PL 5 · cols. 349–366

De Arnobio Afro notitia historica

Editors' preface

DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITIA HISTORICA.

HISTORICAL NOTICE CONCERNING ARNOBIUS THE AFRICAN.

SYNOPSIS.

I. Arnobius Siccae in Africa rhetor clarus sub Diocletiano. Ethnicae superstitioni addictus, divinitus ad christianam religionem vocatur.

I. Arnobius, a famous rhetor at Sicca in Africa under Diocletian. Given over to heathen superstition, he is called by God to the Christian religion.

Editors' notes and page, col. 349

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349

(printed under page 177)

(1) Caro enim Salvatori smanducata. Graeca hujus loci exhibet Allatius in Exercit. contra Creygthonum. p. 563. Οὔτε σὰρξ τοῦ Σωτῆρος τρωγομένη φθείρεται, οὔτε ἐξαναλίσκεται τὸ αἷμα πινόμενον, ἀλλ' ὁ τρώγων μὲν εἰς αὔξησιν θείων δυνάμεων αἴρεται· τὸ δὲ τρωγόμενόν ἐστιν ἀδαπάνητον, ἐπειδὴ τοῖς ἀδαπανήτου φύσεως λόγῳ τινὶ συγγενὲς ὑπάρχει καὶ ἀχώριστον. « Neque vero caro Salvatoris manducata corrumpitur, neque sanguis potatus consumitur : sed qui edit, divinis virtutibus augescit ; quod vero editur, consumi non potest : quoniam rei consumptibili naturae cognatum quodammodo est, minime ab ea separabile. » Eadem ex Allatio repetit Lequienius, loc. cit., p. 273.

"For the flesh of the Saviour, when eaten" [the misprint "smanducata" as printed]. Allatius gives the Greek of this passage in his Exercitationes against Creyghton, p. 563: "Neither is the Saviour's flesh corrupted when it is eaten, nor is the blood used up when it is drunk; but he who eats is raised up to an increase of divine powers, while what is eaten cannot be spent, since by some principle it is akin to, and inseparable from, that which is of an unspendable nature." [Then the Latin version:] "Nor is the Saviour's flesh corrupted when eaten, nor the blood consumed when drunk; but he who eats grows in divine powers, while what is eaten cannot be consumed, since it is in some way akin to a thing of consumable nature [so printed, "consumptibili"; the Greek has "unspendable"] and in no way separable from it." Lequien repeats the same from Allatius, at the place cited, p. 273.

(printed under page 177) (2) Albertin., de Sacram. Eucharist., lib. II, p. 400.

Albertinus, On the Sacrament of the Eucharist, book II, p. 400.

(printed under page 177) (3) Cave, Hist. litter., t. I, 135.

Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, 135.

(printed under page 177)

Page

running head: 349 DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITI[A] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹stupida mente nugati sunt›; B ‹est : ex terra similiter exstitit›; C ‹divinitatis. Deinde subjungit›; D ‹corpore et sanguine ejus facta est›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "DE ARNOBIO AFRO / NOTITIA HISTORICA." (complete on the page, read across both foot images) stands below the rule after "et sanguis,"; it stands above the unit's start (the unit begins under the band, per the boundary) and is not set here; "SYNOPSIS." is centred across the page, so it is set as a caption; editors' matter set: synopsis item ‹I. Arnobius Siccae in Africa›; the D marker sits between "quae in" and "corpore et sanguine", placement approximate; the column ends mid-sentence at "sanguis,"
other: a full-width band stands across cols 349/350 in mid-page: the 2 paragraph(s) above it in col 350 are set here, after the 3 above it in col 349 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
other: the column opens with the end of the previous work (another unit); not set here: the unit begins at SYNOPSIS.
running head: 349 DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITIA HISTORICA. 350
marginal letters: A ‹stupida mente nugati sunt›; B ‹est : ex terra similiter exstitit›; C ‹divinitatis. Deinde subjungit›; D ‹nem patris habeat› (all beside the previous dissertation's text, above this unit)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:350

II. Locus hieronymianus de Arnobio expenditur.

II. The passage of Jerome concerning Arnobius is examined.

III. Quo tempore libros VII adversus gentes conscripserit,

III. At what time he wrote the VII books against the nations

Editors' notes and page, col. 350

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: corrumpitur› · call in col 350

(printed under page 177; the call stands above the full-width band, in the previous work's text, which is not in this unit; the note's text is set under n349)

(2) ‹anchor: inficiatus est› · call in col 350

(printed under page 177; the call stands above the full-width band, in the previous work's text, which is not in this unit; the note's text is set under n349)

(3) ‹anchor: abunde constat› · call in col 350

(printed under page 177; the call stands above the full-width band, in the previous work's text, which is not in this unit; the note's text is set under n349)

Page

running head: …O AFRO NOTITIA HISTORICA. 350
marginal letters: A qui illud vinum, immortalitatem; B Allatio, Zacharia Cretensi; C penes Turrianum exigui judicii; D tatus consumitur (in the footnotes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the 2 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band belong to the previous work (another unit) and are not set in this unit (cut on receipt); the unit's text in this column is synopsis items II and III below the band ("SYNOPSIS." is set once, under col 349); "conscri-" at the column foot is joined whole here, its tail standing at the top of col 351
running head: 349 DE ARNOBIO AFRO NOTITIA HISTORICA. 350
marginal letters: A ‹qui illud vinum, immortalitatem›; B ‹Allatio, Zacharia Cretensi›; C ‹penes Turrianum exigui judicii›; D ‹tatus consumitur : sed qui edit› (all beside the previous dissertation's text, above this unit)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:351

inquiritur. Id vero contigisse anno CCCIV aut insequente, ex ipso auctore ostenditur.

is inquired into. That this happened in the year 304 or the following one is shown from the author himself.

IV. Operis arnobiani pretium exponitur. Multo luculentius ethnicam superstitionem impugnasse, quam christianam veritatem docuisse auctor existimatur.

IV. The value of Arnobius's work is set forth. The author is judged to have attacked pagan superstition much more brilliantly than he taught Christian truth.

V. De praecipuis operis editionibus. Praestantior Lugduno-Batava, quae tamen naevis mendisque haud caret. Quid operae in nostram adornandam collatum.

V. On the principal editions of the work. The Leiden edition is the more excellent, though it is not free from blemishes and errors. What labour has been spent on preparing ours.

I. Discimus ab Hieronymo (Hieron., de Vir. illustr., cap. LXXIX), Arnobium Siccae, quae Africae mediterraneae urbs erat, sub Diocletiano principe florentissime rhetoricam docuisse : quo quidem tempore idolorum cultui se fuisse addictum ipsemet deplorat his verbis : « Venerabar, o caecitas, nuper simulacra.... Nunc doctore tanto (Christo) in vias veritatis inductus, omnia ista quae sint, scio : digna de dignis sentio (Arnob., adv. Gent., lib. I, cap. 13). » Quomodo autem acciderit ut Christianam religionem amplecteretur, idem Hieronymus alibi sic tradit : « Arnobius rhetor clarus in Africa..., cum in civitate Siccae ad declamandum juvenes erudiret, et adhuc ethnicus ad credulitatem somniis compelleretur, neque ab episcopo impetraret fidem quam semper impugnaverat, elucubravit adversus pristinam religionem luculentissimos libros ; et tandem velut quibusdam obsidibus pietatis foedus impetravit (Hieron., in Chron. ad ann. MMCCCXLII, pag. 181). Tanto igitur lumine donatus fuit Arnobius, quin et somniis divinitus immissis adeo perculsus, ut pristinam impietatem ejurarit verumque Dei cultum fuerit amplexus. Docet enim ille, Christum « non per vana insomnia, sed per purae speciem simplicitatis apparere (Arnob., adv. Gent., lib. I, cap. XVI), adhuc suo tempore consuevisse : expertus id nimirum, inquit Dodwellus, ipsemet scripsit auctor : ut propterea vere dixerit se ab ipso Christo « doctore tanto in vias veritatis fuisse inductum (Dodw., Dissert. Iren. II, § 57, pag. 199). » Quid autem posthac egerit Arnobius, quove anno e vivis excesserit, plane incompertum habemus.

I. We learn from Jerome (Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 79) that Arnobius taught rhetoric with the greatest distinction at Sicca, which was a city of inland Africa, under the emperor Diocletian; at which time, as he himself laments, he had been given over to the worship of idols, in these words: « I used to venerate, O blindness, images until lately.... Now, led into the ways of truth by so great a teacher (Christ), I know what all these things are; I think worthy things of the worthy (Arnobius, Against the Nations, bk 1, ch. 13). » But how it came about that he embraced the Christian religion, the same Jerome relates elsewhere thus: « Arnobius, a famous rhetorician in Africa..., while he was training young men in declamation in the city of Sicca, and, still a pagan, was being driven to belief by dreams, and could not obtain from the bishop the faith which he had always attacked, composed by lamplight most brilliant books against his former religion; and at length, as if by certain hostages, he obtained the covenant of piety (Jerome, in the Chronicle at the year 2342, p. 181). Arnobius was therefore endowed with so great a light, and indeed so struck by dreams sent by God, that he abjured his former impiety and embraced the true worship of God. For he teaches that Christ « was accustomed, still in his own time, to appear not through vain dreams but in the form of pure simplicity (Arnobius, Against the Nations, bk 1, ch. 16): the author, says Dodwell, plainly wrote this having experienced it himself, so that he could therefore truly say that by Christ Himself, « so great a teacher, he had been led into the ways of truth (Dodwell, Dissertations on Irenaeus 2, § 57, p. 199). » But what Arnobius did after this, or in what year he departed from the living, we hold to be entirely unknown.

II. Neque vero ex Hieronymi verbis modo recitatis quisquam arguat, ad annum saltem CCCXXVI, vitam produxisse auctorem nostrum, propterea scilicet quod illa proxime scripserit sanctus Doctor post notata Constantini vicennalia, eodem Christi anno CCCXXVI celebrata : siquidem ex iisdem verbis Hieronymianis colligendum esset, eo ipso anno conversum fuisse ad Christi fidem Arnobium, adeoque paulo ante suos conscripsisse libros adversus gentes, quibus velut quibusdam obsidibus pietatis foedus impetrarit : cum contra manifestum sit ex eodem Arnobio, ut mox videbimus, neque obscure praeterea ex ipso Hieronymo appareat (Hieron., de Vir. ill., loc. cit.), eos libros imperante Diocletiano fuisse ab auctore perscriptos. Quo igitur Hieronymus sibi constet, observandum interest cum viro doctissimo (Nourr., Appar. ad Bibl. patrum, tom. II, pag. 283), eo Chronici Eusebiani loco non indicasse veram Arnobii aetatem doctorem maximum. Nam in Chronico post notata ab Eusebio

II. Nor indeed should anyone argue from the words of Jerome just recited that our author prolonged his life at least to the year 326, on the ground, namely, that the holy Doctor wrote them immediately after recording the vicennalia of Constantine, celebrated in the same year of Christ 326; for from those same words of Jerome it would have to be inferred that Arnobius was converted to the faith of Christ in that very year, and so had written his books against the nations a little before, by which, as if by certain hostages, he obtained the covenant of piety; whereas, on the contrary, it is manifest from the same Arnobius, as we shall soon see, and it also appears not obscurely from Jerome himself (Jerome, On Illustrious Men, loc. cit.), that those books were written by the author in the reign of Diocletian. In order, therefore, that Jerome may be consistent with himself, it is important to observe, with a most learned man (Nourry, Apparatus to the Library of the Fathers, vol. 2, p. 283), that at that place of Eusebius's Chronicle the greatest of doctors did not indicate the true date of Arnobius. For in the Chronicle, after there had been recorded by Eusebius

Editors' notes and page, col. 351

Page

running head: 351 DE ARNOBIO AFR (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹pserit, inquiritur›; B ‹Nunc doctore tanto›; C ‹perculsus, ut pristinam›; D ‹Constantini vicennalia›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: whole column is editors' matter (preliminary dissertation on Arnobius): end of the italic chapter summary (‹pserit, inquiritur›, IV ‹Operis arnobiani pretium›, V ‹De praecipuis operis editionibus›) and sections I ‹Discimus ab Hieronymo› and II ‹Neque vero ex Hieronymi›; column begins with the word fragment "pserit" broken from the previous column (probably [conscri]pserit); the quotations opened at « non per vana insomnia and « doctore tanto are closed as printed (the first has no closing mark); column ends mid-sentence at "ab Eusebio"; italics not marked

PL 5:352

Constantini vicennalia, ipse Hieronymus statim subdit : « Huc usque historiam scribit Eusebius, Pamphili martyris contubernalis, cui nos ista subjecimus. » Tum continenter : Arnobius, inquit, rhetor, etc. Ne igitur Eusebii narratio abrumperetur, Hieronymus verba de Arnobio, cujus nulla mentio apud illum episcopum caesariensem, superioribus Eusebianis suffecerit : cum jam postea suam de eodem scriptore sententiam in proprio de Viris illustribus opere manifestam ediderit.

the vicennalia of Constantine, Jerome himself immediately adds: "Up to this point Eusebius, the companion of the martyr Pamphilus, writes the history, to which we have appended these things." Then straight on: "Arnobius," he says, "a rhetorician," etc. So, lest the narrative of Eusebius be broken off, Jerome would have put the words about Arnobius, of whom there is no mention in that bishop of Caesarea, in after the preceding Eusebian matter; whereas later he set out his own judgement on the same writer plainly in his own work On Illustrious Men.

III. Jam vero propius inspiciendum, quo demum tempore Arnobius libros VII adversus gentes conscripserit. In ejus itaque opere tres notationes comparent, quarum duae chronologicae, tertia vero historica ; ex quibus quod quaerimus, definiri, utcumque valeat. Et primum quidem sic loquitur auctor : « Trecenti sunt anni ferme, minus vel plus aliquid, ex quo coepimus esse christiani, et terrarum in orbe censeri » (Arnob., lib. I adv. Gent., cap. 6). Ubi trecenti anni, ut cum Dodwello loquamur (Dodw., Dissert. II Iren., § 56, pag. 197), si a XLII Augusti pro illorum temporum chronologia supputentur, desinent in annum aerae vulgaris CCXCVIII. Deinceps vero Arnobiana isthaec nobis occurrunt : « Ae⟨t⟩atis urbs Roma cujus esse in annalibus indicitur? Annos ducit quinquaginta et mille, aut non multum ab his minus » (Arnob., lib. II, cap. 34). Anno autem Urbis conditae ML juxta putationem varronianam respondet aerae vulgaris anno CCXCVII juxta capitolinam vero incidit in annum Christi CCXCVIII, ut proinde huc usque fere sibi concors videatur auctor. At cum priore in loco addat, minus vel plus aliquid; in posteriore autem, aut non multum ab his minus : hinc dubitatio suboritur, num utrobique calculos accurate posuerit.

III. Now we must look more closely at the time at which Arnobius finally composed the seven books Against the Nations. In his work, then, three indications appear, of which two are chronological and the third historical; from these what we are seeking may be determined, so far as it can be. And first the author speaks thus: "It is about three hundred years, somewhat less or more, since we began to be Christians and to be counted in the world" (Arnobius, Against the Nations, book 1, ch. 6). Here the three hundred years, to speak with Dodwell (Dodwell, Dissertations on Irenaeus 2, § 56, p. 197), if they are reckoned from the 42nd year of Augustus according to the chronology of those times, end in the year 298 of the common era. Next, these words of Arnobius meet us: "Of what age is the city of Rome said in the annals to be? It reckons a thousand and fifty years, or not much less than these" (Arnobius, book 2, ch. 34). Now the year 1050 from the founding of the City corresponds, according to the Varronian reckoning, to the year 297 of the common era, but according to the Capitoline it falls in the year of Christ 298, so that thus far the author seems nearly consistent with himself. But since in the former place he adds "somewhat less or more", and in the latter "or not much less than these", a doubt arises from this whether in both places he set down his calculations accurately.

Posthabito itaque utroque charactere chronologico, ad alium historicum qui certior esse videtur, propterea recurrendum. Sic igitur prosequitur auctor : « Nostra quidem scripta cur ignibus meruerunt dari? cur immaniter conventicula dirui (Id., lib. IV, cap. 48)? Quae sane verba scripserit Arnobius post annum CCCIII, quo Diocletiani persecutio saevire coepit. « Tunc enim, inquit Eusebius, Aedes sacras solo aequari ac funditus subverti, sacros divinarum Scripturarum libros in medio foro concremari, oculis nostris vidimus (Euseb., Hist. eccles., lib. VIII, cap. 8). » Atque hanc veriorem sententiam de tempore quo scribebat Arnobius, primus omnium amplexus est Baronius (Baron., ad ann. 302, § 17), quem deinde sunt assectati Dodwellus (Dodw., loc. cit.), Pagius (Pag., ad ann. 302, § 15) aliique, licet eam quodammodo infirmare aggressus sit Tillemontius (Tillem., Mem., tom. IV, pag. 767, not.). Quamvis autem in boc postremo loco certius loqui videatur Arnobius, non est tamen cur illum censeamus cum nonnullis viris eruditis, in suis reliquis putationibus haud sibi constare. Neque enim demum uno calami ductu integros septem suos libros exaraverit auctor. Adeoque duos priores perscribens, annos Urbis conditae primum ; deinde vero annos aerae christianae, plus aliquid , aut

Setting aside, therefore, both chronological indications, we must for that reason have recourse to the other, the historical one, which seems to be more certain. The author, then, proceeds thus: "Why have our writings deserved to be given to the flames? Why our meeting-places to be cruelly torn down (Id., book 4, ch. 48)? Arnobius would surely have written these words after the year 303, in which the persecution of Diocletian began to rage. "For then," says Eusebius, "we saw with our own eyes the sacred buildings levelled to the ground and overturned from their foundations, and the sacred books of the divine Scriptures burnt in the middle of the market-place" (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 8, ch. 8). And this truer opinion about the time at which Arnobius was writing was first of all embraced by Baronius (Baronius, at the year 302, § 17), whom Dodwell (Dodwell, loc. cit.), Pagi (Pagi, at the year 302, § 15) and others afterwards followed, although Tillemont undertook in some measure to weaken it (Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. 4, p. 767, note). But although in this last place Arnobius seems to speak more certainly, there is nevertheless no reason why we should judge, with some learned men, that he is not consistent with himself in his other reckonings. For the author will not, after all, have written out his seven books entire with one stroke of the pen. And so, in writing out the first two, first the years from the founding of the City, and then the years of the Christian era, "somewhat more", or

Editors' notes and page, col. 352

Page

running head: ARNOBIO AFRO (start of the running head cut off at the image's left edge)
marginal letters: A Constantini vicennalia; B Et primum quidem sic; C sti CCXCVIII, ut proinde; D mus (Euseb., Hist. eccles.
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (Constantini vicennalia) and ends mid-sentence (aut); editors' matter set: the preliminary dissertation on Arnobius, from "Constantini vicennalia" through § III; "Ae⟨t⟩atis": the t is damaged in the type; "boc" may be a broken h rather than a true misprint (UNSURE); the quotation opened at "Nostra quidem" has no closing mark printed; text of the left column (col. 351) visible at the image edge was not set

PL 5:353

non multo minus probe putarit: accedens autem ad librum IV, quo ⟨f⟩ervebat diocletiana persecutio, notis certioribus scriptionis suae tempus nobis prodiderit. Quibus positis, anno demum CCCIV, aut forte insequente, integrum suum opus Arnobius perfecisse videtur.

not much less", he may properly have reckoned; but when he comes to book 4, in which the Diocletianic persecution was raging, he has disclosed to us the time of his writing by surer marks. These things being laid down, Arnobius seems to have completed his whole work at last in the year 304, or perhaps in the following one.

IV. Nunc vero de operis Arnobiani pretio loqui placet cum viro erudito, in hanc ferme sententiam edisserente: « Reconditae hoc sapientiae promptuarium quo insana gentium religio exploditur, vera confirmatur, omni laude majus est. Quis enim eloquentiae nervos, rationum pondera, exquisitas sententias cum pervolvit, non abripitur in amorem et desiderium tanti auctoris? Ubique triumphat florentissima ejus dictio, atque ipsi adeo gentiles suo jugulantur gladio. Calamus ille simul omnes tacentes gentilium deos perfodit, confecit. Verbo, Arnobius Afer adversus gentes, abstrusae eruditionis auctor, subtilis, disertus, ingenio et facundia praestans, ethnicismi debellator fortissimus » (Praefat. ad Arnob., edit. Lugd. Bat., 1651). Haec ille.

IV. Now, as to the worth of the Arnobian work, it is fitting to speak with a learned man who discourses to roughly this effect: "This storehouse of recondite wisdom, by which the insane religion of the nations is hissed off the stage and the true one is confirmed, is greater than all praise. For who, when he turns over the sinews of its eloquence, the weight of its reasonings, its exquisite sentences, is not carried away into love and longing for so great an author? Everywhere his most flourishing diction triumphs, and the gentiles themselves are actually slain with their own sword. That pen has pierced through and finished off all the gods of the gentiles together, who are silent. In a word, Arnobius the African, against the nations, an author of abstruse erudition, subtle, eloquent, outstanding in talent and fluency, the most valiant vanquisher of heathenism" (Preface to Arnobius, Leiden edition, 1651). Thus he.

Quandoquidem vero Arnobius in suis septem libris conscribendis duplex sibi pensum absolvendum proposuerit, nimirum ut et falsam gentilium et veram christianorum esse religionem evinceret: multo luculentius ethnicae superstitionis impietatem impugnasse, quam christianae fidei veritatem ostendisse visus est. Hinc sanctus Hieronymus: « Ego, » inquit (Hieron., epist. LXII, al. LXXVI, ad Tranquill., § 2), « Origenem propter eruditionem sic interdum legendum arbitror, quomodo Tertullianum, Novatum, Arnobium, Apollinarium et nonnullos ecclesiasticos scriptores, graecos pariter et latinos; ut bona eorum eligamus, vitemusque contraria, juxta Apostolum dicentem: Omnia probate; quod bonum est, tenete (I Thess., V, 21). » Caeterum non adeo incomperta fuerunt Arnobio christianae religionis mysteria, quin recte de summis fidei capitibus disputarit; ut adversus nonnullos morosiores homines luculenter demonstrarunt viri doctissimi, Nourryus (Nourr., Appar. ad Bibl. patrum, tom. II, pag. 290, 296 et seq.), Maranus (Maran., Divin. D. N. J. C., lib. III, cap. 4, § 5, et lib. IV, cap. 22, § 1, pag. 326, 534), alii quos proinde consulere operae pretium fuerit.

But since Arnobius, in composing his seven books, set himself a twofold task to be accomplished, namely to prove both that the religion of the gentiles is false and that that of the Christians is true, he appears to have attacked the impiety of heathen superstition much more brilliantly than he showed the truth of the Christian faith. Hence Saint Jerome says (Jerome, Letter 62, otherwise 76, to Tranquillinus, § 2): "I think that Origen should sometimes be read on account of his erudition in the same way as Tertullian, Novatus, Arnobius, Apollinarius and some ecclesiastical writers, Greek and Latin alike, so that we may choose what is good in them and avoid the contrary, according to the Apostle who says: Prove all things; hold fast what is good (1 Thess. 5:21)." For the rest, the mysteries of the Christian religion were not so unknown to Arnobius that he did not argue correctly about the chief heads of the faith; as most learned men have brilliantly demonstrated against certain rather captious persons: Nourry (Nourry, Apparatus to the Library of the Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 290, 296 and following), Maran (Maran, The Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, book 3, ch. 4, § 5, and book 4, ch. 22, § 1, pp. 326, 534), and others, whom it would therefore be worth the trouble to consult.

V. Sed ut de auctore demum ejusque opere sermonem concludamus, ex uno superstite ms. codice bibliothecae vaticanae, octingentis et amplius abhinc annis eleganti charactere exarato; qui postea in regiam bibliothecam parisiensem transiit, curis Fausti Sabaei prodiit operis Arnobiani princeps romana editio anno 1542. Hanc vero insecutae sunt complures, virorum eruditorum, Canteri, Ursini, Elmenhorstii, Stewechii, Heraldi aliorumque studio expolitae. Omnium emendatissima existimatur, quae Lugduni Batavorum, anno 1651, ex recensione viri celeberrimi evulgata est, adjectis praeterea integris omnium commentariis: ad quam postmodum exacta fuit parisiensis anni 1666. Priorii et selectis aliorum notis adornata, operibusque Cypriani subjecta. Quamvis

5. But to conclude at last our discourse about the author and his work: from the one surviving manuscript codex of the Vatican library, written out in an elegant hand more than eight hundred years ago, which afterwards passed into the royal library of Paris, the Roman first edition of the Arnobian work came out through the care of Faustus Sabaeus in the year 1542. This was followed by several others, polished by the zeal of learned men, Canter, Orsini, Elmenhorst, Stewech, Hérault and others. The most correct of all is reckoned to be the one published at Leiden in the year 1651 from the recension of a most celebrated man, with the complete commentaries of all being added besides; to which the Paris edition of the year 1666 was afterwards conformed. Adorned with the notes of Priorius and selected notes of others, and appended to the works of Cyprian. Although

Editors' notes and page, col. 353

Page

running head: 353 NOTITIA HISTORICA (cut off at the image edge; numeral faintly printed, reads like 355)
marginal letters: A non multo minus probe putarit; B ejus dictio, atque ipsi adeo gentiles; C (Hieron., epist. LXII, al. LXXVI; D V. Sed ut de auctore demum
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter set throughout (the historical notice on Arnobius: non multo minus probe putarit); fervebat has a damaged first letter; notis printed with a wide space (no tis), joined; pervolvit faintly printed; date 1542 and the full stop after 1666 left as printed; column ends mid-sentence at Quamvis

PL 5:354

autem editio Lugduno-Batava reliquis enimvero praestantior jure habeatur, haud paucis tamen naevis typothetarum vitio laborat, quin et alicubi verba integra penitus omissa in ea deprehendas; quibus proinde mendis aliisque adhuc gravioribus scatet, quae illam expressit parisiensis.

however, the Leiden edition may indeed rightly be held superior to the rest, yet it suffers from not a few blemishes through the fault of the typesetters, and you may even find in it here and there whole words entirely omitted; with these faults, therefore, and with others still graver, the Paris edition which reproduced it teems.

Ductore itaque potissimum Nourryo v. cl. qui libris arnobianis emaculandis illustrandisque operae plurimum contulit (Nourr., Appar. ad Bibl. patrum, tom. II, pag. 257-570), editioni nostrae perpoliendae incubuimus, selectioribus eruditorum notis ad Arnobii textum imprimis emendandum comparatis, nostras qualescumque intexehtes. Deinde quo auctoris lectio utilior in posterum contingeret, simulque taedium lectorum ac laborem allevaremus, arnobianos libros qui hactenus conjuncto continuatoque sermone prodierunt, nunc primum in capita seu sectiones distribuimus; quarum analysim praeterea in indice operi adjecto subjecimus. — Hactenus Gallandius. Sed jam de singulis editionibus cum Schoennemann videamus.

With the most distinguished Nourry, therefore, as our chief guide, who devoted a very great deal of labour to correcting and elucidating the books of Arnobius (Nourry, Apparatus to the Library of the Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 257-570), we applied ourselves to polishing our edition, having gathered the choicer notes of the learned chiefly for emending the text of Arnobius, and weaving in our own, such as they are. Then, so that the reading of the author might in future prove more profitable, and at the same time that we might relieve the weariness and labour of readers, we have now for the first time divided into chapters or sections the books of Arnobius, which until now have come out as one joined and continuous discourse; and we have moreover placed an analysis of these in the index appended to the work. — Thus far Galland. But now let us look with Schoennemann at the individual editions.

SAECULO DECIMO SEXTO.

In the sixteenth century.

1543.

Romae apud Franc. Priscianen. Florentinum, in-f°. Arnobii Disputationum adversus gentes libri octo, nunc primum in lucem editi. — In fine: Romae in aedibus Francisci Priscianensis, MDXLII.

Rome, at the house of Francesco Priscianese, the Florentine, in folio. Eight books of the Disputations of Arnobius against the nations, now for the first time brought to light. — At the end: Rome, in the house of Francesco Priscianese, 1542.

Princeps haec Arnobii editio debetur Fausto Sabaeo Brixiano, bibliothecae vaticanae tunc temporis custode, homine erudito et insigni imprimis versificatore, qui Francisco I, Gallorum regi, eam inscripsit epistola data Romae et bibl. palatina, kalend. septembris MDXLIII. Ex hac nonnulla delibare in lectorum commodum juvat. Intelleximus enim a multis quidem de hac editione verba esse facta, ipsam autem paucissimis tantum visam, quod variis passim erroribus ansam dedit. Praecipuum, quod cuiquam animadversatione dignum videri possit, profecto hoc est, quod jure belli suum esse Arnobium dicit, quem scilicet e media barbarie non sine dispendio et discrimine eripuerit. Quae si attentius aliquando perpendas et ea simul memoria reputes, quae de vita rebusque nostri tradita legimus, id innuere velle videtur, se Arnobii aliquemcumque unicum, ut postea apparuit, codicem in terris remotis, forte in germanicis vel belgicis oris deprehendisse ac in vaticanam bibl. intulisse. Nam quod ad primam hujus conjecturae partem attinet, saepius in versiculis suis populos truces et feros, mediamque barbariem crepat, unde summo cum discrimine et labore et suis adeo sumptibus codices antiquos protulerit, quorum exquirendorum causa a Leone papa et ejus deinceps successoribus missus esset. Eumdem autem in vaticanam ab eo fuisse repositum, tum officii, quod ipsi incumbebat, rationes suadent, tum vero expressis Fulvii Ursini, ipsius quoque Arnobii editoris, verbis, epistola ante romanam alteram ad Gregorium XIII dedicatione inspersis, confirmatur, quibus Arnobium primum e vaticana bibl.

This first edition of Arnobius is owed to Faustus Sabaeus of Brescia, at that time keeper of the Vatican library, a learned man and above all a distinguished versifier, who dedicated it to Francis I, King of the French, in a letter dated at Rome and the Palatine library, on the kalends of September 1543. It is worthwhile to excerpt a few things from this for the convenience of readers. For we have learned that a great deal has indeed been said by many about this edition, but that the edition itself has been seen by very few, which has given occasion to various errors here and there. The chief point which might seem to anyone worthy of attention is surely this, that he says Arnobius is his by right of war, since, that is, he snatched him out of the midst of barbarism not without cost and danger. If you weigh these words more attentively at some time, and at the same time recall to memory what we read handed down about the life and affairs of our man, he seems to wish to hint that he had found some single manuscript of Arnobius, as afterwards appeared, in distant lands, perhaps in German or Belgian regions, and had brought it into the Vatican library. For as regards the first part of this conjecture, in his little verses he often prates of fierce and savage peoples, and of the midst of barbarism, from which with the greatest danger and labour, and indeed at his own expense, he brought forth ancient manuscripts, for the seeking out of which he had been sent by Pope Leo and his successors after him. That this same manuscript, moreover, was deposited by him in the Vatican, both the reasons of the office which was incumbent upon him persuade us, and it is confirmed above all by the express words of Fulvius Ursinus, himself also an editor of Arnobius, scattered through the letter of dedication to Gregory XIII prefixed to the second Roman edition, in which Arnobius first from the Vatican library

Editors' notes and page, col. 354

Page

running head: [NOT]ITIA HISTORICA. (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹autem editio Lugduno-Batava›; B ‹ctorum ac laborem allevaremus›; C ‹Brixiano, bibliothecae vaticanae›; D ‹aliquemcumque unicum, ut postea›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: year heading read as 1543; the final digit could also be read as 5. "In fine" appears as "Iu fine" (probably a damaged n); set as In. "reputes" has a t that looks like an l; set as reputes. "discrimine" in the italic passage has a damaged i. The text ends mid-sentence at "e vaticana bibl."; no word is split at the column break. Editors' matter set: Galland's account of his own edition, through "Hactenus Gallandius", followed by Schoennemann's notice of the editions, beginning "Sed jam de singulis editionibus"; the whole column is editors' prose. The left-column fragments belong to col. 353 and are not set.

PL 5:355

in lucem prodiisse testatur. Jam fuit aliquando Ludovici Carrionis haec opinio, omnium deinceps doctorum hominum assensu comprobata, codicem Arnobii, qui in bibliotheca regia parisiensi extat, eum ipsum esse, ex quo Sabaeum eum luci daret, quod, quae sit in romana prima librorum illorum publicatione paginarum aliquot in alienum locum transpositio, tandem hoc in libro esse constet. Unde suspicatur codicem hunc una eum textu typis per Priscianensem ex scripto Francisco oblatum fuisse. Quod si recte ille conjecisse putandus est, ut probabile sit quoque hoc, quod alterius romanae curator Fulv. Ursinus codicis, quo uteretur, mentionem nullam facit; jussu pontificis Pauli III hoc factum esse oportet. Certe codex regius ex omni inde tempore pro unico habitus, et tamquam tutissima critices arnobianae regula, dignus judicatus est, qui iterum atque iterum a viris doctis excuteretur. Sed ad Sabaeum redeamus. Is igitur ita epistolam nuncupatoriam exorditur: « Jamdudum bonarum artium studiosi, qui me non vulgari amore prosequuntur, quotidianis expostulationibus et pene convicio infestarunt, quod cum studio litterarum et credulitati nostrae divinae suffragari possem et deberem, in dies moras moris connecterem. In causa erat, quod Arnobium pristinae religionis—eversorem supprimerem et mihi vindicarem. Contra ego inferebam ipsum variis et multiplicibus mendis atque erroribus refertissimum, et multum mutatum ab illo qui fuerat quondam ora doctorum hominum subterfugere et rubore suffundi. Tum illi—omnem operam et studium in unum convenientes adhibuere, ut—integer et abstersus—in publicum prodiret: et quia ejus curatio in longum protrahebatur (difficile enim erat multos diversis negotiis praepeditos ad horam praescriptam invenire et convenire), Hieronymus Ferrarius et Franciscus Priscianensis, viri doctissimi et ingenii et judicii perspicacissimi, emendandi et imprimendi Arnobium provinciam susceperunt; et ita feliciter sunt assecuti, ut illum a variis et enormibus vitiis atque erroribus vindicarint: tum elegantibus et pulcherrimis typis impressum in stadium produxerint, me vero a calumniis et molestiis absolverint. » Haec ille. Ex quibus facile unusquisque componere potest, quae diversa et sibi repugnantia passim a diversis scripta de bac editione inveniet, quibusque refellendis operam navare nec vacat nec lubet. Hoc addamus, editionem hanc typorum et chartae elegantia esse splendidissimam. Unde omnino miramur cum purpurato Brixiae litteratae auctore (t. II, p. 192), hominem cui nil frequentius in ore, quam: Langueo et esurio, sumptus ad amplam eam nitidamque editionem suppeditare potuisse. Hoc enim diserte

came forth into the light, as he testifies. Now there was once this opinion of Louis Carrion, approved thereafter by the assent of all learned men: that the codex of Arnobius which exists in the royal library of Paris is that very one from which Sabaeus brought it to light, because, whatever transposition of some pages to a wrong place there is in the first Roman publication of those books, it is at length established that it is in this book. Whence he conjectures that this codex, together with the text printed in type, was presented through Priscianensis, according to a written record, to Francis. But if he is to be thought to have conjectured rightly, so that this too is probable, since Fulvius Ursinus, the editor of the other Roman edition, makes no mention of the codex which he used, this must have been done by order of Pope Paul III. Certainly the royal codex, held from that time onwards as the only one, and as the surest rule of Arnobian criticism, was judged worthy to be examined again and again by learned men. But let us return to Sabaeus. He, then, begins his dedicatory epistle thus: "For a long time now the students of the good arts, who pursue me with no common love, have assailed me with daily complaints and almost with reproach, because, though I could and ought to support both the study of letters and our divine belief, I was linking delays to delays from day to day. The reason was that I was suppressing Arnobius—the overthrower of the former religion—and keeping him to myself. I, on the contrary, replied that he was crammed full of various and manifold faults and errors, and much changed from what he had once been, and that he shunned the faces of learned men and was suffused with blushing. Then they—coming together as one, applied all their effort and zeal, so that he—whole and cleansed—might come forth in public: and because the care of him was being drawn out at length (for it was difficult to find and bring together at an appointed hour many men hindered by various business), Hieronymus Ferrarius and Franciscus Priscianensis, most learned men and most keen-sighted both in talent and in judgement, undertook the task of emending and printing Arnobius; and they succeeded so happily that they freed him from various and enormous faults and errors: then they brought him forth into the arena printed in elegant and most beautiful type, and released me from calumnies and annoyances." Thus he. From which anyone can easily put together the various and self-contradictory things he will find written here and there by various people about this edition, and to refuting which we have neither the leisure nor the wish to devote our effort. Let us add this, that this edition is most splendid in the elegance of its type and paper. Whence we altogether wonder, with the purple-clad author of the Brixia litterata (vol. 2, p. 192), that a man in whose mouth nothing was more frequent than "I languish and I hunger" could have supplied the expenses for that ample and handsome edition. For this expressly

Editors' notes and page, col. 355

Footnotes

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

(printed under page 180) (1) In emendatt., lib. I, c. 9, fol. 18, ed. Paris., 1585, in-4°. Quae in Scaligeranis (ed. a Cologne, 1695, in-8°, p. 35) super hoc Arnobii codice leguntur, ea optimus auctor nec curiose satis commentatus esse, nec qui describeret, recte legisse videtur.

In the Emendationes, book I, ch. 9, fol. 18, Paris edition, 1585, quarto. What is read in the Scaligerana (Cologne edition, 1695, octavo, p. 35) about this manuscript of Arnobius, that excellent author seems neither to have set down with enough care, nor did the man who copied it seem to have read it correctly.

(printed under page 180)

(2) ‹anchor: Langueo et esurio› · call in col 355

(printed under page 180) (2) Vide quotquot ille ex epigrammatibus protulit exempla.

See the many examples he has brought forward from the epigrams.

(printed under page 180)

Page

running head: 355 DE ARNOBIO AFR (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹in lucem prodiisse testatur›; B ‹regius ex omni inde tempore›; C ‹fugere et rubore suffundi›; D ‹componere potest, quae diversa›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:356

affirmatur in privilegio a Paulo III, ipsi concesso et aliquot a limine paginis impresso, in quo typothetae errore accidit, ut anni nota falso MDLXII loco XLII (Pontificatus Pauli anno octavo) exscriberetur. Hujus editionis exemplaria tria, unum cum emendationibus et variis lectionibus manu Jac. Dalechampii exaratis, alterum cum notis et emendationibus a Nic. Rigaltio exscriptis, tertium cum glossario Francisci Pithoei et indice rerum et verborum, necnon restitutionibus et conjecturis marginalibus Jo. Passeratii mss. extant in biblioth. regia parisiensi. Vide Cat., t. I, p. 367.

is affirmed in the privilege granted to him by Paul III and printed on some of the opening pages, in which it happened by the compositor's error that the year was wrongly written MDLXII instead of XLII (in the eighth year of Paul's pontificate). Three copies of this edition, one with emendations and variant readings written in the hand of Jac. Dalechamp, the second with notes and emendations copied out by Nic. Rigault, the third with the glossary of François Pithou and an index of matters and words, as well as the restorations and marginal conjectures of Jo. Passerat, are extant in manuscript in the royal library at Paris. See the Catalogue, vol. I, p. 367.

1546.

Basileae, apud Frobenium, in-8°, Arnobii Disp. adversus gentes libri VIII, nunc demum sic accurati ut ab eruditis sine ulla offensatione et cum majore lectionis operae pretio cognosci possint. Accessit index eorum, quae notatu digna sunt. Sigismundus Gelenius in epistola nuncupatoria ad Gilbertum Cognatum canonicum nazoretensem, postquam comparationem inter Lactantium et Arnobium instituerat: « Sed hanc censuram, pergit, criticis relinquimus, nobis nihil sumpsimus nisi castigationis laborem. Nam Romani ut candoris in communicando, in transcribendo fidei laudem promerentur, ita negari non potest nullum eos adhibuisse in legendis priscis characteribus exercitatum: quo saepissime factum est, ut non tam sinceram lectionem, quam ejus vestigia prodiderint, per quae vix pedetentim ad veritatem evadere potuimus. Fateberis nos non vana jactare, si in uno quovis ternione periculum facere libuerit; nostra haec editio planior sit an illa altera. Est enim ingens discrimen et quantum non facile credas nisi illa pergustata. » — Praeter indicem in titulo laudatum accessit etiam indiculus auctorum ab Arnobio laudatorum.

At Basel, by Froben, in octavo, the eight books of Arnobius's Disputations against the gentiles, now at last so carefully prepared that they may be studied by the learned without any stumbling and with greater profit in the reading. An index has been added of those things which are worthy of note. Sigismundus Gelenius, in the dedicatory letter to Gilbert Cousin, canon of Nozeroy, after he had drawn a comparison between Lactantius and Arnobius: « But this judgement, he continues, we leave to the critics; we have taken upon ourselves nothing but the labour of correction. For just as the Romans deserve praise for candour in sharing and for fidelity in transcribing, so it cannot be denied that they employed no one practised in reading the ancient characters: whence it very often happened that they put forth not so much a sound reading as its traces, by which we were scarcely able, step by step, to make our way through to the truth. You will grant that we make no empty boasts, if you care to make a trial in any one gathering of your choice, whether this edition of ours is the clearer or that other one. For the difference is enormous, and greater than you would readily believe unless you had tasted that one through. » — Besides the index mentioned in the title, a small index of the authors cited by Arnobius has also been added.

1560.

Basileae, apud Hieron. Froben., in-8°, D. Arnobii Afri commentarii in omnes psalmos, ex emendatione Desiderii Erasmi. Accedunt ejusdem Arnobii libri VIII Disputationum adversus gentes, ex recensione Sigismundi Gelenii. Cat. de la Bibl. Roy., t. I, p. 367.

At Basel, by Hieron. Froben, in octavo, the commentaries of St Arnobius the African on all the psalms, from the emendation of Desiderius Erasmus. To these are added the eight books of Disputations against the gentiles of the same Arnobius, from the recension of Sigismundus Gelenius. Catalogue of the Royal Library, vol. I, p. 367.

1580.

Parisiis, apud Mich. Julianum, in-folio: « Arnobii libri octo a Sigismundo Gelenio primum, dein a R. Laurentio castigatiores emissi, cum Tertulliano. R. Laur. de la Barre. Praecipua hujus editionis dos sunt argumenta unicuique libro praefixa, marginalia deinde, et index rerum memorabilium. Qua ratione textum reformaverit, cum ipse plane sileat, nisi sedulo comparaveris cum Geleniana, vix dicas. Scholia autem textui subjecta non magni sunt pretii.

At Paris, by Mich. Julien, in folio: « The eight books of Arnobius, issued in a more corrected form first by Sigismundus Gelenius, then by R. Laurentius, with Tertullian. R. Laur. de la Barre. The chief merit of this edition is the arguments prefixed to each book, then the marginal notes, and the index of memorable matters. On what principle he reshaped the text, since he himself is entirely silent, you could scarcely say unless you compared it carefully with the Gelenian edition. The scholia placed beneath the text, however, are of no great value.

1582.

Antuerpiae, ex officina Christ. Plantini: Arnobii D. adversus gentes libri septem, recogniti et aucti. Ex

At Antwerp, from the press of Christ. Plantin: the seven books of St Arnobius against the gentiles, revised and enlarged. From

Editors' notes and page, col. 356

Page

running head: ARNOBIO AFRO (left part of the running head cut off at the image edge) ... 356
marginal letters: A ‹affirmatur in privilegio a Paulo III›; B ‹Basileae, apud Frobenium›; C ‹sinceram lectionem, quam ejus›; D ‹mundi Gelenii. Cat. de la Bibl. Roy.›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter: the whole column is the editors' preliminary dissertation on Arnobius, list of editions (‹affirmatur in privilegio a Paulo III›); left-column fragments belong to col. 355 and are not set; "Dalechampii" read from a blurred "Dalechampil"; the « opened before "Arnobii libri octo" (1580) has no closing mark in this column, set as printed; "nazoretensem" set as printed; "Arnobii D." word order as printed; column ends mid-sentence at "Ex"

PL 5:357

bibliotheca Theodori Canteri ultrajectini, cujus etiam notae adjectae sunt.

the library of Theodore Canter of Utrecht, whose notes have also been added.

Cum aeque ac Gelenius codicibus manuscriptis destitutus, solo ingenio nitendum sibi intelligeret Canterus, partem fide romani codicis (editionis primae) quem ad instar ms. sibi fuisse et praeclara veteris Scripturae vestigia continuisse contendit, partim etiam Clementis Alexandrini, a quo multa nostrum ad verba desumpsisse ostenditur, auxilio fultus, quidquid praestitum est, hac editione effecit. « Nullas autem, inquit, conjecturas, quamvis veras et certas textui inseruimus, sed quidquid a nobis mutatum et additum fuit, auctoritate et fide romani codicis factum est. Verum ubi melius, quod substitueremus, non habebamus, secuti sumus lectionem Gelenii (qui nimium quantum sibi in hoc auctore emendando indulsit homo alioquin doctissimus et de re litteraria optime meritus), quamvis interdum falsam et veri vestigiis procul remotam. Et quamplurimis in locis (quod praefiscine dixerim), subdola illius et adulterina lectione rejecta, veram ac genuinam scripturam reposuimus. » Utinam vero eventum habuisset quod de futuro suo in hunc auctorem studio pollicitus erat, se amplissimum in Arnobium commentarium adornaturum. Nemini profecto Salmasiani desiderium fuisset excitatum. Nam quas in praesenti addidit notas, eae non nisi emendationum rationem reddunt aut Clementis Alexandrini locis comparandis inserviunt. Haud raro autem ad Jos. Scaligeri, Turnebi, Lipsii et Mureti conjecturas Canterus provocat. Inscripsit ille Arnobium Valenti Guellio Pimpontio, in curia parisiensi senatori, epistola data Ultrajecti, idib. novemb. 1581. Postremo nec praetereundum erit, quod in capita seu sectiones certas textum editor partitus sit, a quo praeclaro sane instituto nescio, qui factum sit, ut insecuti editores rursus defecerint.

Since Canter, being, just like Gelenius, without manuscript codices, understood that he had to rely on his own ingenuity alone, he achieved whatever was accomplished in this edition supported partly by the authority of the Roman codex (that of the first edition), which he maintains served him as a manuscript and preserved excellent traces of the old text, and partly also by the help of Clement of Alexandria, from whom our author is shown to have taken many things word for word. "We have, however," he says, "inserted no conjectures into the text, however true and certain, but whatever was changed and added by us was done on the authority and faith of the Roman codex. Where, though, we had nothing better to substitute, we followed the reading of Gelenius (who, though otherwise a most learned man and one who deserved exceedingly well of letters, allowed himself far too much licence in emending this author), even though it is sometimes false and far removed from the traces of the truth. And in a great many places (be it said without boasting), having rejected his deceitful and adulterated reading, we have restored the true and genuine text." Would that what he had promised concerning his future study of this author had come to pass, namely that he would prepare a very full commentary on Arnobius. Then surely no one would have felt the want of Salmasius's work. For the notes which he has added at present do no more than give an account of the emendations or serve for comparing passages of Clement of Alexandria. Not seldom, moreover, Canter appeals to the conjectures of Joseph Scaliger, Turnèbe, Lipsius and Muret. He dedicated his Arnobius to Valens Guellius Pimpontius, senator in the Parlement of Paris, in a letter dated at Utrecht on the Ides of November 1581. Finally, it ought not to be passed over that the editor divided the text into fixed chapters or sections, an excellent practice indeed, from which, I know not how it came about, the editors who followed fell away again.

1583.

Romae, ex typographia Dominici Basae, in-4°; Arnobii disputationum adversus gentes libri septem. — M. Minucii Felicis Octavius. Romana editio posterior et emenatior.

Rome, from the press of Domenico Basa, in quarto; Seven books of the disputations of Arnobius against the nations. — The Octavius of M. Minucius Felix. The later and more correct Roman edition.

Difficile est, de Ursini opera verba facere et verbis ipsius non uti. Itaque nimii videri malumus, quam chartae parcimonia committere, ut scitu dignum aliquid omittatur.

It is difficult to speak of Ursinus's work and not use his own words. We therefore prefer to seem excessive rather than, through sparing of paper, allow something worth knowing to be omitted.

Accipe ergo: « Quadragesimus agitur annus, inquit, ex quo pius hic scriptor e bibliotheca S. P. vaticana in lucem primum prodiit, non eo quo diu latuerat situ, et squalore deformis, sed ab innumeris pene sordibus, quibus squalebat, doctorum virorum industria perpurgatus. Qui cum ingenio et eruditione, quantum

Hear it, then: "It is now the fortieth year," he says, "since this pious writer first came forth into the light from the Vatican library of the Supreme Pontiff, not disfigured by the mould and squalor in which he had long lain hidden, but thoroughly cleansed by the industry of learned men from the almost countless defilements with which he was befouled. And although they, with ingenuity and learning, as much as

Editors' notes and page, col. 357

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: pollicitus erat› · call in col 357

(printed under page 181) (1) In praefatione ad lectorem ante notas et iterum in notis ad lib. sextum. Quanta vero hujus illa etiam aetate inter doctos expectatio fuerit, vel Meursii verba declarent, qui criticum arnobianum lectoribus tradens : Hui ! inquies forte, inquit, ante Canterum ? ante et quidem eo lubente, immo vero jubente. Ne in messem me ejus falcem injectum iisse maligne dictites.

In the preface to the reader, before the notes, and again in the notes on book six. How great the expectation of this work was among the learned even in that age, Meursius's words alone may show; handing his criticism of Arnobius to his readers, he says: "Ha! you will perhaps say, before Canter? Before him indeed, and with his good will, nay rather at his bidding. So do not spitefully keep saying that I have thrust my sickle into his harvest."

(printed under page 181) (1) Nempe ex fide Sabaei haec scribit : Codicem ipsum neutiquam inspexit. Taedet tam inepti moris rhetorici, quem omnes hujus aevi auctores itali affectant.

He writes this, that is, on Sabaeus's word: he never looked at the manuscript itself. One wearies of so silly a rhetorical habit, which all the Italian authors of this age affect.

(printed under page 181)

Page

running head: 357 NOTITIA HISTORIC (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹bibliotheca Theodori Canteri ultrajectini›; B ‹lenii (qui nimium quantum›; C ‹Scaligeri, Turnebi, Lipsii›; D ‹ipsius non uti. Itaque›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:358

illis temporibus posuerunt, infinitas prope maculas ex eo scriptore sustulissent totum plane corpus suo nitori restituere nequiverunt. Itaque Romae edito jam libro, et in manus hominum pervulgato, aggressi sunt, non Itali tantum, qui tunc permulti et judicii et ingenii acumine florebant: sed Transalpini etiam homines Arnobium adhibita diligentiore cura perpolire. Atque ex Italis quidem, ut reliquis nominandis supersedeamus, unus maxime, idemque post vulgatum exemplar primus, Joannes Baptista Sighicellus Bononiensis, qui postea episcopus faventinus a Pio IV. P. M. factus est, multa sane, quae non vulgarem eruditionem, nec mediocre ingenium, desiderabant, in hoc scriptore correxit, restituit ac prope desperata sanavit. Sed dum Cinnae Smyrnam imitatus, nunquam, ut aiunt, manum de tabula, nihilque minus quam de pervulgandis emendationibus cogitaret, suum interim Germani ediderunt Arnobium. In quo si pro omnibus suis in Romanos salibus et conviciis, eadem ipsi fide in transcribendo exemplari, eademque in emendando religione, qua Romani usi sunt, versati essent, majorem sine dubio gratiam a studiosis omnibus iniissent. Nunc autem, dum quodlibet, quod ipsi corruptum opinantur pro libitu suo et arbitrio addendo, tollendo, mutando,, ut aliquem sensum eliciant, corrigere sibi fas esse putant, tam multa in Arnobio immutarunt, ut infinitis locis ne vestigium quidem antiquae lectionis sit relictum. Hoc incommodum Petrus Ciacconius, Hispanus, homo magni ingenii doctrinaeque judicio excultae, cum animadvertisset in Arnobio, coepissetque auctore summo viro Antonio Carafa cardinale, sacrorum veterum scriptorum omni ratione perpoliendorum percupido, Accuratius undique edita A. exemplaria conferre eaque docte pariter et ingeniose corrigere, institutum opus eo deduxerat, ut multis et quidem praeclaris correctionibus industria sua illustratum brevi editurus fuisset Arnobium. Sed absoluta fere, jam nondum autem perpolita libri emendatione, importuna morte ereptus, eidem, a quo totus pendebat, clarissimo viro, correctiones hujusmodi, si ei videretur, publicandas testamento reliquit. » Hic itaque perpoliendi atque pervulgandi provinciam Ursino credidit, qui eorum, quos modo ex eo nominavimus, aliorumque doctorum hominum emendationibus, quae in Arnobium variis locis dispersae circumferebantur, in unum collectis, diligenterque examinatis, eas tantum ex his in textum recepisse, se affirmat, quae et multorum judicio probatae et sine ulla controversa verae visae essent. Quae item non ita certae videbantur, ut tuto admitti possent, eas suis distinctas numeris, in oris paginarum notandas curavit, notis simul, si quae erant ad conjecturas, confirmandas adscriptae, additis. His omnibus de suo etiam nonnulla, obiter inter legendum animadversa adjecit. Denique ex Ursino

they set down in those times, had removed almost countless blemishes from that writer, they were unable to restore the whole body entirely to its proper lustre. Therefore, when the book had already been published at Rome and spread abroad into men's hands, not only the Italians, very many of whom were then flourishing in keenness both of judgement and of talent, but also men from beyond the Alps undertook to polish Arnobius, applying more diligent care. And of the Italians, to forbear naming the rest, one above all, and he the first after the edition was put out, Giovanni Battista Sighicelli of Bologna, who was afterwards made bishop of Faenza by Pius IV, Supreme Pontiff, corrected in this writer, restored, and healed when almost despaired of, many things which truly demanded no common learning and no middling talent. But while, imitating Cinna's Smyrna, he never, as they say, took his hand from the tablet, and thought of nothing less than of publishing his emendations, the Germans meanwhile brought out their own Arnobius. In which, if, instead of all their witticisms and insults against the Romans, they had themselves proceeded with the same fidelity in transcribing the copy and the same scrupulousness in emending as the Romans used, they would without doubt have won greater favour from all students. But as it is, while they think it lawful for themselves to correct anything which they suppose corrupt, at their own pleasure and judgement, by adding, removing and changing, so as to draw out some sense, they have altered so many things in Arnobius that in countless places not even a trace of the ancient reading is left. When Pedro Chacón, a Spaniard, a man of great talent and of a judgement refined by learning, had noticed this defect in Arnobius, and had begun, at the instance of that most eminent man Antonio Carafa, cardinal, who was most eager that the ancient sacred writers should be polished in every way, to compare more accurately the copies of A. published everywhere and to correct them both learnedly and ingeniously, he had brought the work he had undertaken to the point that he would shortly have published Arnobius, illustrated by his industry with many and indeed excellent corrections. But when the emendation of the book was almost complete, though not yet polished, he was snatched away by an untimely death, and left by will corrections of this kind to that same most illustrious man on whom the whole depended, to be published if it seemed good to him." He therefore entrusted the task of polishing and publishing to Orsini, who affirms that, having gathered into one and diligently examined the emendations of those whom we have just named from him, and of other learned men, which were circulating scattered in various places concerning Arnobius, he received into the text only those of them which had both been approved by the judgement of many and seemed true beyond any dispute. Those which likewise did not seem so certain that they could safely be admitted he took care to have marked in the margins of the pages, distinguished by their own numbers, adding at the same time the notes, if there were any, that had been written to confirm the conjectures. To all these he also added some things of his own, noticed by the way in the course of reading. Finally, from Orsini

Editors' notes and page, col. 358

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: sustulissent› · call in col 358

(printed under page 181) (1) Nempe ex fide Sabaei haec scribit : Codicem ipsum neutiquam inspexit. Taedet tam inepti moris rhetorici, quem omnes hujus aevi auctores itali affectant.

That is, he writes this on the word of Sabaeus: he never looked at the codex itself. One wearies of so inept a rhetorical habit, which all the Italian authors of this age affect.

(printed under page 181)

Page

running head: ...TITIA HISTORICA. 358 (left part of the head cut off at the image edge; presumably NOTITIA HISTORICA.)
marginal letters: A ‹illis temporibus posuerunt›; B ‹quam, ut aiunt, manum de tabula›; C ‹ingenii doctrinaeque judicio›; D ‹quos modo ex eo nominavimus›
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:359

discimus, eodem pene tempore, quo in Germania octavus Arnobii liber suo auctori restitutus erat, eamdem fraudem sensisse Sirletum cardin.; ejusque adeo persuasione factum est, ut primum in Italia hac editione Minucii Octavius ederetur.

we learn that at almost the same time at which in Germany the eighth book of Arnobius had been restored to its author, Cardinal Sirleto perceived the same fraud; and it was indeed by his persuasion that the Octavius of Minucius was published for the first time in Italy in this edition.

1586.

Antuerpiae [ex off. Christ. Plant.] in 8°; Arnobii libri septem cum Godescalci Stewechii electis. Hanc primam Stewechii editionem ipse non vidi, neque memoratam in catalogo aliquo inveni, sed sponsore Fabricio cito, cui praefationes Stewechii, editioni anni 1604 insertae quodammodo fidem facere videntur. Nam dnplex ibi comparet epistola nuncupatoria, et ad lectorem admonitio. Ac illis quidem, quae electis praemissae sunt, annus subscriptus est 1586; epistola autem dedicatoria, textui praefixa, data est 1587, praefatio ad lectorem anni nota caret, sed dicit ibi, « parum abfuisse, quin electa ex ingeniolo suo tantummodo nata, juvando Arnobio, ante biennium seorsum publicasset, verum Franciscum Modium dissuasisse, ejusque adeo opera effectum esse, ut textum quoque corrigere et restituere sibi licuerit. » Quae quorsum referenda sint, non satis capio. Contra plerique, quibus de editionibus Arnobii sermo fuit, inter quos diligentissimus Nurrius, de ea prorsus silent, et repugnare videtur, quae editioni antuerpiensi anno 1604 praefixa est approbatio, qua non denuo typis tradi; sed jam demum mandari Arnobius dicitur. Quocirca quamquam definire nihil jam ausim, fateor tamen me in eam sententiam magis proclivem, ut ante annum 1604 Stewechii Arnobium non impressum esse dicam. Cui etiam Auberti Miraei auctoritas accedit, qui pro explorato scribit, Arnobii libros VII cum notis Theodori Canteri Plantinum et cum notis Godesc. Stewechii Trognaesium 1604, Antuerpiae excudisse.

Antwerp [from the press of Christopher Plantin], in octavo: The Seven Books of Arnobius with the Selections of Godescalc Stewech. This first edition of Stewech I have not seen myself, nor have I found it mentioned in any catalogue, but I cite it on the warrant of Fabricius, to whom the prefaces of Stewech, inserted in the edition of the year 1604, seem in some measure to lend credence. For there appear in it, twice over, a dedicatory epistle and an admonition to the reader. And to those which are prefixed to the Selections the year 1586 is subscribed; but the dedicatory epistle prefixed to the text is dated 1587; the preface to the reader lacks any note of the year, but he says there "that he had come close to publishing separately, two years before, the Selections, born merely of his own slender wit, as an aid to Arnobius, but that Franciscus Modius had dissuaded him, and that it was indeed by his efforts that he was permitted to correct and restore the text as well." To what these things are to be referred I do not well understand. On the other hand, most of those who have discussed the editions of Arnobius, among them the most diligent Nourry, are entirely silent about it; and the approbation prefixed to the Antwerp edition of the year 1604 seems to contradict it, in which Arnobius is said not to be committed to print anew, but only now at last to be committed. Wherefore, although I would not now venture to determine anything, I confess nevertheless that I am rather inclined towards the opinion that Stewech's Arnobius was not printed before the year 1604. To this is added also the authority of Aubertus Miraeus, who writes as an established fact that Plantin printed the seven books of Arnobius with the notes of Theodor Canter, and Trognaesius, with the notes of Godesc. Stewech, in 1604, at Antwerp.

1597.

Genevae editionem Heraldi laudat Magna Bibl.

The Geneva edition of Heraldus is commended by the Magna Bibl.

Editors' notes and page, col. 359

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 359

(printed under page 182) (1) in Delectu argg. et syllabo SS. pro veritate Rel. christ. pag, 226. Hinc vero Lipenius, Bibl. theol. I, 734, et M. Bibl. eccl. Colon, p. 623, laudant.

In the Delectus argumentorum et syllabus scriptorum pro veritate religionis christianae, p. 226. From here Lipenius, Bibliotheca theologica I, 734, and the Magna Bibliotheca ecclesiastica of Cologne, p. 623, cite it.

(printed under page 182)

(2) ‹anchor: diligentissimus Nurrius› · call in col 359

(printed under page 182) (2) Appar. ad Biblioth. max. veterum Patrum.

Apparatus to the Bibliotheca maxima veterum Patrum.

(printed under page 182)

(3) ‹anchor: Arnobius dicitur› · call in col 359

(printed under page 182) (3) Quo magis viros doctos excitem, ut de prima, quae dicitur Stewechii, curiosius dispiciant, addita hic esto : Haec Arnobii restitutio, auctore Godesc. Stewechio, multum utilitatis studioso lectori afferre potest. Dignam igitur, quae typis mandetur, judico. Antuerpiae, 24 januarii. 1604. EGBERTUS SPITHOLDUS, canonicus et plebanus antuerpiensis.

To stir the learned the more to look into the so-called first edition of Stewech more carefully, let this be added here: "This restoration of Arnobius, by Godescalc Stewech, can bring much profit to the studious reader. I therefore judge it worthy to be committed to print. Antwerp, 24 January 1604. Egbert Spithold, canon and parish priest of Antwerp."

(printed under page 182)

(4) ‹anchor: pro explorato scribit› · call in col 359

(printed under page 182) (4) In notisad Hieronymum de Eccles. SS. ed. Fabric., anno 1718, p. 165, nec aliter eodem loco ipse Fabricius, similiter Francisc. Stwechius in Athenis Belgicis (Antuerp., 1628, in-folio, pag. 294), ubi dum scripta Stewechii recenset, simpliciter posuit : Electa in Arnobium, typis Trognaesii. Adde quod Casp. Scioppius in Arte critica, ubi Stewechii scripta laudat, Arnobium et electa in eum prorsus ignoret. Ex quibus omnibus non sine aliqua fiducia dixerim, praefationes illas annis 1586 et 1587 insignitas Fabricio fraudem fecisse.

In the notes to Jerome's On Ecclesiastical Writers, Fabricius's edition, 1718, p. 165; Fabricius himself says the same at the same place; likewise Franciscus Sweertius [printed "Stwechius"] in the Athenae Belgicae (Antwerp, 1628, folio, p. 294), where, listing Stewech's writings, he put simply: "Electa on Arnobius, printed by Trognaesius." Add that Caspar Scioppius in his Ars critica, where he praises Stewech's writings, knows nothing at all of the Arnobius or the Electa on it. From all this I would say, with some confidence, that those prefaces dated 1586 and 1587 misled Fabricius.

(printed under page 182)

Page

running head: 359 DE ARNOBIO AFRO (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹discimus, eodem pene tempore›; B ‹tis praemissae sunt, annus›; C ‹ausim, fateor tamen me›; D ‹(3) Quo magis viros doctos› (in the footnote area)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 5:360

Ecclesiastica coloniensis, sed fidem haud praestare ausim.

Ecclesiastica coloniensis, but I would not dare to vouch for it.

1598.

Lugd.-Bat. ex off. Io. Balduini. — Io. Meursii Criticus arnobianus tributus in libros septem. Item Hypocriticus Minutianus et Excerpta ms. regii parisiensis, in queis Arnobius adversus Gentes et Minucius sexcenta amplius locis, alii scriptores varie castigantur.

Leiden, from the press of Johannes Balduinus. Johannes Meursius's Arnobian Critic, divided into seven books. Also the Minucian Hypocritic and Excerpts from the royal Paris manuscript, in which Arnobius's Against the Nations and Minucius are corrected in more than six hundred places, and other writers in various ways.

Quamquam negari sine invidia nequit, praeclarum ingenii acumen, et quod ex omnimoda doctrinae copia effloruit et quasi redundavit, hoc schediasmate Meursium ostendisse, ad Arnobium tamen et Minucium non magis illud quam ad omnem antiquitatem et scriptores valde multos pertinere recte censebitur. Quotiescumque enim illos attigit mirifice callidum detegendis et persanandis vulneribus se praebuit, multa acute vidit, ad quae superiores editores omnino caecutiebant, multa menda levissima medela sustulit: sed multo largius haec quibuscumque aliis scriptoribus quam Arnobio et Minucio ab eo sunt praestita. Ac initio, inquit, nihil annotare erat decretum soli auctoris valetudini curandae intento, non potui tamen mihi temperare; quin aliquoties, loci potissimum alterius emendandi occasione invitatus, excurrerem; in quibus omnibus ut nihil alieni sibi vindicaret nec aliorum emendationibus adducendis vel erratis refellendis tempus tereret, sed sua simpliciter proponeret; caute ac graviter studuit. Porro, quidquid in Arnobio praestitit, id omne ab ingenio neque a libris veteribus profectum esse vel non affirmanti puto tribuisses, sed miraberis fortasse, tam raram in iis regionibus fuisse editionem primam, ut se optare Meursius dicat, ut plures Canterus romani codicis variantes repraesentasset, quod plura investigandi occasionem praebiturum fuisset. Quod superest, accesserunt operi huic appendicis loco excerpta exemplaris regii manuscripti ex libro Josephi Scaligeri, quem olim Lutetiae cum regio exemplari manuscripto contulerat. Singulis judicium suum, subinde etiam animadversationes prolixiores apposuit. Universe, vidi, inquit, hac collatione plura loca utiliter augeri, meas conjecturas aliquot probari, non paucas item novas inveniendi ansam dari: quamvis re vera saepenumero pro thesauro, quem speraram, carbones offenderim, et merum sterquilinium: e quo tamen, nisi me egregie judicium fallit, aliquas, ut ita dicam, gemmalas elicui. Caeterum haec excerpta inscripta sunt Petro Scriverio amico, ut ipse declarat, dilectissimo, de cujus Anticritico, quae Hadrianus Bailletus (De Antiscriptoribus, tom. II, pag. 299), memoriae prodidit, fabulis accensere nemo dubitet.

Although it cannot be denied without envy that Meursius in this sketch displayed a brilliant keenness of mind, and one which blossomed and as it were overflowed from an abundance of every kind of learning, it will nevertheless rightly be judged that this concerns Arnobius and Minucius no more than all antiquity and a great many writers. For whenever he touched upon them he showed himself wonderfully skilful at detecting and thoroughly healing wounds; he saw many things acutely to which earlier editors had been altogether blind, and removed many faults with the lightest remedy: but he rendered these services far more liberally to any other writers whatever than to Arnobius and Minucius. And at the beginning, he says, I had resolved to note nothing, being intent solely on caring for the health of the author; yet I could not restrain myself from sometimes digressing, invited chiefly by the occasion of emending some other passage; in all of which he took care, cautiously and seriously, to claim nothing belonging to another for himself, and not to waste time in adducing the emendations of others or in refuting their errors, but simply to put forward his own. Further, whatever he accomplished in Arnobius, you would, I think, have attributed it all to his own wit and not to old books, even had he not affirmed it; but you will perhaps be surprised that the first edition was so rare in those regions that Meursius says he wished that Canterus had presented more variants of the Roman codex, since that would have afforded occasion for investigating more. For the rest, there were added to this work, by way of appendix, excerpts of the royal manuscript copy from the book of Joseph Scaliger, which he had once collated at Paris with the royal manuscript copy. To each he appended his judgement, and from time to time also more extended remarks. On the whole, he says, I saw that by this collation many passages were usefully enlarged, several of my conjectures were confirmed, and occasion was likewise given for finding not a few new ones: although in truth I very often came upon coals instead of the treasure I had hoped for, and a mere dunghill: from which nevertheless, unless my judgement greatly deceives me, I have drawn out some little gems, so to speak. Moreover, these excerpts are dedicated to Petrus Scriverius, his dearest friend, as he himself declares; and what Hadrianus Bailletus (On Antiscriptores, vol. II, p. 299) recorded about his Anticriticus, let no one hesitate to count among fables.

SAECULO DECIMO SEPTIMO.

In the Seventeenth Century.

1603.

Hanoviae, in-8°: Arnobius..... cum notis Geverhardi Elmenhorstii, ad illustrem virum Josephum Scaligerum, eruditorum suae aetatis facile principem.

Hanau, in octavo: Arnobius..... with the notes of Geverhard Elmenhorst, to the illustrious man Joseph Scaliger, easily the foremost of the learned men of his age.

Ita Fabricius (in Delectu, pag. 226) et ex eo Magna

So Fabricius (in the Delectus, p. 226), and from him the Magna

Editors' notes and page, col. 360

Page

running head: [DE] ARNOBIO AFRO 360 (left edge cut off)
marginal letters: A ‹Ecclesiastica coloniensis›; B ‹Quotiescumque enim illos›; C ‹fectum esse vel non›; D ‹e quo tamen, nisi me›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter: the preliminary dissertation on Arnobius, list of editions (from ‹Ecclesiastica coloniensis› through ‹et ex eo Mag-›); column begins mid-sentence; last word Mag- split at the column break; punctuation after "temperare" is unclear (a stray mark beside a semicolon), set as a semicolon; "gemmalas" is printed so, probably for gemmulas, UNSURE; "Geverhardi" has an initial resembling C, read as G; a stray mark before "Hanoviae" is ignored; a stray mark on "sterquilinium" is ignored; no full-width line seen

PL 5:361

Bibl. Eccles. proferunt primam Elmenhorstii. Nurrius eam manibus versavit.

Bibl. Eccles. present the first edition of Elmenhorst. Nurrius handled it with his own hands.

Paris, in-8° : Arnobius...... cum observationibus Des. Heraldi. Citat Fabricius l. l. an recte, dubito.

Paris, in octavo: Arnobius...... with the observations of Desiderius Heraldus. Fabricius cites it in the place quoted; whether rightly, I doubt.

1604.

Antverpiae, apud Joach. Trognaesium, in-8° : Arnobius.... cum Godescalci Stewechii Electis. Confer quae supra ad annum 1586 dicta sunt. Iteratam Stewechius operam Arnobio suo impendit, Electis primum conscribendis, in quo negotio solo ingenio se confisum esse fatetur; deinde cum codicis ms. variantes lectiones a Francisco Modio ipsi essent suppeditatae, quibus denuo laborem jam absolutum aggressus, non solum electa meliora fecit, sed ipsum quoque Arnobii textum infinitis locis se interpolasse, correxisse, et soepe numero lacunis magni momenti suppletes auxisse affirmat. De codice hoc sententiam nostram suo loco proferemus. Quod Electa attinet, (nam de his audiamus oportet, antequam de ipsa textus recensione dicendi locus erit), ideo hoc nomine appellare visum esse inquit, quod e plurimis, quae depravata, quae obscura hic reperiret, elegerit sibi ex ingenio et membraneis codicibus vel emendanda vel illustranda; id quod plerumque et tantum non ubique ex antiqui romanorum sermonis usu ac proprietate, nec non ritibus apud priscos solemnibus haud sinistre profecto ipsi cessit, etc. quemadmodum plurimum in Varrone ad Arnobium illustrandum est praesidii, ita haec Stewechii Electa egregium, meo judicio, Varroni atque omni sermonis priori doctrinae adjumentum afferunt. Quam in rem non parum etiam syllabus contentorum praemissus conducit. Sed neque ex his, neque ex ipsa, quam manibus teneo, editione satis mihi liquere faeteor, quo pacto textum ad suas aliorumve conjecturas refinxerit. Is certe, quem ed. Trognaesiana (1604) sistit, ab Ursiniano haud magnopere differt; eo saepius autem Stewechii lectiones in margine laudat, ita non numquam, ut nescias, an diversa aliqua a Stewechii recensione per hos typographos data sit. Quod si praecipitantius paulo a nobis divinatum fuerit vereque editio Antwerpiana anno 1604 ad ipsius Stewechii descriptionem expressa sit; laudabis fortasse hominis verecundiam, qui margines libri emendationibus et conjecturis opplere maluerit, quam vel certissimam in seriem recipere. Nunc vero is ipsum textum interpolavisse, correxisse et integriorem dedisse dici possit, videant alii. Quamquam enim in eadem, unde praecedentia adduximus, praefatione de sua in textu adornando opera prae se ferat, se summo candore, suis ubique locis, atque adeo, ipsi quoque margini nomina eorum adscripsisse, qui ante ipsum manus auxiliatrices Arnobio porrexissent, idemque se facturum fuisse in iis, quae Ursiana profert, nisi hie omnia, sua aliena miscuisset: haec tamen circa lectionis varietatem sedulitate non ipsius textus sospitator sibi videri poterat.

Antwerp, at Joachim Trognaesius's, in octavo: Arnobius.... with the Electa of Godescalc Stewech. Compare what was said above under the year 1586. Stewech spent renewed labour on his Arnobius: first in composing the Electa, a task in which he admits that he relied on his own wit alone; then, when the variant readings of a manuscript codex had been supplied to him by Franciscus Modius, he took up with these once more the work already completed, and he affirms that he not only made the Electa better, but also interpolated the very text of Arnobius in countless places, corrected it, and very often enlarged it by filling lacunae of great moment. We shall give our opinion of this codex in its proper place. As for the Electa (for we must hear about these before there is occasion to speak of the recension of the text itself), he says he decided to call them by this name because, out of the very many passages which he found here depraved or obscure, he chose for himself, from his own wit and from parchment codices, those to be either emended or illustrated; and this, for the most part and all but everywhere, from the usage and propriety of the ancient Roman speech, and also from the rites customary among the ancients, assuredly turned out not unhappily for him, etc. Just as there is very great help in Varro for illustrating Arnobius, so these Electa of Stewech bring, in my judgement, outstanding assistance to Varro and to all learning in the earlier speech. Towards this the syllabus of contents placed in front also contributes not a little. But neither from these, nor from the edition itself, which I hold in my hands, is it, I confess, sufficiently clear to me in what way he refashioned the text to his own or others' conjectures. Certainly the text which the Trognaesian edition (1604) presents does not differ greatly from the Ursinian; but it cites Stewech's readings in the margin all the more often, so much so that at times you would not know whether some recension different from Stewech's was issued by these printers. But if we have guessed somewhat too hastily, and the Antwerp edition of the year 1604 was truly printed after Stewech's own copy, you will perhaps praise the modesty of the man, who preferred to fill the margins of the book with emendations and conjectures rather than to admit even the most certain of them into the run of the text. But whether he can now be said to have interpolated, corrected and given a more complete text, let others see. For although in the same preface from which we adduced the foregoing he declares of his labour in preparing the text that he, with the greatest candour, in their proper places everywhere, and indeed in the margin itself too, wrote down the names of those who before him had stretched out helping hands to Arnobius, and that he would have done the same in those things which the Ursinian brings forward, had not this man mixed everything together, his own and others': yet by this diligence regarding variety of reading he could seem to himself the preserver not of the text itself.

1605.

Parisiis, apud Marcum Orry, via Jacobea, ad insigne Leonis salientis, in-8° : Arnobii..... Libri septem.

Paris, at Marc Orry's, in the rue Saint-Jacques, at the sign of the Leaping Lion, in octavo: Of Arnobius..... Seven books.

Editors' notes and page, col. 361

Page

running head: 361 ARNOBII NOTITIA EDIT (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹gna Bibl. Eccles. proferunt›; B ‹correxisse, et soepe numero›; C ‹judicio, Varroni atque›; D ‹quam vel certissimam in seriem›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter set throughout: the notice of editions of Arnobius (‹gna Bibl. Eccles. proferunt›, entries 1604 ‹Antverpiae, apud Joach. Trognaesium›, 1605 ‹Parisiis, apud Marcum Orry›). Column begins with the fragment "gna" (Magna) broken from the previous column; it ends with "sep-" (septem) broken across the column break. "Des." is printed with a long s, so it looks like "Def.". "soepe" is printed with the oe ligature. "hie omnia" is set as printed (for hic); the "s" of "nisi" there is faint. "Quod Electa attinet" is set as printed, without "ad". The printer's signature "PATROL. V." is not set.
misprints kept as printed (Q2): "suppletes" (for suppletis); "faeteor" (for fateor).

PL 5:362

— M. Minucii Felicis Octavius. Editio nova, ad editionem romanam expressa, quibusdam tamen in locis e ms. reg. aucta et emendata. Desiderii Heraldi ad Arnobii libros VII animadversiones et castigationes.

— The Octavius of M. Minucius Felix. A new edition, printed after the Roman edition, yet in certain places enlarged and corrected from a royal manuscript. The animadversions and corrections of Desiderius Heraldus [Didier Hérault] on the seven books of Arnobius.

Romanam intellige novissimam, quae, quanto plures veteres lectiones restituit, tanto praestantior ipsi visa est ac saepius laudata. Quo factum est, ut nonnullis etiam in locis, ubi illa Gelenium secuta esset, eam desereret et vel Canteri sententiam amplecteretur vel de suo quaedam inferret. De singulis in animadversionibus, sed paucissimis verbis, judicium tulit, reliquae vel sensu declarando vel rebus omnigenis illustrandis serviunt. In quibus ut varia sunt ex omni antiquitatis doctrina deprompta nequaquam vero quod deceret, quodve alienum esset vel tritum, oblitus est. Egregio quoque instituto factum est, ut textus Arnobii seorsim cum indice rerum peculiari, deinde animadversiones Heraldi et ipsae cum indicibus et auctorum, qui varie illustrantur vel emendantur, et rerum exhiberentur. Denique notari meretur et hoc, quod animi causa opera haec instituta sit et intra duorum mensium spatium ad finem perducta; item quod epistola dedicatoria, quae omnino praefationis locum sustinet, data sit Lutetiae Paris, kal. mart. MDCV, ut adeo vix probabile videatur, ante hunc annum Heraldi operam esse evulgatam.

By the Roman understand the most recent, which, the more old readings it restored, the more excellent it seemed to him and the more often it was praised by him. Hence it came about that even in some places where it had followed Gelenius, he abandoned it and either embraced Canter's opinion or brought in certain things of his own. On individual readings he gave his judgement in the animadversions, but in very few words; the rest serve either to explain the sense or to illustrate matters of every kind. In these, while varied things are drawn from all the learning of antiquity, he by no means forgot what was fitting, or what was irrelevant or trite. It was also an excellent arrangement that the text of Arnobius was presented separately with its own index of subjects, and then the animadversions of Heraldus, these too with indexes both of the authors who are variously illustrated or emended and of subjects. Finally this also deserves to be noted, that this work was undertaken for recreation and brought to completion within the space of two months; likewise that the dedicatory epistle, which wholly fills the place of a preface, is dated at Lutetia of the Parisii [Paris] on the kalends of March 1605, so that it hardly seems probable that the work of Heraldus was published before this year.

1610.

Hamburgi, in-folio : Arnobii..... l. VII. Gebhart. Elmenhorstius collatis diversis codicibus recensuit et observationibus (sic) illustravit.

Hamburg, in folio: Of Arnobius..... seven books. Gebhart Elmenhorst revised them, having collated various manuscripts, and illustrated them with observations (sic).

Elmenhorstius lectori : « Ut instituti nostri ratio tibi constare possit, scito me in hac nova Arnobii editione recensenda praecipue usum codice vetusto Francisci Sabaei Brixiani, Romae anno 1542 impresso. Ubi is corruptus aut mendosus, ad excerpta manuscripta et doctorum virorum emendationes confugi, optimasque ex illis desumpsi, et textui Arnobiano, quamquam raro, inserui; ratione nempe ipsa jubente, adjeci quoque variarum lectionum collectanea, in quibus eos, quorum emendationes probo et sequor, nomino. In observationibus meis id potissimum egi, ut sensum auctoris, quem edendum suscepi, edissererem, breviterque et aperte, ubi is obscurus, dilucidarem. Certe eruditissimum scriptorem innumeris faedissimorum mendorum naevis liberavi, et infinitis ejus locis male affectis, salubriter, ut confido, medicinam adhibui. Nec tamen dissimulo, plurima etiam nunc residere falsa et corrupta, quae nullo modo intelligi aut absque ope melioris codicis sanari queant. Ea ego de industria intacta praeterii et felicioribus ingeniis corrigenda reliqui. Rel. » Nosti jam codices, quorum speciosa ostentatione titulus superbit. Si de Elmenhorstio interroges, si non ingenium, certe maturitas et studium illi defuit. Textus ad verbum pene ad romanam alteram descriptus est. Hinc etiam conjecturas et emendationes, quas sine auctorum nominibus in margine posuerat Ursinus, omnes Fulvii nomine laudatas desumpsit, et intermixtis aliis ad calcem observationum subjecit, suo judicio raro interposito.

Elmenhorst to the reader: "That the plan of our undertaking may be clear to you, know that in revising this new edition of Arnobius I used chiefly the old copy of Franciscus Sabaeus of Brescia, printed at Rome in the year 1542. Where it is corrupt or faulty, I have had recourse to manuscript excerpts and the emendations of learned men, and have taken the best of them and inserted them, though rarely, into the text of Arnobius; and, as reason itself bids, I have also added collections of variant readings, in which I name those whose emendations I approve and follow. In my observations I have aimed above all at setting forth the sense of the author whom I undertook to edit, and at making it clear, briefly and plainly, where it is obscure. Certainly I have freed a most learned writer from countless blemishes of the foulest errors, and to innumerable passages of his that were in bad condition I have applied a remedy, wholesomely, as I trust. Yet I do not conceal that very many false and corrupt things still remain, which can in no way be understood or healed without the help of a better manuscript. These I have deliberately passed over untouched and left to happier talents to correct. Etc." You now know the manuscripts with whose showy display the title prides itself. If you ask about Elmenhorst, if not talent, then certainly maturity and diligence were lacking to him. The text is copied almost word for word from the second Roman [edition]. Hence also he took over all the conjectures and emendations which Ursinus had put in the margin without the names of their authors, cited under the name of Fulvius, and, mixing others in among them, placed them at the end of the observations, with his own judgement rarely interposed.

Editors' notes and page, col. 362

Page

running head: …I NOTITIA EDITIONUM. 362 (beginning of the running head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A tem. — M. Minucii Felicis Octavius; B oblitus est. Egregio quoque; C observationibus (sic) illustravit; D faedissimorum mendorum naevis
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter set throughout (notice of editions: tem. — M. Minucii Felicis Octavius; 1610. Hamburgi, in-folio); column begins with the fragment "tem." of a word broken from column 361 and ends with "in-" broken into column 363; "Lutetiae Paris" set as printed (abbreviation); "faedissimorum" set from the æ-ligature as printed, unsure whether æ or œ; stray mark after "intelligi" read as a comma; the "12" at the page foot is the printer's signature, not set

PL 5:363

Neque vero animadversiones ita comparatae sunt, ut viris doctis, quales ejus aetas ferebat, admodum placere poterant. Nam praeter cumulate ex omnibus veterum scriptis ad verba vel res singulas congesta frustra aliquid expectes. Caeterum satis apte haec editio excripta est typis nitidis ac luculentis, et quamquam capitum descriptio desit, numerus tamen lineis denis uniuscunque paginae in margine interiori commode adscriptus est. Indices etiam accesserunt textui tres, rerum ac verborum et locutionum, animadversionibus item duo, auctorum (quorum loca adducta sunt) et rerum vocumque. Hujus editionis exemplari, quod bibl. regio-acad. servat, a Heumanno, quem possessorem olim habuit, notulae quaedam, item emendationes appictae sunt.

Nor indeed are the notes so composed that they could greatly please learned men such as his age produced. For apart from what has been heaped together from all the writings of the ancients on individual words or matters, you would look for anything in vain. Otherwise this edition is printed quite suitably in neat and clear type, and although a division into chapters is lacking, the count is nevertheless conveniently written against every tenth line of each page in the inner margin. Indexes were also added, three to the text, of things and of words and phrases, and likewise two to the notes, of authors (whose passages are cited) and of things and words. In the copy of this edition which the Royal Academic Library keeps, some brief notes, and likewise emendations, were written in by Heumann, who was once its owner.

Tolosae, 1612, in-8° : Julii Caesaris Bulengeri Juliodunensis Eclogarum ad Arnobium liber primus. — Ineptum opus.

Toulouse, 1612, in octavo: First Book of Selections on Arnobius by Julius Caesar Bulenger of Loudun. A foolish work.

1634.

Duaci, in-8° : Stewechii Electa cum Paratitlis seu summariis Leandri de S. Martino.

Douai, in octavo: Stewech's Selections, with the Paratitla or summaries of Leander of St Martin.

1651.

Lugduni-Batavorum, ex officina Jo. Maire, in-4° : Arnobii..... libri VII, cum recensione viri celeberrimi et integris omnium commentariis. Editio novissima atque omnium accuratissima. « Quod ad hanc Arnobii nostri editionem, quam accuratissimam hic exhibemus, attinet, typographus inquit, exemplar ante aliquot annos nacti fuimus manu viri celeberrimi emendatum, cujus eruditio et fama in his artibus, quae ab humanitate nomen habent, veluti principatum tenet. Curam postmodum itidem viro erudito commisimus, ut quicquid ad gloriam hujus editionis colligi posset, in medium produceret. Itaque omnes et quidem integros commentatores, nulla parte truncata, in unum corpus redegimus, ut editionis ratio ex iis peti possit — ita ut nihil ei desit, quod vel votis exoptari possit. » — Recensionis hujus auctorem fuisse putant Salmasium, cujus etiam commentarius morte interceptus sit. Ac quantum quidem comparando didicimus, non mutationum indicium prorsus nullum apparet, credo, ne decor typographicus interciperetur, hoc viro certe non indigna est. Igitur a superioribus toto caelo quidem differt, plurimas tamen ex iis lectionibus suscepit, quas Ursinus ad marginem suae editionis proposuisse indicavimus adeoque fortasse Ciacconii ingenio praecipue Salmasius juvavit. De reliquis hujus editionis dotibus non est, quod pluribus lectores doceamus. Invenias Canteri, Stewechii, Elmenhorstii et Heraldi commentaria ad verbum descripta. Commodis doctorum hoc saltem consulere potuissent si indicem universalem subjecissent. Quod reliquum est, procurasse hanc editionem ex parte (nempe ut singulorum animadversiones rite describerentur) dictus est Antonius Thysius, I. C., cujus etiam in Arnobium epigramma pagina post dedicationem proxima ostendit. Typothetarum erroribus iisque admodum foedis hanc editionem nitidissimam scatere, Nurrius imprimis conquestus est.

Leiden, from the press of Jo. Maire, in quarto: The seven books of Arnobius....., with the recension of a most celebrated man and the complete commentaries of all. The newest edition and the most accurate of all. "As regards this edition of our Arnobius, which we present here as most accurate," says the printer, "some years ago we obtained a copy corrected by the hand of a most celebrated man, whose learning and fame hold, as it were, the first place in those arts which take their name from humanity. Afterwards we likewise entrusted the task to a learned man, so that he might bring into public view whatever could be gathered for the glory of this edition. And so we have brought all the commentators, and complete ones at that, with no part cut off, into one body, so that the method of the edition may be learned from them, so that nothing is lacking to it which could be wished for even in prayers." The author of this recension is thought to have been Salmasius, whose commentary too was cut short by death. And indeed, so far as we have learned by comparison, no indication whatever of the changes appears, lest, I believe, the typographical elegance be interrupted; it is certainly not unworthy of this man. It therefore differs from the earlier ones by the whole heaven, yet it has taken up very many of those readings which we have shown that Ursinus proposed in the margin of his edition, and so perhaps it was chiefly with Ciacconius's ingenuity that Salmasius helped it. As for the other merits of this edition, there is no reason to instruct readers at greater length. You would find the commentaries of Canter, Stewech, Elmenhorst and Heraldus copied word for word. They could at least have served the convenience of the learned in this, if they had added a general index. For the rest, Antonius Thysius, I.C. [jurisconsult], is said to have seen to this edition in part (namely so that the notes of the individual [commentators] might be properly copied), and the page next after the dedication also shows his epigram on Arnobius. That this most elegant edition teems with errors of the compositors, and very ugly ones, Nurrius above all complained.

Editors' notes and page, col. 363

Footnotes

(1) Journal des savants, février, page 44 : « Le tout avec des remarques de différents auteurs. »

Journal des savants, February, page 44: "The whole with remarks by various authors."

(printed under page 184)

Page

running head: 363 ARNOBII NOTITIA ED (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹terposito. Neque vero›; B ‹Tolosae, 1612, in-8°›; C ‹tum, cujus eruditio›; D ‹pit, quas Ursinus›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the word fragment "terposito" (interposito) broken from the previous column; editors' matter: the whole column is the editors' notice of editions of Arnobius (‹terposito. Neque vero animadversiones›, ‹Tolosae, 1612›, ‹1634.›, ‹Duaci, in-8°›, ‹1651.›, ‹Lugduni-Batavorum›); unsure: "juvavit" is unclear in the type (it could be read liuavit); "appictae" and "excripta" are set as printed; the right-hand column of the page is cut off and not set

PL 5:364

1666.

Parisiis, apud Joann. Dupuis, in-folio, cum Cypriani operibus ex editione Rigaltii per Priorium. Ex Ephemeridibus parisiensibus hujus anni intelleximus, variorum notis excerptis, priori more instructos esse, quotquot praeter Cyprianum Rigaltianum hic auctores evulgati sunt. Textus ex Lugduno-Batava una cum omnibus, auctis itidem, vitiis est repetitus.

At Paris, at the house of Jean Dupuis, in folio, with the works of Cyprian from the edition of Rigault, by Priorius. From the Parisian Ephemerides of this year we have learned that all the authors published here besides the Rigaltian Cyprian are furnished in the earlier manner, with notes of various [scholars] excerpted. The text was repeated from the Leiden [edition], together with all its faults, likewise increased.

1677.

Lugduni, apud Anissonios, in-folio, in Bibl. Patrum, tom. III, pp. 430-514. Recusa Priorii. Notae maximam partem Elmenhorstii sunt, raro Heraldi, Stewichii, etc., quibus suas Priorius interspersit.

At Lyons, at the house of the Anissons, in folio, in the Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. III, pp. 430-514. A reprint of Priorius. The notes are for the most part Elmenhorst's, rarely Hérault's, Stewech's, etc., among which Priorius interspersed his own.

SAECULO DECIMO OCTAVO.

Eighteenth century.

1715.

Parisiis, apud Jo. Bapt. Delespine, in-folio, in Nicolai le Nourry Apparatu ad Bibl. max. Patrum, Lugduni editam, tom. II, pp. 257-570. — Dissertio in Arnobium, in qua post analyses singulorum librorum, de auctore, operis aetate, consilio, argumento et tractatione, stylo, eruditione et reliquis dotibus, de opere distribuendo, librorum integritate, ac textus corruptione, — de erroribus quibusdam Arnobii, de variis horum librorum codd. mss. editionibus et in eos notis et observationibus, fuse pro more suo, sed praeclare disserit, a p. 257 ad 296, denique a p. 296 ad 570, novas in Arnobium observationes profert, in quibus vel argumenta singula, quibus ille cum in asserenda veritate, tum refutandis adversariorum erroribus utitur, examinantur, vel potiora antiquitates monumenta illustrantur.

At Paris, at the house of Jean-Baptiste Delespine, in folio, in Nicolas le Nourry's Apparatus to the Bibliotheca maxima Patrum published at Lyons, vol. II, pp. 257-570. — A dissertation on Arnobius, in which, after analyses of the individual books, he discourses at length, as is his custom, but excellently, on the author, the age of the work, its purpose, argument and treatment, style, erudition and remaining qualities, on the distribution of the work, the integrity of the books and the corruption of the text, — on certain errors of Arnobius, on the various manuscript codices of these books, the editions, and the notes and observations on them, from p. 257 to 296; finally, from p. 296 to 570, he puts forward new observations on Arnobius, in which either the individual arguments which he uses both in asserting the truth and in refuting the errors of his adversaries are examined, or the more important monuments of antiquity are illustrated.

1768.

Venetiis, ex typogr. Jo. Bapt. Albritii, in-folio, in Gallandi Bibl. vet. Patrum, etc., tom. IV, a pag. 135 ad 224. Sistitur textus editionis Lugduno Batavae emaculatus et adhibitis iis, quae Nurrius attulerat, perpolitus. Simul constitutum erat, notas addiere selectiores, quaeque imprimis ad emendandum textum spectarent, sed hic industriam aeque ac judicium desideramus. Cui bono, quaeso, Priorii notae, quas omnibus paginis inculcatas videbis. Singularis autem qua praecedentes editiones Arnobii haec antecellit, eaque nescio an summa virtus est textus, quem praeter Canterum ad unam omnes continua serie exhibebant, in capita descriptio, quorum analysis in calce subjecta compendium quasi totius scriptoris praebet.

At Venice, from the press of Giovanni Battista Albrizzi, in folio, in Galland's Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, etc., vol. IV, from p. 135 to 224. The text of the Leiden edition is presented, cleansed of faults and thoroughly polished by the use of those things which Le Nourry had brought forward. At the same time it had been resolved to add the more select notes, and those which pertained chiefly to emending the text, but here we miss both diligence and judgement. To what purpose, I ask, are the notes of Priorius, which you will see thrust in on every page? But the singular [merit] by which this surpasses the preceding editions of Arnobius, and which is perhaps its greatest virtue, is the division into chapters of the text, which all of them, to the last one, apart from Canter, presented in a continuous series; an analysis of these chapters, appended at the end, provides as it were a compendium of the whole writer.

1783.

Wirceburgi, in off. libr. Stabeliana, in-8°: Arnobii Afri adversus gentes libri VII et Julii Firmici Materni V. C. de Errore prof. Rel., etc.

At Würzburg, in the Stahel bookshop, in octavo: The seven books of Arnobius the African Against the Nations, and Julius Firmicus Maternus, V. C., On the Error of Profane Religions, etc.

Iidem sub titulo: Opera SS. Patrum latinorum, volumen quintum.

The same under the title: Works of the Holy Latin Fathers, volume five.

SAECULO DECIMO NONO.

Nineteenth century.

1816.

Lipsiae, sumptibus Frid. Christ. Guil. Vogelii,

At Leipzig, at the expense of Friedrich Christian Wilhelm Vogel,

Editors' notes and page, col. 364

Footnotes

(1) ‹anchor: hujus anni (1) intelleximus› · call in col 364

(printed under page 184) (1) Journal des savants, février, page 41 : « Le tout avec des remarques de différents auteurs. »

Journal des savants, February, page 41: "The whole with remarks by various authors."

(printed under page 184)

Page

running head: 365 DISSERTATIO IN ARNOBIUM, (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹CAPUT PRIMUM›; B ‹aut ethnici causam se obtinuisse›; C ‹nomen vexatos fuisse aut iisdem›; D (none visible)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: opening lines "2 tom. in-8°..." are the end of the editors' notice on Arnobius, set in two columns; its last word "no-" continues in the next column as "tis" (notis). Full-width title lines not set: DISSERTATIO / In septem Arnobii di[sputationum libros] / ADVERSUS GENTES / (AUCTORE DOM LE NO[URRY]), standing between the notice and CAPUT PRIMUM. The dissertation itself (CAPUT PRIMUM. Analysis horum librorum...) below the band belongs to the next unit and is not set here.
other: a full-width band stands across cols 365/366 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 366 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 365 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
other: the column continues with CAPUT PRIMUM. (another unit); not set here

PL 5:366

Editors' notes and page, col. 366

Page

running head: …TIO IN ARNOBIUM, CAP. I. (left part cut off at image edge); column number 366
marginal letters: A ‹bendum ideo tantum›; B ‹et unde ipse›; C ‹memores et immemores›; D (none)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with "tis", the rest of "no-tis" broken from col. 365; editors' matter: ‹tis priorum interpretum› (end of the list of editions, Orelli); full-width title "[DISSER]TATIO PRAEVIA in [Ar]nobii disputationum [adversus] GENTES LIBROS. ([AUCTO]RE DOM LE NOURRY.)" stands between "Orellius." and "bendum", cut off at left, not set; dissertation text in this column begins with "bendum", the rest of "scri-bendum" broken from col. 365; editors' matter: ‹bendum ideo tantum› (Le Nourry's preliminary dissertation); UNSURE: "impulsum" looks like "impnlsum" in the scan (worn type?); "dici" and "fortuna" poorly printed but readable
other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 365 (reading order, moved on receipt)
other: the text of this column below the full-width band belongs to the next unit; not set here (rail-only part)