Cyprianus, Epistolae XXII-LI

(a) ‹anchor: praesentiam differantur› · call in col 302

Cognitio haec differatur Bod. 1.

"Cognitio haec differatur" (let this inquiry be deferred) first Bodleian manuscript.

(printed under page 146)

(b) ‹anchor: conspirata temeritas› · call in col 302

Quorumdam prospecta temeritas Oxon. De quorumdam temeritate Manut.

"Quorumdam prospecta temeritas" (the foreseen rashness of certain persons) Oxford edition. "De quorumdam temeritate" (concerning the rashness of certain persons) Manutius.

STEPH. BALUZII NOTAE. (Baluze, lemma "II. — Blanditiis", from p. 145) · col 301

(continued) in libro de Amicitia ait nullam pestem esse majorem quam adulationem, blanditiam, assentationem. Dio Chrysostomus Orat. III, scribit omnium vitiorum turpissimum esse adulationem. Hieronymus in epistola ad Eustochium de virginitate servanda: Adulator quisque blandiens inimicus est. Idem in Dialogo contra Pelagianos: Semper insidiosa, callida, blanda est adulatio. Sanctus Ambrosius, seu quis alius, lib. III Officior. cap. 16: Non est enim vera amicitia ubi est fallax adulatio. Seneca dixit Epist. XLV, adulationem esse similem avaritiae. Apud Plutarchum exstat liber quomodo possit adulator ab amico internosci. Symmachus lib. I, Epist. 31: Quassa fide sunt qui jugiter blandiuntur. Ovidius lib. III Amorum, eleg. 8;

Impia sub dulci melle venena latent. Placentinos vocat adulatores vetus auctor glossae ad capitulare Karoli M. de causis Italiae, ut monuimus tom. II Capitularium pag. 1043.

(continued) in the book On Friendship says that there is no greater plague than adulation, flattery, assent. Dio Chrysostom, Oration III, writes that adulation is the most shameful of all vices. Jerome in the letter to Eustochium on keeping virginity: "Every flatterer who fawns is an enemy." The same in the Dialogue against the Pelagians: "Adulation is always treacherous, crafty, smooth." St Ambrose, or whoever else, Offices book III, chapter 16: "For there is no true friendship where there is deceitful adulation." Seneca said, Letter XLV, that adulation is like avarice. In Plutarch there is a book "How a flatterer may be told from a friend". Symmachus, book I, Letter 31: "Those who flatter continually are of broken faith." Ovid, Amores book III, elegy 8:

"Impious poisons lie hidden under sweet honey." An old author of a gloss on the capitulary of Charles the Great on the affairs of Italy calls flatterers "Placentini" (pleasers), as we noted in volume II of the Capitularies, p. 1043. (Baluze, lemma "Inaudientiam") · col 301 Inaudientiam. Codex Fuxensis, inobedientiam. Et tamen idem codex in Epistola XLII, pag. 56, habet, quae discordiosis et inaudientibus scandalum. Tertullianus in libro de Exhortatione Castitatis dixit obaudientiam.

"Inaudientiam" (refusal to listen). The Foix manuscript: "inobedientiam" (disobedience). And yet the same manuscript in Letter XLII, p. 56, has "which [is] a stumbling-block to the quarrelsome and those who refuse to listen". Tertullian in the book On the Exhortation to Chastity said "obaudientiam" (obedience).

(Baluze, lemma "III. — Non potui me solum") · col 301 III. — Non potui me solum. Ita Manutius et Rigaltius. At in libro meo veteri, in Gratianopolitano et in uno Bodleiano legitur, non puto me solum debere sententiam dare. Sic etiam in editione Morellii, nisi quod posuit potui pro puto.

III. — "Non potui me solum" (I could not [make] myself alone). So Manutius and Rigault. But in my old book, in the Grenoble manuscript and in one Bodleian one reads "non puto me solum debere sententiam dare" (I do not think I alone ought to give judgement). So too in Morel's edition, except that he put "potui" for "puto".

(Baluze, lemma "Locum suum") · col 301 Locum suum. Ita Pamelius et caeteri. Manutius edidit, hoc solum. Quo etiam modo legitur in codice Fuxensi. Sic etiam reperi scriptum fuisse in uno codice Vaticano.

"Locum suum" (his place). So Pamelius and the rest. Manutius printed "hoc solum" (this alone). So too it is read in the Foix manuscript. So also I found it had been written in one Vatican manuscript.

(Baluze, lemma "Sero") · col 302 Sero. Haec est lectio editionis Manutianae et codicis Gratianopolitani. Editio Morellii et unus Bodleianus, sorte. In meo, sorore, pro sorte, ut opinor.

"Sero" (late). This is the reading of Manutius's edition and of the Grenoble manuscript. Morel's edition and one Bodleian: "sorte" (by lot). In mine, "sorore" (sister), for "sorte", I think.

(Baluze, lemma "Ministros") · col 302 Ministros. Quamvis non dubitem quin haec lectio sit bona, admonere tamen debeo in codice Fuxensi, in quo, ut antea dixi, Epistola ista bis descripta est, constanter scriptum esse omnes viros. Quo etiam modo scriptum fuisse in Veronensi mihi constat. Sed alii libri veteres et editiones praeferunt ministros.

"Ministros" (ministers). Although I do not doubt that this reading is good, I must point out that in the Foix manuscript, in which, as I said before, this letter is copied twice, "omnes viros" (all men) is consistently written. I know it was so written in the Verona manuscript too. But the other old books and the editions show "ministros".

(Baluze, lemma "A divisione") · col 302 A divisione. Sic edidit Morellius pro eo quod editio Manutii habet, dictione. Sed in codice Latinii et in Veronensi, tum etiam in Fuxensi, scriptum est, a dictione. Meus confirmat editionem Morellii.

"A divisione" (from the division). So Morel printed in place of what Manutius's edition has, "dictione" (by the dictation). But in Latinius's manuscript and in the Verona, and also in the Foix, is written "a dictione". Mine confirms Morel's edition.

(Baluze, lemma "Mensurna") · col 302 Mensurna. Infra Epist. XXXIV, pag. 28, divisiones mensurnas aequalis quantitatibus partiantur. Rufinus lib. IV, cap. 28, centum quinquaginta denariis menstruae praestationis. Codex Fuxensis et Gratianopolitanus et editio Morellii mensurantium, meus mensuratantium.

"Mensurna" (monthly). Below, Letter XXXIV, p. 28: "let them share the monthly distributions in equal amounts". Rufinus, book IV, chapter 28: "with a hundred and fifty denarii of monthly allowance". The Foix and Grenoble manuscripts and Morel's edition: "mensurantium"; mine "mensuratantium".

(Baluze, lemma "Epist. XXIX") · col 302 Epist. XXIX — Tria istius Epistolae, quam debemus editioni Manutianae, exemplaria habui, unum ex bibliotheca Colbertina, quod fuit olim collegii Fuxensis, aliud ex mea, tertium ex urbe Gratianopolitana. Angli unum habuerunt ex Bodleiana.

Letter XXIX. — I had three copies of this letter, which we owe to Manutius's edition: one from the Colbert library, which once belonged to the College of Foix, another from my own, a third from the city of Grenoble. The English editors had one from the Bodleian.

(Baluze, lemma "Hypodiaconum") · col 302 Hypodiaconum. Postea in omnibus editionibus quae prodierunt post Manutianam additur fratres nostros. Quae verba, addita videlicet a Morellio, nos sustulimus ut superflua, quia non exstant in libris nostris veteribus. Et tamen in Gratianopolitano post hypodiaconum additur fratrem nostrum.

"Hypodiaconum" (subdeacon). After this, in all the editions that came out after Manutius's, "fratres nostros" (our brothers) is added. These words, evidently added by Morel, we have removed as superfluous, because they do not stand in our old books. And yet in the Grenoble manuscript "fratrem nostrum" (our brother) is added after "hypodiaconum".

(Baluze, lemma "Quorumdam conspirata") · col 302 Quorumdam conspirata. Nescio qua auctoritate Morellius addidit quorumdam prospecta temeritate. Nam, praeterquam quod vox prospecta istic necessaria non est, ea non exstat in editione Manutii, neque in ve- (continues)

"Quorumdam conspirata" (the conspiring [rashness] of certain persons). I do not know on what authority Morel added "quorumdam prospecta temeritate" (by the foreseen rashness of certain persons). For, besides the fact that the word "prospecta" is not needed there, it does not stand in Manutius's edition, nor in the ol[d] (continues)

(printed under page 146)