PL 1 · cols. 535–560

Mosheim, Disquisitio de aetate Apologetici Tertulliani initioque persecutionis Severi

Editors' preface

JOANNIS LAURENTII MOSHEIM, DE AETATE APOLOGETICI TERTULLIANI, INITIOQUE PERSECUTIONIS SEVERI, DISQUISITIO.

Johann Lorenz Mosheim, Disquisition on the Date of Tertullian's Apology and the Beginning of the Persecution of Severus.

§ I. Summa disquisitionum ejusmodi utilitas docetur. Occasio hujus.

§ I. The very great usefulness of disquisitions of this kind is shown. The occasion of this one.

Editors' notes and page, col. 535

Footnotes

The four notes printed at the head of this column, (a), (b), (c) and (d printed c), belong to Havercamp's Commentarius on the Apologeticum, ch. 50, and are set with that unit: see apologeticus, PL 1:535. Mosheim's Disquisitio has no footnotes on this page.

Page

running head: 535 DE AETATE APOLOGETICI (running across the page; 536 at right)
marginal letters: A beside "haec pati Deus patitur. Nam et proxime, ad lenonem"; B beside "clamando. Erat vero et haec ex populi furentis accla-" (Commentarius); C beside "definitum est, quia pudicitia auferri non potest, nisi" (Commentarius); D beside "exstet in gaza Christianae Reginae, in quo ille velut" (Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: The upper part of this column is the end of the Apologeticus text and Havercamp's Commentarius (notes a, b): unit apologeticus, pointer only, not set here. The unit begins below the rule with the title, printed full width across both columns (settle: full_width); it was set whole from this column's and col. 536's bottom images. Below the title the page carries only the two italic section heads (§ I left, § II right); the lower part of the page is blank in the crop.

PL 1:536

§ II. Diversarum de hoc argumento opinionum duplex classis constituitur.

§ II. A twofold class of the differing opinions on this subject is established.

Editors' notes and page, col. 536

Footnotes

(printed under page 304)

Page

running head: DE AETATE APOLOGETICI 536
marginal letters: A beside "Christiani factis docendo. Illa ipsa obstinatio, quam"; B beside "sus Christianos, nummus aureus singularis exhibeatur" (Commentarius); C beside "tur; ita tunc quoque piis compluribus interfectis, multo" (Commentarius); D in the gutter level with col. 535's last Commentarius line ("exstet in gaza Christianae Reginae"), below this column's last line
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: The upper part of this column is the end of the Apologeticus (cap. L, to "a Deo absolvimur") and Havercamp's Commentarius (end of note b, notes c, c[d]): unit apologeticus, pointer only, not set here. The full-width title of the Disquisitio is set once in col. 535. Only the § II head of the disquisition stands in this column; nothing printed below it in the crop.

PL 1:537

§ III. Sc. producuntur primum, qui post a. CC Apologeticum scriptum esse volunt. Contra quos,

§ III. Namely, those are brought forward first who will have it that the Apology was written after the year 200. Against whom,

§ IV, V, VI. Multis ostenditur, coepisse afflictiones Christianorum sub SEVERO, antequam peculiaria is decreta eam in rem rogaret.

§ IV, V, VI. It is shown by many [arguments] that the afflictions of the Christians began under SEVERUS before he proposed special decrees to that end.

§ VII. Dodwelli speciatim argutiae examinantur.

§ VII. Dodwell's subtleties in particular are examined.

§ VIII. Qui post mortem SEVERI Apologeticum prodiisse dicunt, refelluntur. Quo facto,

§ VIII. Those who say that the Apology came out after the death of SEVERUS are refuted. This done,

§ IX. Ad alteram eorum classem acceditur, qui licet concedant ante a. CC eum esse consignatum, de anno tamen dissident.

§ IX. We come to the other class, of those who, though they grant that it was written down before the year 200, yet disagree about the year.

§ X. Nostrae sententiae proponendae initium fit, ac primo sub SEVERO scriptum esse ostenditur. Deinde,

§ X. A beginning is made of setting out our own opinion, and first it is shown that it was written under SEVERUS. Then,

§ XI. Post motus ALBINI. Quo vero annus recte possit constitui.

§ XI. After the risings of ALBINUS. And how the year can rightly be determined.

§ XII, XIII. Hos motus a. CXCVI coepisse. A. CXCVII compressos fuisse novis rationibus docetur, oppositaeque rationes evidenter diluuntur. Quo facto,

§ XII, XIII. That these risings began in the year 196. That they were suppressed in the year 197 is shown by new arguments, and the opposing arguments are plainly refuted. This done,

§ XIV. Pro a CXCVIII. pronuntiatur, ac ex illustri TERTULLIANI loco haec sententia diligenter confirmatur.

§ XIV. Judgement is given for the year 198, and this opinion is carefully confirmed from a notable passage of TERTULLIAN.

§ XV. Conclusio.

§ XV. Conclusion.

§ I.— Si, qua se utilitate commendat certa temporum, quibus libros suos prisci doctores litteris mandavere, scientia, eo semper studio ac diligentia a viris eruditis quaesita fuisset, non dubito quin multo paucioribus hodie difficultatibus historia sacra abundaret, concinniorique instructa esset ordine. At qui barbariei sordes primi absterserant, majores nostri, id potius agebant, ut collapsae plane litterarum res erigerent, quam ut istis, quas putabant, minutiis sibi aliisque earum conciliarent fastidium. Alia quidem iis, qui divinos illos restauratores consecuti sunt, mens fuit, quos Scaligero, Baronio, Petavio, Calvisio, aliisque praeeuntibus, magna in his curis stadia confecisse constat. Sed, et patrum nostrorum, nostraque aetas summos in hoc genere viros tulit, Norisium, Pagium, Lloydium, Dodwellum, Tillemontium, Nourrium, multosque, qui Patrum edidere scripta, benedictinae familiae socios. Quorum omnium de laudibus quanquam ego nihil detraho, non tamen multa ab eis relicta esse dissimulo, multa eruditius quam felicius tractata, multa quod sectae flagrarent amore, aut novae cuidam nimium faverent opinioni, implicata potius, quam evoluta. Nulla alia ejus rei testimonia si existerent, ipsa, quibus mutuo se oppugnant, scripta, ipsi, quibus novas subinde rationes constituunt, libri loquerentur. In historia praecipue calamitatum, quibus vetustissimi fratrum nostrorum defuncti sunt, magno id fuisset emolumento, si librorum, quos pro illis imperatoribus ac praesidibus oblatos esse accepimus, caeterorumque, quae ferv⟨e⟩ntibus istis vexationibus consignata sunt, scriptorum aetas curate definita fuisset. Sic etenim de rerum gestarum serie, malorum illatorum magnitudine, confessorum numero, invicto, quo sanctissimi homines valuerunt, animi robore, certior nobis ac plenior esset notitia. Quam quidem egregiam quibuscumque utilitatem praestare posse, nulli, quibus maturius est judicium, ignorare possunt. Certe miror, quum vir alioqui immortalis, Henricus Dodwellus, bono fortassis consilio, totos martyrum exercitus civitate sacra ejiceret, neminem illorum, qui adversus eum prodiere, in hac sese palaestre

§ I.— If the certain knowledge of the times at which the early teachers committed their books to writing, by whatever usefulness it commends itself, had always been sought by learned men with that zeal and diligence, I do not doubt that sacred history would today abound in far fewer difficulties, and would be furnished with a neater order. But those who first wiped away the filth of barbarism, our forebears, were rather intent on raising up the utterly collapsed state of letters than on winning for themselves and others a distaste for letters through these trifles, as they thought them. Those who followed those godlike restorers had indeed another mind; it is agreed that, with Scaliger, Baronius, Petavius, Calvisius and others leading the way, they covered great stretches in these labours. And both our fathers' age and our own have produced men of the highest rank in this field: Noris, Pagi, Lloyd, Dodwell, Tillemont, Le Nourry, and many members of the Benedictine family who have edited the writings of the Fathers. Although I take nothing away from the praises of all of these, yet I do not conceal that much has been left by them, much handled more learnedly than happily, and much, because they burned with love of a party or favoured some new opinion too much, entangled rather than unravelled. Were there no other evidences of this, the very writings in which they attack one another, the very books in which they keep setting up new reckonings, would speak. Especially in the history of the calamities in which the most ancient of our brethren died, it would have been of great profit if the date of the books which we have learned were presented on their behalf to emperors and governors, and of the other writings which were set down while those harassments were raging, had been carefully fixed. For so we should have surer and fuller knowledge of the sequence of events, the magnitude of the evils inflicted, the number of the confessors, and the unconquered strength of mind in which those most holy men excelled. That this can afford a signal usefulness to anyone whatever, none whose judgement is riper can be ignorant. Certainly I wonder that, when a man otherwise immortal, Henry Dodwell, perhaps with good intent, was expelling whole armies of martyrs from the sacred city, none of those who came forward against him exercised himself in this arena

Editors' notes and page, col. 537

Footnotes

(1) Exstat in bibliotheca theol. hist. philol. quæ Bremæ prodiit; t. II, fascic.

(1) It appears in the Bibliotheca theologica, historica, philologica published at Bremen; vol. 2, fascicle.

(printed under page 305)

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: ætate Dissertatio› · call in col 538

(printed under page 305)

Page

gap: the text in this column is not set: output filter, L01 blocked after writing 535-537 (2026-10-04). Marked gap (Ray's ruling); not retried.

PL 1:545

rec.) ex Eusebio (Hist. Eccl. lib. VI, c. XI, p. 212, 213) viri docti bene observarunt. Quo quidem turbulento ac calamitoso tempore tam laborioso operi eum vacare potuisse, nullus facile dixerit. Ipse celeberrimus Dodwellus, qui sua saepe vineta caedit, hoc agnovit, ac diu ante a. CCII. Stromata ista exarata fuisse pluribus rationibus binis locis docuit (Diss. III. in Irenaeum, § XXVII. p. 276, s; et Diss. de Roman. Pontif. primaeva successione, c. XV, § IV, p. 209.). Quod itaque praecipue nobis optandum erat, id consecuti sumus. Reum habemus confitentem. Quod si non multum provecto SEVERI imperio Clemens scripsit, erroris esse reos, qui ante a. CCII. vexationem coepisse Christianorum negant, exploratum est. Caedes enim ac supplicia fratrum scribenti ob oculos quotidie versabantur. En quae dicat: ἡμῖν δὲ ἄφθονοι μαρτύρων πηγαὶ ἑκάστης ἡμέρας, ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν θεωρούμενοι, παροπτωμένων, ἀνασκινδυλευομένων, τὰς κεφαλὰς ἀποτεμνομένων (Stromatum Libro II. p. 494.): Nobis autem sunt quotidie redundantes martyrum fontes, qui nostris spectantur oculis, qui torrentur, torquentur et capite truncantur. Respondeant hic, quibus Dodwolli praecepta sequi gloriosum ducitur, ac ante omnia virum cum se ipso concilient. Fatis, quod pueri norunt, ea nocte, quae annos CXCII. et CXCIII. sejungebat, satisfecit COMMODUS. Scripserit Clemens primum suum librum tribus post mortem ejus annis, a. CXCV. Intercesserint iterum, id quod tamen haud verisimile est, duo prope anni inter primum et secundum Stromatum volumen. Nihilominus, jam a. CXCVII. pulchram Alexandriae eorum cohortem inveniemus, quae hoc inspectante cruentam pro SERVATORE mortem oppetierint. Hic vero acumen Baronii mirari liceat, qui ob haec Clementis verba libros ejus post decimum SEVERI annum conscriptos fuisse asseverat. Caeterum, inquit (Annal., Tom. II. ad a. CXCVI. n. XXII. p. 278, 279.), cum constet in ipsis Stromatum libris de Christianorum persecutione tunc vigente mentionem fieri, affirmare necesse est, ipsum post annum decimum SEVERI scripsisse. Indignum Annalium scriptore judicium! Obliviscitur vir illustrissimus eorum, quae mox ipse defensurus erat, jam a. CXCVIII. Plautiano instigante, Christianis injurias fuisse illatas, quo nomine duplicem committit errorem. Recentiores facit et Christianorum miserias, quam ipse putabat, et Clementis libros, quam rerum permittit conditio.

rec.) from Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. book VI, ch. XI, pp. 212, 213) learned men have rightly observed. That he could have had leisure for so laborious a work in so turbulent and calamitous a time, no one would readily say. The most celebrated Dodwell himself, who often cuts down his own vines, acknowledged this, and taught in two places, by several arguments, that those Stromata were written long before the year CCII (Diss. III on Irenaeus, § XXVII, p. 276 f.; and Diss. on the Primitive Succession of the Roman Pontiffs, ch. XV, § IV, p. 209). What we were chiefly to wish for, therefore, we have obtained. We have the defendant confessing. But if Clement wrote when the reign of SEVERUS was not far advanced, it is established that those who deny that the harassing of the Christians began before the year CCII are guilty of error. For the slaughters and punishments of the brethren were daily before the eyes of the writer. Here is what he says: ἡμῖν δὲ ἄφθονοι μαρτύρων πηγαὶ ἑκάστης ἡμέρας, ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν θεωρούμενοι, παροπτωμένων, ἀνασκινδυλευομένων, τὰς κεφαλὰς ἀποτεμνομένων (Stromata, Book II, p. 494): "But to us there are daily overflowing fountains of martyrs, who are watched by our eyes, who are roasted, tortured and beheaded." Let those to whom it is reckoned glorious to follow Dodwell's precepts answer here, and above all let them reconcile the man with himself. COMMODUS, as boys know, yielded to the fates on the night that separated the years CXCII and CXCIII. Suppose Clement wrote his first book three years after his death, in the year CXCV. Suppose again, though it is hardly likely, that nearly two years came between the first and the second volume of the Stromata. Nevertheless, as early as the year CXCVII we shall find at Alexandria a fine company of them who, while he looked on, met a bloody death for the SAVIOUR. Here indeed one may wonder at the acuteness of Baronius, who on account of these words of Clement asserts that his books were composed after the tenth year of SEVERUS. "Moreover," he says (Annals, Vol. II, at the year CXCVI, no. XXII, pp. 278, 279), "since it is agreed that in the very books of the Stromata mention is made of the persecution of the Christians then in force, it must be affirmed that he wrote after the tenth year of SEVERUS." A judgement unworthy of the writer of the Annals! The most illustrious man forgets what he was presently to defend himself, that already in the year CXCVIII, at Plautianus's instigation, wrongs had been inflicted on the Christians; and on this score he commits a double error. He makes both the miseries of the Christians more recent than he himself thought, and Clement's books more recent than the state of affairs permits.

§. VI — Nescio an his addi mereatur, ita antiquitus jam fuisse creditum, dudum ante a. CCII. Christianos sub SEVERO exagitatos fuisse? Qui majorum traditionibus non omnem demunt fidem, hanc non penitus observationem spernent. Paulum igitur Orosium, quinti saeculi scriptorem, producam, qui, antequam ALBINUS res novas moliretur, a. minimum CXCVI, gravem SEVERUM Christianis fuisse tradit (Historiar. Libro VII. c. XVII. p. †342. Mogunt. 1615. 8.). Verba haec sunt, quae Treculphus Lexoviensis (Chronicorum Tom. II. Lib. II. c. XXIV. p. 488. ed. Genev. 1597. in 8.), saeculi

§ VI — I do not know whether it deserves to be added to these that it was already believed in antiquity that the Christians were harassed under SEVERUS long before the year CCII? Those who do not take away all credit from the traditions of their forebears will not wholly spurn this observation. I shall therefore bring forward Paulus Orosius, a writer of the fifth century, who records that SEVERUS was harsh to the Christians before ALBINUS attempted his revolution, at the least in the year CXCVI (Histories, Book VII, ch. XVII, p. 342, Mainz 1615, octavo). These are the words which Freculph of Lisieux (Chronicles, Vol. II, Book II, ch. XXIV, p. 488, Geneva edition 1597, octavo), a

Editors' notes and page, col. 545

Page

running head: 545 MOSHEIM DISQUIS[ITIO …] (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A rec.) ex Eusebio (Hist. Eccl.; B benti ob oculos quotidie versabantur; C Nihilominus, jam a. CXCVII.; D facit et Christianorum miserias
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: final word printed "sæ-" at the column end; completed as "saeculi" from the first line of col. 546 ("culi noni historicus"); col. 546 begins at "noni". Orosius page number "342" blurred (†). "Tre-culphus" read so in both crops (Freculph of Lisieux intended); the T is blurred, so the misprint is UNSURE.

PL 1:546

noni historicus, nulla vocula mutata, repetiit: Quinta post Neronem persecutione Christianos excruciavit: plurimique sanctorum per diversas provincias martyrio coronati sunt. Hanc prophanam in Christianos et Ecclesiam Dei praesumptionem Severi, coelestis ultio e vestigio acta subsequitur. Nam continuo rapitur, vel potius retrahitur in Galliam Severus e Syria ad tertium civile bellum. Unum jam enim Romae adversus Julianum, aliud in Syria contra Pescennium gesserat: tertium Clodius Albinus Juliani in occidendo Pertinacem socius, qui se in Gallia Caesarem fecerat, suscitabat. Idcirco Numen voluisse, ut quietem imperii ALBINUS turbaret, ait, quod in Christianos SEVERUS fuisset injurius. Equidem non is sum, qui Orosium summa fide scriptorem esse putem. Neque etiam omnia, quae hic narrat, mea facio. Testem ejus tantum esse cupio, quod suo tempore opinio, quam tueor, communiter recepta fuerit. Si qua fides narrationibus, quas a majoribus traditas accepimus, huic etiam, quin aliqua esse debeat, nnllus dubitabit. Abjecissem protinus hominem, cujus manifesta nimis fuisset superstitio, si omnium omnino bellorum, etiam cum Juliano et Nigro gestorum, caussam saevitiam in Christianos dixisset. Jam non prorsus despicio, quoniam religiosius instituit, nec de suppliciis fratrum semper somniat, cum bello orbem terrarum flagrasse intelligit.

ninth, a historian, repeated without changing a single little word: "In the fifth persecution after Nero he tortured the Christians, and very many of the saints were crowned with martyrdom throughout the various provinces. This profane presumption of Severus against the Christians and the Church of God was followed forthwith by heavenly vengeance. For at once Severus is hurried, or rather dragged back, from Syria into Gaul to a third civil war. For he had already waged one at Rome against Julianus, another in Syria against Pescennius; the third was stirred up by Clodius Albinus, Julianus's partner in slaying Pertinax, who had made himself Caesar in Gaul." He says, therefore, that the Deity willed that ALBINUS should disturb the peace of the empire because SEVERUS had been injurious to the Christians. For my part I am not one to think Orosius a writer of the highest reliability. Nor do I make my own all that he narrates here. I wish only to have him as a witness that in his time the opinion I defend was commonly received. If there is any credit in the narratives we have received as handed down from our forebears, no one will doubt that there must be some in this one too. I would have cast the man aside at once, as one whose superstition was all too plain, if he had said that the cause of absolutely all the wars, even those waged with Julianus and Niger, was cruelty towards the Christians. As it is, I do not wholly despise him, since he has set out his account more scrupulously, and does not always dream of the punishments of the brethren when he perceives that the world was ablaze with war.

§ VII. — Quae hucusque disserui, tanta praedita esse arbitror perspicuitate ac evidentia, ut in se ipsum iniquus futurus sit, qui contrariis in posterum partibus se adjungeret. Si res ita postularet, longe plura potuissem proferre; quae, cum nullo modo flagitet, mihi in aliud tempus reservo. Omnia sic cadunt, quae non sine sudore forsitan pro rationibus suis celebris Dodwellus excogitavit. TERTULLIANUM primo nobis ille eripere conatur. Intellexit enim in Apologeticum SEVERUM eorum excludere numero, qui violentas Christianis manus intulissent; etsi, quae nos excussimus, illustria plane loca ne tangat quidem. Quid vero exinde eum colligere existimas? Vide et mirare. Decreta imperatoris tum quidem jam rogata, sed in eas partes, ubi TERTULLIANUS degebat, perlata non fuisse (Diss. Cyprian. XI. § 44. p. 69.). Magnitudinem videlicet miseriarum diminuere omnibus viribus conatur. Frigidum vero somnium! quod fortassis ne iis quidem arridebit, qui Romani imperii statum ignorant. At non minus in explodendo eo frigidus Ruinartus est, qui, si quo loco, hic tum inter nives gallicas versatus fuisse videtur (Praef. ad Acta Mart. Sect. II. § 44, 45, p. 46, C.). Locis quibusdam tumultuarie coacervatis longe lateque extensam fuisse persecutionem docet. Quid vero hoc ad Dodwelli argutias? qui non hoc negabat, sed non tam immanes in omnibus provinciis fuisse ausus contendit, eo quod latae ab imperatore leges ad omnes non pervenissent. Si quid video, certius ab hac detorsione TERTULLIANUM vindicavi. Duo alia deinceps testimonia attuli, quae, si omnia, id quod fieri plane nequit,

§ VII. — What I have argued so far I judge to be endowed with such clarity and evidence that whoever should henceforth join the opposite side would be unjust to himself. If the matter so required, I could have brought forward far more; since it in no way demands it, I reserve that for another time. Thus everything falls that the celebrated Dodwell devised, perhaps not without sweat, for his reasons. First he tries to snatch TERTULLIAN from us. For he understood that in the Apologeticum he excludes SEVERUS from the number of those who had laid violent hands on the Christians; although he does not even touch the plainly illustrious passages that we have examined. But what do you suppose he gathers from this? Look, and marvel. That the emperor's decrees had indeed already then been proposed, but had not been carried to the parts where TERTULLIAN was living (Diss. Cyprian. XI, § 44, p. 69). He strives, that is, with all his might to diminish the magnitude of the miseries. A chilly dream indeed! which perhaps will not please even those who are ignorant of the state of the Roman empire. But no less chilly is Ruinart in hissing it off, who here, if anywhere, seems then to have been dwelling among the Gallic snows (Preface to the Acts of the Martyrs, Sect. II, §§ 44, 45, p. 46, C). By certain passages heaped together in haste he teaches that the persecution was extended far and wide. But what has this to do with Dodwell's subtleties? He did not deny this, but ventured to contend that it was not so savage in all the provinces, because the laws issued by the emperor had not reached them all. If I see anything, I have more surely vindicated TERTULLIAN from this distortion. I then brought two other testimonies, which, if all, which plainly cannot happen,

Editors' notes and page, col. 546

Page

running head: [MO]SHEIM DISQUISITIO. 546 (left part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A culi noni historicus; B nia, quae hic narrat; C partibus se adjungeret; D vero somnium! quod fortassis
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column opens with the second half of "sae-culi", set whole at the end of col. 545; this file begins at "noni". "vindicavi" slightly blotted in the scan but legible.

PL 1:547

APOLOGETICI loca possent elidi, nihilominus ante illum, quem designat, annum Christianos excruciatos fuisse docerent. Inanis est suspicio, cui militat vir doctus. Valeat tamen, si qui velint. Alia adhuc supersunt, quae huic non patent artificio. Iis immotis ea quoque jacebunt, quae idem, ut ad a. CCII. omnium afflictionum initium referat, in medium adduxit (Loc. cit. § XLI, p. 68.), ad duo redeunt illa capita. Otium ait et occasionem Christianos invadendi gentibus defuisse. Utriusque facile apparet imbecillitas, si cum iis quae scripsi contendantur. Demus tamen viro erudito loquendi veniam: Nec otium erat antea, inquit, sive ipsi imperatori, sive provinciarum praefectis, nec ipsis urbium plebibus magistratibusque, quos externa saltem ab hostibus pax in eam saeviendi lasciviam plerumque convertit. Vix dubito, quin alia cogitaverit, cum sic scriberet. Quod, quaeso, vinculum harum propositionum: Bello Romani fuerunt implicati, et: Christiani nihil malorum sensere? Aut nihil ego intelligo, aut nullum. Medios inter maximi belli fragores VALERIANUS infinitas Christianis molestias exhibebat. Clariora haec erunt, si distinctius ejus temporis bella intueamur. In Orientis regionibus et Gallia militiae vacabat iis annis imperator. Fuerit illic, quod tantisper concedam, in diviniore coetu pax: quod vero hinc provinciarum aliarum praefectis, quod plebi erat impedimentum, quo minus Christianos in jus vocarent? Quid notius, nunquam majorem scelerum impunitatem esse, quam bellis omnia vastantibus? Quid vulgarius denique gentium illa consuetudine, quae majores nunquam miserias Christi creabant discipulis, quam cum orbis romanus bellicis aliisque calamitatibus premeretur? Rogati, quid caussae esset, sacrificuli omnem in Christianis residere culpam confidenter clamabant: Negliguntur Dii, hanc vocem eorum Arnobius refert (L. I. adv. gentes, p. 16. ed. Heraldi), atque in templis jam raritas summa est: jacent antiquae derisui caerimoniae, et sacrorum quondam veterrimi ritus religionum novarum superstitionibus occiderunt. Hinc illae lacrymae; hinc novi novis orientibus turbis furores. Non erat itaque, cur hanc rationem clariss. Dodwelli vir alioqui paucis in hoc genere conferendus, Seb. Tillemontius, sibi ut optimam repetendam esse duceret (Histoire des Emper. Tom. III. P. 1. p. 146, ed. Bruxell.). Quae quidem, tantum abest, ut aliquid probet, ut contrariis potius partibus aliquid auxilii afferat. Sed exilior adhuc altera, occasionem male Christianis faciendi non abfuisse. Nec occurrebat saltem occasio aliqua, quae imperatoris iram in Christianos excitaret, cum nec nigriniani fuissent illi, nec albiniani, ut TERTULLIANUS ait. Verbis hic parco, eo quod inconsideratius nil dici potuisse putem. Adeone nunquam Christianorum rebus imperatores infesti erant, nisi cum aliqui eorum iis, qui civilia movebant bella, sese addixissent? Ne pueri quidem id ferrent. Neque vero de SEVERO hic potissimum quaeritur, an is ante a. CCII. in Christianos saevierit. Quanquam et huic et aliis ipsum Christianorum nomen

passages of the APOLOGETICUM could be struck down, they would nevertheless teach that the Christians had been tortured before the year that he designates. It is an empty suspicion that the learned man is fighting for. Let it stand, however, if any wish. Other things still remain which lie open to this artifice. With these unmoved, those things too will fall which the same man brought forward so as to refer the beginning of all the afflictions to the year CCII (loc. cit., § XLI, p. 68); they come back to two heads. He says that the gentiles lacked leisure and occasion for attacking the Christians. The weakness of both readily appears if they are set against what I have written. Let us nonetheless give the learned man leave to speak: "Nor was there leisure before," he says, "either for the emperor himself, or for the prefects of the provinces, or for the very populace and magistrates of the cities, whom external peace at least from enemies commonly turns to that wantonness of raging." I scarcely doubt that he had other things in mind when he wrote so. What, I ask, is the link between these propositions: "The Romans were entangled in war," and "The Christians felt nothing of evils"? Either I understand nothing, or there is none. In the midst of the din of a very great war VALERIAN inflicted endless troubles on the Christians. This will be clearer if we look more distinctly at the wars of that time. In those years the emperor was occupied with warfare in the regions of the East and in Gaul. Let there have been peace there for the more godly assembly, as I shall concede for the moment; but what hindrance was there on that account for the prefects of the other provinces, or for the populace, to keep them from bringing the Christians to court? What is better known than that there is never greater impunity for crimes than when wars are laying everything waste? What, finally, is more commonplace than that custom of the gentiles who never created greater miseries for the disciples of Christ than when the Roman world was oppressed by warlike and other calamities? Asked what the cause was, the petty priests confidently cried that all the blame lay with the Christians: "The gods are neglected," Arnobius reports as their cry (Against the Gentiles, Book I, p. 16, Hérault's edition), "and in the temples there is now the greatest scarcity; the ancient ceremonies lie in derision, and the most ancient rites of the once sacred things have perished before the superstitions of new religions." Hence those tears; hence new furies as new disturbances arose. There was no reason, therefore, why Seb. Tillemont, a man otherwise comparable to few in this field, should think this argument of the most celebrated Dodwell one to be repeated as excellent (Histoire des Empereurs, Vol. III, Part 1, p. 146, Brussels edition). So far is it from proving anything that it rather brings some help to the opposite side. But slighter still is the other, that there was no occasion for doing harm to the Christians. "Nor did there occur at least any occasion that might rouse the emperor's anger against the Christians, since they had been neither Nigrinians nor Albinians, as TERTULLIAN says." Here I spare words, because I think nothing more inconsiderate could have been said. Were the emperors, then, never hostile to the affairs of the Christians except when some of them had attached themselves to those who stirred up civil wars? Not even boys would bear that. Nor indeed is the question here chiefly about SEVERUS, whether he raged against the Christians before the year CCII. And yet to him and to others the very name of the Christians

Editors' notes and page, col. 547

Page

running head: 547 DE AETATE APOLOGE[TICI …] (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A APOLOGETICI loca possent elidi; B taverit, cum sic scriberet; C consuetudine, quae majores nunquam; D ed. Bruxell.). Quae quidem
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "huic non patent artificio" as printed (sense seems to want "patent"/"non"; kept). Scan has some blotted letters (vinculum, Christianos) but all legible.

PL 1:548

occasionis satis erat. Ideo torquemur, noster ait TERTULLIANUS (Apologetici c. II. p. 35.), confitentes et punimur perseverantes, et absolvimur negantes, quia NOMINIS PRAELIUM EST.

was occasion enough. "Therefore we are tortured," says our TERTULLIAN (Apologeticum, ch. II, p. 35), "when we confess, and we are punished when we persevere, and we are acquitted when we deny, because IT IS A BATTLE OVER A NAME."

§ VIII. Plura quam cogitabam in eos dicta sunt, qui ante a. CCII. APOLOGETICUM non fuisse natum, contendunt. Nec tamen nimis, quod sic lucis aliquid historiae sacrae additum ac tempus vexationis Christianorum sub SEVERO curatius constitutum sit. Pergo jam ad eos, quibus longius adhuc procedere, ac, SEVERO extincto, post a. CCX. librum prodiisse defendere, placet. Facilius hi excusantur, quorum non tam mala Christianorum extenuare, quam ad CARACALLAE quoque initia extendere, animus est. Longe tamen illis argumentorum cedunt praestantia, quorum vis hic prope nulla est. Familiam vir summus ducit Jos. Scaliger, cujus auctoritatem fraudi nonnullis fuisse, equidem nil miror. Apologeticum, ait is (Notis ad Chronicon Eusebii, in Thes. tempor. p. 229, ed. Alex. Mori ultimae), dubito, cn sub SEVERO scripserit, cum dicat: Papias leges heri SEVERUS constantissimus principum exclusit, videtur de mortuo loqui. Ego vero tam acutus non sum, ut, quid haec TERTULLIANI verba de mortuo SEVERO exponere cogat, videam? Laudatur ille. At quis vivos laudibus solere decorari neget? Vox heri adhibetur. Quamobrem autem illa de praeterito SEVERI imperio, quod cum die sic TERTULLIANUS contulisset, intelligi debet. Tu jam recte, Havercampi doctissime, cam de tempore non longe elapso capi posse, monuisti (Notis ad Apologet., p. 287.). Addo ego, capi ita debere, nisi patrum eruditissimum ineptiisse velimus. Ex Scaligeri sententia haec voluisset: SEVERUS, quum adhuc viveret, leges Papias abrogavit. Tacete profecto! Edocendi fortassis Romani erant, non apud inferos ab imperatore hoc beneficium esse praestitum. Sit itaque heri hic nil aliud, quam haud ita pridem. Nihilo tamen minus vir celeberrimus, Petrus Allixius, Scaligeri hoc argumentum comprobavit, illique praecipue opinionem suam, minimum non ante a. CCXI. Apologeticum litteris esse mandatum, superstruxit (Dissert. de Tertulliani vita et scriptis, cum aliis; edit. Paris, 1680. in-4°). Quod quam improvide factum sit, evidens esse opinor. Adjunxit idem duas alias pro hac computatione rationes, quas, etiamsi a celeb. Dupinio jam brevibus dilutae sunt (Nov. Bibl. des Auteurs ecclés. Tom. I. p. 107.108. ed. secundae), ut hic denuo expendam, institutum postulat. Primum post librum de praescriptionibus nostrum esse compositum, ex eo constare ait, quod in hoc ad illum TERTULLIANUS digitum quasi intenderit. De aetate libri de praescriptionibus hic commentandi locus non est. Adoptabo interea Cavei (Histor. litterar. scriptor. eccles., p. 43.), aliorumque sententiam, circa a. CCVII, publicatum esse. Quemadmodum clariss. Allixius probet, librum hunc in Apologetico commemorari, tantum videndum est. Locus, quem producit, hic est (c. XLVII, p. 519): Expedite autem PRAESCRIBIMUS adulteris nostris

§ VIII. More than I intended has been said against those who contend that the APOLOGETICUM was not born before the year CCII. Yet not too much, since in this way some light has been added to sacred history and the time of the harassing of the Christians under SEVERUS has been more carefully established. I now pass to those who are pleased to go further still and to maintain that the book appeared after the year CCX, when SEVERUS was dead. These are more easily excused, whose aim is not so much to make light of the Christians' ills as to extend them also to the beginnings of CARACALLA. Yet they fall far short in the excellence of their arguments, whose force here is almost nil. The leader of the family is that very great man, Jos. Scaliger, whose authority, I indeed do not wonder, has misled some. "The Apologeticum," he says (Notes on Eusebius's Chronicle, in the Thesaurus temporum, p. 229, last edition by Alex. Morus), "I doubt whether he wrote under SEVERUS, since when he says, 'Yesterday SEVERUS, the most steadfast of princes, shut out the Papian laws,' he seems to be speaking of a dead man." But I am not so acute as to see what compels these words of TERTULLIAN to be explained of SEVERUS dead. He is praised. But who would deny that the living are customarily adorned with praises? The word "yesterday" is used. But why must it be understood of SEVERUS's past reign, which TERTULLIAN had thus compared with a day? You, most learned Havercamp, rightly pointed out that it can be taken of a time not long elapsed (Notes on the Apologeticum, p. 287). I add that it must be taken so, unless we would have the most learned of the fathers talk nonsense. On Scaliger's view he would have meant this: "SEVERUS, while he was still alive, abrogated the Papian laws." Hold your tongues, indeed! Perhaps the Romans had to be taught that this benefit had not been bestowed by the emperor among the dead. Let "yesterday" here, then, be nothing other than "not so long ago." Nevertheless the most celebrated Peter Allix approved this argument of Scaliger's, and built on it chiefly his own opinion that the Apologeticum was committed to writing at the earliest not before the year CCXI (Dissertation on the Life and Writings of Tertullian, with others; Paris edition, 1680, quarto). How improvidently this was done is, I think, evident. The same man added two other reasons for this reckoning, which, although they have already been briefly refuted by the celebrated Du Pin (Nouvelle Bibliothèque des Auteurs ecclésiastiques, Vol. I, pp. 107–108, second edition), our plan requires that I weigh here afresh. The first: he says it is established that our book was composed after the book On Prescriptions, from the fact that in it TERTULLIAN as it were pointed his finger at that one. This is not the place to discuss the date of the book On Prescriptions. Meanwhile I shall adopt the opinion of Cave (Historia litteraria scriptorum ecclesiasticorum, p. 43) and others, that it was published about the year CCVII. It only remains to see how the most celebrated Allix proves that this book is mentioned in the Apologeticum. The passage he brings forward is this (ch. XLVII, p. 519): "But we readily PRESCRIBE against our adulterers

Editors' notes and page, col. 548

Page

running head: [DE AE]TATE APOLOGETICI 548 (left part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A occasionis satis erat. Ideo torquemur; B quorum vis hic prope nulla est; C monuisti (Notis ad Apologet.; D rationes, quas, etiamsi a celeb. Dupinio
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "Tacete profecto!" as printed; "Facete profecto!" ("Wittily said!") may be intended — UNSURE whether T or F is printed; translated as printed. "quod cum die sic … contulisset" as printed.

PL 1:549

illam esse regulam veritatis, quae veniat a Christo, transmissa per comites ipsius, quibus aliquanto posteriores diversi isti commentatores probabuntur. Mirabilem cernis viri docti ratiocinationem: Usurpavit praescribendi vocabulum TERTULLIANUS; ergo ad librum de praescriptionibus respexit. Tum demum aliqua ejus vis erit, si, antequam de praescriptionibus commentaretur noster, vocem praescribendi Romanis inauditam fuisse, ostenderit. Pergit vero, tangi a TERTULLIANO solis defectum Uticae a. CCX. observatum. Perii, si vera dicit. Nimis vero ingeniosum, qui ex iis, quae spectat, verbis haec elici posse putet. Audi illa (Apolog., c. XX, p. 390.): Quod etiam officia temporum et elementorum munia exorbitant: quod et monstris et portentis naturalium forma turbatur. Ubi solis hic defectus? ubi Utica? De anni temporibus fruges nec mature satis, nec optime producentibus sermonem esse reor. At concedamus, quod falsum, de obfuscato sole hic aliquid dici: quo pacto eum, qui a. CCX. obtigerit, defectum hic notari demonstrabitur?

that that is the rule of truth which comes from Christ, handed down through His companions, than whom those various commentators will be proved to be somewhat later." You see the learned man's wonderful reasoning: TERTULLIAN used the word "prescribe"; therefore he had regard to the book On Prescriptions. It will have some force only if he shows that, before our author wrote his commentary on prescriptions, the word "prescribe" had been unheard of among the Romans. He goes on, however, to say that TERTULLIAN touches on the eclipse of the sun observed at Utica in the year CCX. I am undone, if he speaks the truth. But too ingenious is the man who thinks this can be drawn out of the words to which he looks. Hear them (Apologeticum, ch. XX, p. 390): "That also the offices of the seasons and the functions of the elements go astray; that the form of natural things is disturbed by monsters and portents." Where is the eclipse of the sun here? where is Utica? I think the talk is of seasons of the year which brought forth crops neither early enough nor in the best way. But let us grant, what is false, that something is said here of the sun's being darkened: how will it be shown that the eclipse marked here is the one that occurred in the year CCX?

§ IX. Tandem aliquando sic ad eos ventum est, qui aut ante a. CC. aut eo ipso anno Apologeticum exaratum esse confitentur, quosve veritati amiciores esse supra agnovimus. Non eumdem illi cursum tenent, sed in varia discedunt. Sunt quibus a. CXCVI. placet (Cave Hist. litter. Script. Eccl., p. 42.). Quorum ego quidem rationes ignoro. A. CXCVIII. PAGIUM quondam elegisse, antea docui. Caesar Baronius A. CCI. ut ipse quidem computare assuevit, hoc est, aerae vulgaris, quam in disquisitionibus ejusmodi obtinere notissimum est, a. CXCIX. librum prodiisse vult (Annal. eccles. T. II, ad a. CC. n. VII, p. 198. ad a. CCI. n. XXVII, p. 307, n. XXXVI, p. 310), videlicet cum SEVERUS in Parthos, quod hoc anno factum esse sine rationibus censet, moveret, Plautianum praetorio praefectum Romae relictum pacem violasse Christianorum conjicit. Quam ob causam TERTULLIANUM, in urbe, ut vult, tum praesentem, pericula ista hoc libro repellere voluisse putat. Suspicionem de Plautiano Anton. Pagius jam sustulit, qui eum in Asiam cum SEVERO migrasse, evicit (Crit. in Baron. T. II. ad A. CXCIX. n. IV. p. 92, 93). Quod, cum TERTULLIANUS scriberet, non nisi christianos Romae degentes excruciatos fuisse, contendit, ipse refellit Apologeticus, quem provinciarum praesidibus inscriptum esse certum est. De tempore belli Parthici inferius diligenter agetur. Annus CC. a plurimis electus est, iisque eruditissimis viris. Est in illis JAC. PAMELIUS, (Vita Tertulliani Opp. ejus praefixa), si Jo. Forbesio a Corse (Instruct. Histor. Theol. lib. VII, c. VII, § 16. p. 320, T. II, Opp. Theol.), qui se eum sequi affirmat, credimus; Baronius enim in sua eum castra pertrahit. Est diligentissimus Tillemontius (Hist. des Emper. Tom. III. P. 1, p. 94.): quanquam is alio loco (In sua Chronologia, ad calcem T. III, Hist. p. 1221.) dubius est, annon melius a. CCI. ponendus sit? Est L. E. Dupin (Bibl. des Auteurs eccl. Tom. I, p. 91), aliique complures, quorum nomina hic recensere, parum arbitror

§ IX. Thus at long last we have come to those who acknowledge that the Apologeticum was written either before the year CC or in that very year, and whom we recognized above to be friendlier to the truth. They do not hold the same course, but go off in various directions. There are some who favour the year CXCVI (Cave, Historia litteraria scriptorum ecclesiasticorum, p. 42). Their reasons, for my part, I do not know. I showed earlier that PAGI once chose the year CXCVIII. Caesar Baronius would have the book appear in the year CCI as he himself was accustomed to reckon, that is, in the year CXCIX of the common era, which, as is very well known, prevails in inquiries of this kind (Annales ecclesiastici, Vol. II, at the year CC, no. VII, p. 198; at the year CCI, no. XXVII, p. 307, no. XXXVI, p. 310): namely, he conjectures that when SEVERUS was moving against the Parthians, which he holds without reasons to have happened in this year, Plautianus, the praetorian prefect left at Rome, violated the peace of the Christians. For this reason he thinks that TERTULLIAN, then present in the city, as he would have it, wished to ward off those dangers by this book. Anton. Pagi has already removed the suspicion about Plautianus, having proved that he went off to Asia with SEVERUS (Critica in Baronium, Vol. II, at the year CXCIX, no. IV, pp. 92, 93). As for his contention that when TERTULLIAN was writing only the Christians living at Rome had been tortured, the Apologeticum itself refutes it, which is certainly addressed to the governors of the provinces. The time of the Parthian war will be dealt with carefully below. The year CC has been chosen by a great many, and those most learned men. Among them is JAC. PAMELIUS (Life of Tertullian prefixed to his Works), if we believe Jo. Forbes of Corse (Instructiones historico-theologicae, book VII, ch. VII, § 16, p. 320, Vol. II of his Theological Works), who affirms that he follows him; for Baronius drags him into his own camp. There is the most diligent Tillemont (Histoire des Empereurs, Vol. III, Part 1, p. 94), although in another place (in his Chronology, at the end of Vol. III of the History, p. 1221) he is doubtful whether it should not rather be placed in the year CCI. There is L. E. Du Pin (Bibliothèque des Auteurs ecclésiastiques, Vol. I, p. 91), and very many others, whose names to list here I think of little

Editors' notes and page, col. 549

Page

running head: 549 MOSHEIM DISQUISITI[O.] (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A illam esse regulam veritatis; B solis hic defectus? ubi Utica?; C notissimum est, a. CXCIX.; D ciarum praesidibus inscriptum
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: bottom lines of the column are blotted in the scan ("praefixa", "Theol.", "diligentissimus", "annon", "Bibl.", "complures, quorum", "arbitror") but each is legible enough to read; "Theol" in "Instruct. Histor. Theol." partly blotted.

PL 1:550

utile. Nonnulli ex his simpliciter sententiam dicunt, rationes omittunt. Manet enim haec nostra id fati plerumque genus, ut contempta jaceant ac derelicta. Qui diligentissimi sunt, ex eodem sua loco petunt, quem nos in subsidium vocabimus. Differunt in factis, de quibus quaeritur, ad annos suos referendis, bello nimirum Parthico, ac Albini motibus. Quapropter nihil huic negotio perficiendo magis conducet, quam si meam, et promam, et stabiliam sententiam. Quo facto, quis aliorum rationibus locus esse queat, obscurum amplius esse nequit. Ordine vero ac per gradus incedere animus est; generaliora praecedent, ac eorum caussa, qui post SEVERUM aetatem libri collocant, eo regnante consignatum esse, demonstrabitur. Specialior sequetur disquisitio, ac impedimenta cuncta indubitatis argumentis removebuntur. Ultimo loco de ipso anno deliberabitur.

use. Some of these simply state an opinion and leave out reasons. For it is the lot of this kind of ours, for the most part, to lie despised and abandoned. Those who are most diligent seek theirs from the same passage which we shall call to our aid. They differ in assigning to their years the facts in question, namely the Parthian war and the risings of Albinus. Wherefore nothing will conduce more to accomplishing this business than if I both bring forward and establish my own opinion. When that is done, it can no longer be obscure what room there can be for the reasons of others. But my intention is to proceed in order and by steps: the more general matters will come first, and for the sake of those who place the date of the book after SEVERUS, it will be shown that it was put on record while he reigned. A more particular inquiry will follow, and all obstacles will be removed by indubitable arguments. In the last place the year itself will be considered.

§ X. Imperante SEVERO opus hoc TERTULLIANUM composuisse, cum loci quidam jam supra a me indicati, tum is quem nunc recitabo declarat. Caeterum, inquit (Cap. V. p. 294.), de tot exinde principibus ad hodiernum, DIVINUM HUMANUMQUE SAPIENTIBUS, edite aliquem debellatorem Christianorum. Eum, qui tum res imperii administrabat, in principibus divinum humanumque sapientibus, seu utriusque juris ac litterarum peritis numerat. Excipe SEVERUM; et nullus erit imperatorum, in quem haec conveniant. Aut COMMODUS, aut CARACALLA, quorum ille ante, hic post eum orbi terrarum praefuit, nominandus est. PERTINAX enim et JULIANUS, qui paucis tantum diebus defuncto COMMODO fastigium hoc tenuerunt, in hunc censum non veniunt. At quales, quaeso, illi quos dixi? Nec divinum, nec humanum sapientes, belluinis verius quam humanis moribus praediti, flagitiorum, non litterarum scientissimi. Multum e contrario temporis in addiscendis artibus SEVERUS collocaverat. Philosophiae ac dicendi studiis satis deditum, doctrinae quoque nimis cupidum, Spartianus (Vita Severi, cap. XVIII. p. 454.) vocat: Ardorem ejus et industriam Dio commendat, licet ad ea, quae mente conceperat, in usum deducenda non adeo aptus fuerit. Hunc nimirum verborum, quae exscribam, sensum esse opinor (Lib. XXVI, in Excerpt. Peiresc. ab Henr. Valesio edit. p. 740, Paris, 1634, in-4°): παιδείας μὲν γὰρ ἐπεθύμει μᾶλλον ἢ ἐπετύγχανε, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ πολυγνώμων μᾶλλον ἢ πολυλόγος ἦν. Nec enim VALESII mihi versio ex omni parte placet: Disciplinarum studiosus, potius quam peritus; et reliqua. Talis princeps quin suo jure eruditis connumerari potuerit, quis dubitet? Sed longiori probatione haud opus est. Ipsa res extra omne collocat dubium, sub nullo, quam SEVERO, hoc scriptum in litteras relatum esse.

§ X. That TERTULLIAN composed this work in the reign of SEVERUS is declared both by certain passages already indicated by me above and by the one I shall now recite. "Moreover," he says (ch. V, p. 294), "of so many princes from then until today, MEN WISE IN THINGS DIVINE AND HUMAN, produce any one who made war on the Christians." Him who was then administering the affairs of the empire he numbers among princes wise in things divine and human, that is, skilled in both kinds of law and in letters. Take away SEVERUS, and there will be none of the emperors to whom this applies. Either COMMODUS or CARACALLA, of whom the former ruled the world before him and the latter after him, would have to be named. For PERTINAX and JULIANUS, who held this summit only a few days after COMMODUS died, do not come into this reckoning. But what sort of men, I ask, were those I have named? Wise neither in things divine nor human, endowed with manners more truly bestial than human, most knowing in crimes, not in letters. SEVERUS, on the contrary, had spent much time in learning the arts. Spartianus (Life of Severus, ch. XVIII, p. 454) calls him "sufficiently given to the studies of philosophy and oratory, and also very eager for learning." Dio commends his ardour and industry, although he was not very apt at bringing into use what he had conceived in his mind. This, I think, is the sense of the words I shall copy out (Book XXVI, in the Excerpta Peiresciana edited by Henr. Valois, p. 740, Paris, 1634, quarto): παιδείας μὲν γὰρ ἐπεθύμει μᾶλλον ἢ ἐπετύγχανε, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ πολυγνώμων μᾶλλον ἢ πολυλόγος ἦν ("for he desired learning more than he attained it, and for this reason he was rich in thought rather than in words"). For VALOIS's version does not please me in every part: "Studious of the disciplines rather than skilled in them," and the rest. Who would doubt that such a prince could by his own right be numbered among the learned? But there is no need of longer proof. The matter itself puts beyond all doubt that this writing was committed to letters under none other than SEVERUS.

§ XI. Imperatorem habemus. Non omnes deinde imperii ejus annos, sed eos tantum, qui ab a. CXCIII. quo illud suscepit, ad a. CC. numerantur, spectandos esse ex antea dictis novimus. Octo igitur iste annorum circulus nos jam exercebit. Cui vero non exiguum statim detrahetur spatium, si post civile ALBINI

§ XI. We have the emperor. Next, we know from what was said before that not all the years of his reign are to be considered, but only those counted from the year CXCIII, in which he took it up, to the year CC. This circle of eight years, then, will now occupy us. But no small space will at once be taken from it if after the civil

Editors' notes and page, col. 550

Page

running head: [MOSH]EIM DISQUISITIO. 550 (left part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A utile. Nonnulli ex his; B menta cuncta indubitatis argumentis; C et JULIANUS, qui paucis; D παιδείας μὲν γὰρ (Greek line)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: final word printed "AL-" at the column end; completed as "ALBINI" from the first line of col. 551 ("BINI bellum"), read in the next step; col. 551 begins at "bellum". The lower half of this column is heavily inked in the scan: page numbers 294, 454, 740 blotted but read as such on independent re-read (Q1), daggers removed; "Cui vero" read through a blot. The Greek is small and blotted; read as the standard Dio text, UNSURE in accents. The English rendering of the Greek in parentheses translates the Greek; it is not printed.

PL 1:551

bellum in Gallia commotum scriptum esse librum demonstrabimus. Fiet id ope loci hujus, quem exhibeo. Nihil unquam in principum capita molitos esse sectae christianae socios dum vir ingeniosus contendit, sic inter alia exclamat (Cap. XXXV, p. 3000.): Unde Cassii et Nigri et ALBINI? Unde qui inter duas lauros obsident Caesarem? De Romanis, nisi fallor, id est, de non christianis. Praeterita imperii mala praesidibus in memoriam hoc loco revocat, periculaque, quibus Imperatores feliciter defuncti sint, recenset. In his praecipue tumultum ab ALBINO excitatum memorat. Ad certiorem itaque scientiam nil amplius requiritur, quam ut, quo anno Albiniani hi conatus compressi sint, disquiramus.

war stirred up in Gaul by ALBINUS we prove the book to have been written. This will be done by help of this passage, which I set out. While the ingenious man contends that the members of the Christian sect never plotted anything against the lives of princes, he exclaims thus among other things (ch. XXXV, p. 3000): "Whence came Cassius and Niger and ALBINUS? Whence those who besiege Caesar between the two laurels? From the Romans, if I am not mistaken, that is, from non-Christians." In this passage he recalls to the governors' memory the past ills of the empire, and reviews the dangers which the emperors had happily come through. Among these he mentions especially the uprising stirred up by ALBINUS. For surer knowledge, therefore, nothing more is required than that we inquire in what year these Albinian attempts were suppressed.

§ XII. Enimvero novi hic circuitus. Dissident ii, quorum magnam in his rebus auctoritatem esse, paucissimi ignorant. Unicus tamen annus tantum eos sejungit. Placet his a. CXCVII; aliis a. CXCVIII. Nos, quibus aliquid, quod ad caussam omnem discutiendam pertinet, praetermittere religio est, indubitatis rationibus, quid sentire oporteat, docebimus. Quod eo quidem libentius fiet, quoniam omnis haec disceptatio de Apologetici anno ex hoc negotio pendet. Pervulgata prior est opinio, quam plerique fastorum conditores (Vid. Onuphr. Panvinius fastor. consul., p. 241, Heidelb. 1588.), Caesar Baronius (Annalium Tom. II, ad annum CXCIX, n. I, p. 293.), Franc. Mediobarbus (In Numism. Imper., p. 271, Mediob. 1683), celeberrimus Tillemontius (Histoire des Emper. Tom. III, P. I, p. 72 et p. 404) compluresque alii tuentur. Hi si majori rationes suas industria munivissent, inviolatas sine dubio ac tectas conservassent. Munivissent vero, ut opinor, si quemquam tam audacem fore putassent, ut eas pervertere ac rejicere conaretur. Ego sine omni mora iis me addictum esse profiteor. Cujus consilii rationes, antequam eorum, qui secus sentiunt, apparatum disjiciam, expositurus sum. Fundamentis enim computationis nostrae indicatis, facilius judicabitur quod pretium alteri sit statuendum. Primo omnium hoc observari volo, non diuturnum Albinianum fuisse bellum, sed altero anno coeptum, altero absolutum. Magnis ac festinatis itineribus in Galliam ex Oriente SEVERUS advolabat. Aderat et statim hostis ALBINUS. Nec mora; congrediuntur, ac velitationibus quibusdam de summa rei publicae, haud quidem ita magnis, decertant. Ancipiti initio marte pugnabatur, ac in spem victoriae ALBINUS jam erectus erat. Sed paulo post fatalis ac decretoria prope Lugdunum pugna die XI. kal. martias, SEVERO victoriam, ALBINO afferebat interitum. Omnes, quos habemus, scriptores cuncta haec brevi tempore gesta, nec ulterius quam in alterum annum protracta esse, testantur. Nec quod excipi possit ullo modo intelligo. Jam, cur duos hosce annos CXCVI. et CXCVII. esse velim, accipe. Tria in aciem argumenta educam. PESCENNIUM NIGRUM, alterum SEVERI aemulum, a. CXCIV. victum vitaque privatum esse, qui in dubium vocet aut vocare possit, nullus est.

§ XII. Here indeed are new windings. Those whose authority in these matters is great, as very few are unaware, disagree. Yet a single year only separates them. Some favour the year CXCVII, others the year CXCVIII. We, who hold it a scruple to pass over anything that bears on examining the whole case, shall show by indubitable reasons what one ought to think. This will be done the more gladly because this whole dispute about the year of the Apologeticum hangs on this business. The former opinion is the more widespread, which most compilers of the fasti (see Onuphrius Panvinius, Fasti consulares, p. 241, Heidelberg 1588), Caesar Baronius (Annals, Vol. II, at the year CXCIX, no. I, p. 293), Franc. Mezzabarba (On the Imperial Coins, p. 271, Milan 1683), the most celebrated Tillemont (Histoire des Empereurs, Vol. III, Part I, p. 72 and p. 404) and many others defend. If these had fortified their reasons with greater industry, they would without doubt have kept them inviolate and secure. And they would have fortified them, I think, if they had supposed that anyone would be so bold as to try to overturn and reject them. I declare without any delay that I am attached to them. The reasons for this decision I shall set out before I scatter the equipment of those who think otherwise. For once the foundations of our reckoning have been indicated, it will more easily be judged what value is to be set on the other. First of all I want this observed: that the Albinian war was not long, but begun in one year and finished in the next. SEVERUS hastened from the East into Gaul by great and hurried marches. ALBINUS too, the enemy, was there at once. Without delay they engage, and contend in certain skirmishes, not so very great, for the supreme power of the state. In the beginning they fought with doubtful fortune, and ALBINUS was already raised to the hope of victory. But a little later the fatal and decisive battle near Lyons, on the eleventh day before the kalends of March, brought victory to SEVERUS and death to ALBINUS. All the writers we have testify that all these things were done in a short time and not drawn out further than into the second year. Nor do I see in any way what exception could be taken. Now hear why I would have these two years be CXCVI and CXCVII. I shall lead three arguments into the battle line. That PESCENNIUS NIGER, the other rival of SEVERUS, was defeated and deprived of life in the year CXCIV, there is no one who calls or could call into doubt.

Editors' notes and page, col. 551

Page

running head: 551 DE AETATE APOLOGE[TICI] (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A BINI bellum in Gallia; B rum magnam in his rebus; C pluresque alii tuentur; D quibusdam de summa rei publicae
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column opens with the second half of "AL-BINI", set whole at the end of col. 550; this file begins at "bellum". "p. 3000." as printed; probably a misprint for a three-digit page, but the intended figure is not determinable (UNSURE). "Mediob." = Mediolani (Milan).

PL 1:552

Non multo vero post in Galliam SEVERUS sicarios mittebat, qui, ne quem augustae dignitatis porro haberet socium, ALBINUM de medio tollerent. Praeter Herodianum (Historiar. Lib. III. c. V., p. m. 133.), ipsa SEVERI ad ALBINUM epistola, quam percussoribus ei reddendam tradiderat, apud Capitolinum (Vit. Cl. Albini c. VII, p. 212) hoc confirmat. Anno minimum post NIGRI exitium hanc exaratam esse, vel levis ejus inspectio docere potest. Eventus expectationi imperatoris cum non responderet, insidiaeque comparatae retegerentur, ALBINUS continuo arma in SEVERUM capiebat. Is nuntio hoc accepto nil quieti dandum esse putabat; sed collectis e vestigio, quae poterant, copiis incredibili celeritate in Galliam, qua animi erat vehementia, properabat, ALBINUMque adoriebatur. Ne Byzantii quidem exspectare volebat expugnationem. Αὐτὸς δὲ, inquit de eo Herodianus (Hist. L. III, c. VI. p. 139.) τῆς ὁδοῦ εἴχετο, μηδεμίαν ἀνοχὴν ἀναπαύλης διδοὺς μήτε ἑορταῖς μήτε καμάτοις, κρύους καὶ θάλπους ὁμοίως καταφρονῶν. Ipse iter faciebat sine intermissione, neque festos dies, neque labores ullos magnopere curans, algoris atque aestus juxta patiens. Hanc qui festinationem considerat, non potest, quin a. CXCVI, initium a. CXCVII. finem Albiniani belli factum esse constituat. Insidiatores concedam a. CXCV ablegatos a SEVERO esse. Anno hoc pene finito eos in facinore deprehensos esse, adjungam. Denique A. CXCVI jam exorso rei ejus certiorem SEVERUM esse factum dicam. Intra haud ita multos dies morae impatientissimus imperator, qui currebat potius, quam proficiscebatur, Galliam post hunc nuntium acceptum attingere potuit. Aliud ex obsidionis Byzantinae tempore praesidium parabimus. Dio Cassius trium annorum spatio, ἐπὶ ὅλον τριετῆ χρόνον, oppugnatam a SEVERO hanc urbem fuisse, scribit (Hist. Lib. LXXIV, p. 845, ed. Francof. 1606.). Omnes rei circumstantiae, id quod Tillemontio (Voy. Not. VIV, sur Sévère, T. III, Hist. des Emper., P. I, p. 401, 402.) jam observatum esse video, non de completo annorum trium circulo has voces explicandas esse jubent, sed ita tantum, ut tribus annis sibi succedentibus continuatam fuisse obsidionem indicent, licet fortassis primo exeunte coepta, tertio incipiente perfecta sit. Modus hic loquendi Graecis admodum familiaris est. Non disputabo, cui anno initium ejus assignari debeat, num a. CXCIII aut a. CXCIV: sufficit, quod iterum Dioni debemus (Histor. Lib. LXXIV, p. 844.) NIGRO nondum extincto urbem copiis fuisse cinctam. Ceeidit is a. CXCIV. Sive igitur, quod aliqui faciunt, finis a. CXCIII, sive exordium a. CXCIV. praeferatur, semper vicimus. Nec tamen nego, melius longe eos sentire, qui A. CXCIV. eligunt, ac multis quidem de caussis. Cadit ergo expugnatio in a. CXCVI. Nondum vero in potestatem imperatoris urbs redacta erat id temporis, cum ALBINO occnrrebat, Herodiano teste (Histor. L. III. c. VI. p. 139.). Quin in itinere gallico jam constitutus fuisse videtur, cum receptae urbis nuntius ad eum perferretur.

Not long after, SEVERUS sent assassins into Gaul to remove ALBINUS from the scene, so that he should no longer have a partner in the Augustan dignity. Besides Herodian (Histories, Book III, ch. V, p. 133 of my edition), SEVERUS's own letter to ALBINUS, which he had given to the assassins to deliver to him, confirms this in Capitolinus (Life of Clodius Albinus, ch. VII, p. 212). That it was written at least a year after the death of NIGER even a slight inspection of it can show. When the outcome did not answer the emperor's expectation and the plot prepared was uncovered, ALBINUS at once took up arms against SEVERUS. He, on receiving this news, thought that nothing should be given to rest; but having on the instant gathered what forces he could, with the vehemence of spirit that was his he hastened into Gaul with incredible speed and attacked ALBINUS. He would not even wait for the storming of Byzantium. Αὐτὸς δὲ, says Herodian of him (Hist., Book III, ch. VI, p. 139), τῆς ὁδοῦ εἴχετο, μηδεμίαν ἀνοχὴν ἀναπαύλης διδοὺς μήτε ἑορταῖς μήτε καμάτοις, κρύους καὶ θάλπους ὁμοίως καταφρονῶν: "He himself made the journey without intermission, caring little for feast days or for any toils, bearing cold and heat alike." Whoever considers this haste cannot but determine that the beginning of the Albinian war fell in the year CXCVI and its end in the year CXCVII. I will grant that the assassins were dispatched by SEVERUS in the year CXCV. I will add that they were caught in the act when this year was nearly finished. Finally I will say that SEVERUS was informed of the matter when the year CXCVI had already begun. Within not so very many days the emperor, most impatient of delay, who ran rather than travelled, could reach Gaul after receiving this news. We shall procure another support from the time of the siege of Byzantium. Dio Cassius writes that this city was besieged by SEVERUS for a space of three years, ἐπὶ ὅλον τριετῆ χρόνον (History, Book LXXIV, p. 845, Frankfurt edition 1606). All the circumstances of the matter, as I see was already observed by Tillemont (see Note VIV on Severus, Vol. III of the Histoire des Empereurs, Part I, pp. 401, 402), require these words to be explained not of a complete circle of three years, but only so that they indicate that the siege was continued through three successive years, although it may have been begun at the end of the first and completed at the beginning of the third. This manner of speaking is very familiar to the Greeks. I shall not dispute to which year its beginning ought to be assigned, whether CXCIII or CXCIV: it is enough that we owe to Dio again (History, Book LXXIV, p. 844) that the city was surrounded by forces while NIGER was not yet dead. He fell in the year CXCIV. Whether, then, the end of the year CXCIII is preferred, as some do, or the beginning of the year CXCIV, we have won either way. Yet I do not deny that those who choose the year CXCIV judge far better, and indeed for many reasons. The storming therefore falls in the year CXCVI. But the city had not yet been brought into the emperor's power at the time when he was hurrying against ALBINUS, as Herodian witnesses (History, Book III, ch. VI, p. 139). Indeed he seems already to have been set on the journey to Gaul when the news of the city's capture was brought to him.

Editors' notes and page, col. 552

Page

running head: [DE AE]TATE APOLOGETICI 552 (left part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A Non multo vero post in Galliam; B properabat, ALBINUMque adoriebatur; C rebat potius, quam proficiscebatur; D disputabo, cui anno initium
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: final word printed "perfer-" at the column end; completed as "perferretur" from the first line of col. 553 ("retur. Quod si ergo"); col. 553 begins at "Quod". Herodian's Greek is small and blurred in the scan; read with the standard text where letters were indistinct (UNSURE in accents). "p. m." = pagina mea, rendered "of my edition".

PL 1:553

Quod si ergo Byzantii recuperati et profectionis adversus ALBINUM annus unus idemque est, ille vero necessario a. CXCVI sit, sequitur omnino A. CXCVII praelium lugdunense commissum fuisse. Si ad a. CXCVIII progrediaris, obsidionem una byzantinam per quatuor durasse annos confiteberis, id quod falsissimum esse ex Dione constat. Maximum est, quod postremo loco afferam, argumentum. Magna apud Gruterum, aliosque inscriptionum, magna apud Biragium numorum, vis est, quae natu majorem SEVERI filium, ANTONIUM, CARACALLAM deinde vocatum, a. CXCVIII Augusti condecoratum esse titulo docet. Qua quidem commoti eruditi homines, licet de die, menseque disceptent (Vid. Ant. Pagi Crit. in Baron. T. II, ad A. CXCVIII, n. VII, p. 90; Henr. Norisius de votis decennal. Impp. p. 91, S. Tillemont Histoire des Emper. T. III, P. I, Not. XIX, sur Sevère p. 406.) de anni veritate non dubitant, ac Spartianum, qui id a. CC., decimo tertio CARACALLAE anno, factum fuisse ait (Vit. Severi c. XVI, p. 182.), deferendum esse monent. Quod hunc jure reprehendant, quem ego quidem non de titulo Augusti, sed Imperatoris, ANTONINO a militibus imposito, intelligi forte debere, conjicio, non laboro. Ipsam sententiam et amplector, et nullis expositam esse dubiis agnosco. Egregie vero ea nostrae subvenit hoc loco computationi. Anno qui lugdunense praelium secutus est, honorem hunc CARACALLAE esse habitum ex Historicis liquet. Herodianus paulo ante parthicam expeditionem Romae (Histor. Lib. III, c. IX, p. 148.) Spartianus, ut aiunt, in Oriente illud contigisse docet. Alias rationes praetereo. Utraque sententia in anno CXCVIII conspirat, quo in Parthos Imperator movit. Quod si igitur, imminente jam parthico bello, a. CXCVIII ANTONIUS Imperator salutatus est, nullo modo a. CXCVII occidisse ALBINUM, negari potest.

If, then, the year of the recovery of Byzantium and of the march against ALBINUS is one and the same, and that year must necessarily be CXCVI, it follows absolutely that the battle of Lyons was fought in the year CXCVII. If you go on to the year CXCVIII, you will have to confess that the siege of Byzantium alone lasted four years, which from Dio is established to be utterly false. The greatest argument is the one I shall bring in the last place. There is a great mass of inscriptions in Gruter and others, a great mass of coins in Biragus, which teaches that SEVERUS's elder son, ANTONIUS, afterwards called CARACALLA, was honoured with the title of Augustus in the year CXCVIII. Moved by this, learned men, although they dispute about the day and the month (see Ant. Pagi, Critica in Baronium, Vol. II, at the year CXCVIII, no. VII, p. 90; Henr. Noris, On the Decennial Vows of the Emperors, p. 91; S. Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, Vol. III, Part I, Note XIX on Severus, p. 406), do not doubt the truth of the year, and advise that Spartianus, who says this happened in the year CC, the thirteenth year of CARACALLA (Life of Severus, ch. XVI, p. 182), should be set aside. Whether they rightly censure him, whom for my part I conjecture should perhaps be understood not of the title of Augustus but of that of Imperator, conferred on ANTONINUS by the soldiers, I do not trouble about. The opinion itself I both embrace and acknowledge to be exposed to no doubts. And it comes admirably to the aid of our reckoning at this point. It is clear from the historians that this honour was conferred on CARACALLA in the year that followed the battle of Lyons. Herodian teaches that it happened at Rome a little before the Parthian expedition (History, Book III, ch. IX, p. 148), Spartianus, as they say, in the East. I pass over other reasons. Both opinions agree on the year CXCVIII, in which the emperor moved against the Parthians. If, then, ANTONIUS was saluted Imperator in the year CXCVIII, when the Parthian war was already imminent, it can in no way be denied that ALBINUS perished in the year CXCVII.

§ XIII. — Equidem sic argumentis hisce comparatum esse arbitror, ut communem de ALBINI clade sententiam certissimam esse doceant. Si res flagitaret, de aliis addendis essem sollicitus. Jam satius esse puto, ut, quid eos, quibus tritam relinquere viam placuit, commoverit, disquiramus. Levia sunt: nec tamen omittenda. Dion. Petavius primas teneat. Initium is oppugnati Byzantii ad a. CXCV refert. Quam ob rem necessarium quoque fuit, quum triennio obsidio ista continuata sit, ut A. CXCVII., quo Orientem reliquerit SEVERUS, a. CXCVIII quo ALBINUM devicerit, fuisse diceret (Doctrinae tempor. Lib. XV. p. 693. ed. Paris. 1627). Perspicuus est error, modo observetur, fontem ejus esse, quod male exordium oppugnationis byzantinae a. CXCV tribuerit. Haec vero, ut id faceret, ratio eum impulit, quod NIGRO superstite tantae molis operi, qualis haec obsidio, SEVERUM vacare non potuisse, credidit. Contrarium ex Dione vir eruditus discere potuisset, ut jam indicavi. Revocetur itaque cum Dione bysantinae oppugnationis initium ad verum suum a. CXCIV, et

§ XIII. — For my part I judge that things are so arranged by these arguments that they show the common opinion about the overthrow of ALBINUS to be most certain. If the matter demanded it, I should be concerned to add others. As it is, I think it better that we inquire what moved those who chose to leave the beaten path. They are light things, yet not to be omitted. Let Dion. Petau hold first place. He refers the beginning of the siege of Byzantium to the year CXCV. For this reason it was also necessary for him, since that siege was continued for three years, to say that it was in the year CXCVII that SEVERUS left the East, and in the year CXCVIII that he defeated ALBINUS (De doctrina temporum, Book XV, p. 693, Paris edition 1627). The error is plain, provided it is observed that its source is that he wrongly assigned the beginning of the siege of Byzantium to the year CXCV. The reason that drove him to do this was that he believed SEVERUS could not have had leisure, while NIGER survived, for a work of such magnitude as this siege. The learned man could have learned the contrary from Dio, as I have already indicated. Let the beginning of the siege of Byzantium, then, be brought back with Dio to its true year CXCIV, and

Editors' notes and page, col. 553

Footnotes

(1) Histoire des empereurs, t. III, pag. 408. Le père Pagi, qui met comme nous la défaite d'Albin en 198.

(1) Histoire des empereurs, vol. 3, p. 408: "Father Pagi, who, as we do, puts the defeat of Albinus in 198."

(printed under page 313)

Page

running head: 553 MOSHEIM DISQUISIT[IO] (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A retur. Quod si ergo Byzantii; B decennal. Impp. p. 91; C c. IX, p. 148.) Spartianus; D Initium is oppugnati Byzantii
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column opens with the end of "perfer-retur", set whole at the end of col. 552; this file begins at "Quod". "Quod hunc jure reprehendant": the final d of "Quod" is damaged in the type (reads like "Quò"); set as Quod. "Sevère" printed with grave accent as in the French title, kept. "ANTONIUM"/"ANTONIUS" (for Antoninus) as printed. Printer's signature "TERTULLIANI I." at the foot left out. Lower lines blotted at the left edge (observetur, oppugnationis, superstite, indicavi) but legible.

PL 1:554

res ipsa, ut in gratiam nobiscum redeat, Petavium coget (Conf. Tillemont Hist. des Emper. T. III, Not. XVI, sur Sevère, p. 404).

the matter itself will compel Petau to return to good terms with us (compare Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, Vol. III, Note XVI on Severus, p. 404).

Henricus Norisius eidem se patrocinari opinioni innuit (Diss. de votis decennal. Impp. p. 93. Patavii 1686), at rationes non aperit, Spartianum ab eo laudari video, quem nihil hujusmodi dixisse scio. Quare me confestim ad Anton. Pagium confero, cui hanc aeram ex instituto stabilire propositum fuit. (Crit. in baron. ad A. CXCVIII, n. V, p. 89). Fallitur enim Tillemontius, qui Pagium secum facere ait. Summa rationum ejus, quas mire disjectas in unum colligo, haec est: Quinquennalia SEVERI, sine ulla controversia A. CXCVIII, Romae celebrata sunt, Herodianus vero statim post pugnam lugdunensem ingenti cum celeritate Romam eum petiisse, ac, simul ac adventaverit, Quinquennalia ista exhibuisse narrat. Quare si paulo post interemptum ALBINUM, cujus cladem decima nona februarii die contigisse nullus inficiatur, imperator Romam ingressus est, si inter reditum hunc ejus in urbem et quinquennalia nulla aut exigua mora fuit interposita, eumdem necis ALBINI et quinquennalium annum esse deberi, indubitatum est. Nisi, quam facilis in his rebus lapsus esset, scirem, certe admirarer, ab homine tam erudito infirmas ejusmodi ratiunculas proficisci potuisse. Mihi quidem in illis generatim id displicet, quod sic motibus ALBINIANIS tres annos contra omnem fidem tribuit. Arma A. CXCVI, sumpta esse profitetur. Petavium alio loco reprehendit, qui ob eam, quae ipsi cum Pagio communis erat, sententiam, sequentem annum praetulerat (Diss. Hypatica P. II. c. XII. p. 221). Neque tamen, se hoc pacto in longe difficiliores, quam Prtavium, tendiculas incidere sentit, quum in tertium annum omnibus repugnantibus bellum istud protrahat. Est et aliud, quod hanc premit sententiam. Iter SEVERI in Orientem ad expeditionem parthicam, quod eodem anno CXCVIII. factum esse conceditur a viro docto, cum quinquennalibus istis, redituque in urbem conjungitur. At hoc omnium scriptorum adversatur testimoniis, qui sic de his rebus exponunt, ut sine omni dubio ad alium annum reditus SEVERI in urbem e Gallia, ad alium migratio ad debellandos Parthos referenda sit. Quid de rationibus speciatim dicam, quarum nulla se sustentare, vel leviter potest? Distincte quamlibet excutiam. Incertissimum est, a. CXCVIII quinquennalia SEVERUM exhibuisse. Ipse celeb. Pagius hanc inculcavit regulam: Quinquennalia, Decennalia et id genus festa, modo anno quinto ineunte, modo exeunte indiscriminatim celebrabantur (Diss. Hypatica P. II, c. II, § V, p. 87). Lubrico eam fundamento ab eo impositam esse non ignoro, illi nimirum, cujus princeps auctor est, sententiae, imperatores in solemnitatibus ejusmodi consularem semper dignitatem suscepisse. Neque tamen alioqui suis ea nervis destituta est, ut nonnulli sibi

Henry Noris hints that he supports the same opinion (Dissertation on the Decennial Vows of the Emperors, p. 93, Padua 1686), but does not disclose his reasons; I see Spartianus cited by him, who I know said nothing of the kind. Wherefore I betake myself at once to Anton. Pagi, whose design it was to establish this date deliberately (Critica in Baronium, at the year CXCVIII, no. V, p. 89). For Tillemont is mistaken in saying that Pagi sides with him. The sum of his reasons, which are strangely scattered and which I gather into one, is this: the Quinquennalia of SEVERUS were celebrated at Rome, without any dispute, in the year CXCVIII; and Herodian relates that immediately after the battle of Lyons he made for Rome with enormous speed, and as soon as he arrived put on those Quinquennalia. Therefore if the emperor entered Rome shortly after ALBINUS was slain, whose overthrow no one denies took place on the nineteenth day of February, and if no delay, or a slight one, came between this return of his to the city and the Quinquennalia, it is beyond doubt that the year of ALBINUS's death and of the Quinquennalia must be the same. Did I not know how easy a slip is in these matters, I should certainly wonder that such feeble little reasons could have come from so learned a man. For my part, what displeases me in them generally is that he thus assigns three years to the ALBINIAN risings against all credibility. He declares that arms were taken up in the year CXCVI. In another place he censures Petau, who on account of the opinion that he shared with Pagi had preferred the following year (Dissertatio Hypatica, Part II, ch. XII, p. 221). Yet he does not perceive that in this way he falls into far more difficult snares than Petau, since he draws out that war into a third year against all the evidence. There is also something else that weighs on this opinion. SEVERUS's journey into the East for the Parthian expedition, which the learned man grants took place in the same year CXCVIII, is joined with those Quinquennalia and the return to the city. But this is contrary to the testimonies of all the writers, who set out these matters in such a way that, beyond all doubt, the return of SEVERUS from Gaul to the city is to be referred to one year, and the departure to subdue the Parthians to another. What shall I say of the reasons in particular, none of which can hold itself up even slightly? I shall examine each one distinctly. It is most uncertain that SEVERUS put on the Quinquennalia in the year CXCVIII. The celebrated Pagi himself impressed this rule: "Quinquennalia, Decennalia and festivals of that kind were celebrated indiscriminately, now at the beginning of the fifth year, now at its end" (Dissertatio Hypatica, Part II, ch. II, § V, p. 87). I am not unaware that he laid it on a slippery foundation, namely on that opinion, of which he is the chief author, that the emperors on solemnities of this kind always took up the consular dignity. Yet it is not otherwise so bereft of its own sinews that some

Editors' notes and page, col. 554

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: secum facere ait› · call in col 554

(printed under page 313)

Page

running head: [MOS]HEIM DISQUISITIO. 554 (left part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A res ipsa, ut in gratiam; B nensem ingenti cum celeritate; C hendit, qui ob eam; D quarum nulla se sustentare
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 1:555

persuadent. Exstant et eorum, qui ineunte anno quinto aut decimo, et eorum, qui exeunte eo ludos hos exhibuere, exempla. In illis CONSTANTINUS M. est, cujus primum anni tricesimi diem, XXV Julii, ceremoniis tricennalium illustrem fuisse constat. Applicemus haec SEVERI annis, et videbimus, tam a. CXCVII quam a. CXCVIII, eum spectacula ista plebi edere potuisse. Praepositus est imperio circa medium forte a. CXCIII. Diem et mensem, de quo alii litigant, scire parum refert (Vide Tillemont Hist. des Emper. T. III. Not. VII. sur Sevère p. 593). Ego ipsum interea Pagium sequar, qui Idibus Maii id factum censet (Diss. Hypat. P. II, c. XII, p. 220). Quintus itaque imperii ejus a. CXCVII, mense Maio exordiendus erit. Quae jam vero ratio afferri potest, qua invicte demonstretur, non a. CXCVII, quo quintus SEVERI annus incipit, sed a. CXCVIII, quo desinit, Quinquennalia eum dedisse. Utrumque enim fieri potuisse certum est. Reliquorum deterior adhuc conditio est. Falsum est Herodianum dicere, Imperatorem statim post adventum in urbem plebi munera ista edidisse, quae quinquennalia vocat. Audiamus viri verba (Historiar. L. III, c. VIII, p. 145): Ὁ δ' οὖν Σεβῆρος εἰς τὸ τοῦ Διὸς τέμενος ἀνελθὼν, καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς τελέσας ἱερουργίας, ἐπανῆλθεν εἰς τὰ βασίλεια, καὶ τῷ δήμῳ προὔθηκεν ἐπὶ ταῖς νίκαις μεγίστας νομὰς, τοῖς δὲ στρατιώταις ἐπέδωκε χρήματα πλεῖστα, ἄλλα τε πολλὰ συνεχώρησεν ἃ μὴ πρότερον εἶχον. Politianus ita vertit: Postea vero quam in templum Jovis ingressus est, omniaque sacrificia de more peregit, reversus in palatium magnoque congiario populum Romanum, victoriae nomine, prosecutus, ac nummos militibus largitus est, simul alia permulta indulsit, quae nunquam antea acceperant. Quinquennalium hic mentionem quaero, sed frustra. Pagium quidem dicere audio: Quae novitates gratiaque quinquennalium SEVERI indicia. Infelicem vero divinationem! Quasi non aliis temporibus, quam Quinquennalibus, istiusmodi rebus donari populus potuerit. Et quid obfuit, doctissime Pagi, quod voces illas Herodiani non videres, ἐπὶ ταῖς νίκαις? Ob victoriam de ALBINO reportatam, non Quinquennalis imperii caussa, de quibus ludis postea separatim Herodianus dicit, hanc liberalitatem SEVERUS exercebat. Non minus in eo fallitur, quod ex Herodiano patere ait, Augustum statim post ALBINI cladem Romam contendisse. Dicit is quidem, quum Romam peteret, πολλῷ τάχει eum migrasse. At non iter illud coedem ALBINI confestim excepisse memorat (L. c. pag. 145). Potius, non antea eum Romam esse reversum narrat, quam res ordinasset Britanniae, composuisset Galliam ac de magna amicorum ALBINI copia supplicium sumpsisset. Quae tanti mementi sunt negotia, ut multum temporis in perficiendis illis consumptum sine dubio fuerit. Nihil igitur jam certius esse affirmamus, quam A. CXCVII motus ALBINI, auctore ejus occiso, sedatos fuisse.

persuade. There exist also examples both of those who exhibited these games at the beginning of the fifth or tenth year, and of those who did so at its end. Among the former is CONSTANTINE the Great, the first day of whose thirtieth year, 25 July, is agreed to have been made illustrious by the ceremonies of the tricennalia. Let us apply this to the years of SEVERUS, and we shall see that he could have given those spectacles to the people as well in the year 197 as in the year 198. He was set over the empire perhaps about the middle of the year 193. The day and the month, about which others dispute, matter little to know (See Tillemont, Hist. des Emper. Vol. III, Note VII on Severus, p. 593). Meanwhile I shall follow Pagi himself, who judges that it took place on the Ides of May (Diss. Hypat. Part II, ch. XII, p. 220). The fifth year of his reign, therefore, will have to begin in the year 197, in the month of May. Now what reason can be brought forward by which it may be irrefutably shown that he gave the Quinquennalia not in the year 197, in which the fifth year of SEVERUS begins, but in the year 198, in which it ends? For it is certain that either could have happened. The case of the rest is worse still. It is false that Herodian says that the Emperor, immediately after his arrival in the city, gave the people those gifts which he calls quinquennalia. Let us hear the man's words (Histories, Book III, ch. VIII, p. 145): "So Severus, having gone up to the precinct of Zeus and completed the remaining sacred rites, returned to the palace, and set before the people very great distributions for the victories, and gave the soldiers very much money, and granted many other things which they had not had before." Politian translated it thus: "But after he had entered the temple of Jove and performed all the sacrifices according to custom, he returned to the palace and, having honoured the Roman people with a great largess in the name of the victory, he also lavished money on the soldiers, and at the same time granted very many other things which they had never received before." I look here for mention of the Quinquennalia, but in vain. I hear Pagi indeed saying: "These novelties and favours are signs of the quinquennalia of SEVERUS." An unhappy divination indeed! As though the people could not have been presented with things of this kind at other times than at the Quinquennalia. And what hindered you, most learned Pagi, from seeing those words of Herodian, "for the victories"? It was on account of the victory won over ALBINUS, not for the sake of the Quinquennial of his reign (of which games Herodian speaks separately afterwards), that SEVERUS practised this liberality. No less is he mistaken in saying that it is plain from Herodian that the Augustus hastened to Rome immediately after the defeat of ALBINUS. Herodian does say that when he was making for Rome he travelled "with great speed". But he does not relate that this journey followed at once upon the slaughter of ALBINUS (loc. cit., p. 145). Rather, he narrates that he did not return to Rome before he had set in order the affairs of Britain, settled Gaul, and exacted punishment from the great number of the friends of ALBINUS. These are matters of such moment that much time was without doubt spent in accomplishing them. Nothing therefore do we now affirm to be more certain than that in the year 197 the movements of ALBINUS were put down, their author having been slain.

Editors' notes and page, col. 555

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: quam A. CXCVII› · call in col 555

Neque vero cum Baronio hic facio, qui, nescio quas ob caussas, licet a. CXCVII. ALBINUM debellatum esse concedat, tamen ante a. CXCVIII. SEVERUM Romam redisse, negat. Annal. T. II. ad A. 200. n. I, p. 298. Omnia pugnant cum hac opinione ac post medium fortassis A. CXCVII. Imperatorem urbi se reddidisse, confirmant. Taceo apud Adolphum Occonem in numismat., p. 849, adventus hujus Augusti quarto tribunitiae potestatis anno facti, indicia quaedam in numis occurere.

Nor do I side here with Baronius, who, for what reasons I do not know, though he grants that Albinus was defeated in the year 197, still denies that Severus returned to Rome before the year 198 (Annals, vol. II, at the year 200, no. I, p. 298). Everything is against this opinion, and confirms that the emperor came back to the city perhaps after the middle of the year 197. I pass over the fact that in Adolph Occo on coins, p. 849 [page number blotted in the scan; reading uncertain], certain indications occur on the coins of an arrival of this Augustus made in the fourth year of his tribunician power.

(printed under page 314)

Page

running head: 555 | DE AETATE APOLOGETICI (right part cut by crop)
marginal letters: A ‹persuadent. Exstant et eorum›; B ‹qua invicte demonstretur›; C ‹peregit, reversus in palatium›; D ‹diano patere ait, Augustum›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 1:556

§ XIV. — Atque sic inoffenso pede ad reliqua pergi, annusque Apologetici nostri facilius constitui potest. Libere igitur a. CXCVIII, laborantibus fratribus eo subvenire voluisse, pronuntio. Locus, qui hanc firmat opinionem, hic est: Sed et qui nunc scelestarum partium socii aut plausores quotidie revelantur, post vindemiam parricidarum racematio superstes, quam recentissimis et ramossisimis laureis postes praestruebant? quam elatissimis et clarissimis lucernis vestibula enubilabant? quam cultissimis et superbissimis toris forum sibi dividebant? non ut gaudia publica celebrarent, sed ut vota propria jam edicerent in aliena solemnitate et exemplum atque imaginem spei suae inaugurarent, nomen principis in corde mutantes. Eadem officia deperdunt et qui Astrologos et Aruspices et Augures et Magos de Caesarum capite consultant (Apolog. c. XXXV, p. 458). Non fugit illustris hicce locus Baronium: non Tillemontium praeteriit. Sed neuter, quod absque diminutione tantorum hominum dixerim, eo recte uti potuit, eo quod in aliis rebus errarent. Vidit aliquid Baronius ac de strage reliquiarum ALBINI eum interpretandum esse, bene monuit (Annal. ad a. CC, n. III, p. 198). Aetatem libri idcirco recte notare non potuit, quoniam a. CXCVIII. SEVERUM reducem factum fuisse Romam, ac a. CXCIX, Parthis signa demum illata esse, statuit. Tillemontius vero, cujus industriam stupendam alioqui esse fateor, de NIGRI eum sectatoribus improvide intellexit, quos quum Parthis jam SEVERUS immineret, Plautiano suasore, eum persecutum esse, Spartianus (Vit. Severi, c. XV, p. 181) prodit. Propterea a. CC aut CCI Apologeticum exaratum esse voluit. Quamquam ne id quidem intelligo, cur hanc Nigrinianorum stragem, quam Spartianus inter belli parthici initia collocat, post ipsam difficillimam urbis Atrae obsidionem accidisse, vir eruditus censeat. Nos, diligenter excusso TERTULLIANI loco, facilem negotio exitum inveniemus. Parricidae quinam sint in eo, apertum est: ii nempe, qui ALBINO imperium affectanti aut ope aut consilio affuerant. Cicero jamdudum sic senserat (Philippica II, c. XIII, p. 446, T. II, Opp. ed. Gruteri) plus etiam quam parricidas ejusmodi esse homines: siquidem, ut addit, atrocius est patriae parentem quam suum occidere. At horum longe plurimi qui aut vere criminis istius rei erant, aut falso habebantur, tam in Gallia, quam Romae deinde supplicio affecti erant, praeter eos qui aperte arma tulerant. Herodianus et Spartianus hic possunt consuli. Atque hoc est, quod vindemiam TERTULLIANUS vocat. Racematio quaedam, ut quidem Imperator putabat, adhuc supererat.

§ XIV. — And so one may proceed with unstumbling foot to the rest, and the year of our Apologeticus can be fixed more easily. I declare freely, therefore, that it was in the year 198 that he wished to come to the aid of his brethren in their distress. The passage which confirms this opinion is this: "But those too who are now daily being revealed as partners or applauders of the criminal faction, the gleaning left over after the vintage of parricides, with what very fresh and very branching laurels did they hedge their doorposts! with what very lofty and very bright lamps did they brighten their porches! with what very elegant and very proud couches did they parcel out the forum among themselves! not to celebrate the public rejoicing, but already to proclaim their own vows at another's festival, and to inaugurate the pattern and image of their own hope, changing the prince's name in their heart. The same services are rendered by those also who consult astrologers and haruspices and augurs and magi about the life of the Caesars" (Apology, ch. XXXV, p. 458). This famous passage did not escape Baronius; it did not pass Tillemont by. But neither of them, as I would say without disparagement of such great men, could use it rightly, because they were in error on other matters. Baronius saw something, and rightly pointed out that it must be interpreted of the slaughter of what was left of ALBINUS's party (Annals, at the year 200, no. III, p. 198). He could not, however, mark the date of the book rightly, because he held that SEVERUS was brought back to Rome in the year 198, and that war was carried to the Parthians only in the year 199. Tillemont, on the other hand, whose diligence I admit to be otherwise astonishing, understood it, without due caution, of the followers of NIGER, whom, as Spartianus (Life of Severus, ch. XV, p. 181) relates, SEVERUS pursued at the urging of Plautianus when he was already threatening the Parthians. For this reason he would have the Apologeticus written in the year 200 or 201. And yet I do not understand even this: why the learned man should judge that this slaughter of the Nigrinians, which Spartianus places among the beginnings of the Parthian war, took place after the very difficult siege itself of the city of Atra. We, having carefully examined the passage of TERTULLIAN, shall find an easy way out of the matter. Who the parricides are in it is plain: namely those who had stood by ALBINUS, as he aimed at the empire, with either aid or counsel. Cicero long ago had held (Philippic II, ch. XIII, p. 446, Vol. II of the Works, Gruter's edition) that men of this sort are "even more than parricides": "since," as he adds, "it is more atrocious to kill the parent of one's country than one's own." But by far the greatest number of these, who were either truly guilty of that crime or falsely held to be so, had been put to death, both in Gaul and afterwards at Rome, besides those who had openly borne arms. Herodian and Spartianus may be consulted here. And this is what TERTULLIAN calls the vintage. A certain gleaning, as the Emperor at least supposed, still remained.

Editors' notes and page, col. 556

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: exaratum esse voluit› · call in col 556

Hist. des emp. t. III, p. 94, ad A. 200. Une des occupations de Sévère dans l'orient fut de faire de nouvelles recherches des partisans de Niger, et comme Tertullien dit sur cela, de grapiller après la vendange.

Histoire des empereurs, vol. III, p. 94, at the year 200: "One of Severus's occupations in the East was to make fresh searches for the partisans of Niger, and, as Tertullian [word blotted in the scan] says of it, to glean after the vintage."

(printed under page 314)

Page

running head: DE AETATE APOLOGETICI | 556
marginal letters: A ‹§ XIV. — Atque sic inoffenso›; B ‹Magos de Caesarum capite›; C ‹tianus (Vit. Severi›; D ‹istius rei erant›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 1:557

Suspicax scilicet et simul argenti cupidus princeps, quum jam omnia tranquillitati restituta essent, nihilominus quosdam e latebris veluti protrahebat, quos insidias sibi fecisse aiebat, ac ad mortem ideo rapi jubebat. Ista vigente racematione, ut loquitur, TERTULIANUS scribebat. Scire itaque, quo tempore reliquias seditiosorum investigaverit SEVERUS, est ipsum Apologetici annum scire. Ipse vero illud indicat post solemnia quaedam Romae facta evenisse, in quibus isti imperatoris inimici magnum falso gaudium prae se tulerint. Quantum intercesserit intervallum non addit. Patet tamen, haud ita magnum intelligi debere. Est et alius in alio ejus libro locus, qui, quod ad hoc momentum, hunc quasi explicat (Libro ad Scapulam c. I. p. 682, Opp.): Nunquam, ait, Albiniani, aut Nigriani, vel Cassiani inveniri potuerunt Christiani: sed iidem ipsi, qui per genios eorum in pridie usque juraverant, qui pro salute eorum hostias et voverant et fecerant. De eadem re loquitur vir ingeniosus, de qua in nostris, quae exponimus. Vocem itaque pridie, quae breve denotat tempus, ad utrumque trahi, quid prohibet? Quaenam vero erant haec gaudia publica, ad quae respicit? Fallor aut quinquennalia innuit. Romam quidem quum ingrederetur SEVERUS post interfectum ALBINUM, gaudiis omnia et plausibus personabant (Vid. Herodianus Histor. Lib. III. c. VIII, p. 145). Nec nobis id obesset, si quis eam hic laetitiam pnblicam indicari diceret. Longe tamen probabilius arbitror de quinquennalibus sermonem esse, cum alias ob caussas, tum quod vota pro salute Augusti tum esse facta, subindicat: Sed ut vota propria jam edicerent in aliena solemnitate, et reliqua. Ecquid vero notius, ludis quinquennalibus hunc morem praecipue observatum fuisse? Ecquid his numorum inscriptionibus celebrius: VOTA DECENN. SUSCEP.? Tangit has ceremonias sine dubio Herodianus, qui praeter munus illud, quod Romam redux Imperator populo exibuerat, aliam ejus hujus generis liberalitatem paulo ante parthicam expeditionem commemorat. νομάς τε μεγαλοφρόνως ἐπεδίδου, ἐπετέλεσε δὲ καὶ ἐπινίκιον ἀγῶνα, τοὺς πανταχόθεν μούσης τε ὑποκριτὰς καὶ ἀνδρείας μαθητὰς μεταπεμψάμενος (L. III, c. VIII, p. 147). Sed et congiaria dedit uberrima et certamen proposuit, undique accitis ludionibus atque athletis. Idem Spartianus perhibet (Vita Severi, c. XIV, p. 150.) cujus haec sunt: Profectus deinde ad bellum parthicum est, edito gladiatorio munere et congiario populo dato. Vide, quam amice hi duo conspirent: quam apte uterque praecessisse aliquam magnae munificentiae solemnitatem expeditionem parthicam tradat. Quae si celeberrimus attendisset Tillemontius, aliter sine dubio instituisset. De Pescenni NIGRI sectatoribus, quas in Syria venabatur SEVERUS, sermonem hic esse censet. At eos inducit TERTULIANUS, qui Romanis interfuerint spectaculis. Quales, qui in Syria delitescebant, NIGRI sectatores non erant. Quo anno, num a. CXCVII aut CXCVIII festos hosce dies imperator indixerit, †parum curo. Id mihi tantum, ut ostendam, incumbit, sanguinem denuo Albinianorum, ut credebantur,

For the prince, being suspicious and at the same time greedy for money, although everything had by now been restored to tranquillity, nevertheless kept dragging certain men, as it were, out of their hiding places, who he said had laid plots against him, and on that account ordered them to be hurried off to death. While this "gleaning", as he puts it, was in full force, TERTULLIAN was writing. To know, therefore, at what time SEVERUS hunted down the remnants of the seditious is to know the very year of the Apologeticum. He himself indicates that this happened after certain solemnities held at Rome, in which those enemies of the emperor had made a show of great joy, falsely. How long an interval came between he does not add. It is clear, however, that it must be understood to have been not very long. There is also another passage in another of his books which, so far as this point goes, as it were explains this one (Book to Scapula, ch. I, p. 682 of the Works): "Never," he says, "could Christians be found to be Albinians, or Nigrians, or Cassians; but the very same men who until the day before had sworn by their genii, who had both vowed and offered sacrifices for their safety." The ingenious man is speaking of the same matter as in the words of ours which we are expounding. What then prevents the word "the day before", which denotes a short time, from being drawn to both? But what were these public rejoicings to which he refers? Either I am mistaken or he hints at the quinquennalia. When SEVERUS entered Rome after ALBINUS had been killed, everything indeed resounded with rejoicing and applause (see Herodian, Histories, book III, ch. VIII, p. 145). Nor would it count against us if someone said that it is that public gladness which is indicated here. Yet I judge it far more probable that the talk is of the quinquennalia, both for other reasons and because he gives a hint that vows were then made for the safety of the Augustus: "but already to proclaim their own vows amid another's solemnity", and so on. What, indeed, is better known than that this custom was chiefly observed at the quinquennial games? What is more famous than these inscriptions on coins: VOTA DECENN. SUSCEP. [ten-year vows undertaken]? Herodian without doubt touches on these ceremonies, who, besides that gift which the emperor on his return to Rome had shown the people, records another liberality of his of the same kind a little before the Parthian expedition: "and he gave distributions with magnificence, and he also held a victory contest, having sent for performers of music and students of manly prowess from every quarter" (book III, ch. VIII, p. 147). "But he both gave very rich largesses and set forth a contest, players and athletes having been summoned from every side." Spartianus bears witness to the same (Life of Severus, ch. XIV, p. 150), whose words are these: "He then set out for the Parthian war, after giving a gladiatorial show and bestowing a largess on the people." See how amicably these two agree: how aptly each relates that some solemnity of great munificence preceded the Parthian expedition. Had the most celebrated Tillemont attended to this, he would without doubt have proceeded otherwise. He judges that the talk here is of the followers of Pescennius NIGER, whom SEVERUS was hunting down in Syria. But TERTULLIAN brings in men who had been present at the spectacles at Rome. Such were not the followers of NIGER who were lying hidden in Syria. In which year, whether A.D. 197 or 198, the emperor proclaimed these festal days I care little. This alone is incumbent on me, to show that the blood of the Albinians, as they were believed to be, again

Editors' notes and page, col. 557

Page

placed: the text of this column, recovered by the filter re-test of 2026-10-19, was placed after publication (Ray 2026-10-24) and read against the page by QA Q5 (2026-10-25). The column break with 556 checks: "super-|erat." is set whole at the end of 556, and the tail "erat." at the top of 557 is not restored here.
running head: 557 MOSHEIM DISQUISIT[...] (right part of the running head cut off by the column crop)
marginal letters: A ‹erat. Suspicax scilicet›; B ‹Albiniani, aut Nigriani, vel Cassiani›; C ‹Augusti tum esse facta, subindicat›; D ‹Profectus deinde ad bellum parthicum›
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed: "pnblicam" (for publicam); "exibuerat" (for exhibuerat); "quas" (for quos, "sectatoribus, quas in Syria").
other: no foot notes on this column (the page foot carries none). The last three lines are heavily over-inked: "aut CXCVIII", "parum curo" (UNSURE, marked †) and "sanguinem denuo Albinianorum" read with difficulty. "p. 682" in the Scapula reference UNSURE (blotted). The second "Ecquid" ("Ecquid his numorum") prints with a gap after the E and no visible c (UNSURE whether a dropped letter or a misprint "Equid"; kept as Ecquid). Greek of Herodian small; "ἐπινίκιον ἀγῶνα" and "πανταχόθεν" set as they appear (accentuation UNSURE at this resolution).

PL 1:558

profusum fuisse, quum in eo esset, ut Parthos invaderet. Nullus quidem si produci testis posset, nihilo minus certa mea esset computatio, qui omnium instar TERTULIANUM commendare possem. Adest vero commode Spartianus, auspiciaque novi belli caedibus hominum inquinata fuisse, tradit (Vita Severi c. XIV, p. 180): Multos inter haec (dum se novo bello accingeret, dum ludos populo spectandos praeberet, de quibus aliisque in superioribus dixerat) caussis vel veris vel simulatis occidit. Damnabantur autem plerique cur jocati essent: alii cur tacuissent: alii cur pleraque figurata dixissent: ut esset imperator vere nominis sui, vere Pertinax et Severus. Huc etiam, quae paulo post consequuntur, verba refero, quae, ut opinor, non ad solam Nigrinianorum in Oriente persecutionem pertinent, et cum ultimis TERTULLIANI conferenda sunt: Multos etiam, quasi Chaldaeos aut vates de sua salute consuluissent, interemit, praecipue suspectos unumquemque idoneum imperio. Transacta res est. a. CXCVIII, omnium consensu, in Parthos SEVERUS profectus est. Tum post quinquennalia exhibita, quum jam nil nisi praelia et Parthornm funera spiraret, racematio illa rebellium, de qua TERTULLIANUS, contigit. Igitur, quin eodem anno Apologeticus sit exaratus, dubitari amplius nequit. Licet nunc quoque annum primum calamitatum christianis imperante SEVERO illatarum designare. Sustinuerant jam per aliquod tempus furorem hostium, quum pro eis noster verba faceret. Certe nusquam de vulneribus nuper inflictis, sed inveteratis jam malis, loquitur. Quod, si non prius, minimum a praecedenti a. CXCVII miserias eorum repetendas esse, ostendit.

was poured out when he was on the point of invading the Parthians. Even if no witness could be produced, my reckoning would be none the less certain, since I could put forward TERTULLIAN as worth them all. But Spartianus is conveniently at hand, and relates that the auspices of the new war were stained with the slaughter of men (Life of Severus, ch. XIV, p. 180): "Meanwhile" (while he was girding himself for the new war, while he was offering games for the people to watch, of which and of other things he had spoken above) "he killed many on grounds either true or feigned. Most were condemned because they had joked, others because they had kept silent, others because they had said a good many things figuratively, so that the emperor was truly of his own name, truly Pertinax and Severus." To this I also refer the words that follow a little later, which, as I think, do not belong solely to the persecution of the Nigrinians in the East, and are to be compared with the last words of TERTULLIAN: "He also put many to death as though they had consulted Chaldaeans or soothsayers about his welfare, especially suspecting everyone fit for empire." The matter is settled. In A.D. 198, by the agreement of all, SEVERUS set out against the Parthians. Then, after the quinquennalia had been exhibited, when he was already breathing nothing but battles and the deaths of Parthians, that "gleaning" of rebels of which TERTULLIAN speaks took place. There can therefore be no further doubt that the Apologeticum was written in the same year. Now too we may mark out the first year of the calamities brought upon the Christians in the reign of SEVERUS. They had already for some time endured the fury of their enemies when our author spoke on their behalf. Certainly he nowhere speaks of wounds lately inflicted, but of evils already grown old. This shows that their miseries must be traced back, if not earlier, at least to the preceding year, A.D. 197.

§ XV. — Habes jam, quae de aetate Apologetici TERTULLIANI tecum communicare statui. Equidem, ut cum robur, tum perspicuitatem iis compararem, pro viribus studui, utrumque num consecutus sim, aliorum esto judicium. Aliquid si obscuritatis adhaeret, non tam meo id vitio factum esse cogitabis, quam negotii ipsius. Habent hoc disquisitiones ejusmodi, ut semper aliquid domesticarum secum vehant sordium. Sed nec iis, qui prima merent stipendia, scribuntur, verum iis qui jam aliquem inter cives eruditos gradum nacti utriusque historiae, rerumque criticarum non ignari sunt. Quibus quidem, quod illis perobscurum videtur, nullam difficultatem parere solet. Mihi, si fata velint, suisque labor noster fautoribus non plane caruerit, hac via pergere propositum est. De reliquis TERTULLIANI operibus non eadem tantum industria, verum etiam de vita ejus satisque diligentius, quam huc usque factum video, peculiari libro commentabor; cui dissertationes quasdam in opera ejus adjiciam.

§ XV. — You now have what I resolved to share with you concerning the date of TERTULLIAN's Apologeticum. For my part, I have striven with all my strength to give it both strength and clearness; whether I have attained both, let others judge. If any obscurity clings to it, you will consider that this has come about not so much through my fault as through that of the matter itself. Inquiries of this kind have this about them, that they always carry with them some dirt of their own house. But they are not written for those who are serving their first campaigns, but for those who have already attained some rank among learned citizens and are not unacquainted with both histories and with critical matters. To these, indeed, what seems very obscure to the others usually causes no difficulty. For my part, if the fates will it, and our labour does not altogether lack its patrons, it is my purpose to continue on this path. On the remaining works of TERTULLIAN, with no less industry, and also on his life, rather more diligently than I see done up to now, I shall write commentary in a separate book; to which I shall add certain dissertations on his works.

Dudum est, quod eruditiores novam eorum editionem exoptant. Ac nemo me quidem libentius hoc onus in se devolvisset, si ea mihi vivendi sors obtigisset, ut me rite eo defungi posse putarem. Quae quum mihi negata sit, ea tamen, qua dixi, ratione, non tam de hac parte, quam de ipsa Historia sacra et civili bene mereri, constitui. Molitus est ejusmodi

It is long now that the more learned have been longing for a new edition of them. And no one, indeed, would have taken this burden upon himself more gladly than I, had such a lot in life fallen to me that I thought I could discharge it duly. Since that has been denied me, I have nevertheless resolved, in the way I have described, to deserve well not so much of this part as of sacred and civil History itself. There has undertaken a work of this kind

Editors' notes and page, col. 558

Page

placed: the text of this column, recovered by the filter re-test of 2026-10-19, was placed after publication (Ray 2026-10-24) and read against the page by QA Q5 (2026-10-25). The column break with 557 checks: 557 ends on a whole word ("credebantur,") and 558 opens on a whole word ("profusum"); nothing is split.
running head: [MOSH]EIM DISQUISITIO. 558 (left part of the running head cut off by the column crop)
marginal letters: A ‹profusum fuisse, quum in eo esset›; B ‹secutionem pertinent, et cum ultimis›; C ‹Quod, si non prius, minimum›; D ‹solet. Mihi, si fata velint›
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed: "Parthornm" (for Parthorum).
other: no foot notes on this column (the page foot carries none). Column ends mid-sentence ("Molitus est ejusmodi"); the unit continues into col. 559 above AD NATIONES, which was not in this batch. "p. 180" in the Spartianus reference is as printed (col. 557 gives p. 150 for the same chapter); kept. "Transacta res est. a. CXCVIII," punctuated as printed. "dixissent" and "nominis" in the Spartianus quotation may print with turned letters (u for n); UNSURE at this resolution, set as the words. The stray mark before "in opera ejus" is not set. The last line ("civili bene mereri, constitui. Molitus est ejusmodi") is heavily inked but legible.

PL 1:559

opus immortalis memoriae vir, Henricus Dodwellus (Ex vita ejus a Fr. Brockesby scripta vid. la Roche Bib. Angl. Tom. 1. P. 1. p. 86. 87). Mors quominus ad finem perduceret, prohibuit. Ego vero vehementer dubito, an par eruditioni candor ac judicii maturitas in eo futura fuisset. Habemus TERTULLIANI vitam a PETRO Allixio: At eam, quam si dixero minus esse perfectam ac elaboratam, a veritate non aberravero. Sint ea, quae in hac Dissertatione ex ea consideravimus, speciminis loco. Petri Thomae

work, a man of immortal memory, Henry Dodwell (from his Life written by Fr. Brockesby; see la Roche, Bib. Angl. Vol. I, Pt. I, pp. 86, 87). Death prevented him from carrying it through to the end. But I doubt strongly whether in him candour and maturity of judgement would have been equal to his learning. We have a life of TERTULLIAN by PETER Allix: but if I say of it that it is less than complete and worked out, I shall not have strayed from the truth. Let the things which we have considered from it in this Dissertation stand as a sample. Of Peter Thomas

Editors' notes and page, col. 559

Footnotes

(none for this unit) The page foot (page 316) carries two series, LECTIONES VARIENTES (so printed) and COMMENTARIUS; every call in them keys to Ad nationes Liber I (unit ad_nationes). Pointer only, not set here.

Page

running head: 559 TERTULLIANI (the head spans the page; its other half is over col. 560)
marginal letters: A opus immortalis memoriae vir (this unit's text, first line); B 1. Testimonium ignorantiae; C riositas humana torpescit; D apud omnes, ut ne ipsi (B, C, D fall in Ad nationes, neighbouring unit)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: This unit's text in the column is its first ten lines, the close of Mosheim's Disquisitio ("opus immortalis memoriae vir ... speciminis loco. Petri Thomae"), set in parts/c559_a.md. The sentence runs on at the top of col. 560 ("du FO..."), above the caption. Below these lines a rule and the full-width caption QUINTI SEPTIMII FLORENTIS TERTULLIANI / AD NATIONES / LIBER PRIMUS (spanning cols 559-560) begin the neighbouring unit ad_nationes: pointer only.
other: Ad nationes observations (kept for that unit, not set here): "accusati ;]" carries a stray type mark; "Novi" is printed with a damaged o; "si nullum erit odii" as printed.

PL 1:560

du FOSSE vitam TERTULLIANI, quam sine nomine auctoris prodiisse, Dupinius testatur (Bibl. des Auteurs eccl. Tom. XVIII. p. 258), nec ego, nec omnes forte, qui extra Galliam versamur, vidimus. Palma igitur adhuc in medio posita est; quam ut mihi vindicem, si vixero, studebo. Non is sum, qui me iis, quos nominavi, viris doctrina longe inferiorem esse nesciam. Idem tamen, nimis fortassis audacter, Dodwellum veritatis amore, caeteros assiduitate et diligentia me superaturum esse, spondeo.

du Fossé's life of TERTULLIAN, which Dupin testifies came out without the author's name (Bibliothèque des auteurs ecclésiastiques, Vol. XVIII, p. 258), I have not seen, nor perhaps have all of us who live outside France. The palm, therefore, is still set in the middle; and if I live, I shall strive to claim it for myself. I am not one who fails to know that I am far inferior in learning to the men whom I have named. Yet I promise, perhaps too boldly, that I shall surpass Dodwell in love of truth, and the rest in assiduity and diligence.

Editors' notes and page, col. 560

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: Sane caeteros ad hoc tenditis› · call in col 560

Le Pr. leg. tunditis.

Le Prieur reads tunditis ("you beat").

(printed under page 316)

(2) ‹anchor: si de homicida confutatur› · call in col 560

Rigalt conjecit : consultatur.

Rigault conjectured: consultatur ("is inquired into").

COMMENTARIUS. (printed under page 316)

(a) ‹anchor: Christiani vero› · call in col 560

Christiani vero. Christiani nulla vi coacti Christianos se dicebant, eaque de re summopere gloriabantur. sic Apolog. c. I. Si denotatur, gloriatur; si accusatur, non defendit, interrogatus vel ultro confitetur; damnatus, gratias agit. qui vero id ultro fatebantur, ideo damnati aut rei non erant. Le Pr.

But Christians. Christians, under no compulsion, declared themselves Christians, and gloried in it above all things. So Apology ch. 1: "If he is marked out, he glories; if accused, he makes no defence; questioned, or even unasked, he confesses; condemned, he gives thanks." But those who confessed it of their own accord were not for that reason condemned or accused. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 316)