas, alas! and woe, woe!"). Exclamations common in the Greek poets, especially the tragedians. Sometimes they are signs of wonder, sometimes of grief and indignation. Here they signify grief, as also in chapter 15, number 4 of this book: "These things are beyond ioú and pheû, and beyond every tragic outcry" (so I read) "and lament"; "these are beyond iu, iu, and beyond pheu, and beyond all tragic exclamation and cry of grief," as our translator renders it.

(printed under page 289)

(5) ‹anchor: Τὸ τραγικὸν γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπειπεῖν ἔστιν ἐπὶ τῇ› · call in col 566

Τὸ τραγικὸν γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπειπεῖν ἔστιν ἐπὶ τῇ. Sic habet Epiphanius. Cur vero Grabius ea verba omiserit, γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπειπεῖν ἔστιν, non video; cum Latinis satis exacte respondeant, excepta particula γάρ quam non reddidit interpres.

Τὸ τραγικὸν γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπειπεῖν ἔστιν ἐπὶ τῇ ("for one may truly add the tragic cry over the"). So Epiphanius has it. Why Grabe left out the words γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐπειπεῖν ἔστιν I do not see, since they answer the Latin quite exactly, except for the particle γάρ, which the translator did not render.

(printed under page 289)

(6) ‹anchor: Ὄνομα› · call in col 566

Ὄνομα. Leg. ὀνόματα cum interp.

Ὄνομα ("name"). Read ὀνόματα ("names") with the translator.

(printed under page 289)

(7) ‹anchor: Μονάδα καλῶ› · call in col 566

Μονάδα καλῶ. Ex Irenaeo paulo superius, Tertulliano, et interprete ipso patet legendum esse, μονότητα, non μονάδα, et mox μονότητι, non μονάδι.

Μονάδα καλῶ ("I call monad"). From Irenaeus a little above, from Tertullian, and from the translator himself it is clear that one should read μονότητα ("solitude"), not μονάδα, and just after μονότητι, not μονάδι.

(printed under page 289)

(8) ‹anchor: Majus sublime... est quidem› · call in col 566

Majus sublime... est quidem. Forte legendum, magis sublime, Graec. ὑψηλότερον· et est quaedam, Gr. ἔστι τις. Tertullianus vero qui cap. 27 totum hunc locum ad verbum exscribit, omittit sive quidam sive quaedam.

"A greater sublime ... there is indeed." Perhaps read magis sublime ("more sublime"), Greek ὑψηλότερον; and est quaedam ("there is a certain"), Greek ἔστι τις. Tertullian, however, who in chapter 27 copies out this whole passage word for word, leaves out both quidam and quaedam.

(printed under page 289)

(9) ‹anchor: Ante omnes› · call in col 566

Ante omnes. Vertendum est cum Tertull. ante omnia.

Ante omnes ("before all," masculine). It should be rendered with Tertullian ante omnia ("before all things").

(printed under page 289)

(10) ‹anchor: Haec henotes et monotes› · call in col 566

Haec henotes et monotes. Sic Clarom. juxta Graec., in aliis deest haec.

"This henotes and monotes" ("unity and solitude"). So the Clermont manuscript, following the Greek; in the others haec ("this") is missing.

(printed under page 289)

(11) ‹anchor: Cum nihil emiserint› · call in col 566

Cum nihil emiserint. Sic Graeca μὴ προέμεναι, reddidit interpres noster; absurde omnino, ut quisque videt. Si enim henotes et monotes principium omnium emiserint, absurdum est dici nihil emisisse. Longe melius haec expressit Tertullianus: protulerunt, non proferentes, initium omnium. Sed quis istorum verborum sensus? Conjicio id discriminis inter principium omnium, seu monada, et caeteros Aeones ab Epiphane positum fuisse, vel quod illud sic proferretur, ut tamen ab auctore non separaretur; eo fere modo quo Tertullianus lib. contra Prax. c. 8, prolatum dicit Filium a Patre, sed non separatum: caeterorum vero Aeonum prolatio cum separatione fieret. Vel quod monas mera esset Proarches ἐνέργεια, seu δύναμις ἀνυπόστατος, ad eum modum, quo Verbum simplicem Patris ἐνέργειαν ἀνυπόστατον, hominum verbo similem statuebant Sabelliani: caeteri vero Aeones propriam hypostasim haberent. Favere videtur huic conjecturae, quod Epiphanes suam monada sic emissam esse vellet, ut tamen ingenita esset: quod enim hypostasim non habet, gigni proprie loquendo non potest. Eo sensu dicere potuit, monada sic prolatam fuisse, ut tamen non proferretur.

"Though they emitted nothing." So our translator rendered the Greek μὴ προέμεναι ("not emitting"), altogether absurdly, as anyone can see. For if henotes and monotes emitted the beginning of all things, it is absurd to say that they emitted nothing. Tertullian expressed this far better: "they put forth, not putting forth, the beginning of all things." But what is the sense of these words? I conjecture that Epiphanes set this difference between the beginning of all things, or the monad, and the other Aeons: either that it was put forth in such a way as not to be separated from its author, much as Tertullian, in his book Against Praxeas, chapter 8, says the Son was put forth from the Father but not separated, whereas the putting forth of the other Aeons took place with separation; or that the monad was a mere ἐνέργεια ("activity") of the Proarche, a δύναμις ἀνυπόστατος ("power without its own subsistence"), in the way the Sabellians held the Word to be a simple ἐνέργεια of the Father ἀνυπόστατος, like a human word, while the other Aeons had their own hypostasis. This conjecture seems to be supported by the fact that Epiphanes would have his monad so emitted as still to be unbegotten: for what has no hypostasis cannot, properly speaking, be begotten. In that sense he could say that the monad was put forth in such a way that it was nonetheless not put forth.

(printed under page 289)

(12) ‹anchor: Vere› · call in col 566

Vere. In editt. Eras., Gallas. et Feuard. vero.

Vere ("truly"). In the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, vero ("but").

(printed under page 289)

(13) ‹anchor: Factionem› · call in col 566

Factionem. Sic mss. Arund., Voss., Merc. 2 et Clarom. juxta Graec. ὀνοματοποιΐᾳ. Alii fictionem.

Factionem ("making"). So the Arundel, Voss, Mercier 2 and Clermont manuscripts, following the Greek ὀνοματοποιΐᾳ ("name-making"). Others read fictionem ("fiction").

(printed under page 289)

<!-- On this page the Latin stands in the left column (567), the Greek in the right (568). The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO is a running text, not a footnote, and is not set here. --> (printed under page 290)

(1) ‹anchor: Manifestum› · call in col 567

Manifestum. Addiderat Feuard. verbum est, quod sensum conturbat. Addunt et mss. Clarom. et Pass. Sed hoc merito omittunt editt. Eras., Gall., Oxon. et mss. omnes Anglic. Manifestum enim hic adverbialiter accipi debet, ut patet ex Graeco σαφέστατα, quod tamen melius vertisset interpres manifestissime.

Manifestum ("plain"). Feuardent had added the word est ("is"), which confuses the sense. The Clermont and Passerat manuscripts add it too. But the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Oxford and all the English manuscripts rightly omit it. For manifestum must be taken here as an adverb, as is clear from the Greek σαφέστατα ("most plainly"), which, however, the translator would better have rendered manifestissime.

(printed under page 290)

(2) ‹anchor: Quoniam› · call in col 567

Quoniam. Adde ex Graeco, et quoniam.

Quoniam ("since"). Add from the Greek: et quoniam ("and since").

(printed under page 290)

(3) ‹anchor: Posita sunt› · call in col 567

Posita sunt. Graec. antea posita sunt.

Posita sunt ("have been given"). Greek: "have been given before."

(printed under page 290)

(4) ‹anchor: Qui nisi haec auderet, hodie veritas› · call in col 567

Qui nisi haec auderet, hodie veritas, etc. Graeca sonant: Perspicuum est eum esse, qui primus nomina haec condere ausus fuerit: ac nisi ipse aliquando in mundo exstitisset, hodie veritas, etc., ex quibus patet legendum esse in vet. versione, auderet, ut habent omnes editt. cum codd. Clarom. et Pass., non audiret, ut perperam habent mss. Anglic.

"Who, had he not dared these things, truth today," etc. The Greek says: "It is plain that he is the one who first dared to coin these names; and had he not once appeared in the world, truth today," etc. From this it is clear that in the old version one should read auderet ("had dared"), as all the editions have, with the Clermont and Passerat manuscripts, not audiret ("had heard"), as the English manuscripts wrongly have.

(printed under page 290)

(5) ‹anchor: Utique multo credib.› · call in col 567

Utique multo credib. Sic mss. Clarom., Pass. et Voss. melius, ni fallor, quam, et multo, ut habent Eras., Gallas. et Feuard., vel, ut multo, prout ex Arund. et Merc. 2, reposuit Grabius.

"Surely much more credible." So the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts, better, unless I am mistaken, than et multo ("and much"), as Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent have, or ut multo ("as much"), as Grabe restored from the Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts.

(printed under page 290)

(6) ‹anchor: Ab omnibus› · call in col 567

Ab omnibus. Pass., Voss., et Feuard. in marg. ab hominibus.

Ab omnibus ("by all"). The Passerat and Voss manuscripts, and Feuardent in the margin: ab hominibus ("by men").

(printed under page 290)

(7) ‹anchor: Καὶ σαφές ἐστιν ... οὐχ ἡ ἀλήθεια› · call in col 567

Καὶ σαφές ἐστιν........ οὐχ ἡ ἀλήθεια, etc. Graeca haec Irenaei ab Epiphanio descripta, Grabio omittere placuit. Doctissimi viri consilium approbare non possumus. Quamvis enim a Latinis aliquantulum discrepent, non tamen adeo, ut resecari debeant.

Καὶ σαφές ἐστιν ... οὐχ ἡ ἀλήθεια ("And it is plain ... not the truth"), etc. Grabe chose to omit this Greek of Irenaeus, copied out by Epiphanius. We cannot approve that most learned man's decision. For although it differs a little from the Latin, it does not do so to the point that it should be cut out.

(printed under page 290)

(8) ‹anchor: Ὀνόματα› · call in col 567

Ὀνόματα. Quae sequuntur Irenaei verborum Graeca desiderantur. Summam duntaxat, sed non ipsa verba retulit Epiphanius hoc modo: Εἶτα λοιπὸν εἰς ταῦτα αὐτὸς ὁ μακάριος ἐπίσκοπος Εἰρηναῖος, ὥς γε προείπαμεν, γελοιώδη ῥήματα καὶ αὐτὸς προεῖπεν, ἑτερωνυμίαν ἀφ' ἑαυτοῦ, ὡς ἀντάξια τῆς αὐτῶν ληρῳδίας χαριεντιζόμενος, πεπόνων γένη, καὶ σικύων, καὶ κολοκυνθῶν, ὡς ἐπὶ ὑποκειμένων τινῶν ἐπιπλασάμενος, ὡς τοῖς φιλολόγοις σαφὲς ἂν εἴη· ἀφ' ὧν προανέγνωσαν. Tum deinceps in haec idem beatus episcopus Irenaeus, ut diximus, alia quaedam ridicula nomina, ac per jocum a seipso composita facete subjicit, tanquam eorum nugis consentanea: cujusmodi sunt peponum, ac cucurbitarum, aut colocyntharum genera, quorum appellationes certis rebus attribuit; id quod litterarum periti homines, ex iis quae antea legerint, animadvertent.

Ὀνόματα ("names"). The Greek of the words of Irenaeus that follow is lacking. Epiphanius gave only the gist, not the words themselves, thus: "Then, further, on these things the blessed bishop Irenaeus himself, as we said before, himself also set out laughable terms, a nomenclature of his own, jesting as if in fit return for their nonsense, kinds of melons and cucumbers and gourds, fashioning them as if for certain underlying things, as would be plain to the studious from what they have read before." [Epiphanius's Latin rendering, as printed:] "Then next, on these matters, the same blessed bishop Irenaeus, as we said, wittily adds certain other ridiculous names, composed by himself in jest, as though in keeping with their trifles: such as the kinds of melons and of cucumbers or of colocynths, whose names he assigns to certain things; which men skilled in letters will notice from what they have read before."

(printed under page 290)

(9) ‹anchor: Ἄλλοι δὲ πάλιν› · call in col 567

Ἄλλοι δὲ πάλιν, etc. Graeca haec Irenaei, tacito tamen ipsius nomine, descripsit Epiphanius Haer. XXX, § 7.

Ἄλλοι δὲ πάλιν ("But others again"), etc. Epiphanius copied out this Greek of Irenaeus, though without giving his name, Heresy 30, § 7.

(printed under page 290)

(10) ‹anchor: Τὴν δὲ τρίτην› · call in col 567

Τὴν δὲ τρίτην. Supp. δύναμιν.

Τὴν δὲ τρίτην ("and the third"). Supply δύναμιν ("power").

(printed under page 290)

(11) ‹anchor: καὶ πέμπτῳ› · call in col 567

Καὶ πέμπτῳ. Adde τόπῳ ex vet. interp. et Tertull. cap. 35. Sed quae ratio dispensat, addit ibidem Tertull., ut singula binis locis, et quidem tam intercisis nascantur, malo ignorare quam discere. Quid enim recti habeant, quae tam perverse proferuntur? Si quis tamen sensus ejusmodi deliriis esse possit, is esse videtur, scilicet, primam omnium emissionem, seu eam emissionem, quae primo loco et ante caeteras omnes facta est, esse a Proarche, quae Archen protulit quintum ogdoadis locum tenentem: secundo loco, seu secundam emissionem ab Arche factam esse, a qua emissus est Acataleptos, sexto ogdoadis loco constitutus. Et sic de caeteris.

Καὶ πέμπτῳ ("and in the fifth"). Add τόπῳ ("place") from the old translator and Tertullian, chapter 35. "But by what reckoning it is arranged," Tertullian adds in the same place, "that each is born in two places, and those so far apart, I would rather not know than learn. For what rightness can there be in things put forth so perversely?" If, however, any sense can be found in such ravings, it seems to be this: that the first emission of all, that is, the emission made in the first place and before all the others, is from the Proarche, which put forth Arche, holding the fifth place of the ogdoad; that in the second place, the second emission was made by Arche, by whom Acataleptos was emitted, set in the sixth place of the ogdoad. And so with the rest.

(printed under page 290)

(12) ‹anchor: τῆς ἀρχῆς› · call in col 567

Τῆς ἀρχῆς. Delendae hae duae voces, quae sensum conturbant, quasque nec vetus interp. nec Tertullian. legerunt.

Τῆς ἀρχῆς ("of the Arche"). These two words should be deleted: they confuse the sense, and neither the old translator nor Tertullian read them.

(printed under page 290)

<!-- The Latin at the foot of this page runs across the full width; the notes are filed under col 570 by the page's layout (Latin on the outer column of odd pages, as on pp. 287 and 290). --> (*) ‹anchor: CAPUT XII› · call in col 570 Ed. Feu., cap. IV.

Feuardent's edition, chapter 4.

(printed under page 291)

(1) ‹anchor: Ἐκ δὲ τῆς Ἀοράτου› · call in col 570

Ἐκ δὲ τῆς Ἀοράτου. Adde ex vet. interp. et Tertull. τετάρτῳ καὶ ὀγδόῳ τόπῳ.

Ἐκ δὲ τῆς Ἀοράτου ("and from the Invisible"). Add from the old translator and Tertullian: τετάρτῳ καὶ ὀγδόῳ τόπῳ ("in the fourth and eighth place").

(printed under page 291)

(2) ‹anchor: Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος› · call in col 570

Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος. Lego cum vet. interp.: τοῦτο τὸ Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος, et in his verbis novam constituo periodum. In aliis vero omnibus editt. haec praecedentem claudunt, et Πλήρωμα refertur ad ἀγέννητον, quasi ἀγέννητος diceretur complementum primae ogdoadis. Sed id Valentinianorum omnium hypothesi repugnat, qui Pleroma non de uno singulari Aeone dicebant, sed ex pluribus constituebant, ut patet ex cap. 1 hujus libri, in ogdoada scilicet, decada, et duodecada. Pleroma igitur primae ogdoadis nihil aliud est, in eorum mente, quam Pleroma, qua parte constat prima ogdoade, seu prima ogdoas Pleromatis. Et cum Irenaeus hic descriptis ordine et nominibus primae istius ogdoadis, subjungit, τοῦτο τὸ Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος, sensus est: sic primam Pleromatis sui ogdoada constituunt: nam in caeteris partibus, cum reliquis Valentinianis isti consentiebant.

Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος ("Pleroma of the first ogdoad"). I read with the old translator τοῦτο τὸ Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος ("this is the Pleroma of the first ogdoad"), and begin a new sentence with these words. In all the other editions they close the preceding sentence, and Πλήρωμα is referred to ἀγέννητον, as though the unbegotten were called the fullness of the first ogdoad. But that is contrary to the system of all the Valentinians, who did not speak of the Pleroma as one single Aeon but made it up of several, as is clear from chapter 1 of this book, namely in an ogdoad, a decad and a duodecad. The Pleroma of the first ogdoad, then, in their mind, is nothing other than the Pleroma in the part of it made up of the first ogdoad, that is, the first ogdoad of the Pleroma. And when Irenaeus, having here described the order and names of that first ogdoad, adds τοῦτο τὸ Πλήρωμα τῆς πρώτης ὀγδοάδος, the sense is: thus they make up the first ogdoad of their Pleroma; for in the other parts these men agreed with the rest of the Valentinians.

(printed under page 291)

(3) ‹anchor: Ὦ ληρολόγοι σοφισταί› · call in col 570

Ὦ ληρολόγοι σοφισταί! Haec in Gnosticos, qui foedis libidinibus more belluarum seipsos conspurcabant, apprime conveniunt: πέπονες enim, per translationem, Graeci dicunt homines fractos, effeminatos, dissolutos et molles.

Ὦ ληρολόγοι σοφισταί! ("O babbling sophists!"). These words fit the Gnostics exactly, who defiled themselves with foul lusts after the manner of beasts: for by a figure the Greeks call πέπονες ("ripe melons") men who are broken, effeminate, dissolute and soft.

(printed under page 291)

(4) ‹anchor: Οἱ μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἄζυγον λέγουσι› · call in col 570

Οἱ μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἄζυγον λέγουσι. Confer Tertull. cap. 34.

Οἱ μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἄζυγον λέγουσι ("for some call him unpaired"). Compare Tertullian, chapter 34.

(printed under page 291)

(5) ‹anchor: Φύσιν› · call in col 570

Φύσιν. Γένεσιν legit vetus interp., sed male.

Φύσιν ("nature"). The old translator read γένεσιν ("origin"), but wrongly.

(printed under page 291)

(6) ‹anchor: Ὁ Πτολεμαῖος› · call in col 570

Ὁ Πτολεμαῖος, etc. Graeca haec iterum Epiphanio debemus, Haer. XXXIII, § 1. Haec vero verba: οὗτος τοίνυν, etc., usque ad πρῶτον γάρ, quae resecare Grabio placuit, nos edi curavimus, tum ut Graecorum series habeatur, tum etiam quia licet Irenaei verbis quaedam addiderit Epiphanius, illa tamen cum vet. versione collata facile deprehenduntur. Ea duntaxat omisimus, quae minus cum Latina versione conveniunt. Nempe quod brevius scripsisse videtur Irenaeus, Οἱ δὲ περὶ Πτολεμαῖον ἐμπειρότεροι δύο συζύγους ἔχειν τὸν Βυθὸν λέγουσι, ἃς καὶ διαθέσεις καλοῦσιν, Ἔννοιάν τε καὶ Θέλησιν· haec paulo fusiori stylo prosecutus est Epiphanius. In hoc tamen lapsus esse videtur Constantiensis episcopus, quod Ptolemaeo et discipulis ejus eam sententiam ascribat, quam solis ejusdem Ptolemaei discipulis tribuunt Irenaeus et Tertull. Nam paulo aliud erat magistri systema, quod auctor noster fuse descripsit cap. 1 et seq.

Ὁ Πτολεμαῖος ("Ptolemy"), etc. For this Greek we are again indebted to Epiphanius, Heresy 33, § 1. The words οὗτος τοίνυν ("this man, then"), etc., up to πρῶτον γάρ ("for first"), which Grabe chose to cut out, we have had printed, both so that the sequence of the Greek may be kept and because, although Epiphanius added some things to Irenaeus's words, these are easily detected by comparison with the old version. We have omitted only what agrees less well with the Latin version. What Irenaeus seems to have written more briefly, "Those around Ptolemy, more experienced, say that Bythus has two consorts, whom they also call dispositions, Ennoia and Thelesis," Epiphanius set out in a somewhat fuller style. In this, however, the bishop of Constantia seems to have slipped: he ascribes to Ptolemy and his disciples an opinion that Irenaeus and Tertullian attribute to Ptolemy's disciples alone. For the master's system was somewhat different, as our author described at length in chapter 1 and following.

(printed under page 291)

(7) ‹anchor: Pleroma hoc primae ogdoadis› · call in col 570

Pleroma hoc primae ogdoadis. Has voces tum a praecedenti, tum etiam a sequenti periodo separamus; nempe in iis solis novam constituimus periodum. Praecedenti junxit Grab., sequenti caeteri; utrique minus bene.

"This is the Pleroma of the first ogdoad." We separate these words both from the preceding and from the following sentence; that is, we make a new sentence of them alone. Grabe joined them to the preceding, the others to the following; both less well.

(printed under page 291)

(8) ‹anchor: Perfectorum perfectiores, et Gnosticorum magis gnostici› · call in col 570

Perfectorum perfectiores, et Gnosticorum magis gnostici. Hellenismus est. Latine vertendum fuisset: Perfectis perfectiores, et Gnosticis veriores Gnostici.

"More perfect of the perfect, and more gnostic of the Gnostics." This is a Grecism. In Latin it should have been rendered: "more perfect than the perfect, and truer Gnostics than the Gnostics."

(printed under page 291)

(9) ‹anchor: Veri› · call in col 570

Veri. Ita hic, et paulo post, Clarom., Arund., Ottobon. et Merc. 1. Reliqui minus recte, viri.

Veri ("true"). So here, and a little later, the Clermont, Arundel, Ottoboni and Mercier 1 manuscripts. The rest, less correctly, viri ("men").

(printed under page 291)

(10) ‹anchor: Dicentes esse› · call in col 570

Dicentes esse. Sic editt. Eras., Gall. et Feuard. cum mss. Ottobon., Arund. et Merc. 2, melius quam mss. Clarom., Pass., Voss. et edit. Oxon., dicunt.

Dicentes esse ("saying that it is"). So the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent, with the Ottoboni, Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts; better than the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts and the Oxford edition, dicunt ("they say").

(printed under page 291)

(11) ‹anchor: Genesim› · call in col 570

Genesim. Ex Gr. lege naturam.

Genesim ("origin"). From the Greek read naturam ("nature").

(printed under page 291)

(12) ‹anchor: Rursus› · call in col 570

Rursus. Hanc vocem cum Grabio addimus, ex codd. Clarom. et Voss. ac textu Graeco.

Rursus ("again"). We add this word, with Grabe, from the Clermont and Voss manuscripts and the Greek text.

(printed under page 291)

(13) ‹anchor: Hi vero qui sunt› · call in col 570

Hi vero qui sunt. His ad verbum Graeca non respondent. Sic ferunt: Ptolemaeus cum suis, sapientior iis, quos praeceptores habuit,...... Deo, quem illi Bythum appellant, conjuges duas a se inventas attribuit. Has et affectionem vocat, cogitationem videlicet et voluntatem. Eadem habet Tertull. cap. 35. Vid. not. 6.

"But these who are." The Greek does not answer these words word for word. It runs thus: "Ptolemy with his followers, wiser than those he had as teachers, ... assigned to God, whom they call Bythus, two consorts of his own devising. These he also calls affection, namely thought and will." Tertullian has the same, chapter 35. See note 6.

(printed under page 291)

(14) ‹anchor: Dispositiones› · call in col 570

Dispositiones. Mallem, affectiones.

Dispositiones ("dispositions"). I would prefer affectiones ("affections").

(printed under page 291)

<!-- The Latin at the foot of this page runs across the full width; the notes are filed under col 571 by the page's layout (Latin on the outer column of even pages, as on p. 290). Verse lines are joined with " / ". --> (printed under page 292)

(1) ‹anchor: Quiddam emittere› · call in col 571

Quiddam emittere. Sic cod. Pass., alii, quid emittere.

Quiddam emittere ("to emit something"). So the Passerat manuscript; others, quid emittere.

(printed under page 292)

(2) ‹anchor: Non videntur tibi› · call in col 571

Non videntur tibi, etc. Graeca hujus periodi non retulit Epiphanius, sed sensum duntaxat; eadem cum Irenaeo ironia, sed paulo fusius et explicatius Ptolemaeum perstringens.

"Do they not seem to you," etc. Epiphanius did not report the Greek of this sentence, only its sense, glancing at Ptolemy with the same irony as Irenaeus, but a little more fully and explicitly.

(printed under page 292)

(3) ‹anchor: Homerici Jovis› · call in col 571

Homerici Jovis. Alludit Irenaeus ad hunc Homeri locum Il. II, v. 1 et seqq.: Ἄλλοι μέν ῥα θεοί τε καὶ ἀνέρες ἱπποκορυσταὶ / Εὗδον παννύχιοι· Δία δ' οὐκ ἔχε νήδυμος ὕπνος, / Ἀλλ' ὅγε μερμήριζε κατὰ φρένα, ὡς Ἀχιλῆα / Τιμήσῃ, ὀλέσῃ δὲ πολέας ἐπὶ νηυσὶν Ἀχαιῶν. Caeteri quidem tum dii, tum bellicosi homines / Tota nocte dormiebant; hanc vero Jupiter jucundi expertem somni ducebat, / Anxius nimirum animo secum volutabat, quo pacto Achilli / Decus afferret, plures vero perderet ad classem Achivorum. Plures, inquam, an Achivorum? an Trojanorum? ambiguum ex Eustathio. Priorem sensum secutus est Irenaeus.

"Of Homer's Jove." Irenaeus alludes to this passage of Homer, Iliad 2, line 1 and following: "Now the other gods and the horse-crested men / slept all night long; but sweet sleep did not hold Zeus, / but he pondered in his mind how he might honour / Achilles, and destroy many beside the ships of the Achaeans." [Latin rendering:] "The rest, both gods and warlike men, / slept all night; but Jupiter passed it without sweet sleep, / anxiously turning over in his mind how he might / bring honour to Achilles, and destroy many at the fleet of the Achaeans." "Many," I ask, "of the Achaeans? or of the Trojans?" It is ambiguous, from Eustathius. Irenaeus followed the former sense.

(printed under page 292)

(4) ‹anchor: Διάθεσιν› · call in col 571

Διάθεσιν. Sic cod. Reg. In editt. omnibus male διαθέσεσιν. Legisse tamen videtur interp. διαθέσεις, in plurali; quod mallem.

Διάθεσιν ("disposition"). So the Royal manuscript. In all the editions, wrongly, διαθέσεσιν. The translator, however, seems to have read διαθέσεις, in the plural; which I would prefer.

(printed under page 292)

(5) ‹anchor: Θέλημα› · call in col 571

Θέλημα. Has voces θέλημα et θέλησιν promiscue usurpat Epiphanius. Non mirum ergo, si pro θέλημα sic reddat interpres, Thelesin. Sed post eam vocem, θέλημα, haec addit Epiphanius, quae in veteri Irenaei interpretatione Latina non occurrunt: καὶ τὴν μὲν Ἔννοιαν ἀεὶ συνυπάρξασαν ἐν αὐτῷ, ἐννοουμένην ἀεὶ τό τι προβάλλεσθαι, τὸ δὲ θέλημα ἐν αὐτῷ ἐπιγινόμενον. Et cogitatio quidem in illo nunquam non exstitit, semper cogitans aliquid producere: voluntas vero ipsi postmodum accessit. An vero ista Irenaei sint, an Epiphanii, nemo facile dixerit.

Θέλημα ("will"). Epiphanius uses the words θέλημα and θέλησις indiscriminately. No wonder, then, that the translator renders θέλημα as Thelesin. But after the word θέλημα Epiphanius adds the following, which do not occur in the old Latin translation of Irenaeus: "and Ennoia always coexisted in him, always thinking of putting forth something, while the will came upon him afterwards." [Latin rendering:] "And thought indeed was never not in him, always thinking to produce something: but will came to him afterwards." Whether these words are Irenaeus's or Epiphanius's no one could easily say.

(printed under page 292)

(6) ‹anchor: Φησίν› · call in col 571

Φησίν. Scripsit Irenaeus φασίν, vel ὥς φασιν, quia de Ptolemaei discipulis; Epiphanius vero φησίν, quia de Ptolemaeo ipso in singulari loquitur.

Φησίν ("he says"). Irenaeus wrote φασίν ("they say"), or ὥς φασιν ("as they say"), since he is speaking of Ptolemy's disciples; but Epiphanius wrote φησίν, since he speaks of Ptolemy himself, in the singular.

(printed under page 292)

(7) ‹anchor: Τῇ προβολῇ› · call in col 571

Τῇ προβολῇ. Lege cum interprete, ἡ προβολή.

Τῇ προβολῇ ("to the emission"). Read with the translator ἡ προβολή ("the emission").

(printed under page 292)

(8) ‹anchor: Τοῦ μὲν Θελήματος› · call in col 571

Τοῦ μὲν Θελήματος, etc. Haec perverso ordine apud Epiphanium scripta esse bene monet Grab. Sic itaque cum vet. interp. legendum est: Τοῦ μὲν Θελήματος τὸν Νοῦν, τῆς δὲ Ἐννοίας τὴν Ἀλήθειαν. Caeterum hoc loco Νοῦν eumdem esse atque Μονογενῆ, nihil necesse est moneamus.

Τοῦ μὲν Θελήματος ("of the Will"), etc. Grabe rightly points out that these words are written in Epiphanius in the wrong order. So, with the old translator, one should read: "Nous of the Will, and Aletheia of the Ennoia." For the rest, there is no need for us to point out that Nous here is the same as Monogenes.

(printed under page 292)

(9) ‹anchor: Διὰ τοῦτον› · call in col 571

Διὰ τοῦτον. Lege cum interp. διὰ τοῦτο, tum adde cum eodem, τοῦ ἐπιγινομένου θελήματος. Vertit enim, propter hoc adventitiae voluntatis.

Διὰ τοῦτον ("because of him"). Read with the translator διὰ τοῦτο ("for this reason"), then add with him τοῦ ἐπιγινομένου θελήματος ("of the supervening will"). For he renders: "for this reason, of the adventitious will."

(printed under page 292)

(10) ‹anchor: Τοῦ Θελήματος ... ὁ δὲ θῆλυς τοῦ Θελήματος› · call in col 571

Τοῦ Θελήματος..... ὁ δὲ θῆλυς τοῦ Θελήματος. Depravatum hunc locum ita cum doctissimo Grabio ex veteri interpretatione restitue: τοῦ ἐπιγινομένου Θελήματος ὁ μὲν ἄῤῥην εἰκὼν γέγονεν, ὁ δὲ θῆλυς τῆς ἀγεννήτου Ἐννοίας. Ac proinde expunge postremum illud, τοῦ θελήματος. Ita restituendum esse mox subdita demonstrat ratio: Quoniam voluntas velut virtus facta est Ennoeae. Demonstrat et Tertull. c. 33: Ad imaginem quidem cogitationis, feminam Veritatem: ad imaginem voluntatis, marem Monogenem. Tum hanc continuo rationem addit: voluntatis enim vis, utì quae effectum praestat cogitationi, maris obtinet censum. Masculum proinde semen ad imaginem voluntatis, femininum vero ad imaginem cogitationis factum est.

Τοῦ Θελήματος ... ὁ δὲ θῆλυς τοῦ Θελήματος ("of the Will ... and the female of the Will"). Restore this corrupt passage thus, with the most learned Grabe, from the old translation: "of the supervening Will the male became the image, and the female of the unbegotten Ennoia." And so strike out the last words, τοῦ θελήματος. That it must be restored so is shown by the reason given just after: "since the will became, as it were, the power of Ennoia." Tertullian shows it too, chapter 33: "after the image of thought, the female Truth; after the image of will, the male Monogenes." Then he at once adds this reason: "for the power of will, as that which gives effect to thought, holds the rank of the male." The male seed, accordingly, was made after the image of will, the female after the image of thought.

(printed under page 292)

(11) ‹anchor: Τὸ Θέλημα τοίνυν› · call in col 571

Τὸ Θέλημα τοίνυν. Delendum vult Grabius τοίνυν, et pro eo legendum, ὅτι τὸ θέλημα, sed frustra: haec enim Graeca periodus, prout nunc legitur, rectum efficit sensum, nec a versione Latina discrepat: nisi quod interpres, hujus connectendae gratia cum praecedenti, addidit particulam quoniam. Hic tamen praeterea pro δύναμις, legisse videtur, ὡς δύναμις, vel ὡσεὶ δύναμις.

Τὸ Θέλημα τοίνυν ("the Will, then"). Grabe would delete τοίνυν and read in its place ὅτι τὸ θέλημα ("since the will"), but needlessly: for this Greek sentence, as it now reads, makes good sense and does not differ from the Latin version, except that the translator, to connect it with the preceding, added the particle quoniam ("since"). Here, however, he also seems to have read, for δύναμις ("power"), ὡς δύναμις or ὡσεὶ δύναμις ("as a power").

(printed under page 292)

(12) ‹anchor: Ἐνενόει μὲν γάρ› · call in col 571

Ἐνενόει μὲν γάρ. Adde cum interprete ἀεί.

Ἐνενόει μὲν γάρ ("for it was thinking"). Add ἀεί ("always") with the translator.

(printed under page 292)

(13) ‹anchor: Ἐπιτετελεκέναι› · call in col 571

Ἐπιτετελεκέναι. Legendum vult Petavius, ἐπιτετέλεκε, mallem ἐπιτελεῖ, ut legit interpres.

Ἐπιτετελεκέναι ("to have accomplished"). Petau would read ἐπιτετέλεκε ("he has accomplished"); I would prefer ἐπιτελεῖ ("he accomplishes"), as the translator read.

(printed under page 292)

<!-- The page's foot notes (1)–(11) are filed under col 574 by the page's layout (Latin on the outer column of odd pages); notes (1)–(6) are called in this column's Greek. Copies of notes (1) and (6) formerly set here under Editors' prose duplicated n574 and were removed (Q2b). --> (printed under page 293; filed under col 574)

(1) ‹anchor: Τοῦτο ἐννοούμενος, ὃ καί› · call in col 574

Τοῦτο ἐννοούμενος, ὃ καί. Legit interpres, τότε ἐννοούμενος, ὅτε, etc.

Τοῦτο ἐννοούμενος, ὃ καί ("thinking this, which also"). The translator read τότε ἐννοούμενος, ὅτε ("thinking then, when"), etc.

(printed under page 293)

(2) ‹anchor: Ὅλος Θέλημα ... ὅλος φῶς› · call in col 574

Ὅλος Θέλημα,.... ὅλος φῶς. Has voces vel addidit Epiphanius, vel omisit interpres. Posteriores quidem exstant lib. II, cap. 12 n. 3, et 28, n. 5, ubi locum hunc fere repetit Irenaeus; sed non priores. At vicissim plura alia illic addit auctor noster, quae hic non leguntur. Caeterum ὅλος φῶς male omittuntur in edit. Oxon.

Ὅλος Θέλημα ... ὅλος φῶς ("wholly Will ... wholly light"). Either Epiphanius added these words or the translator left them out. The latter ones do occur in book 2, chapter 12, number 3, and chapter 28, number 5, where Irenaeus nearly repeats this passage; but not the former. On the other hand our author adds a good many other things there that are not read here. For the rest, the words ὅλος φῶς are wrongly omitted in the Oxford edition.

(printed under page 293)

(3) ‹anchor: Τὴν πρώτην ὀγδοάδα› · call in col 574

Τὴν πρώτην ὀγδοάδα. Haec ex Epiph. Haer. XXXV, § 1, excerpta sunt, ubi pro his Irenaei verbis, qui autem prudentiores illorum putantur esse, solum habet episcopus Constantiensis: λέγει γὰρ (ὁ Κολόρβασος) τὴν πρώτην ὀγδοάδα, etc.; unde discimus haec esse Colorbasi dogmata, quae tacito auctoris nomine perstringunt Irenaeus et Tertull. cap. 36. Eadem Colorbasiis attribuit Theodoret. lib. I Haer. fab., c. 12.

Τὴν πρώτην ὀγδοάδα ("the first ogdoad"). This is excerpted from Epiphanius, Heresy 35, § 1, where, for these words of Irenaeus, "but those of them who are thought wiser," the bishop of Constantia has only: "for he (Colorbasus) says that the first ogdoad," etc. From this we learn that these are the doctrines of Colorbasus, which Irenaeus and Tertullian, chapter 36, attack without naming their author. Theodoret attributes the same to the Colorbasians, book 1 of the Haereticae fabulae, chapter 12.

(printed under page 293)

(4) ‹anchor: Αἰῶνα προβεβλῆσθαι› · call in col 574

Αἰῶνα προβεβλῆσθαι. Haec perperam omisit editor Oxoniensis.

Αἰῶνα προβεβλῆσθαι ("that an Aeon was put forth"). The Oxford editor wrongly omitted these words.

(printed under page 293)

(5) ‹anchor: Τετέχθαι, ὡς αὐτὸς μαιωσάμενος διαβεβαιοῦται› · call in col 574

Τετέχθαι, ὡς αὐτὸς μαιωσάμενος διαβεβαιοῦται. Ex vet. interpretatione liquet Irenaeum scripsisse, ἐν τῷ τετέχθαι αὐτοὺς, αὐτοὶ μαιώσασθαι διαβεβαιοῦνται. Sed hanc metaphoram ironicam tantillum emollire Epiphanio visum fuit.

Τετέχθαι, ὡς αὐτὸς μαιωσάμενος διαβεβαιοῦται ("to have been born, as he himself, having acted as midwife, affirms"). From the old translation it is clear that Irenaeus wrote ἐν τῷ τετέχθαι αὐτοὺς, αὐτοὶ μαιώσασθαι διαβεβαιοῦνται ("they affirm that they themselves acted as midwives when these were born"). But Epiphanius thought fit to soften this ironical metaphor a little.

(printed under page 293)

(6) ‹anchor: Οὐκέτι ἐκ Λόγου καὶ Ζωῆς› · call in col 574

Οὐκέτι ἐκ Λόγου καὶ Ζωῆς, etc. Hic corrupta sunt Graeca. Sic ex veteri interprete restituenda censerem: Οὐκέτι ἐκ Λόγου καὶ Ζωῆς Ἄνθρωπον καὶ Ἐκκλησίαν, ὡς οἱ ἄλλοι, ἀλλ' ἐξ Ἀνθρώπου καὶ Ἐκκλησίας Λόγον καὶ Ζωήν φασι τετέχθαι αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ αὐτοῦ. Ἀλλὰ ἑτέρῳ τρόπῳ τοῦτο λέγουσιν, etc. Superius enim ex Irenaeo observavimus, Gnosticos fuisse Valentinianorum parentes; ab illis hos tres syzygias aperte sumpsisse, sive furatos esse; neque id male tulisse Gnosticos: sed mali furti eos accusasse, quod syzygiam Hominis et Ecclesiae post illam Verbi et Vitae posuissent, quod absurdum existimabant. Unde post Valentinum multi ejus discipuli, ac in primis Colorbasii, a Gnosticis admoniti, magistri sui ordinem immutarunt, et Hominem et Ecclesiam ante Verbum et Vitam posuerunt. De ea autem, inquit Irenaeus lib. II, c. 13, n. 10, quae est ex his, secunda emissione Hominis et Ecclesiae, ipsi patres eorum falso cognominati Gnostici pugnant adversus invicem, sua propria vindicantes, et malos fures semetipsos convincentes, aptabile esse magis emissioni dicentes, uti verisimile, ex Homine Verbum, sed non ex Verbo Hominem emissum, et esse Hominem Verbo anteriorem. In hoc igitur Colorbasii caeteris Valentinianis opponebantur, quod hi, ut constat ex lib. I, c. 1, in posteriori tetrade ex Logo et Zoe emissam secundam conjugationem, Hominem scilicet et Ecclesiam, vellent: isti vero contra, inverso ordine, ex Anthropo et Ecclesia Logon et Zoen. Hinc paulo post subdit Irenaeus: Locutus est Anthropos Logon: hic est primogenitus Filius. Subsequitur autem Logon Zoe. Porro nihil necesse est moneam, Epiphanium, hic majoris explicationis causa, pauca quaedam Irenaei verbis addidisse, ut ὡς οἱ ἄλλοι, αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἑτέρῳ τρόπῳ, etc.

Οὐκέτι ἐκ Λόγου καὶ Ζωῆς ("no longer from Logos and Zoe"), etc. Here the Greek is corrupt. I would restore it from the old translator thus: "He and his followers say that Anthropos and Ecclesia were born no longer from Logos and Zoe, as the others say, but Logos and Zoe from Anthropos and Ecclesia. But they say this in another way," etc. For we noted above from Irenaeus that the Gnostics were the parents of the Valentinians; that the latter openly took, or stole, these three syzygies from them; and that the Gnostics did not resent this, but accused them of a bad theft, because they had put the syzygy of Anthropos and Ecclesia after that of Logos and Zoe, which they thought absurd. Hence after Valentinus many of his disciples, and above all the Colorbasians, warned by the Gnostics, changed their master's order and put Anthropos and Ecclesia before Logos and Zoe. "But about that second emission from these," says Irenaeus, book 2, chapter 13, number 10, "of Anthropos and Ecclesia, their own fathers, the falsely named Gnostics, fight against one another, each claiming his own and convicting themselves of being bad thieves, saying that it is better suited to emission, as being probable, that Logos was emitted from Anthropos, but not Anthropos from Logos, and that Anthropos is prior to Logos." In this, then, the Colorbasians stood opposed to the other Valentinians: the latter, as is clear from book 1, chapter 1, would have the second pair, Anthropos and Ecclesia, emitted from Logos and Zoe in the latter tetrad; these, on the contrary, in reverse order, Logos and Zoe from Anthropos and Ecclesia. Hence a little later Irenaeus adds: "Anthropos spoke Logos: this is the firstborn Son. And Zoe follows Logos." Further, there is no need for me to point out that Epiphanius here, for the sake of fuller explanation, added a few things to Irenaeus's words, such as "as the others," "he and his followers," and "in another way," etc.

(printed under page 293)

(7) ‹anchor: Perdere› · call in col 574

Perdere. Codd. Clarom., Pass. et Voss. prodere. Sed vera lectio est perdere, ut ex Homero liquet.

Perdere ("to destroy"). The Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts read prodere ("to betray"). But the true reading is perdere, as is clear from Homer.

(printed under page 293)

(8) ‹anchor: Prudentiores illorum› · call in col 574

Prudentiores illorum. Graecismus, pro prudentiores illis.

Prudentiores illorum ("wiser of them"). A Grecism, for prudentiores illis ("wiser than they").

(printed under page 293)

(9) ‹anchor: Aeonum› · call in col 574

Aeonum. Scite monet Fronto Duc. legendum esse, sex Aeonum, quod quidem haud advertit Billius, dum vertit, omnes Aeonas. Sic enim Graece Epiphanius, τὴν τῶν ἓξ Αἰώνων προβολήν. Tertullianus quidem octojugem nominat: sed quia parentes numerat cum liberis. Addit vir eruditus multa hic esse ἀνακόλουθα, si ad Graecorum sententiam examinentur. Hanc longe accuratius sic exprimere potuisset interpres: Dicunt primam ogdoadem non gradatim ita productam esse, ut alius ex alio Aeon fluxerit: verum sex Aeonum emissionem simul et semel a Propatore, et cogitatione ejus factam esse non minus certo asseverant, quam si, dum ederentur, ipsi obstetricis munere functi fuissent. In hoc duntaxat ea versio, quam auctoris nostri menti consentaneam existimo, discrepat a textu Graeco, quod Epiphanius de Colorbaso in singulari, Irenaeus vero de Colorbasiis in plurali sermonem faciat.

Aeonum ("of the Aeons"). Fronton du Duc rightly points out that one should read sex Aeonum ("of six Aeons"), which Billius did not notice when he rendered "all the Aeons." For so Epiphanius has it in Greek: "the emission of the six Aeons." Tertullian, indeed, calls it eight-yoked, but because he counts the parents with the children. The learned man adds that there are many anacolutha here, if examined by the sense of the Greek. The translator could have expressed this far more accurately thus: "They say that the first ogdoad was not produced step by step, so that one Aeon flowed from another, but they assert, no less confidently than if they themselves had acted as midwives while they were being born, that the emission of the six Aeons was made all at once by the Propator and his thought." In this alone that version, which I judge agrees with our author's mind, differs from the Greek text: that Epiphanius speaks of Colorbasus in the singular, Irenaeus of the Colorbasians in the plural.

(printed under page 293)

(10) ‹anchor: Cum crearentur› · call in col 574

Cum crearentur. Feuardent. cumque crearentur.

Cum crearentur ("when they were created"). Feuardent: cumque crearentur ("and when they were created").

(printed under page 293)

(11) ‹anchor: Ipsi se obstetricasse affirmant› · call in col 574

Ipsi se obstetricasse affirmant. Diutius suspicatus sum, ex Graeco legendum esse, ipsi quasi obstetricassent, affirmant, cum maxime lib. II, cap. 28, n. 6, eadem phrasi utatur auctor noster: hunc, quasi ipsi obstetricaverint, enuntiant. Sed cum incidissem in lib. IV, cap. 33, n. 3, ubi Valentinianos deridendo iis exprobrat, quod Christi emissionem..., semetipsos obstetricatos esse affirmant; non dubitavi quin iisdem salibus, iisdem verbis Colorbaseos hic, quod caeteros Aeones spectat, defricuerit. Quare vera lectio est, quam modo exhibet textus Latinus, et ab Irenaei verbis nonnihil deflexit Epiphanius.

"They affirm that they themselves acted as midwives." For a long time I suspected that one should read from the Greek ipsi quasi obstetricassent, affirmant ("they affirm, as though they themselves had acted as midwives"), especially since in book 2, chapter 28, number 6, our author uses the same phrase: "they declare him, as though they themselves had acted as midwives." But when I came upon book 4, chapter 33, number 3, where, mocking the Valentinians, he reproaches them because "the emission of Christ ... they affirm that they themselves were midwives to," I no longer doubted that with the same wit and the same words he here rubbed down the Colorbasians in what concerns the other Aeons. The true reading, therefore, is the one the Latin text now gives, and Epiphanius departed somewhat from Irenaeus's words.

(printed under page 293)

<!-- On this page the Latin stands in the left column (575), the Greek in the right (576). The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO is a running text, not a footnote, and is not set here. --> (*) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 575 Edit. Feuard., cap. VII.

Feuardent's edition, chapter 7.

(printed under page 294)

(1) ‹anchor: Quando cogitavit aliquid emittere› · call in col 575

Quando cogitavit aliquid emittere. Ita Clarom., Pass. et Voss. In Arund. et Merc. 2 deest cogitavit, ut et in edit. Erasmi, qui idcirco ad marginem notavit, forte addendum esse voluit, quod Gall. et Feuard. inde textui inseruerunt. Fert textus Graecus: quod cogitavit emittere Propator.

"When he thought to emit something." So the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts. In the Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts cogitavit ("he thought") is missing, as also in Erasmus's edition, who therefore noted in the margin that voluit ("he willed") should perhaps be added, which Gallasius and Feuardent then inserted into the text. The Greek text has: "what the Propator thought to emit."

(printed under page 294)

(2) ‹anchor: Hoc Alethia vocatum est› · call in col 575

Hoc Alethia vocatum est. Hinc emendandus videtur Tertulliani textus cap. 36, et pro, hic veritas appellata est, legendum, hoc veritas appellata est; uti antea scripsit, hoc Pater dictus est; et postea, hoc Homo pronuntiatus est.

"This was called Aletheia." From this it seems Tertullian's text, chapter 36, should be emended, and for "this one (hic) was called Truth" one should read "this (hoc) was called Truth"; as he wrote before, "this (hoc) was called Father," and afterwards, "this (hoc) was pronounced Man."

(printed under page 294)

(3) ‹anchor: Cum ergo voluit› · call in col 575

Cum ergo voluit. Sic codd. Clarom., Pass. et Voss. juxta Graecum, ὅτε οὖν. In caeteris, cum autem.

Cum ergo voluit ("when, therefore, he willed"). So the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts, following the Greek ὅτε οὖν. In the others, cum autem ("but when").

(printed under page 294)

(4) ‹anchor: Quos autem praecogitaverat, postquam emisit› · call in col 575

Quos autem praecogitaverat, postquam emisit. Vertendum erat: quos autem praecogitavit, cum emisit. Sic Tertullian. quos autem praecogitavit, cum protulit.

"But those whom he had thought of beforehand, after he emitted them." It should have been rendered: "but those whom he thought of beforehand, when he emitted them." So Tertullian: "but those whom he thought of beforehand, when he put them forth."

(printed under page 294)

(5) ‹anchor: Locutus est› · call in col 575

Locutus est. Deest in codd. Clarom. et Voss. Hinc Grabii animum subiit suspicio, vet. interpretem nullum in Graeco Irenaei textu verbum legisse. Sed, doctissimi viri pace, infirma omnino suspicio. Longe probabilius videtur, omissionem verbi hujus, quod cum apud Tertull. tum in caeteris omnibus Irenaei codd. tum mss. tum editis legitur, duorum scribarum oscitantiae ascribendam esse.

Locutus est ("spoke"). Missing in the Clermont and Voss manuscripts. Hence the suspicion entered Grabe's mind that the old translator read no verb in Irenaeus's Greek text. But, with all respect to that most learned man, the suspicion is quite weak. It seems far more probable that the omission of this verb, which is read in Tertullian and in all the other copies of Irenaeus, manuscript and printed alike, should be put down to the drowsiness of two scribes.

(printed under page 294)

(6) ‹anchor: Hic est primogenitus› · call in col 575

Hic est primogenitus. Codd. Clarom. et Voss. hoc est primogenitus. Sed in Graeco, οὗτος, non τοῦτο.

Hic est primogenitus ("this one is the firstborn"). The Clermont and Voss manuscripts: hoc est primogenitus ("this is the firstborn"). But the Greek has οὗτος ("this one"), not τοῦτο ("this").

(printed under page 294)

(7) ‹anchor: Pleroma bene sensit› · call in col 575

Pleroma bene sensit. Melius vertisset interpres, Pleromati placuit.

Pleroma bene sensit ("the Pleroma felt well"). The translator would better have rendered "it pleased the Pleroma."

(printed under page 294)

(8) ‹anchor: Et Zoen emissi› · call in col 575

Et Zoen emissi. Adde ex Graeco, productum illum fuisse dicunt.

"And emitted [from] ... and Zoe." Add from the Greek: "they say that he was produced."

(printed under page 294)

(9) ‹anchor: Postgenitum› · call in col 575

Postgenitum. Vertendum erat, nepotem.

Postgenitum ("later-born"). It should have been rendered nepotem ("grandson").

(printed under page 294)

(10) ‹anchor: Iis› · call in col 575

Iis. Ita reposuit Feuardentius monitus, ut ipse dicit, a Pamelio in Tertull. et Frontone Duc. In Erasmi autem et Gallas. editt. et in omnibus prorsus mss. legitur eorum. Unde conjicit Grabius, sic ipsum scripsisse interpretem ex Graeco τῶν, haud advertentem, Latinam constructionem ablativum postulare.

Iis ("those," ablative). So Feuardent restored it, prompted, as he himself says, by Pamelius on Tertullian and by Fronton du Duc. But in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius and in absolutely all the manuscripts eorum ("of them") is read. From this Grabe conjectures that the translator himself wrote so, from the Greek τῶν, not noticing that the Latin construction requires the ablative.

(printed under page 294)

(11) ‹anchor: Ὃ προεβάλετο ἀλήθεια ἦν› · call in col 575

Ὃ προεβάλετο ἀλήθεια ἦν. Legendum vult Fronto Duc. ἃ προεβάλετο ἀληθῆ ἦν. Sic quidem legisse veterem interp. et Tertullianum c. 36, negari non potest. Legere tamen sufficiat, ὃ προεβάλετο ἀληθὲς ἦν, quamvis et vulgatam lectionem cum Petavio retinere nihil impediat.

Ὃ προεβάλετο ἀλήθεια ἦν ("what he put forth was truth"). Fronton du Duc would read ἃ προεβάλετο ἀληθῆ ἦν ("the things he put forth were true"). It cannot be denied that the old translator and Tertullian, chapter 36, read it so. It will be enough, however, to read ὃ προεβάλετο ἀληθὲς ἦν ("what he put forth was true"), although nothing prevents keeping the received reading with Petau.

(printed under page 294)

(12) ‹anchor: Αὐτόν› · call in col 575

Αὐτόν. Lege cum interp. ἑαυτόν. Interpreti consentit Tertullianus cap. cit. Cum voluit semetipsum probari, hoc Homo pronuntiatus est.

Αὐτόν ("him"). Read with the translator ἑαυτόν ("himself"). Tertullian agrees with the translator in the chapter cited: "When he willed himself to be shown, this was pronounced Man."

(printed under page 294)

(13) ‹anchor: Καὶ ὁ Ἄνθρωπος τὸν Λόγον› · call in col 575

Καὶ ὁ Ἄνθρωπος τὸν Λόγον. Adde ex interpr. ἐλάλησεν. Tertullian. Sonuit Homo Sermonem.

Καὶ ὁ Ἄνθρωπος τὸν Λόγον ("and Anthropos the Logos"). Add ἐλάλησεν ("spoke") from the translator. Tertullian: "Man sounded forth the Word."

(printed under page 294)

(14) ‹anchor: Ηὐδόκησεν› · call in col 575

Ηὐδόκησεν. Adde ex interprete et Theodoreto lib. I Haer. fab., c. 12: δι' αὐτοῦ δοξάσαι τὸν Πατέρα, quae verba omisit oscitans scriba.

Ηὐδόκησεν ("was pleased"). Add from the translator and from Theodoret, book 1 of the Haereticae fabulae, chapter 12: δι' αὐτοῦ δοξάσαι τὸν Πατέρα ("to glorify the Father through him"), words a drowsy scribe left out.

(printed under page 294)

(15) ‹anchor: Αὐτὸν λέγουσι› · call in col 575

Αὐτὸν λέγουσι. Adde iterum ex interp. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο Λόγον καὶ Ζωὴν λέγεσθαι αὐτόν.

Αὐτὸν λέγουσι ("they say him"). Add again from the translator: καὶ διὰ τοῦτο Λόγον καὶ Ζωὴν λέγεσθαι αὐτόν ("and for this reason he is called Logos and Zoe").

(printed under page 294)

(16) ‹anchor: Ὀνόματα τά› · call in col 575

Ὀνόματα τά. Dele τά, ultima syllaba est nominis praecedentis scribae negligentia repetita.

Ὀνόματα τά ("the names the"). Delete τά: it is the last syllable of the preceding noun, repeated through the scribe's carelessness.

(printed under page 294)

(17) ‹anchor: Καὶ Ζωῆς› · call in col 575

Καὶ Ζωῆς. Pro Ζωῆς lege cum interpr. et Tertull. Ἐκκλησίας.

Καὶ Ζωῆς ("and of Zoe"). For Ζωῆς read Ἐκκλησίας ("of Ecclesia") with the translator and Tertullian.

(printed under page 294)

(18) ‹anchor: Ὁμολογεῖ› · call in col 575

Ὁμολογεῖ. Lege cum interpr. ἑαυτὸν ὁμολογεῖν.

Ὁμολογεῖ ("he confesses"). Read with the translator ἑαυτὸν ὁμολογεῖν ("to confess himself").

(printed under page 294)

(19) ‹anchor: qui ad stabilimentum Pleromatis emissi sunt› · call in col 575

Εἰς στήριγμα, etc. Legendum esse cum interprete, τῶν εἰς στήριγμα τοῦ Πληρώματος προβεβλημένων, bene monent Billius et Fronto Duc. Lectionem hanc confirmat Tertullian. c. 39 scribens: (continues)

Εἰς στήριγμα ("for the support"), etc. Billius and Fronton du Duc rightly point out that one should read with the translator τῶν εἰς στήριγμα τοῦ Πληρώματος προβεβλημένων ("of those put forth for the support of the Pleroma"). Tertullian confirms this reading, chapter 39, writing: (continues)

(printed under page 294)

<!-- The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO is a running text, not a footnote, and is not set here. Notes filed under col 578 by the page's layout (Latin on the outer column of odd pages). --> (*) ‹anchor: CAPUT XIII› · call in col 578 Edit. Feuard., cap. VIII.

Feuardent's edition, chapter 8.

(19, p. 294) ‹anchor: qui ad stabilimentum Pleromatis emissi sunt› · call in col 575

(continued) Alii a Christo et Spiritu sancto, constabiliendae universitati provisis, confictum. Et revera superius cap. 11, ex Valentinianorum hypothesi docuit Irenaeus, non Salvatorem, sed Christum et Spiritum sanctum εἰς πῆξιν καὶ στηριγμὸν τοῦ Πληρώματος emissos fuisse. Sed jam a quinto saeculo eodem vitio, quo jam laborat Epiphanii textus, laborasse et Irenaei codices, ex eo patet, quod Theodoretus loco cit. eodem prorsus modo legit et scripsit, atque nunc apud Epiphanium legimus. Unde subit suspicio Epiphanium ipsum, mendosis usum codicibus, vitiose scripsisse.

(printed under page 295)

(1) ‹anchor: Τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς ... διασώζοντα προσηγορίαν› · call in col 578

Τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς.... διασώζοντα προσηγορίαν. Clarius Theodoretus: τῇ τοῦ Πατρὸς αὐτὸν προσηγορίᾳ καλεῖσθαι Χριστόν, Patris nomine Christum eum appellari.

Τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς ... διασώζοντα προσηγορίαν ("preserving the title of the Father"). Theodoret more clearly: "that he is called Christ by the Father's title," "that he is named Christ by the Father's name."

(printed under page 295)

(2) ‹anchor: Ὡς εἰπεῖν ῥαψῳδοί› · call in col 578

Ὡς εἰπεῖν ῥαψῳδοί. Haec addidisse videtur Epiphanius; neque enim vel apud interpretem, vel apud Tertull. leguntur.

Ὡς εἰπεῖν ῥαψῳδοί ("rhapsodists, so to speak"). Epiphanius seems to have added these words; for they are read neither in the translator nor in Tertullian.

(printed under page 295)

(3) ‹anchor: Ἄνθρωπον› · call in col 578

Ἄνθρωπον. Fallor, inquit hic Grabius, an Anthropiani inde dicti sint, quorum solus, quod ego sciam, S. Cyprianus epist. 73 (edit. Oxon.) meminit, eos cum Patripassianis et Valentinianis conjungens. At doctissimo viro procul dubio exciderat, Lactantium sub finem lib. IV De vera sapientia, pag. 407 edit. Oxon. an. 1684, conceptis verbis meminisse Anthropianorum, quos Novatianis, Valentinianis et Marcionitis subnectit. Ex Cypriani vero verbis id unum colligi potest, Anthropianos fuisse haereticos, qui nec eumdem Patrem, nec eumdem Filium nobiscum confiterentur: ex Lactantio vero, eos Jesum Christum merum hominem esse sensisse: quae si Grabii conjecturam non firmant, saltem non infirmant

Ἄνθρωπον ("Man"). "Am I wrong," says Grabe here, "or were the Anthropians named from this? Of them, so far as I know, only St Cyprian makes mention, letter 73 (Oxford edition), joining them with the Patripassians and the Valentinians." But it had no doubt slipped that most learned man's mind that Lactantius, near the end of book 4 of On True Wisdom, page 407 of the Oxford edition of 1684, mentions the Anthropians in express words, attaching them to the Novatians, Valentinians and Marcionites. From Cyprian's words only this can be gathered: that the Anthropians were heretics who did not confess the same Father or the same Son as we; from Lactantius, that they held Jesus Christ to be a mere man. These facts, if they do not confirm Grabe's conjecture, at least do not weaken it.

(printed under page 295)

(4) ‹anchor: Μάρκος δέ τις› · call in col 578

Μάρκος δέ τις. Verba sunt Epiphanii Haer. XXXIV, § 1. Quamvis autem hic episcopus Constantiensis plura Irenaei verbis addiderit, illiusque textus paulo magis ab illo episcopi Lugdunensis discrepet; operae tamen pretium duximus Graeca haec (omissa in edit. Oxon.) e regione antiquae Irenaei versionis apponere, tum quod ab auctoris nostri sensu non recesserit, imo non pauca ejusdem verba retinuerit Epiphanius; tum quod ex Graecis illustrari interdum possint Latina.

Μάρκος δέ τις ("But a certain Marcus"). These are the words of Epiphanius, Heresy 34, § 1. Although the bishop of Constantia here added a good deal to Irenaeus's words, and his text differs a little more from that of the bishop of Lyons, we have nevertheless thought it worth while to set this Greek (omitted in the Oxford edition) opposite the ancient version of Irenaeus, both because Epiphanius did not depart from our author's sense, and indeed kept not a few of his words, and because the Latin can sometimes be illuminated from the Greek.

(printed under page 295)

(5) ‹anchor: Προσέχειν αὐτῷ› · call in col 578

Προσέχειν αὐτῷ. Desideratur hic aliquod verbum, forte ἐποίησε. Scribit enim Irenaei interpres, ad se converti fecit; sic enim legendum, non convertit.

Προσέχειν αὐτῷ ("to attend to him"). Some verb is wanting here, perhaps ἐποίησε ("he made"). For Irenaeus's translator writes "he made them turn to him"; for so one should read, not convertit ("he turned").

(printed under page 295)

(6) ‹anchor: Et ideo hoc› · call in col 578

Et ideo hoc. I. e. propter hoc. Mallem tamen deleri hoc, utpote superfluum.

Et ideo hoc ("and therefore this"). That is, "on this account." I would rather, however, that hoc be deleted as superfluous.

(printed under page 295)

(7) ‹anchor: Emendatorem› · call in col 578

Emendatorem. Clarom. commendatorem. Sed repugnat Graeca vox διορθωτής, qua utitur Epiphanius.

Emendatorem ("corrector"). The Clermont manuscript: commendatorem ("commender"). But the Greek word διορθωτής, which Epiphanius uses, is against it.

(printed under page 295)

(8) ‹anchor: Ad se converti› · call in col 578

Ad se converti. Sic restituimus, juxta Graecum προσέχειν, sicque restituendum esse dudum monuerat Fronto Duc. In omnibus quidem cum editt. tum mss. legitur, convertit: sed tam manifesto scribarum errato, ut mirum sit id a Feuardentio, vel Grabio emendatum non fuisse.

Ad se converti ("to be turned to him"). So we have restored it, following the Greek προσέχειν, and Fronton du Duc had long ago pointed out that it should be so restored. In all the editions and manuscripts alike convertit ("he turned") is read: but by so manifest a scribal error that it is surprising it was not corrected by Feuardent or Grabe.

(printed under page 295)

(9) ‹anchor: Et perfectissimum› · call in col 578

Et perfectissimum. Deest in codd. Clarom. et Voss. nec quidquam est in Graeco Epiphanii textu, quod huic respondeat.

Et perfectissimum ("and most perfect"). Missing in the Clermont and Voss manuscripts, and there is nothing in Epiphanius's Greek text that answers to it.

(printed under page 295)

(10) ‹anchor: Et ab inenarrabilibus locis› · call in col 578

Et ab inenarrabilibus locis. Ita recte Feuard. consent. Clarom., Pass., Voss. et Graeco Epiphan. textu. In mss. autem Arund. et Merc. 2, aeque ac in editt. Eras. et Gall. tribus prioribus vocibus omissis, pro locis, perperam legitur logis.

"And from places that cannot be told." So Feuardent, rightly, with the Clermont, Passerat and Voss manuscripts and Epiphanius's Greek text agreeing. But in the Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts, as in the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius, the first three words are left out, and for locis ("places") logis is wrongly read.

(printed under page 295)

<!-- The Latin at the foot of this page runs across the full width; the notes are filed under col 579 by the page's layout (Latin on the outer column of even pages, as on pp. 290 and 294). Verse lines are joined with " / ". --> (*) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 579 Cap. IX.

Chapter 9.

(printed under page 296)

(1) ‹anchor: Anaxilai enim ludicra› · call in col 579

Anaxilai enim ludicra. Anaxilai exstitere plures. Nam praeter Anaxilaum, seu Anaxilam Messenium, Rheginorum tyrannum, cujus meminere Pausanias in Messen., Justinus lib. IV, et Macrob. Saturn. I, 2, fuit Anaxilaus historicus, cujus mentionem facit Dionysius Halicarn. initio Antiq. Rom. Alius fuit Anaxilaus comicus, cujus fabulas plurimas citat Athenaeus, qui Anaxilas dicitur Suidae et Etymologo. Alius denique fuit Anaxilaus medicus, quem laudat Plinius pluribus in locis. Hunc ipsum esse, de quo hic Epiphanius et Irenaeus, haud improbabile videbitur ei, qui utriusque verba contulerit cum iis, quae de illo refert Plinius lib. XXV, cap. 15. Lusit, inquit, et Anaxilaus eo (sulphure, de quo ibi sermo est) candens in calice novo, prunaque subdita circumferens, exardescentis repercussu pallorem dirum, velut defunctorum, offundente conviviis (conviviis hic dictum pro convivis). Ludendi siquidem verbum, quo Plinius utitur, optime convenit cum Irenaei ludicris, et Epiphanii παιγνίοις, apprimeque quadrat ad magorum praestigias. Nam ludorum et ludicrorum vox in hac arte propria est. Hinc Minutius Felix, de magis: Quidquid miraculi ludunt, per daemones faciunt. Deinde quemadmodum Anaxilaus, ut ex Plinii verbis liquet; sic et Marcus ejus imitator, poculo ad magicas imposturas utebatur: adeo ut alter cum altero maximam habeat affinitatem. Scripsisse autem videtur iste Anaxilaus de rebus naturalibus, vel, ut existimat Petavius, de arcanis quibusdam ac miris naturae operibus, ut ex Plinio colligere licet lib. XIX, c. 1; lib. XXVIII, c. 2; lib. XXX, c. 8.

"For the tricks of Anaxilaus." There were several men named Anaxilaus. Besides Anaxilaus or Anaxilas of Messene, tyrant of Rhegium, whom Pausanias mentions in the Messeniaca, Justin in book 4, and Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.2, there was Anaxilaus the historian, mentioned by Dionysius of Halicarnassus at the beginning of the Roman Antiquities. Another was Anaxilaus the comic poet, many of whose plays Athenaeus cites, and who is called Anaxilas by the Suda and the Etymologicum. Another, finally, was Anaxilaus the physician, whom Pliny praises in several places. That this is the man of whom Epiphanius and Irenaeus speak here will not seem improbable to anyone who compares the words of both with what Pliny relates of him in book 25, chapter 15: "Anaxilaus too," he says, "played a trick with it (sulphur, which is the subject there), heating it in a new cup and carrying it round with live coals beneath, so that by the reflection of its burning it cast a dreadful pallor, like that of the dead, over the guests" (conviviis here put for convivis). For the word "play," which Pliny uses, fits very well with Irenaeus's "tricks" (ludicra) and Epiphanius's παίγνια, and suits the conjurings of magicians exactly; for the words ludus and ludicrum are proper to this art. Hence Minucius Felix, of the magicians: "Whatever wonder they play at, they do through demons." Then, just as Anaxilaus, as is clear from Pliny's words, so also Marcus, his imitator, used a cup for his magical impostures: so that the one is very closely akin to the other. This Anaxilaus seems to have written on natural things, or, as Petau thinks, on certain secret and wonderful works of nature, as can be gathered from Pliny, book 19, chapter 1; book 28, chapter 2; book 30, chapter 8.

(printed under page 296)

(2) ‹anchor: Pro calice enim vino misto› · call in col 579

Pro calice enim vino misto, etc. Vertere debuisset interpres: Calicem enim vino mistum fingens se consecrare. Consecrare, inquam, non gratias agere (quomodo et paulo inferius εὐχαριστεῖν iterum redditur); hic enim non de gratiarum actione simpliciter, sed de ipso Eucharistiae sacrificio, a Marco utcunque adumbrato, agitur.

"For over a cup mixed with wine," etc. The translator should have rendered: "For pretending to consecrate a cup mixed with wine." "Consecrate," I say, not "give thanks" (as εὐχαριστεῖν is again rendered a little lower down); for here it is not a matter of thanksgiving simply, but of the very sacrifice of the Eucharist, which Marcus after a fashion counterfeited.

(printed under page 296)

(3) ‹anchor: Apparere facit› · call in col 579

Apparere facit. Poculum addidit Feuard.; nos expungimus, quia deest ea vox omnibus cum editis, tum manu exaratis codicibus, et in textu Graeco. Satis subintelligitur.

Apparere facit ("makes appear"). Feuardent added poculum ("the cup"); we strike it out, because that word is missing in all the copies, printed and handwritten alike, and in the Greek text. It is understood well enough.

(printed under page 296)

(4) ‹anchor: Concupiscere› · call in col 579

Concupiscere. Vertendum erat, concupiscant.

Concupiscere ("to desire"). It should have been rendered concupiscant ("that they may desire").

(printed under page 296)

(5) ‹anchor: Vocatur› · call in col 579

Vocatur. Pro invocatur. Sic Horat. lib. I, od. 2: Quem vocet divum populus ruentis / Imperi rebus?

Vocatur ("is called"). For invocatur ("is invoked"). So Horace, book 1, ode 2: "Which of the gods shall the people call on / for the affairs of the falling empire?"

(printed under page 296) <!-- Notes (6)–(9) on this page are called in the Greek, col 580, and are set once under n580 (Q7a). -->

(6) ‹anchor: Ποτήρια› · call in col 580

Ποτήρια. Hic ex professo Irenaei verba exscribit Epiphanius, et ut ipse loquitur, πρὸς ἔπος, ad verbum, Haer. cit. § 2 et seqq. Videtur autem interpres legisse, ποτήριον οἴνῳ κεκραμένον, etc.

Ποτήρια ("cups"). Here Epiphanius deliberately copies out Irenaeus's words and, as he himself puts it, πρὸς ἔπος, word for word, Heresy cited, § 2 and following. The translator, however, seems to have read ποτήριον οἴνῳ κεκραμένον ("a cup mixed with wine"), etc.

(printed under page 296)

(7) ‹anchor: κεκραμένα› · call in col 580

Κεκραμένα. Vult Petavius distinctionem post hanc vocem apponendam esse, ut ποτήρια οἴνῳ κεκραμένα, non cum verbo εὐχαριστεῖν, sed cum sequenti ἀναφαίνεσθαι construantur. Sed malim ego illas voces cum εὐχαριστεῖν construi, quam cum ἀναφαίνεσθαι. Nam hic εὐχαριστεῖν significat consecrare, ut recte vertit Billius, non gratias agere. Vide Dissertationem nostram III, § 7, init., ubi fusius expendimus quae hic de Eucharistia tractat Irenaeus.

Κεκραμένα ("mixed"). Petau would put a stop after this word, so that ποτήρια οἴνῳ κεκραμένα is construed not with the verb εὐχαριστεῖν but with the following ἀναφαίνεσθαι. But I would rather construe those words with εὐχαριστεῖν than with ἀναφαίνεσθαι. For here εὐχαριστεῖν means to consecrate, as Billius rightly rendered it, not to give thanks. See our Dissertation III, § 7, at the beginning, where we weigh at greater length what Irenaeus treats here concerning the Eucharist.

(printed under page 296)

(8) ‹anchor: πορφύρεα καὶ ἐρυθρὰ ἀναφαίνεσθαι ποιεῖ› · call in col 580

Πορφύρεα καὶ ἐρυθρὰ ἀναφαίνεσθαι ποιεῖ. Observat Feuardentius tria Marci praestigiarum exempla hic ab Irenaeo subnecti. Primum paulo clarius explicat Nicetas Choniates lib. IV Thesauri, cap. 6: Ille, ut divus Irenaeus auctor est, vitrea quaedam albi coloris pocula praeparabat: deinde carmine, nescio quo, usus, confestim eorum aliud in rubrum, aliud in purpureum, aliud denique in coeruleum convertebat. Postea confutans istas praestigias addit: Praesentium oculos fascinabat, efficiebatque ut ea, quae conspicerentur, contra se habere viderentur, quam eorum natura ferret. Nec enim pellucida vasorum vitreorum corpora in varios mutare colores potuisset, etc. Secundum autem erat, dum ex minore poculo, quod seductis mulierculis porrexerat, multo majus, quod ipse tenebat, adeo explebatur, ut etiam ex ipso supereffundi putarent. Postremum, quando deliria, quae palpitantes et stupentes effutiebant, vaticinia esse sibi persuadebant.

"He makes them appear purple and red." Feuardent observes that three examples of Marcus's conjuring tricks are joined together here by Irenaeus. The first is explained a little more clearly by Nicetas Choniates, book IV of the Thesaurus, chapter 6: "He, as the divine Irenaeus relates, used to prepare certain glass cups of white colour; then, using some spell or other, he would at once turn one of them to red, another to purple, another again to blue." Afterwards, refuting these tricks, he adds: "He bewitched the eyes of those present, and made the things seen appear otherwise than their nature allowed. For he could not have changed the transparent bodies of glass vessels into various colours," etc. The second was when, from a smaller cup which he had held out to the women he had led astray, the much larger one that he himself held was filled so full that they thought it was even overflowing. The last, when they persuaded themselves that the ravings they blurted out, trembling and stupefied, were prophecies.

(printed under page 296)

(9) ‹anchor: Χάριν› · call in col 580

Χάριν. Non improbabile censuerim cum Grabio, per τὴν Χάριν Marcum intellexisse conjugem (continues)

Χάριν ("Grace"). I would judge it not improbable, with Grabe, that by τὴν Χάριν Marcus understood the consort ... (continues)

(printed under page 296)

(1) ‹anchor: Προσενεγκών› · call in col 582

Προσενεγκών. Legendum vult Billius, προενεγκών, sed frustra.

Προσενεγκών ("having offered"). Billius would read προενεγκών ("having brought forward"), but needlessly.

(printed under page 297)

(2) ‹anchor: Κεκοσμημένον› · call in col 582

Κεκοσμημένον. Legunt Billius et Petav. cum interpr. κεκομισμένον. Post hoc verbum legisse videtur interpres, πολλῷ μεῖζον, nisi multo majorem vel ipse, vel scriba ex praecedentibus repetierit.

Κεκοσμημένον ("adorned"). Billius and Petau read, with the translator, κεκομισμένον ("brought"). After this word the translator seems to have read πολλῷ μεῖζον ("much larger"), unless he or a scribe repeated multo majorem from what went before.

(printed under page 297)

(3) ‹anchor: Δαίμονά τινα πάρεδρον› · call in col 582

Δαίμονά τινα πάρεδρον. Daemones paredri dicebantur, qui hominibus assistebant, et morbos atque infortunia ab illis avertere credebantur. Magos ejusmodi daemones habuisse assistentes sibi et obsequentes, quorum ope multa portenta ederent, scribit Tertullian. Apologet. c. 23. Cum illi spiritus ad tutelam duntaxat assistebant, dicebantur πάρεδροι· cum hominibus somnia injiciebant, vocabantur ὀνειροπομποί· cum eos ad terram elidebant, ut deinde tanquam ex morbo comitiali excitati, consulentibus futura praedicerent, appellabantur catabolici. Paredrorum et Oneiropomporum meminit Irenaeus hujus lib. cap. 23, n. 4, Paredrorum et Catabolicorum Tertull. lib. De an., c. 28.

Δαίμονά τινα πάρεδρον ("some familiar demon"). Demons were called paredri ("assessors") that attended on men and were believed to turn away diseases and misfortunes from them. Tertullian writes, Apology chapter 23, that magicians had such demons attending on them and obeying them, by whose help they worked many marvels. When those spirits attended only for protection they were called πάρεδροι; when they cast dreams on men they were called ὀνειροπομποί ("dream-senders"); when they dashed men to the ground, so that, roused afterwards as from epilepsy, they foretold the future to those who consulted them, they were called catabolici ("throwers-down"). Irenaeus mentions the paredri and oneiropompi in this book, chapter 23, number 4; Tertullian the paredri and catabolici, On the Soul, chapter 28.

(printed under page 297)

(4) ‹anchor: Ὁ δὲ τόπος τοῦ μεγέθους› · call in col 582

Τοῦ μεγέθους. Lege cum interpr. τοῦ μεγέθους σου. Hac voce μέγεθος designari Σιγὴν sive Χάριν conjicit Grabius: sed rem acu non tetigit vir eruditus. Μέγεθος Angelus est, de quo mox dixit Marcus, quod ὁ Πατὴρ τῶν ὅλων τὸν Ἄγγελόν σου διαπαντὸς βλέπει πρὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ, Pater omnium Angelum tuum semper videt ante faciem suam. Sic enim angelos paulo inferius describit hic haereticus: τὰ Μεγέθη διαπαντὸς βλέποντα τὸ πρόσωπον τοῦ Πατρός, Magnitudines semper videntes faciem Patris. Quod de angelis intelligi fatetur ipse Grabius, probatque ex eo epitheto, semper videntes faciem Patris, quod a Marco angelis expresse ascriptum ex Matth. XVIII, 10, legitur pagina 64, legitur et in verbis quae modo versamus. Horum igitur, locus autem tuae magnitudinis in nobis est, sensus est: locus angeli tui in nobis est. Effutiebat enim veterator, ut paulo post refert Irenaeus, se suosque, imagines angelorum, id est, spiritales homines esse, quos mater Achamoth ex inspectatione angelorum Salvatoris conceperat, iisque similes pepererat.

Τοῦ μεγέθους ("of the greatness"). Read with the translator τοῦ μεγέθους σου ("of your greatness"). Grabe conjectures that by this word μέγεθος Sige or Charis is meant; but the learned man did not hit the mark. The Μέγεθος is the Angel of whom Marcus said just before that "the Father of all beholds your Angel continually before his face," "the Father of all always sees your Angel before his face." For so this heretic describes the angels a little lower down: "the Greatnesses that continually behold the face of the Father," "the Magnitudes always seeing the face of the Father." Grabe himself admits that this is to be understood of angels, and proves it from the epithet "always seeing the face of the Father," which Marcus expressly ascribes to angels from Matt. 18:10, as is read on page 64, and is read also in the words we are now considering. The sense of the words "the place of your greatness is in us" is therefore: "the place of your angel is in us." For the old rogue blurted out, as Irenaeus reports a little later, that he and his followers were images of the angels, that is, spiritual men, whom the mother Achamoth had conceived from beholding the Saviour's angels and had borne like them.

(printed under page 297)

(5) ‹anchor: Eucharistiam facit› · call in col 582

Eucharistiam facit. Vertendum erat: Eucharistiam fecit.

Eucharistiam facit ("makes the Eucharist"). It should have been rendered: Eucharistiam fecit ("made the Eucharist").

(printed under page 297)

(6) ‹anchor: Et talia quaedam› · call in col 582

Et talia quaedam. Clarom. et alia quaedam.

"And some such things." The Clermont manuscript: "and some other things."

(printed under page 297)

(7) ‹anchor: Exterminavit multos› · call in col 582

Exterminavit multos. Id est, extra terminos abduxit, seduxit; Graec. ἐξηπάτησε.

Exterminavit multos ("he drove many out"). That is, led them beyond the bounds, led them astray; Greek ἐξηπάτησε ("he deceived").

(printed under page 297)

(8) ‹anchor: Et hoc› · call in col 582

Et hoc. Pro, et maxime.

Et hoc ("and this"). For "and especially."

(printed under page 297)

(9) ‹anchor: Honestae› · call in col 582

Honestae. Id est, eleganter cultae, praetextatae, opulentae. Nam ut observat Asconius Pedianus Ciceronis interpres, Honesti, pro divitibus; vetuste.

Honestae ("respectable women"). That is, elegantly dressed, of good family, wealthy. For, as Asconius Pedianus, the commentator on Cicero, observes: "honesti, for the rich; an old usage."

(printed under page 297)

(10) ‹anchor: quas saepe abducere› · call in col 582

Abducere. Sic recte Grab. ex cod. Arund. et Graeco reposuit, pro adducere, ut legitur in om. edit. et mss.

Abducere ("to lead away"). So Grabe rightly restored it from the Arundel manuscript and the Greek, in place of adducere ("to bring"), as is read in all the editions and manuscripts.

(printed under page 297)

<!-- On this page the Latin stands in the left column (583), the Greek in the right (584). The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO is a running text, not a footnote, and is not set here. --> (printed under page 298)

(1) ‹anchor: Quodcunque› · call in col 583

Quodcunque. Editt. quaecunque.

Quodcunque ("whatever"). The editions: quaecunque ("whatever things").

(printed under page 298)

(2) ‹anchor: Seducta› · call in col 583

Seducta. Gr. χαυνωθεῖσα, stulte de seipsa sentiens, vana, inflata.

Seducta ("led astray"). Greek χαυνωθεῖσα: thinking foolishly of herself, vain, puffed up.

(printed under page 298)

(3) ‹anchor: Concalefaciens animam› · call in col 583

Concalefaciens animam. Clarom. concalefaciens animum. Gr. διαθερμανθεῖσα τὴν ψυχήν, effervescens animo; quod melius.

Concalefaciens animam ("warming her soul"). The Clermont manuscript: concalefaciens animum ("warming her mind"). Greek διαθερμανθεῖσα τὴν ψυχήν, "seething in mind"; which is better.

(printed under page 298)

(4) ‹anchor: Suspicione› · call in col 583

Suspicione. Vertendum erat, exspectatione, vel spe.

Suspicione ("suspicion"). It should have been rendered "expectation," or "hope."

(printed under page 298)

(5) ‹anchor: Quod incipiat prophetare› · call in col 583

Quod incipiat prophetare. Vertendum erat, quod prophetatura sit, vaticinia edictura sit.

"That she is beginning to prophesy." It should have been rendered "that she is going to prophesy, is going to utter prophecies."

(printed under page 298)

(6) ‹anchor: Quaecunque evenerint omnia› · call in col 583

Quaecunque evenerint omnia. Gr. τὰ τυχόντα πάντα, quidquid temere occurrerit, quidquid in buccam venerit. In Merc. 2 codd. deest omnia.

"All whatever things have happened." Greek τὰ τυχόντα πάντα: whatever chances to occur to her, whatever comes into her mouth. In the Mercier 2 manuscript omnia ("all") is missing.

(printed under page 298)

(7) ‹anchor: Vacue› · call in col 583

Vacue. Melius, inaniter, et paulo post, inani aere, pro vacuo aere.

Vacue ("emptily"). Better inaniter ("vainly"), and a little later inani aere ("with vain air") for vacuo aere ("with empty air").

(printed under page 298)

(8) ‹anchor: Calefacta spiritu› · call in col 583

Calefacta spiritu. Adde ex Graec. inani.

Calefacta spiritu ("heated with a spirit"). Add from the Greek inani ("empty").

(printed under page 298)

(9) ‹anchor: Melior nobis› · call in col 583

Melior nobis. Sic ex Graeca lectione Feuardentius emendavit. In omnibus enim praecedentibus editt. et mss. codd. legitur, meliora nobis; forte pro, melior a nobis.

Melior nobis ("better than we"). So Feuardent emended from the Greek reading. For in all the earlier editions and manuscripts meliora nobis ("better things than we") is read; perhaps for melior a nobis.

(printed under page 298)

(10) ‹anchor: Exsequitur› · call in col 583

Exsequitur. Forte scripsit interpres, eloquitur, juxta Gr. ἔφη.

Exsequitur ("goes on"). Perhaps the translator wrote eloquitur ("speaks out"), following the Greek ἔφη ("said").

(printed under page 298)

(11) ‹anchor: Quod audax et inverecunda est anima› · call in col 583

Quod audax et inverecunda est anima. Sic iterum ex Graeco restituit Feuard. pro, eo quod audax et verecunda anima, ut habent Eras., Gall. et omnes mss. Mallem tamen, audax et impudens res est anima.

"That the soul is bold and shameless." So again Feuardent restored it from the Greek, in place of eo quod audax et verecunda anima ("because the soul is bold and modest"), as Erasmus, Gallasius and all the manuscripts have. I would prefer, however, "the soul is a bold and impudent thing."

(printed under page 298)

(12) ‹anchor: Quae vacuo aere› · call in col 583

Quae vacuo aere. Ita partim ex Graeco, partim ex codd. tum editis, tum manu exaratis emendo. In editt. siquidem Eras., Gall. et Feuard. ac codd. Clarom., Pass., Arund. et Merc. 2 legitur, quasi e vacuo, ubi quasi e manifesta scribarum incuria scriptum occurrit pro quae. Hoc enim pronomen scribi debuit, tum ut accurate reddatur ψυχὴ κενῷ ἀέρι θερμαινομένη, tum ut verbis legitimus subsit sensus; qui profecto nullus est si legatur, quasi e vacuo, vel, ut edidit Grabius, quasi vacuo aere excalefacta est. Caeterum per vacuum aerem intelligitur vanitas.

"Which, with empty air." I emend it so, partly from the Greek, partly from copies both printed and handwritten. For in the editions of Erasmus, Gallasius and Feuardent and in the Clermont, Passerat, Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts quasi e vacuo ("as if from empty") is read, where quasi e appears, written through the scribes' manifest carelessness, in place of quae. For this pronoun ought to have been written, both so that ψυχὴ κενῷ ἀέρι θερμαινομένη ("a soul heated with empty air") might be rendered accurately and so that the words might carry a proper sense; and they carry none at all if one reads quasi e vacuo or, as Grabe printed, quasi vacuo aere excalefacta est ("as if heated with empty air"). For the rest, by "empty air" vanity is meant.

(printed under page 298)

(13) ‹anchor: Δι' ἡμᾶς ἐγκαταστῆσαι› · call in col 583

Δι' ἡμᾶς ἐγκαταστῆσαι. Lege δεῖ ἡμᾶς ἐν καταστῆσαι, vel καταστῆναι.

Δι' ἡμᾶς ἐγκαταστῆσαι ("to establish because of us"). Read δεῖ ἡμᾶς ἓν καταστῆσαι ("we must establish one"), or καταστῆναι ("become").

(printed under page 298)

(14) ‹anchor: Ἀποτολμᾷ λαλεῖν› · call in col 583

Ἀποτολμᾷ λαλεῖν. Legisse videtur interpres, ἀποτολμᾷ καὶ λαλεῖ. Sed utrum legas, parum refert.

Ἀποτολμᾷ λαλεῖν ("dares to speak"). The translator seems to have read ἀποτολμᾷ καὶ λαλεῖ ("dares and speaks"). But it makes little difference which you read.

(printed under page 298)

(15) ‹anchor: Κρείσσων ἡμῶν› · call in col 583

Κρείσσων ἡμῶν. Quis sit ille antiquus scriptor quem saepe laudat Irenaeus, hactenus deprehendi non potuit.

Κρείσσων ἡμῶν ("one better than we"). Who that ancient writer is whom Irenaeus often praises has not so far been discovered.

(printed under page 298)

(16) ‹anchor: Μεταλαμβάνει› · call in col 583

Μεταλαμβάνει. Suspicantur Billius et Petavius legendum esse, ὑπολαμβάνει.

Μεταλαμβάνει ("partakes"). Billius and Petau suspect one should read ὑπολαμβάνει ("supposes").

(printed under page 298)

<!-- On this page the Greek stands in the left column (585), the Latin in the right (586). The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO, the signature line "PATROL. GR. VII." and the gathering number are not footnotes and are not set here. Verse lines are joined with " / ". --> (printed under page 299)

(1) ‹anchor: προτέρων› · call in col 585

Προτέρων. Leg. cum interprete πιστοτέρων.

Προτέρων ("former"). Read, with the translator, πιστοτέρων ("more faithful").

(printed under page 299)

(2) ‹anchor: ὑποτέτακται› · call in col 585

Ὑποτέτακται. In edit. Oxoniensi male προτέτακται.

Ὑποτέτακται ("is subject"). The Oxford edition wrongly has προτέτακται ("is set before").

(printed under page 299)

(3) ‹anchor: ἐπὶ τοῖς δείπνοις τοῦ κλήρου› · call in col 585

Ἐπὶ τοῖς δείπνοις τοῦ κλήρου. Alludit auctor ad veterem conviviorum agendorum morem. In his enim rex convivii unus aliquis sorte eligi solebat, qui modum bibendi poneret. Hinc Horat. Carm. lib. II, od. 7: . . . . Quem Venus arbitrum / Dicet bibendi. Et Carm. lib. I, od. 4: Nec regna vini sortiere talis. Hunc bibendi arbitrum Varro lib. XX Rerum human., Modimperatorem vocat; Laertius in Empedocle, et Plutarchus Sympos. I, cap. 4 συμποσίαρχον, vel συμποσιάρχαν; caeteri Regem convivii. Jaciebantur et sortes de loco, in quo quisque accumberet, et de ciborum partibus, quas quisque tolleret; sed hae minus faciunt ad Irenaei institutum.

"At the suppers of the lot." The author alludes to the old custom of holding banquets. For at them some one person used to be chosen by lot as king of the banquet, to set the measure of drinking. Hence Horace, Odes, book II, ode 7: ". . . . Whom will Venus / name master of the drinking?" And Odes, book I, ode 4: "Nor will you win by dice the lordship of the wine." This master of the drinking Varro, in book XX of the Res humanae, calls Modimperator; Laertius in his Empedocles, and Plutarch, Symposiaca I, chapter 4, call him συμποσίαρχος or συμποσιάρχης; the rest, king of the banquet. Lots were also cast for the place where each should recline, and for the portions of food each should take; but these bear less on Irenaeus's purpose.

(printed under page 299)

<!-- Notes (1)–(3) on this page are called in the Greek, col 585, and are set once under n585 (Q7a). -->

(4) ‹anchor: Habent› · call in col 586

Habent. Cod. Voss. habebant.

Habent ("they have"). The Voss manuscript: habebant ("they had").

(printed under page 299)

(5) ‹anchor: Seducibiles› · call in col 586

Seducibiles. Vertendum erat, seducta.

Seducibiles ("easily led astray"). It should have been rendered seducta ("led astray").

(printed under page 299)

(6) ‹anchor: Jubens eis› · call in col 586

Jubens eis. Al. jubens eas.

Jubens eis ("bidding them," dative). Others: jubens eas (accusative).

(printed under page 299)

(7) ‹anchor: Catathematizantes› · call in col 586

Catathematizantes. Sic codd. Clarom. et Voss., nec dubium quin ita scripserit interpres ex Gr. καταθεματίσασαι· siquidem infra cap. 16 habet, quam scientiam exsufflantes, et catathematizantes, etc.

Catathematizantes ("cursing"). So the Clermont and Voss manuscripts, and there is no doubt that the translator wrote so from the Greek καταθεματίσασαι ("having cursed"), since below, in chapter 16, he has "blowing upon which knowledge and cursing it," etc.

(printed under page 299)

(8) ‹anchor: Insano, qui se divinum spirare simulabat› · call in col 586

Insano, qui se divinum spirare simulabat. Sic unicam Graecam vocem θίασον reddit versio Latina. Sed vel quidpiam aliud legit interpres, vel male vertit. Neque enim θίασος insanum, qui se divinum, etc., significat; sed proprie choream et saltationem actam in honorem Bacchi, turbam Bacchicos choros agitantem; generaliter, coetum, societatem, sodalitium, etc. Vertendum proinde erat, legendo θιάσου, separaverunt se ab illo coetu. Probabile cum Grabio censuerim, interpretem legisse, non θιαπότου (quod suspicatur Billius), sed quoddam aliud derivatum a θειάζειν, sui compotem non esse, divinum afflatum sive spiritum alteri immittere.

"From the madman who pretended to breathe something divine." So the Latin version renders the single Greek word θίασον. But either the translator read something else or he rendered it badly. For θίασος does not mean "a madman who pretends to be divine," etc., but properly a dance and leaping performed in honour of Bacchus, a crowd stirring up Bacchic dances; and generally a gathering, a society, a fellowship, etc. It should therefore have been rendered, reading θιάσου, "they separated themselves from that company." I would judge it probable, with Grabe, that the translator read not θιαπότου (as Billius suspects) but some other word derived from θειάζειν, "not to be master of oneself, to breathe a divine inspiration or spirit into another."

(printed under page 299)

(9) ‹anchor: Quod enim jubet, eo› · call in col 586

Quod enim jubet, eo. Sic omnes editt. cum Graeco. At mss. cum nostri, tum Anglicani habent: qui enim jubet, ab eo.

"For what commands, than that." So all the editions, with the Greek. But the manuscripts, both ours and the English, have: "for he who commands, by him."

(printed under page 299)

(10) ‹anchor: Dominatius› · call in col 586

Dominatius, et paulo post, dominatior. Ita codd. Clarom., Arund. et Merc. 2, cum edit. Oxon. Sicque legendum esse, non dominantius, dominantior, patet ex lib. II, cap. 5, ubi in omnibus cum editt. tum mss. legitur dominatior et dominatiorem. Dominatius, id est auctoritate praestantius.

Dominatius ("more lordly"), and a little later dominatior. So the Clermont, Arundel and Mercier 2 manuscripts, with the Oxford edition. That one should read so, not dominantius, dominantior, is clear from book 2, chapter 5, where in all the editions and manuscripts alike dominatior and dominatiorem are read. Dominatius: that is, superior in authority.

(printed under page 299)

(11) ‹anchor: Hi homines› · call in col 586

Hi homines. Al. omnes.

Hi homines ("these men"). Others: omnes ("all").

(printed under page 299)

<!-- On this page the Latin stands in the left column (587), the Greek in the right (588). The band headed BILLII INTERPRETATIO is a running text, not a footnote, and is not set here. --> (printed under page 300)

(1) ‹anchor: Adhuc etiam› · call in col 587

Adhuc etiam, etc. Ἔτι δέ male legit interpres, pro ὅτι δέ, quod autem. Unde et sequentes periodos aliter distinxit.

Adhuc etiam ("further also"), etc. The translator wrongly read ἔτι δέ ("and further") for ὅτι δέ, "but that." Hence he also divided the following sentences differently.

(printed under page 300)

(2) ‹anchor: Velut cupidine› · call in col 587

Velut cupidine. His in Graeco nihil respondet.

Velut cupidine ("as if with desire"). Nothing in the Greek answers to these words.

(printed under page 300)

(3) ‹anchor: Nostri› · call in col 587

Nostri. Hanc vocem recte addidit Grabius ex codd. Arund., Voss. et Merc. 2, juxta Graecum ἡμετέρων. Eamdem habet cod. Clarom.

Nostri ("of ours"). Grabe rightly added this word from the Arundel, Voss and Mercier 2 manuscripts, following the Greek ἡμετέρων. The Clermont manuscript has the same.

(printed under page 300)

(4) ‹anchor: Quidam circumobversati in iisdem› · call in col 587

Quidam circumobversati in iisdem. Sic codd. Clarom., Voss. et Merc. 2, cum edit. Oxon. In editt. Eras. et Feuard. quidem circumobversati. Gallasius pejus, quidem circumobservati. Porro illa verba sic interpretor: quidam in iisdem studiis, vel fraudibus circumeuntes, iisdem vestigiis inhaerentes, cum iisdem dolis insidias captantes. Vide not. 6.

"Some going about in the same." So the Clermont, Voss and Mercier 2 manuscripts, with the Oxford edition. In the editions of Erasmus and Feuardent, quidem circumobversati. Gallasius, worse, quidem circumobservati. I interpret these words thus: some going about in the same pursuits or frauds, following the same tracks, laying snares with the same tricks. See note 6.

(printed under page 300)

(5) ‹anchor: Ἐνίαις τῶν γυναικῶν› · call in col 587

Ἐνίαις τῶν γυναικῶν. Haec eadem ex Irenaeo refert Hieronymus ep. 53, al. 29, ad Theodoram, quae est epitaphium Lucinii Baetici.

Ἐνίαις τῶν γυναικῶν ("to some of the women"). Jerome reports these same things from Irenaeus in letter 53 (otherwise 29), to Theodora, which is the epitaph of Lucinius of Baetica.

(printed under page 300)

(6) ‹anchor: Τῶν ἡμετέρων› · call in col 587

Τῶν ἡμετέρων. Ex hac voce colligi posse putat Grabius, tam Irenaeum, quam istum, ad quem hos adversus haereses libros misit, Asiaticos fuisse. Sed levior videtur haec conjectura; τῶν ἡμετέρων significare diaconum catholicae communionis probabilius est.

Τῶν ἡμετέρων ("of ours"). Grabe thinks it can be gathered from this word that both Irenaeus and the man to whom he sent these books against the heresies were Asiatics. But the conjecture seems rather slight; it is more probable that τῶν ἡμετέρων denotes a deacon of the Catholic communion.

(printed under page 300)

(7) ‹anchor: Τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ› · call in col 587

Τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ. Nota, inquit idem Grabius, ministris sacrorum in Asia integrum tunc temporis fuisse cum mulieribus (scripsissem ego, cum uxoribus) habitare, iis saltem quas ante susceptos sacros ordines duxerant. Ecquis neget? Dissimulandus non erat quaestionis status. Neque enim in controversiam venit an ministris sacrorum post susceptos ordines integrum esset cum uxoribus habitare: sed utrum iisdem tota Asia fas esset uxoribus matrimonii jure uti. Prius quidem probat is Irenaei locus: non certe posterius.

Τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ ("his wife"). "Note," says the same Grabe, "that ministers of sacred things in Asia were at that time free to live with women" (I would have written "with wives"), "at least with those they had married before receiving holy orders." Who would deny it? But the state of the question should not have been glossed over. For the point in dispute is not whether ministers of sacred things were free, after receiving orders, to live with their wives, but whether throughout Asia they were permitted to use their wives by right of marriage. This passage of Irenaeus proves the former, but certainly not the latter.

(printed under page 300)

(8) ‹anchor: Ἐξομολογουμένη› · call in col 587

Ἐξομολογουμένη. Eam exhomologesin, de qua hic Irenaeus, fuse expendimus in Dissert. III, § 7, init.

Ἐξομολογουμένη ("making confession"). The exomologesis of which Irenaeus speaks here we have weighed at length in Dissertation 3, § 7, beginning.

(printed under page 300)

(9) ‹anchor: Περιπολίζοντες› · call in col 587

Περιπολίζοντες. Legendum censerem περιπολεύοντες, vel περιπολοῦντες· vertit enim interpres, circumobversati, id est, ni fallor, circumeuntes, circumvagati, vel potius circuitorum more explorantes, insidias captantes. At περιπολίζω (sicubi scriptum legatur) significat urbem circumaedificare, circumstruere, etc., quod significati genus nihil habet cum eo Irenaei loco commune.

Περιπολίζοντες. I would judge one should read περιπολεύοντες or περιπολοῦντες ("going the rounds"); for the translator renders circumobversati, that is, unless I am mistaken, "going about, wandering round," or rather "spying out after the manner of patrols, laying snares." But περιπολίζω (if it is found written anywhere) means to build round a city, to wall about, etc., a kind of meaning that has nothing in common with this passage of Irenaeus.

(printed under page 300)

(10) ‹anchor: τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν› · call in col 587

Ἀπολύτρωσιν. Per redemptionem, quam hic et paulo post memorat Irenaeus, intelligit non (continues)

Ἀπολύτρωσιν ("redemption"). By the "redemption" which Irenaeus mentions here and a little later he means not ... (continues)

(printed under page 300)

(1) ‹anchor: Πρὸ αἰῶνος› · call in col 590

Πρὸ αἰῶνος. Cod. Reg. unica voce, προαιῶνος, nec male. Interpres vero legit πρὸ αἰώνων. Sed quomodocunque legas, parum refert, modo vocem αἰών, non fictitium Valentinianorum Aeonem, sed saeculum, interpreteris: ut sensus sit, Σιγὴν ante saecula exstitisse, ut recte vertit Petavius, (minus bene Billius, ante aeonas), quae revera initio cap. 1. una cum Bytho ante saecula, seu ἐν ἀπείροις αἰῶσι χρόνων, infinitis temporum saeculis, fuisse dicitur.

Πρὸ αἰῶνος ("before the age"). The Royal manuscript has it as a single word, προαιῶνος, not badly. The translator read πρὸ αἰώνων ("before the ages"). But however you read it, it matters little, provided you take the word αἰών not as the fictitious Aeon of the Valentinians but as an age: so that the sense is that Sige existed before the ages, as Petau rightly renders (Billius less well, "before the aeons"); and indeed at the beginning of chapter 1 she is said to have been, together with Bythus, before the ages, or ἐν ἀπείροις αἰῶσι χρόνων, "in infinite ages of time."

(printed under page 301)

(2) ‹anchor: Τὰ μεγέθη› · call in col 590

Τὰ μεγέθη. Id est Angelos. Vid. sup. num. 3 (col. 581, not. 4).

Τὰ μεγέθη ("the Greatnesses"). That is, the angels. See above, number 3 (col. 581, note 4).

(printed under page 301)

(3) ‹anchor: Χρώμεθα› · call in col 590

Χρώμεθα. Leg. cum interp. χρώμενα.

Χρώμεθα ("we use"). Read with the translator χρώμενα ("using").

(printed under page 301)

(4) ‹anchor: Ἀνασπῶσιν ἄνω τὰς αὐτῶν μορφάς› · call in col 590

Ἀνασπῶσιν ἄνω τὰς αὐτῶν μορφάς, etc. Μορφὰς, id est species, ideas, seu formas, (non vultus, ut perperam vertit Petavius), quas Achamoth μεγαλότολμος, ex audaciori Angelorum Salvatoris satellitium inspectatione ἐφαντασίασε, animo informavit, et ad quarum imaginem κεκύηκε καρπούς, κύημα πνευματικὸν καθ' ὁμοίωσιν γεγονὸς τῶν δορυφόρων τοῦ Σωτῆρος, ut habetur cap. 4, peperit fructus, partum videlicet spiritalem, ad similitudinem effectum satellitum Salvatoris. Id est, peperit spiritales homines: προεβάλετο ἡμᾶς αὐτῶν εἰκόνας, emisit nos Angelorum illorum mente conceptorum imagines, effutiebant Marcosii. Has igitur Angelorum imagines, spiritales nimirum homines, ad Angelorum imagines effictos, existimabant, Sophia duce ac sequestro, iisdemque Angelis opem ferentibus, sursum retrahi: ita ut Judicis conspectum, superiorumque Potestatum manus effugientes, a Sophia excepti, et in thalamum inducti, sponsis suis Angelis redderentur, ut explicatur paulo post et cap. 7, necnon cap. 21, sub finem.

Ἀνασπῶσιν ἄνω τὰς αὐτῶν μορφάς ("they draw their forms up on high"), etc. Μορφαί: that is, appearances, ideas, or forms (not "faces," as Petau wrongly rendered), which Achamoth, μεγαλότολμος ("greatly daring"), from a too bold gazing on the angels of the Saviour's retinue, ἐφαντασίασε, "formed in her mind," and after whose image κεκύηκε καρπούς, κύημα πνευματικὸν καθ' ὁμοίωσιν γεγονὸς τῶν δορυφόρων τοῦ Σωτῆρος, as it is put in chapter 4, "she bore fruits, namely a spiritual offspring made after the likeness of the Saviour's attendants." That is, she bore spiritual men: προεβάλετο ἡμᾶς αὐτῶν εἰκόνας, "she emitted us as images of those angels she had conceived in her mind," as the Marcosians babbled. These images of the angels, then, spiritual men fashioned after the angels' images, they thought were drawn back upward, with Sophia as guide and mediator and the same angels lending their help: so that, escaping the sight of the Judge and the hands of the higher Powers, they were received by Sophia, led into the bridal chamber, and given back to their bridegrooms the angels, as is explained a little later and in chapter 7, and also in chapter 21, towards the end.

(printed under page 301)

(5) ‹anchor: Φαντασιωθεῖσα› · call in col 590

Φαντασιωθεῖσα. Cod. Reg. φαντασθεῖσα.

Φαντασιωθεῖσα ("having imagined"). The Royal manuscript: φαντασθεῖσα.

(printed under page 301)

(6) ‹anchor: Τὰς εἰκόνας› · call in col 590

Τὰς εἰκόνας. Adde cum interprete, αὐτῶν.

Τὰς εἰκόνας ("the images"). Add αὐτῶν ("their") with the translator.

(printed under page 301)

(7) ‹anchor: Ἀμφοτέρων ἡμῶν› · call in col 590

Ἀμφοτέρων ἡμῶν. Achamothae scilicet, quae μεγαλότολμος, audaci facinore, Angelos contuita, eorum species mente effinxerat, et nostrum, quorum solutior fuit vita. Amborum nimirum eadem erat ratio: ambo in thalamum Pleromatis inducendi.

Ἀμφοτέρων ἡμῶν ("of us both"). That is, of Achamoth, who, μεγαλότολμος, by a daring deed, having gazed on the angels, had shaped their appearances in her mind; and of us, whose life was the more dissolute. The case of both, of course, was the same: both were to be led into the bridal chamber of the Pleroma.

(printed under page 301)

(8) ‹anchor: Et incomprehensibiles› · call in col 590

Et incomprehensibiles. Ἀκρατήτους melius, quamvis non minus barbare, reddidisset interpres, inapprehensibiles, id est qui a judice teneri nequeant.

Et incomprehensibiles ("and incomprehensible"). The translator would have rendered ἀκρατήτους better, though no less barbarously, by inapprehensibiles ("unseizable"), that is, who cannot be held by the judge.

(printed under page 301)

(9) ‹anchor: O assessor Dei› · call in col 590

O assessor Dei. Felicius reddidit Billius, o quae Deo assides. Haec enim non ad judicem referri, sed ad Sophiam, quae ultimum inter 30 Aeones tenebat locum, et matris Achamothae mater a Valentinianis fingebatur, multo cum judicio observat Grabius, evidenterque demonstrat ex fine capitis 21, ubi, inter varias precationes, quibus animae e corpore discedentes, incomprehensibiles et invisibiles Principibus et Potestatibus fiant, haec ad eos, qui circa Demiurgum sunt, oratio refertur: Invoco incorruptibilem Sophiam, ἐπικαλοῦμαι τὴν ἄφθαρτον Σοφίαν, quae est in Patre, mater autem est matris vestrae, scilicet Achamoth, cujus ibidem sequitur descriptio. Tum iterum dicitur: Ego autem invoco ejus matrem, ἐγὼ δὲ ἐπικαλοῦμαι αὐτῆς τὴν μητέρα.

"O assessor of God." Billius rendered it more happily: "O you who sit beside God." For Grabe observes with great judgement that these words refer not to the judge but to Sophia, who held the last place among the thirty Aeons and was imagined by the Valentinians to be the mother of the mother Achamoth; and he shows it clearly from the end of chapter 21, where, among the various prayers by which souls departing from the body become incomprehensible and invisible to the Principalities and Powers, this prayer to those around the Demiurge is reported: "I invoke the incorruptible Sophia," ἐπικαλοῦμαι τὴν ἄφθαρτον Σοφίαν, "who is in the Father, and is the mother of your mother," that is, of Achamoth, whose description follows in the same place. Then again it is said: "But I invoke her mother," ἐγὼ δὲ ἐπικαλοῦμαι αὐτῆς τὴν μητέρα.

(printed under page 301)

(10) ‹anchor: Pro aeonon› · call in col 590

Pro aeonon. Sic Graecisans interpres, pro ante aeonas. Sed vertendum erat, ante saecula. Vide notam 1.

Pro aeonon. So the translator, Graecizing, for "before the aeons." But it should have been rendered "before the ages." See note 1.

(printed under page 301)

(11) ‹anchor: Adductore› · call in col 590

Adductore. Vertit Billius, perductore: sed melius Petavius, conciliatore, seu potius conciliatrice.

Adductore ("by the one who leads to"). Billius rendered perductore ("guide"); but Petau better, conciliatore ("go-between"), or rather conciliatrice (feminine).

(printed under page 301)

(12) ‹anchor: Imagines illorum› · call in col 590

Imagines illorum. Lege imagines illarum, scilicet Magnitudinum. Ad genus siquidem vocis Graecae τὰ Μεγέθη attentus interpres, haud cogitavit vocem Latinam, Magnitudines, femininum exposcere.

Imagines illorum ("images of those," masculine/neuter). Read imagines illarum (feminine), namely of the Magnitudes. For the translator, attending to the gender of the Greek word τὰ Μεγέθη (neuter), did not reflect that the Latin word Magnitudines requires the feminine.

(printed under page 301)

(13) ‹anchor: Intentionem illorum, quae sunt sursum, quasi somnium habens› · call in col 590

Intentionem illorum, quae sunt sursum, quasi somnium habens. Id est superarum rerum, seu Angelorum ideam somnii cujusdam instar mente volvens.

"Having the intention of the things above as a dream." That is, turning over in her mind, like some dream, the idea of the things above, or of the angels.

(printed under page 301)

(14) ‹anchor: Tu autem, quasi quae scias› · call in col 590

Tu autem, quasi quae scias, etc. Totam hanc periodum pessime vertit interpres. Primo Graeca (continues)

"But you, as one who knows," etc. The translator rendered this whole sentence very badly. First, the Greek ... (continues)

(printed under page 301)

(1) ‹anchor: Regiones Rhodanenses› · call in col 591

Regiones Rhodanenses. Vide not. 7.

Regiones Rhodanenses ("the regions of the Rhône"). See note 7.

(printed under page 302)

(2) ‹anchor: Cauterizatas› · call in col 591

Cauterizatas. Al. cauteriatas.

Cauterizatas ("seared"). Others: cauteriatas.

(printed under page 302)

(3) ‹anchor: Reverentes› · call in col 591

Reverentes. Ita correxit Feuard. ex Graeco, αἱ δὲ δυσωπούμεναι, pro revertentes, quod habent editt. Eras. et Gall. cum omnibus mss.

Reverentes ("abashed"). So Feuardent corrected it from the Greek, αἱ δὲ δυσωπούμεναι ("but those who are put to shame"), in place of revertentes ("returning"), which the editions of Erasmus and Gallasius have, with all the manuscripts.

(printed under page 302)

(4) ‹anchor: Dubitant› · call in col 591

Dubitant, etc. Sic recte juxta Graec. codd. Clarom., Pass., Voss. et Ottobon. cum edit. Oxon. Reliqua omnia exemplaria cum edita, tum mss. accurata non esse, aut prorsus vitiata asserit Grabius.

Dubitant ("they waver"), etc. So, rightly, following the Greek, the Clermont, Passerat, Voss and Ottoboni manuscripts, with the Oxford edition. Grabe asserts that all the other copies, printed and manuscript alike, are inaccurate or wholly corrupt.

(printed under page 302)

(5) ‹anchor: Proverbii› · call in col 591

Proverbii. Clarom. verbi; Voss. verbum.

Proverbii ("of the proverb"). The Clermont manuscript: verbi ("of the saying"); Voss: verbum ("the saying").

(printed under page 302)

(6) ‹anchor: Τὴν Ὁμηρικὴν Ἄϊδος κυνέην› · call in col 591

Τὴν Ὁμηρικὴν Ἄϊδος κυνέην. Orci galea, Ἄϊδος κυνῆ, proverbium ex Homeri Il. E, v. 845, desumptum, ubi Pallas cum Marte dimicans, orci galea, ne ab eo conspici posset, contexisse se dicitur: ... αὐτὰρ Ἀθήνη / Δῦν' Ἄϊδος κυνέην, μή μιν ἴδοι ὄβριμος Ἄρης. Plutoni siquidem, ut observat Erasmus in Adag., galea erat, quam qui gestaret, omnes videbat, ipse nemini conspicuus. Id autem ab Irenaeo huc adductum, ut vanas Gnosticorum fabulas derideret, ineptisque poetarum nugis prorsus similes esse demonstraret.

Τὴν Ὁμηρικὴν Ἄϊδος κυνέην ("the Homeric helmet of Hades"). The helmet of Orcus, Ἄϊδος κυνῆ: a proverb taken from Homer, Iliad 5, line 845, where Pallas, fighting with Mars, is said to have covered herself with the helmet of Orcus so that he could not see her: "... but Athena / put on the helmet of Hades, that mighty Ares might not see her." For Pluto, as Erasmus observes in the Adages, had a helmet whose wearer saw everyone while visible to no one. Irenaeus brought it in here to mock the empty fables of the Gnostics and to show that they are just like the silly trifles of the poets.

(printed under page 302)

(7) ‹anchor: Ἐν τοῖς καθ' ἡμᾶς κλίμασι τῆς Ῥοδανουσίας› · call in col 591

Ἐν τοῖς καθ' ἡμᾶς κλίμασι τῆς Ῥοδανουσίας. Lugdunensem tractum intelligit. Lugdunum siquidem a veteribus Rhodanusiam dictum fuisse, perspicue, ni fallor, colligitur ex Sidonio Apollinari lib. I, epist. 5. Egresso, inquit, mihi Rhodanusiae nostrae moenibus, etc. Atqui Lugduni natus erat Sidonius: nec eo tempore, quo epistolam hanc scribebat, nondum episcopus Arvernensis, aliam urbem, praeter Lugdunum, Rhodanusiam suam appellare poterat. Ῥοδανουσίας cujusdam meminit Stephanus, quam πόλιν ἐν Μασσαλίᾳ, Massiliensium urbem esse dicit. Id de Rhoda (Gallice Roses) quam tenuere Massilienses, interpretantur quidam. Sed repugnat Marcianus Heracleota, scribens Rhodanusiam istam a Rhodano flumine allui: Οἱ Μασσαλίαν κτίσαντες ἔχον Φωκεῖς / Ἀγάθην, Ῥοδανουσίαν τε, Ῥοδανὸς ἣν μέγας / Ποταμὸς παραῤῥεῖ. Quin tamen affirmem Rhodanusiam hanc Lugdunum ipsum esse, plura deterrent. Viderint eruditi. Sed si alia a Lugduno sit, dicendum erit duas exstitisse super Rhodanum flumen ejusdem nominis urbes: urbem enim Lugdunum dictam fuisse Rhodanusiam negare non sinit Sidonii Apollinaris laudata auctoritas. Paulo iniquius ergo a Frontone Duc. et Grabio castigantur Cornarius et Gallasius, quod Graeca Irenaei verba reddiderint; in regionibus Rhodanusiae. Perinde est atque si vertissent, in regione Lugdunensi.

Ἐν τοῖς καθ' ἡμᾶς κλίμασι τῆς Ῥοδανουσίας ("in our regions of Rhodanusia"). He means the district of Lyons. For that Lyons was called Rhodanusia by the ancients is plainly gathered, unless I am mistaken, from Sidonius Apollinaris, book 1, letter 5: "When I had gone out," he says, "from the walls of our Rhodanusia," etc. Now Sidonius was born at Lyons, and at the time he was writing this letter, not yet bishop of the Arverni, he could call no other city than Lyons his Rhodanusia. Stephanus mentions a certain Ῥοδανουσία which he says is πόλιν ἐν Μασσαλίᾳ, "a city of the Massilians." Some interpret this of Rhoda (in French, Roses), which the Massilians held. But Marcian of Heraclea is against it, writing that this Rhodanusia is washed by the river Rhône: "The Phocaeans who founded Massilia held / Agathe, and Rhodanusia, past which the great / river Rhône flows." Yet several things deter me from affirming that this Rhodanusia is Lyons itself. Let the learned decide. But if it is other than Lyons, it will have to be said that there were two cities of the same name on the river Rhône: for the cited authority of Sidonius Apollinaris does not allow it to be denied that the city of Lyons was called Rhodanusia. Fronton du Duc and Grabe, then, are a little unfair in censuring Cornarius and Gallasius for rendering Irenaeus's Greek words "in the regions of Rhodanusia." It is just as if they had rendered "in the region of Lyons."

(printed under page 302)

(8) ‹anchor: Κεκαυτηριασμέναι τὴν συνείδησιν› · call in col 591

Κεκαυτηριασμέναι τὴν συνείδησιν. I. e. depravatam, perditam habentes conscientiam. Verba Apostoli sunt I Timoth. IV, 1, ubi alludit Paulus ad servos, qui, noxae convicti, candenti ferro inurebantur, inde στιγματίαι dicti. Et hinc κεκαυτηριασμένος translatum ad significandum perditum quemvis hominem, nefarium, infamem.

Κεκαυτηριασμέναι τὴν συνείδησιν ("seared in conscience"). That is, having a depraved, ruined conscience. These are the Apostle's words, 1 Tim. 4:1[–2], where Paul alludes to slaves who, convicted of an offence, were branded with a red-hot iron and hence called στιγματίαι ("branded ones"). And from this κεκαυτηριασμένος came by a figure to mean any ruined, wicked, infamous man.

(printed under page 302)

(9) ‹anchor: Ἑαυτὰς ἀπηλπικυῖαι› · call in col 591

Ἑαυτὰς ἀπηλπικυῖαι. Alludere videtur Irenaeus ad haec Apostoli verba Ephes. IV, 18, ἀπηλλοτριωμένοι τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ, alienati a vita Dei. Volunt Fronto Duc. et Grabius verbum χωρίζουσιν post ἑαυτάς addendum esse. Sic quidem legisse veterem interpretem non inficior. At cum Petavio censeam, phrasin, spreto hoc verbo, commodum, imo forte commodiorem habere sensum.

Ἑαυτὰς ἀπηλπικυῖαι ("having despaired of themselves"). Irenaeus seems to allude to these words of the Apostle, Eph. 4:18, ἀπηλλοτριωμένοι τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ, "alienated from the life of God." Fronton du Duc and Grabe would add the verb χωρίζουσιν ("they separate") after ἑαυτάς. I do not deny that the old translator read it so. But I would judge with Petau that the phrase, without this verb, has a suitable sense, perhaps indeed a more suitable one.

(printed under page 302)

(10) ‹anchor: Μήτε ἔξω, μήτε ἔσω› · call in col 591

Μήτε ἔξω, μήτε ἔσω. Proverbium de iis dictum, qui ancipitis ac incerti animi, haesitant quid potissimum eligant.

Μήτε ἔξω, μήτε ἔσω ("neither outside nor inside"). A proverb said of those who, being of a wavering and uncertain mind, hesitate over what to choose.

(printed under page 302)