PL 7 · cols. 79–148

L. Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius, Liber de Ira Dei, ad Donatum

Editors' preface

PL 7:79

LIBER DE IRA DEI, AD DONATUM.

The Book on the Wrath of God, to Donatus.

CAPUT PRIMUM.

Chapter I.

De sapientia divina et humana.

On divine and human wisdom.

Animadverti saepe, Donate, plurimos id existimare (quod etiam nonnulli philosophorum putaverunt), non irasci Deum; quoniam vel benefica sit tantummodo natura divina, nec cuiquam nocere, praestantissimae atque optimae congruat potestati; vel certe nil curet omnino, ut neque ex beneficentia ejus quidquam boni perveniat ad nos, neque ex maleficentia quidquam mali. Quorum error, quia maximus est, et ad evertendum vitae humanae statum spectat, coarguendus est a nobis, ne et ipse fallaris, impulsus

I have often noticed, Donatus, that very many people think this (which some of the philosophers also held), that God is not angry; since either the divine nature is only beneficent, and to harm no one befits the most excellent and best power; or else He cares for nothing at all, so that neither does any good come to us from His beneficence, nor any evil from His maleficence. Their error, because it is very great and tends to overturn the condition of human life, must be refuted by us, lest you too be deceived, impelled

Editors' notes and page, col. 79

Footnotes

(printed under page 39)

(1) ‹anchor: Liber de ira Dei› · lemma note, title, col 79

Liber de ira Dei, ad Donatum. Ita ferunt plerique mss. et editi. In ms Bonon. antiquiore est L. Caelii Firmiani Lactantii incipit de Ira Dei liber VIII. In Regio-Puteano, Caelii Firmiani institutionum Divinarum de Vita beata explicit septimus liber, incipit de Ira Divina liber VIII. Legitur quoque de Ira Divina, in 1, Oxoniensi. In 16 mss. deest ad Donatum. Extat de hoc libro honorificum B. Hieronymi testimonium ad cap. IV Epist. ad Ephesios, his verbis: Firmianus noster librum de Ira Dei docto pariter et eloquenti sermone conscripsit, quem qui legerit, puto ei ad irae intellectum satis abundeque sufficere, etc. Eumdem librum appellat pulcherrimum in libro de Scriptor. Ecclesiast. in Firmiano. Cavendum tamen a themate illius, quod est de Ira Dei; nam toto libro docet, irae affectum et alios quosdam vere et proprie in Deo reperiri, et praesertim cap. 15, 16 et 17 quod etiam asseruit lib. II Div. Institut. cap. 18. Quem locum adi. ISAEUS.

A Book on the Anger of God, to Donatus. So most manuscripts and editions have it. In the older Bologna manuscript it is: "Here begins the eighth book of L. Caelius Firmianus Lactantius, On the Anger of God." In the Regio-Puteanus: "Here ends the seventh book of Caelius Firmianus's Divine Institutes, On the Happy Life; here begins the eighth book, On the Divine Anger." "On the Divine Anger" is also the reading in one Oxford manuscript. In 16 manuscripts "to Donatus" is missing. Blessed Jerome bears honourable witness to this book on chapter 4 of the Epistle to the Ephesians, in these words: "Our Firmianus wrote a book On the Anger of God in a style as learned as it is eloquent; whoever reads it will, I think, find it amply and abundantly sufficient for an understanding of anger," etc. He calls the same book "most beautiful" in his book On Ecclesiastical Writers, under Firmianus. Yet one must be wary of its thesis, which is "on the anger of God"; for throughout the book he teaches that the affection of anger and certain others are truly and properly found in God, especially in chapters 15, 16 and 17, which he also asserted in Divine Institutes book II, chapter 18. See that passage. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 39)

(2) ‹anchor: Animadverti saepe, Donate› · lemma note, col 79

Animadverti saepe, Donate. Imitatio est Ciceronis, qui Paradoxa sua sic inchoat: Animadverti saepe, Brute.—Donate. Hunc nonnulli fuisse censent Donatum confessorem, cui Lactantius suum de Mortibus Persecutorum dicavit librum. Alii volunt fuisse Donatum haeresiarcham Donatistarum, alteri vero Aelium Donatum Grammaticum S. Hieronymi praeceptorem: quod cum divinari magis, quam certo sciri possit, penes lectorem remitto examen et judicium.

I have often noticed, Donatus. This imitates Cicero, who begins his Paradoxes thus: "I have often noticed, Brutus." — Donatus. Some think this was Donatus the confessor, to whom Lactantius dedicated his book On the Deaths of the Persecutors. Others will have it that he was Donatus, the heresiarch of the Donatists; others again Aelius Donatus the grammarian, Saint Jerome's teacher. Since this can be guessed rather than known for certain, I leave the examination and judgement to the reader.

(printed under page 39)

(3) ‹anchor: Plurimos id existimare› · lemma note, col 79

Plurimos id existimare. Ita veteres 2 edit. Rom. et Betul. cum omnibus mss. praeter 2 Bonon. et Tax. in quibus est aestimare. Caeteri edit. id tanquam inutile abjecerunt.

That very many think this. So the two old Roman editions and Betuleius's, with all the manuscripts except the two Bologna ones and Tax., in which it is "aestimare". The other editions threw out "id" as useless.

(printed under page 39)

(4) ‹anchor: Coarguendus est a nobis› · lemma note, col 79

Coarguendus est a nobis. Abest praepositio a ms. 1 Bonon. antiq.

Must be refuted by us. The preposition is absent from one old Bologna manuscript.

(printed under page 39)

(5) ‹anchor: Ne et ipse fallaris› · lemma note, col 79

Ne et ipse fallaris. Additum et ex omnibus mss. et vet. ed. Rom. an. 1470.

Lest you too be deceived. "Et" is added from all the manuscripts and the old Roman edition of the year 1470.

(printed under page 39)

(6) ‹anchor: Nec tamen nos tam arrogantes sumus› · lemma note, col 80

Nec tamen nos tam arrogantes sumus. Tam abest a 21 mss. et 3 vet. editis.

Yet we are not so arrogant. "Tam" is absent from 21 manuscripts and 3 old editions.

(printed under page 39)

(7) ‹anchor: Tenebroso corporis domicilio circumsepta› · lemma note, col 80

Tenebroso corporis domicilio circumsepta. Platonicum hoc est, qui alibi τὸ σῶμα τῆς ψυχῆς σκῆνος, alibi ὄχημα nominat, alibi φυλακήν: Cicero nunc vas, nunc receptaculum. De quo in Divinis Institut. plura dicta sunt. Pauli philosophia magnificentius de dignitate corporis humani sentit. Sic Corinthiis scribit I Cor. cap. 3, v. 6: Nescitis, quia templum Dei estis, et Spiritus Dei habitat in vobis. Rursus, Nescitis, quoniam corpora vestra membra sunt Christi, cap. 5 v. 15.

Hemmed in by the dark dwelling of the body. This is Platonic: Plato calls the body the soul's tent in one place, its vehicle in another, its prison in another; Cicero calls it now a vessel, now a receptacle. Of this more was said in the Divine Institutes. Paul's philosophy thinks more grandly of the dignity of the human body. Thus he writes to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. chapter 3, verse 6: "Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you?" And again: "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?" chapter 5, verse 15.

(printed under page 39)

(8) ‹anchor: Longe a veri perspectione› · lemma note, col 80

Longe a veri perspectione. Ita plures edd. et omnes fere mss, cum Thomasio. Et recte. In 5 mss. rec. et edit. Rom. 1470, a veri perfectione, male; in 6 editis, a Dei perspectione, vitiose; non enim ibi de Dei cognitione sermonem instituere vult Lactantius, sed ostendere Deum esse auctorem cognitionis veritatis. GALLAEUS.— De hac sententia vide libr. II Institut. cap. 9.

Far from the perception of the truth. So most editions and almost all manuscripts, with Thomasius; and rightly. In 5 recent manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470, "from the perfection of the truth", wrongly; in 6 editions, "from the perception of God", faultily; for Lactantius does not mean to begin a discourse there on the knowledge of God, but to show that God is the author of the knowledge of the truth. GALLAEUS. — On this thought see Institutes book II, chapter 9.

(printed under page 39)

(9) ‹anchor: Humanitate› · lemma note, col 80

Humanitate. Humanitas hic non notat illam virtutem, quam proprie homo alteri homini praestat, sed naturam humanam, ipsum hominem. Minutius Felix in Octavio: Timorem omnem, quo humanitas regitur, penitus sustulerunt.

Humanity. "Humanitas" here does not denote the virtue that one man properly shows another, but human nature, man himself. Minucius Felix in the Octavius: "They have utterly removed all the fear by which humanity is governed."

(printed under page 39)

Page

running head: 79 FIRM. LAC[TANTII] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹tur; ergo et justos diligit›; B ‹CAPUT PRIMUM.›; C ‹coarguendus est a nobis›; D ‹noster librum de Ira Dei› (in the Variorum notes, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "tur;" carried over from the previous column; the English begins at "therefore". Editors' matter set: the closing part of the editors' synopsis of De ira Dei (tur; ergo et justos diligit ... converterentur (Cap. 20)). Full-width lines not set: the double rule and the book title "LIB[ER] DE IRA DEI, AD [DONATUM]" with its ornament, which stand between the synopsis and CAPUT PRIMUM; also the heading "VARIORUM [NOTAE]" above the foot notes. The Variorum notes at the page foot (Liber de ira Dei, ad Donatum ... id tanquam inu-) were left for the later pass. UNSURE: "ne et ipse fallaris" looks like "nc" in the scan, probably a damaged e, so it is set as ne; scan smudges such as existimarc and celiam were read as existimare and etiam.
other: a full-width band stands across cols 79/80 in mid-page: the 5 paragraph(s) above it in col 80 are set here, after the 6 above it in col 79 (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 CAPUT PRIMUM.

PL 7:80

auctoritate hominum, qui se putant esse sapientes. Nec tamen nos tam arrogantes sumus, ut comprehensam nostro ingenio veritatem gloriemur : sed doctrinam Dei sequimur, qui scire solus potest, et revelare secreta. Cujus doctrinae philosophi expertes existimaverunt, naturam rerum conjectura posse deprehendi. Quod nequaquam fieri potest, quia mens hominis, tenebroso corporis domicilio circumsepta, longe a veri perspectione summota est ; et hoc differt ab humanitate divinitas, quod humanitatis est ignoratio, divinitatis scientia.

by the authority of men who think themselves to be wise. Nor yet are we so arrogant as to boast that the truth has been grasped by our own intellect; but we follow the teaching of God, Who alone is able to know and to reveal secret things. Lacking this teaching, the philosophers supposed that the nature of things could be discovered by conjecture. This can by no means be done, because the mind of man, hedged about by the dark dwelling of the body, is removed far from the perception of the truth; and divinity differs from humanity in this, that ignorance belongs to humanity, knowledge to divinity.

Unde nobis aliquo lumine opus est ad depellendas tenebras, quibus offusa est hominis cogitatio, quoniam

Hence we have need of some light to dispel the darkness with which the thought of man is overspread, since

Editors' notes and page, col. 80

Page

running head: FIRM. LACTANTII 80
marginal letters: A Objectio : Deus hominem irasci vetat; B auctoritate hominum, qui se putant; C tenebras, quibus offusa est; D (in the notes area) alibi ὄχημα nominat
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: editors' matter set: the end of Scultetus's argument of De ira Dei (Objectio : Deus hominem irasci...), signed SCULTETUS. The full-width title "LIBER [DE IR]A DEI, AD DONATUM." with its ornament stands between the argument and the text, and is cut off at the left, so it is not set. The full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE and the notes below it are not set (they belong to a later pass). "Deus" and "lege" in the first line are read through blurred type ("Dens", "Iege"). The last word "quo-" is split at the column break.
other: the 5 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 79 (reading order, moved on receipt)

PL 7:81

in carne mortali agentes, nostris sensibus divinare non possumus. Lumen autem mentis humanae Deus est, quem qui cognoverit, et in pectus admiserit, illuminato corde mysterium veritatis agnoscet: remoto autem Deo coelestique doctrina, omnia erroribus plena sunt. Recteque Socrates, cum esset omnium philosophorum doctissimus, tamen ut caeterorum argueret inscitiam, qui se aliquid tenere arbitrabantur, ait se nihil scire, nisi unum, quod nihil sciret. Intellexit enim, doctrinam illam nihil habere in se certi, nihil veri; nec, ut putant quidam, simulavit ipse doctrinam, ut alios refelleret; sed vidit ex parte aliqua veritatem. Testatusque est etiam in judicio (sicut traditur a Platone) quod nulla esset humana sapientia: adeo doctrinam, qua tum philosophi gloriabantur, contempsit, derisit, abjecit, ut id ipsum pro summa doctrina profiteretur, quod nihil scire didicisset. Si ergo nulla est sapientia humana, ut Socrates docuit, ut Plato tradidit, apparet esse divinam, nec ulli alii, quam Deo veritatis notitiam subjacere. Deus igitur noscendus est, in quo solo veritas est. Ille mundi parens, et conditor rerum, qui oculis non videtur, mente vix cernitur. Cujus religio multis modis impugnari solet ab iis, qui neque veram sapientiam tenere potuerunt, neque magni et coelestis arcani comprehendere rationem.

while we live in mortal flesh, we cannot divine [it] by our own senses. But the light of the human mind is God, and whoever has come to know Him and has admitted Him into his breast will, with his heart illuminated, recognize the mystery of truth; but when God and heavenly teaching are removed, all things are full of errors. And rightly did Socrates, though he was the most learned of all the philosophers, nevertheless, in order to convict of ignorance the rest, who thought that they held something, say that he knew nothing except one thing, that he knew nothing. For he understood that that learning had nothing certain in itself, nothing true; nor, as some think, did he himself feign learning in order to refute others; but he saw the truth in some part. And he also testified at his trial (as is related by Plato) that there was no human wisdom: so much did he despise, deride and cast away the learning in which the philosophers then gloried, that he professed as the highest learning this very thing, that he had learned to know nothing. If therefore there is no human wisdom, as Socrates taught and as Plato handed down, it is clear that [wisdom] is divine, and that the knowledge of truth is subject to no one other than God. God therefore must be known, in Whom alone is truth. He, the Parent of the world and Founder of things, Who is not seen with the eyes, is scarcely discerned with the mind. His religion is wont to be assailed in many ways by those who have been able neither to hold true wisdom nor to comprehend the reason of the great and heavenly mystery.

CAPUT II.

Chapter II.

De veritate, deque ejus gradibus, atque de Deo.

On truth, and on its steps, and on God.

Nam cum sint gradus multi, per quos ad domicilium

For since there are many steps by which to the dwelling

Editors' notes and page, col. 81

Footnotes

(printed under page 40)

(1) ‹anchor: Nostris sensibus› · lemma note, col 81

Nostris sensibus. Mss. 7 praemittunt de.

By our senses. Seven manuscripts put "de" before it.

(printed under page 40)

(2) ‹anchor: Recteque Socrates› · lemma note, col 81

Recteque Socrates. Francius, forte Itaque. In Em. est Recte ergo.

And rightly Socrates. Francius: perhaps "Itaque". In Em. it is "Recte ergo".

(printed under page 40)

(3) ‹anchor: Inscitiam› · lemma note, col 81

Inscitiam. Reimm. Justitiam. Prave. Pierr., Parrh., insaniam. Rost. Ven. 1471, utraque 78, Paris., Ald., et hoc recentiores omnes, inscitiam. Lond., Reg., Goth., Ven. 1493, inscientiam. Recepi vocem Ciceroni et nostro gratam. Vid. lib. V. Confer. Gronov. ad Liv. XXII, cap. 25. BUNEMAN.

Ignorance. Reimm. has "Justitiam", wrongly. Pierr. and Parrh. have "insaniam". Rost., Venice 1471, both of 1478, Paris, Aldus, and after them all the more recent ones have "inscitiam". Lond., Reg., Goth. and Venice 1493 have "inscientiam". I have adopted the word dear to Cicero and to our author. See book V. Compare Gronovius on Livy XXII, chapter 25. BUNEMANN.

(printed under page 40)

(4) ‹anchor: Se nihil scire› · lemma note, col 81

Se nihil scire. Apud Platon. in Apolog. Socrat. sub initium, et Cic. I Acad. quaest.

That he knew nothing. In Plato's Apology of Socrates near the beginning, and Cicero, Academic Questions I.

(printed under page 40)

(5) ‹anchor: Putant› · lemma note, col 81

Putant. Ita ms. Bov. quam lectionem probat Heumannus; alii putabant.

They think. So the Bov. manuscript, a reading Heumann approves; others have "putabant".

(printed under page 40)

(6) ‹anchor: Simulavit ipse doctrinam› · lemma note, col 81

Simulavit ipse doctrinam. Mss. 7, ipse. Scripti 9 et 2 vet. edd. Rom., dissimulavit ipsam.

He himself feigned learning. Seven manuscripts have "ipse". Nine manuscripts and the two old Roman editions have "dissimulavit ipsam".

(printed under page 40)

(7) ‹anchor: Ex parte aliqua veritatem› · lemma note, col 81

Ex parte aliqua veritatem. Lond., Reg., Ex parte aliquam veritatem. Non male. Reliqui, ex parte aliqua, ut lib. III, cap. 5: Potest fieri, ut omnes ex parte aliqua erraverint, ex parte attigerint veritatem. Idem ex Cicerone lib. III, aliqua ex parte. BUN.

The truth in some part. Lond. and Reg.: "some truth in part"; not bad. The rest have "in some part", as in book III, chapter 5: "It may be that all have erred in some part and in part have touched the truth." Likewise from Cicero, book III, "in some part". BUN.

(printed under page 40)

(8) ‹anchor: Testatusque› · lemma note, col 81

Testatusque. Abest que a Colbert. 1 et 9 editis. Plato scripsit pro Socrate Apologiam, quemadmodum etiam Xenophon et Lysias. In ea Plato Socratem causam suam contra calumniatores defendentem inducit, ac ut elevaret cujusdam sapientiae titulo turgentis opinionem, pulcherrima et modesta syncrisi sapientiae illius suam praefert, quod ipse de nulla sapientia gloriaretur, ille vero cum nihil sciat, sapiens tamen videre velit. Aristophanes Comicus, a Socratis aemulis pecunia corruptus, eum ludo scenico indignis modis praescindit, inter caetera calumnians, quod μεριμνοσοφίστης pro mercede aequum et iniquum doceat. Hanc calumniam Commentator fideliter (ut caeteras quoque) retundit. BETUL.

And he bore witness. "-que" is absent from Colbert 1 and 9 editions. Plato wrote an Apology for Socrates, as did Xenophon and Lysias too. In it Plato brings on Socrates defending his cause against his slanderers; and to deflate the opinion of a man swollen with the title of wisdom, by a most beautiful and modest comparison he sets his own wisdom above the other's: that he himself boasted of no wisdom, while the other, though he knows nothing, still wishes to seem wise. Aristophanes the comic poet, bribed by Socrates's rivals, cut him up shamefully in a stage play, slandering him among other things as a "thinker-sophist" who taught right and wrong for a fee. The Commentator faithfully rebuts this slander (as he does the others too). BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 40)

(9) ‹anchor: Platone› · lemma note, col 81

Platone. Plato in Apolog.

Plato. Plato in the Apology.

(printed under page 40)

(10) ‹anchor: Adeo doctrinam› · lemma note, col 81

Adeo doctrinam. Sic omnes mss. et plerique editi. In 6 impressis est adeoque.

So far learning. So all the manuscripts and most editions. In 6 printed editions it is "adeoque".

(printed under page 40)

(11) ‹anchor: In quo solo veritas est› · lemma note, col 81–82

In quo solo veritas est. 1 Reg. rec. et 7 editi, in quo sola.

In whom alone truth is. One recent Reg. and 7 editions: "in quo sola".

(printed under page 40)

(12) ‹anchor: Stabilem gressum tenere› · lemma note, col 81–82

Stabilem gressum tenere. Lucanus lib. I: Inconcussa tenens dubio vestigia cursu. Senec. in Thiest. 5: Stabilem in plano figere gressum. Conf. not. infra. BUN.

To keep a steady step. Lucan, book I: "Keeping unshaken footsteps on a doubtful course." Seneca, Thyestes 5: "To plant a steady step on level ground." Compare the note below. BUN.

(printed under page 40)

(13) ‹anchor: Fabricatorum› · lemma note, col 81–82

Fabricatorum. Scilicet deorum. Sic emendavi ex cunctis fere mss. et vulgatis Gymnic., Is., Cellar., Walch., multo melius quam fabricatos 4 manuscriptorum rec. et 11 editorum. Quid enim sibi vult cultus deorum fabricatos? Sed et supra lib. VII Div. Inst., ad impios cultus manufactorum deorum.—Cultus deorum humana manu fabricatorum. Voces humana manu quae sunt in omnibus, non puto sollicitandas, libenter Latini istas voces conjungunt. Noto ad Lact. lib. V, cap. 22: Non sacrificare lapidibus humana manu factis: Lib. VII, cap. 11: Manibus humanis laboratum. BUN.

Fashioned. That is, of the gods. I have corrected it so from almost all the manuscripts and the printed texts of Gymnicus, Is., Cellarius and Walch, much better than "fabricatos" of 4 recent manuscripts and 11 editions. For what does "the worship of the gods fashioned" mean? Compare above, Divine Institutes book VII: "to the impious worship of gods made by hand." — The worship of gods fashioned by human hand. The words "by human hand", which are in all copies, should not, I think, be tampered with; the Latins gladly join these words. I note on Lactantius book V, chapter 22: "not to sacrifice to stones made by human hand"; book VII, chapter 11: "worked by human hands." BUN.

(printed under page 40)

(14) ‹anchor: Cognoscere ministrum ejus ac nuntium› · lemma note, col 81–82

Cognoscere ministrum ejus ac nuntium, etc. Angelum nimirum magni consilii, Haec est enim vita aeterna, inquit ipse Dominus. Joan. XVII, ut cognoscant te solum verum Deum, et quem misisti JESUM Christum. Si missus, ergo legatus, nuntius, angelus, seu apostolus, salva tamen majestate divina. Item eadem conditione minister. Rom. XV.

To know his minister and messenger, etc. That is, the Angel of great counsel. "For this is eternal life," says the Lord himself, John 17, "that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." If sent, then an envoy, messenger, angel or apostle, the divine majesty however being preserved. Likewise, on the same condition, minister: Romans 15.

(printed under page 40)

(15) ‹anchor: Implicati› · lemma note, col 81–82

Implicati. Ms. Bov.

Entangled. The Bov. manuscript.

(printed under page 40)

(16) ‹anchor: Verum› · lemma note, col 81–82

Verum. At ms. Bov. legit vera.

True. But the Bov. manuscript reads "vera".

(printed under page 40)

(17) ‹anchor: Horum imperitiam jam coarguimus› · lemma note, col 82

Horum imperitiam jam coarguimus in secundo Divinarum Institutionum libro. Inde patet Divinarum Institutionum libros ante librum de Ira Dei fuisse conscriptos.

Their ignorance we have already refuted in the second book of the Divine Institutes. Hence it is clear that the books of the Divine Institutes were written before the book On the Anger of God.

(printed under page 40)

(18) ‹anchor: Qui cum sentiant› · lemma note, col 82

Qui cum sentiant. Ita emendatum ex omnibus pene mss. et edit. Rom. 1470 et Gymnic. Vide seq. Reg. I rec. et edit. Crat., qui cum sentiunt. Multi impressi, qui consentiunt.

Who, though they hold. So corrected from almost all the manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470 and Gymnicus. See what follows. One recent Reg. and Cratander's edition: "qui cum sentiunt". Many printed editions: "qui consentiunt".

(printed under page 40)

Page

running head: 81 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the right edge of the image)
marginal letters: A ‹niam in carne mortali agentes›; B ‹gloriabantur, contempsit, derisit›; C ‹Nostris sensibus. Mss. 7› (notes); D ‹ut lib. III, cap. 5› (notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "niam" (end of a word, presumably quoniam, broken from col. 80) and ends mid-sentence at "domicilium"; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" below the text, cut off at the right edge, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (from "Nostris sensibus" to "Adeo doctrinam ... adeoque") not set, left for the later pass; "sint" in the last line has a stray mark over the i, read as sint

PL 7:82

veritatis ascenditur, non est facile cuilibet evehi ad summum. Caligantibus enim veritatis fulgore luminibus, qui stabilem gressum tenere non possunt, revolvuntur in planum. Primus autem gradus est, intelligere falsas religiones, et abjicere impios cultus deorum humana manu fabricatorum. Secundus vero, perspicere animo, quod unus sit Deus summus, cujus potestas ac providentia effecerit a principio mundum, et gubernet in posterum. Tertius, cognoscere ministrum ejus ac nuntium, quem legavit in terram; quo docente, liberati ab errore, quo implicati tenebamur, formatique ad veri Dei cultum, justitiam disceremus. Ex quibus omnibus gradibus, ut dixi, pronus est lapsus et facilis ad ruinam, nisi pedes inconcussa stabilitate figantur.

of truth one ascends, it is not easy for just anyone to be carried up to the summit. For when their eyes are dazzled by the brightness of truth, those who cannot keep a steady footing roll back down to the level ground. Now the first step is to recognize the false religions, and to cast away the impious worship of gods fashioned by human hand. The second, to perceive with the mind that there is one supreme God, Whose power and providence brought the world into being from the beginning and governs it hereafter. The third, to know His minister and messenger, Whom He sent as envoy to the earth, so that by His teaching, freed from the error in which we were held entangled and formed for the worship of the true God, we might learn justice. From all these steps, as I have said, the slip is headlong and the fall easy, unless the feet are planted with unshaken steadiness.

De primo gradu eos excuti videmus, qui, cum falsa intelligant, tamen verum non inveniunt, contemptisque terrenis fragilibusque simulacris, non ad colendum se Deum conferunt, quem ignorant: sed mundi elementa mirantes, coelum, terram, mare, solem, lunam, caeteraque astra venerantur. Sed horum imperitiam jam coarguimus in secundo Divinarum Institutionum libro. De secundo vero gradu eos dicimus cadere, qui cum sentiant, unum esse summum Deum, iidem tamen a philosophis irretiti, et falsis argumentationibus capti, aliter de unica illa majestate sentiunt, quam veritas habet; qui aut figuram negant

We see those dislodged from the first step who, though they understand what is false, yet do not find what is true, and, having despised earthly and fragile images, do not betake themselves to worshipping God, Whom they do not know, but, marvelling at the elements of the world, venerate the sky, the earth, the sea, the sun, the moon and the other stars. But we have already exposed their ignorance in the second book of the Divine Institutes. From the second step, however, we say that those fall who, though they perceive that there is one supreme God, are nevertheless ensnared by the philosophers and taken in by false arguments, and think otherwise about that unique majesty than the truth holds; who either deny a shape

Editors' notes and page, col. 82

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 82 (left edge cut off in the image)
marginal letters: A ‹veritatis ascenditur, non est›; B ‹blank line before De primo gradu eos excuti›; C ‹In quo solo veritas est (Variorum notae)›; D ‹tini istas voces conjungunt (Variorum notae)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (veritatis) and ends mid-sentence (figuram negant); full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE (cut off at left edge as RIORUM NOTAE) stands below the text and is not set; the Variorum notae below it are editors' commentary at the page foot, left for the later pass; "lunam" is printed with worn type at the line-end (looks like In-nam), read as lunam; facile and coelum/caeteraque read through worn type (coelum with oe, caeteraque with ae as printed)

PL 7:83

habere ullam Deum, aut nullo affectu commoveri putant, quia sit omnis affectus imbecillitatis, quae in Deo nulla est. De tertio vero ii praecipitantur, qui cum sciant legatum Dei, eumdemque divini et immortalis templi conditorem, tamen aut non accipiunt eum, aut aliter accipiunt, quam fides poscit: quos ex parte jam refutavimus in quarto supradicti operis libro, et refutabimus postea diligentius, cum respondere ad omnes sectas coeperimus, quae veritatem, dum disputant, perdiderunt.

of any kind to God, or think that He is moved by no affection, because every affection belongs to weakness, which in God is none. From the third step, however, those are cast headlong who, although they know the Envoy of God, and Him the same as the founder of the divine and immortal temple, nevertheless either do not receive Him, or receive Him otherwise than faith demands: these we have already partly refuted in the fourth book of the above-mentioned work, and we shall refute them later more carefully, when we begin to reply to all the sects which, while they dispute, have lost the truth.

Nunc vero contra eos disseremus, qui de secundo gradu lapsi, prava de summo Deo sentiunt. Aiunt enim quidam, nec gratificari eum cuiquam, nec irasci; sed securum, et quietum, immortalitatis suae bonis perfrui. Alii vero iram tollunt, gratiam relinquunt Deo; naturam enim summa virtute praestantem ut non maleficam, sic beneficam esse debere. Ita omnes philosophi de ira consentiunt; de gratia discrepant. Sed ut ad propositam materiam per ordinem descendat oratio, hujusmodi facienda nobis, et sequenda

But now we shall argue against those who, having fallen from the second step, hold wrong views about the supreme God. For some say that He neither shows favour to anyone nor is angry, but, free from care and at rest, enjoys the goods of His immortality. Others, however, take away anger but leave favour to God; for, [they say,] a nature excelling in the highest power ought, just as it is not maleficent, so to be beneficent. Thus all the philosophers agree concerning anger; concerning favour they differ. But so that our discourse may come down to the matter proposed in due order, of this kind must be made by us, and followed

Editors' notes and page, col. 83

Footnotes

(printed under page 41)

(1) ‹anchor: Qui aut figuram negant› · lemma note, col 83–84

Qui aut figuram negant habere ullam Deum. Deum nemo vidit unquam. Quae ergo est illa figura, ad quam homo, inquies, creatus est? Sed ne ipsa quidem humanis oculis occurrit, quae, ut ipse fateris, vix mente concipitur. Nos figuram Dei nullam cognoscimus. Vide Tertullianum adversus Marcionem, et Basilium Homil. 10.— Figuram... habere... Deum. Statuit quidem alibi, Deum esse incorporeum, e. g., lib. VII, cap. 3 et alias; figuram tamen Deo tribuit. Confer. cap. 11 et 18, in quo erravit cum aliis. BUN.

Who either deny that God has any form. No one has ever seen God. What then is that form, you will say, after which man was created? But not even that meets human eyes which, as you yourself admit, is scarcely conceived by the mind. We know no form of God. See Tertullian Against Marcion, and Basil, Homily 10. — That God has a form. He does lay down elsewhere that God is incorporeal, e.g. book VII, chapter 3, and elsewhere; yet he attributes a form to God. Compare chapters 11 and 18; in this he erred with others. BUN.

(printed under page 41)

(2) ‹anchor: Aut nullo affectu commoveri› · lemma note, col 83–84

Aut nullo affectu commoveri. Sic lego cum mss. 7 Vaticanis, Regio-Put., 2 al. Reg., 5 Colb., Marm., I Clarom., Brun. et 4 impressis. Mendum irrepsit in 3 Reg., 2 Vatic., I Colb. et multis editis, ubi pro nullo legitur ullo, quod res ipsa repudiat; nam Lactantius eos arguit, qui nullo affectu Deum commoveri putant.

Or is moved by no affection. So I read with 7 Vatican manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus, 2 other Reg., 5 Colbert, Marm., 1 Clermont, Brun. and 4 printed editions. A fault crept into 3 Reg., 2 Vatican, 1 Colbert and many editions, where "ullo" is read for "nullo", which the matter itself rejects; for Lactantius is refuting those who think God is moved by no affection.

(printed under page 41)

(3) ‹anchor: Divini et immortalis templi conditorem› · lemma note, col 83–84

Divini et immortalis templi conditorem. Templi vivis constructi lapidibus, I Pet., II, cujus templi dicatio divini Spiritus opus est. Sacerdos vero idem qui et conditor, aeternus ille nimirum, secundum ordinem Melchisedech, ut ad Hebraeos scriptum est. BETUL.

The founder of the divine and immortal temple. A temple built of living stones, 1 Peter 2, whose dedication is the work of the divine Spirit. And its priest is the same as its founder, that eternal one, namely, according to the order of Melchizedek, as is written to the Hebrews. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 41)

(4) ‹anchor: Quos ex parte› · lemma note, col 83–84

Quos ex parte. Mss. 2, Quod.

Whom in part. Two manuscripts: "Quod".

(printed under page 41)

(5) ‹anchor: Supradicti› · lemma note, col 83–84

Supradicti. Vide de hac voce not. lib. VI, cap. 5. Usus eadem Vopiscus in Aureliano cap. 9 et 36, licet satis commode possint esse duae voces. BUN.

Aforesaid. On this word see the note on book VI, chapter 5. Vopiscus used it in the Aurelian, chapters 9 and 36, though they could well enough be two words. BUN.

(printed under page 41)

(6) ‹anchor: Et refutabimus postea› · lemma note, col 83–84

Et refutabimus postea, etc. Videtur Lact. in animo habuisse ad omnes sectas tum in christianismo ortas respondere. Rivetus in Notis mss.

And we shall refute afterwards, etc. Lactantius seems to have had it in mind to answer all the sects that had then arisen in Christianity. Rivet, in his manuscript notes.

(printed under page 41)

(7) ‹anchor: Dum disputant› · lemma note, col 83–84

Dum disputant. Janus Gulielmus ad Plaut. Menaechm. cap. 4, testatur, in quibusdam exemplaribus haberi, dum dissipant, quam lectionem probat ipse. ISAEUS.—Buneman. quoque hanc ultimam lectionem habet, et sic illam probat.—Veritatem dum dissipant, perdiderunt. Idem toties inculcavit Lactantius; maxime de sectis, ad quas respicit, dixit lib. IV, cap. 30: Dissidium facerent, et ecclesiam (in qua veritas) dissiparent; lib. II, cap. 10: ut veritas... solet variis sermonibus dissipata corrumpi; lib. VII, cap. 22: opinio veri veritatem per diversa ora sermonesque varios dissipatam mutavit. BUN.

While they dispute. Janus Gulielmus, on Plautus's Menaechmi chapter 4, attests that some copies have "dum dissipant" (while they scatter), a reading he himself approves. ISAEUS. — Bunemann too has this last reading, and approves it thus: — "While they scatter the truth they have lost it." Lactantius drove the same point home many times; above all of the sects, which he has in view, he said in book IV, chapter 30: "they would make a schism and scatter the Church (in which the truth is)"; book II, chapter 10: "as truth... is apt to be corrupted when scattered in various accounts"; book VII, chapter 22: "the opinion of the true changed the truth, scattered through different mouths and various accounts." BUN.

(printed under page 41)

(8) ‹anchor: Quae veritatem, dum disputant, perdiderunt› · lemma note, col 83–84

Quae veritatem, dum disputant, perdiderunt. Sic legunt plerique mss. sic etiam editi. At Janus Guilielmi mavult legere cum antiquis suis codicibus dissipant, quibus etiam similes sunt mss. Ultr., Em., Br., 2 Reg., 3 Colb. Ratio ejus est, quod veritas disputatione invenitur, non perditur. Sed ego nihil mutandum censui; elegans enim et scopo est apta lectio. GALLAEUS.

Which lost the truth while they disputed. So most manuscripts read, and so the editions. But Janus Guilielmi prefers to read "dissipant" with his old codices, which the manuscripts Ultr., Em., Br., 2 Reg. and 3 Colbert also resemble. His reason is that truth is found by disputation, not lost. But I have judged that nothing should be changed; for the reading is elegant and fits the purpose. GALLAEUS.

(printed under page 41)

(9) ‹anchor: Alii vero iram tollunt› · lemma note, col 83–84

Alii vero iram tollunt. Ita legendum esse ex omnibus mss. et 6 impressis textus ipse suadet, non ut in 12 editis, Illi vero.

But others remove anger. The text itself urges that it be read so, from all the manuscripts and 6 printed editions, not "Illi vero" as in 12 editions.

(printed under page 41)

(10) ‹anchor: Ut non maleficam, sic beneficam esse debere› · lemma note, col 83–84

Ut non maleficam, sic beneficam esse debere. Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips., 2 Reimm.: Ut non maleficam esse debere. Cant., id est, Subl., Rost., Ven. 1471, utraque 78, 93, 97, Parrhas.: Et non maleficam esse debere. Paris, 1513: Praestantem, non maleficam esse debere. BUN.

That as it must not be harmful, so it must be beneficent. Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. and 2 Reimm.: "That it must not be harmful." Cant., that is Subiaco, Rost., Venice 1471, both of 1478, 1493, 1497, Parrhasius: "And it must not be harmful." Paris 1513: "That it must be excellent, not harmful." BUN.

(printed under page 41)

(11) ‹anchor: Et sequenda partitio est› · lemma note, col 83–84

Et sequenda partitio est. Sic lego ex antiquioribus et melioribus mss. 2 Bon., Regio-Put. et 2 al. Reg., 3 Colb. multisque aliis. In scriptis 6 Reg. et editis est, et exsequenda. quod idem est; sequi enim, pro exequi legitur apud Ciceronem.

And the division must be followed. So I read from the older and better manuscripts, 2 Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus and 2 other Reg., 3 Colbert and many others. In 6 Reg. manuscripts and the editions it is "et exsequenda", which is the same; for "sequi" is read for "exequi" in Cicero.

(printed under page 41)

(12) ‹anchor: Utrumque pariter detrahendum› · lemma note, col 83–84

Utrumque pariter detrahendum. Ex omnibus mss. et 13 vet. editis addidi pariter, quod caeteris impressis deest.

Both must be taken away alike. From all the manuscripts and 13 old editions I have added "pariter", which the other printed editions lack.

(printed under page 41)

(13) ‹anchor: Aut utrumque tribuendum› · lemma note, col 83–84

Aut utrumque tribuendum. Ita meliores et antiquiores mss. In 1 Reg. rec. et multis vulgatis est aut neutrum tribuendum. Plurimi mss. et editi 2 vet. Rom. et Betul. ferunt aut neutrum detrahendum.— Aut utrumque tribuendum. Haec lectio tenenda est, vel alia alterius codicis S. Salvatoris minus antiqui, Tax. et P. aut neutrum detrahendum, quae sensu eadem est cum priori. Quod si legatur ut in Aldina, et caeteris editionibus, aut neutrum tribuendum, hoc quartum membrum idem fuerit cum eo, quod ille secundo loco posuit, videlicet, aut utrumque pariter detrahendum; hoc animadvertit quoque Thomasius in notis. ISAEUS.

Or both must be attributed. So the better and older manuscripts. In one recent Reg. and many printed texts it is "or neither must be attributed". Very many manuscripts and the two old Roman editions and Betuleius's have "or neither must be taken away". — Or both must be attributed. This reading must be kept, or the other, of the second, less ancient codex of St Saviour, Tax. and P., "or neither must be taken away", which is the same in sense as the former. But if one reads, as in the Aldine and the other editions, "or neither must be attributed", this fourth member will be the same as the one he put in second place, namely "or both must be taken away alike"; Thomasius too noticed this in his notes. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 41)

(14) ‹anchor: Disconveniens Deo› · lemma note, col 83–84

Disconveniens Deo. Mss. 2 Bon., 1 Reg. rec., Tax., 1 Sorbon., 2 Colb. et ed. Betul. et Is. emendationis gratia praeferunt inconveniens Deo. At vox disconveniens, quae legitur in caeteris mss. et 12 editis, est Ciceroniana, ut existimant grammatici quidam.—Inconveniens Deo. Sic habet Bun. et notam sequentem exhibet: Angl. etiam Lond., Reg., Goth., Guelf., Memb.: Disconveniens Deo. Novi quidem Horatii, disconvenit; et Tertull., disconvenientiam, ab aliis observatam. Ita lib. I, cap. 11: Quanto id magis inconveniens Deo. Epist. Taurin., putant inconveniens fuisse. BUN.

Unbefitting God. The manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 recent Reg., Tax., 1 Sorbonne, 2 Colbert, and the editions of Betuleius and Isaeus, by way of correction, give "inconveniens Deo". But the word "disconveniens", read in the other manuscripts and 12 editions, is Ciceronian, as certain grammarians judge. — Inconveniens Deo. So Bunemann has it, and gives the following note: The English copies too, Lond., Reg., Goth., Guelf., Memb.: "Disconveniens Deo." I know indeed Horace's "disconvenit", and Tertullian's "disconvenientia", noticed by others. So book I, chapter 11: "How much more unbefitting is that to God." The Turin Epitome: "they think it unbefitting." BUN.

(printed under page 41)

(15) ‹anchor: Si malorum tantummodo auctor est Deus?› · lemma note, col 83–84

Si malorum tantummodo auctor est Deus? Theologi distinguunt inter malum poenae et malum culpae; prioris auctor est Deus, culpae non item. GALLAEUS.— Si malorum tantummodo auctor est Deus? loquitur de malis poenarum, quae Deus iratus infligit, quorum auctorem et causam Deum esse fatetur quoque sanctus Thomas, p-p. quaest. 49, art. 2. ISAEUS.

If God is the author of evils only? Theologians distinguish between the evil of punishment and the evil of fault; God is the author of the former, not likewise of fault. GALLAEUS. — If God is the author of evils only? He speaks of the evils of punishment, which God in anger inflicts; Saint Thomas too admits that God is their author and cause, Prima pars, question 49, article 2. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 41)

Page

running head: 83 FIRM. LACTANTI[I] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹habere ullam Deum, aut nullo affectu›; B ‹quunt Deo; naturam enim summa›; C ‹et 18, in quo erravit cum aliis› (in the notes); D ‹naechm. cap. 4, testatur› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" across both columns, cut off at the right edge, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (Qui aut figuram negant habere ullam Deum ... Galleus) are editors' notes at the page foot, left for the later pass, not set; last word "se-" split at the column break (sequenda in col. 84), English ends correspondingly with "fol-"; the column begins mid-sentence with "habere"

PL 7:84

partitio est, cum diversa et repugnantia sint, ira, et gratia. Aut ira tribuenda est Deo, et gratia detrahenda; aut utrumque pariter detrahendum. Aut ira demenda est, et gratia tribuenda, aut utrumque tribuendum. Aliud amplius, praeter haec, nihil potest capere natura, ut necesse sit in uno istorum aliquo verum, quod quaeritur, inveniri. Consideremus singula, ut nos ad latebras veritatis, et ratio et ordo deducat.

a division, since anger and favour are different and opposed. Either anger must be attributed to God and favour taken away; or both alike must be taken away. Or anger must be removed and favour attributed, or both must be attributed. Nature can admit nothing further besides these, so that the truth which is sought must necessarily be found in some one of them. Let us consider each in turn, so that both reason and order may lead us to the hiding places of the truth.

CAPUT III.

Chapter III.

De bonis et malis in rebus humanis, eorumque auctore.

On the goods and evils in human affairs, and their author.

Primum illud nemo de Deo dixit unquam, irasci eum tantummodo, et gratia non moveri. Est enim disconveniens Deo, ut ejusmodi potestate sit praeditus, qua noceat, et obsit, prodesse vero, ac benefacere nequeat. Quae igitur ratio, quae spes salutis hominibus proposita est, si malorum tantummodo auctor est Deus? Quod si sit, jam majestas illa venerabilis, non ad judicis potestatem, cui licet servare ac liberare,

The first of these no one has ever said of God, that He is only angry and is not moved by favour. For it is unbecoming to God that He should be endowed with such a power that He can harm and injure, but cannot help and do good. What reason, then, what hope of salvation is set before men, if God is the author of evils only? And if this be so, then that venerable majesty, not to the power of a judge, to whom it is permitted to save and to set free,

Editors' notes and page, col. 84

Page

running head: [...]RM. LACTANTII | 84 (left part of the head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹quenda partitio est›; B ‹qua noceat, et obsit›; C ‹Et sequenda partitio est (in the Variorum notae)›; D ‹animadvertit quoque Thomasius (in the Variorum notae)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with "quenda", the rest of "se-quenda" broken from column 83; column ends with "libe-" (liberare) broken across the column break; "cum" in the first line looks like "cnm" from worn type, set as cum; full-width heading "[VARIORUM] NOTAE" across the page above the notes, cut off at the left edge, not set; Variorum notae at the page foot not set (later pass); editors' matter set: (none)

PL 7:85

sed ad tortoris et carnificis officium deducetur. Cum autem videamus, non modo mala esse in rebus humanis, sed etiam bona, utique si Deus est auctor malorum, esse alterum necesse est, qui contraria Deo faciat, et det nobis bona. Si est, quo nomine appellandus est? aut cur nobis, qui male faciat, notior est, quam ille, qui bene? Si autem nihil potest esse praeter Deum, absurdum est et vanum, divinam putare potestatem, qua nihil est majus, nihil melius, nocere posse, prodesse non posse. Et ideo nemo extitit, qui auderet id dicere; quia nec rationem habet, nec ullo modo potest credi. Quod quia convenit, transeamus et veritatem alibi requiramus.

but to the office of torturer and executioner will be brought down. But since we see that there are not only evils in human affairs but also goods, then certainly, if God is the author of evils, there must be another who does things contrary to God and gives us goods. If there is, by what name is he to be called? Or why is he who does evil better known to us than he who does good? But if nothing can exist besides God, it is absurd and empty to think that the divine power, than which nothing is greater, nothing better, is able to harm but not able to benefit. And therefore no one has arisen who would dare to say this, since it neither has reason nor can in any way be believed. Since this is agreed, let us pass on and seek the truth elsewhere.

CAPUT IV.

Chapter IV.

De Deo, dequae ejus affectibus, Epicurique reprehensione.

Of God and His affections, and the refutation of Epicurus.

Quod sequitur, de schola Epicuri est; sicut iram in Deo non esse, ita nec gratiam quidem. Nam cum putaret Epicurus, alienum esse a Deo malefacere atque

What follows is from the school of Epicurus: that just as there is no anger in God, so neither is there even favour. For since Epicurus thought it foreign to God to do evil and

Editors' notes and page, col. 85

Footnotes

(printed under page 42)

(1) ‹anchor: Utique si Deus est auctor malorum› · lemma note, col 85–86

Utique si Deus est auctor malorum, esse alterum necesse est, qui contraria Deo faciat. Ita reposui ex mss. 2 Bonon. 1 Reg., 3 Colb., 1 Sorbon., Tax., edd. Thom. et Walch. In mss. 11 et 5 editis legitur: Utique si Deus est, auctorem esse alterum necesse est, qui; in 3 editis rec. Utique si Deus non est, esse alterum necesse est qui; in scriptis 9 et totidem impressis: Utique si Deus non est, auctorem esse alterum necesse est qui.—Utique si Deus est... qui contraria Deo faciat. Retinui communem lectionem, quamvis B. et T. habeant, Utique si Deus est auctor malorum, esse alterum necesse est qui contraria, etc. Si Deus, inquit, non est auctor, scilicet tam bonorum, quam malorum, ita ut solum malefaciat hominibus, alterum igitur constituere auctorem beneficiorum necesse est, cum et bona et mala experiamur. Sed alius praeter Deum constitui non potest: ergo idem Deus auctor est tum malorum, id est, poenarum, tum bonorum, id est beneficiorum, atque praemiorum. ISAEUS.

Certainly, if God is the author of evils, there must be another who does things contrary to God. So I have restored it from the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 Reg., 3 Colbert, 1 Sorbonne, Tax., and the editions of Thomasius and Walch. In 11 manuscripts and 5 editions one reads: "Certainly, if God is, there must be another author who"; in 3 recent editions: "Certainly, if God is not, there must be another who"; in 9 manuscripts and as many printed: "Certainly, if God is not, there must be another author who." — Certainly, if God is... who does things contrary to God. I have kept the common reading, although B. and T. have "Certainly, if God is the author of evils, there must be another who does contrary things," etc. If God, he says, is not the author, namely of good things as well as of evils, so that he only does harm to men, then one must posit another author of benefits, since we experience both good and evil. But no other besides God can be posited: therefore the same God is the author both of evils, that is, punishments, and of goods, that is, benefits and rewards. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 42)

(2) ‹anchor: Nocere posse, prodesse non posse› · lemma note, col 85–86

Nocere posse, prodesse non posse. Tria postrema verba absunt a 20 mss. et 3 ed.

That he can harm, that he cannot help. The last three words are absent from 20 manuscripts and 3 editions.

(printed under page 42)

(3) ‹anchor: Quod quia convenit› · lemma note, col 85–86

Quod quia convenit. Id est, quia in eo conveniunt omnes; sive nostri verbis de Opif., cap. 17: Quod quia inter philosophos convenit. Ita Cicero, lib I invent., cap. 9: Quid factum sit, convenit. Lib. I de Natura deor., cap. 32: Conveniat id quoque. BUN.

And since this is agreed. That is, since all agree on it; or, in our author's words in De opificio, chapter 17: "And since this is agreed among the philosophers." So Cicero, De inventione book I, chapter 9: "What was done is agreed." De natura deorum book I, chapter 32: "Let that too be agreed." BUN.

(printed under page 42)

(4) ‹anchor: Malefacere› · lemma note, col 85–86

Malefacere. Sic Lactantius infra cap. 5, et sic omnes mss.; duobus rec. demptis, in quibus est malum facere, ut in excusis.—At Bun.: Malefacere. Restituo ex Bon., Tax., Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2, 3 Reimm., Heumanno consentiente, malefacere, ut cap. 3: Cur qui male facit, notior est, quam ille, qui bene; cap. 5: nec quicquam male faciat; cap. 1: ex maleficentia. Ven. 1493 97: malum, quod, reliqui, malum facere, quod. Lib. III, cap. 17, ex sententia Epicuri: Sapientis est... malefacere.., Deus non irascitur quicquam. BUN.

To do harm. So Lactantius below, chapter 5, and so all the manuscripts, except two recent ones, in which it is "malum facere", as in the printed copies. — But Bunemann: "Malefacere." I restore "malefacere" from Bon., Tax., Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2 and 3 Reimm., with Heumann's agreement, as in chapter 3: "Why is he who does harm better known than he who does good"; chapter 5: "nor does any harm"; chapter 1: "from maleficence". Venice 1493, 97: "malum, quod"; the rest "malum facere, quod". Book III, chapter 17, from the view of Epicurus: "It is the wise man's part... to do harm..., God is not angry at anything." BUN.

(printed under page 42)

(5) ‹anchor: Atque nocere› · lemma note, col 85–86

Atque nocere. Haec, quippe haud necessaria, Emm., Cant., Lond., Reg., Lips. 2, 3, Reimm., Subl., Rost., Ven. 1471, 72, utraque 78, 93, 97, Pier., Parrh., Paris., Isaeus delent; addunt vero Ald., Crat., Gymn., Fasit., Torn., Betul., Thomas., Thys., Gall., Spark., Cell., Walch., Heumann. BUN.

And to harm. These words, as hardly necessary, Emm., Cant., Lond., Reg., Lips. 2 and 3, Reimm., Subiaco, Rost., Venice 1471, 1472, both of 1478, 1493, 1497, Pier., Parrh., Paris and Isaeus delete; but Aldus, Cratander, Gymnicus, Fasit., Tornaesius, Betuleius, Thomasius, Thysius, Gallaeus, Sparke, Cellarius, Walch and Heumann add them. BUN.

(printed under page 42)

(6) ‹anchor: Ex hoc inquit› · lemma note, col 85–86

Ex hoc inquit. Lucret., l. I, v. 56: Omnis enim per se Divum natura necesse est. Immortali aevo summa cum pace fruatur, Semota a nostris rebus, etc. Versus sunt Lucretii: sed sententia est Epicuri. Lactantius enim nos admonet, lib. de Opificio, cap. 6, Epicuri esse omnia quae delirat Lucretius; eumdemque errorem Epicuro adscripsit Cicero, lib. I de Natura deorum. Haec prima est τῶν κυρίων δόξων: Quamquam, inquit Cicero, video nonnullis videri, Epicurum, ne in offensionem Atheniensium caderet, verbis reliquisse deos, re sustulisse. Itaque in illis selectis ejus brevibusque sententiis, quas habet, quas appellatis κυρίας δόξας, haec (ut opinor) prima sententia est: Quod beatum et immortale est, id nec habet, nec exhibet cuiquam negotium, etc. Adscribendus simul, notandusque Tertulliani de hac re locus est, ex Apologetici, cap. 46. Alii incorporalem asseverant, alii corporalem, ut tam Platonici, quam Stoici; alii ex atomis, alii ex numeris, sicut Epicurus et Pythagoras; alii ex igne, qualiter Heraclito visum est. Et Platonici quidem curantem rerum, Epicurei otiosum et inexercitum, et (ut ita dixerim) neminem humanis rebus, positum vero extra mundum, etc. In primo membro videri possent et Platonici et Stoici Deum corporalem facere, cum utrique incorporalem faciant. Nam Plato ἀσώματον Deum dixit. Sed cur Tertulliano sum iniquior, quod Stoicos dicit Deum corporeum facere, cum hoc idem etiam faciat Origenes contra Celsum? Adde quod Stoici Deum ignem dicunt: ignis autem corpus. BETULEIUS.

From this, he says. Lucretius, book I, line 56: "For the whole nature of the gods must of itself enjoy immortal life in deepest peace, far removed from our affairs," etc. The verses are Lucretius's, but the thought is Epicurus's. For Lactantius reminds us in the book De opificio, chapter 6, that all Lucretius's ravings are Epicurus's; and Cicero ascribed the same error to Epicurus in De natura deorum book I. This is the first of the "Principal Doctrines": "Although," says Cicero, "I see that some think Epicurus, so as not to give offence to the Athenians, kept the gods in word and abolished them in fact. And so among those select and brief sayings of his which you call the Principal Doctrines, this, I believe, is the first: What is blessed and immortal neither has trouble nor causes it to anyone," etc. Along with this one should cite and note Tertullian's passage on the matter, from the Apology, chapter 46: "Some assert that he is incorporeal, others corporeal, as both the Platonists and the Stoics; some that he is made of atoms, others of numbers, as Epicurus and Pythagoras; others of fire, as seemed good to Heraclitus. And the Platonists make him one who cares for things; the Epicureans idle and unemployed, and (so to speak) a nobody to human affairs, placed outside the world," etc. In the first member both Platonists and Stoics could seem to make God corporeal, whereas both make him incorporeal. For Plato called God incorporeal. But why should I be harder on Tertullian for saying that the Stoics make God corporeal, when Origen too does the same against Celsus? Add that the Stoics call God fire; and fire is a body. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 42)

(7) ‹anchor: Nec movetur› · lemma note, col 85–86

Nec movetur. Vide infra, nullum motum. Lact., lib. II, cap. 8: Potestas faciendi aliquid non potest esse, nisi in eo, quod sentit, quod sapit, quod cogitat, quod movetur... Quod insensibile est, iners et torpidum semper jacet, et nihil inde oriri potest, ubi nullus est motus voluntarius. BUN.

Nor is moved. See below, "no motion". Lactantius, book II, chapter 8: "The power of doing anything cannot exist except in what feels, what knows, what thinks, what is moved... What is without feeling always lies inert and torpid, and nothing can arise from it, where there is no voluntary motion." BUN.

(printed under page 42)

(8) ‹anchor: Quod est proprium Dei› · lemma note, col 85–86

Quod est proprium Dei. Ut supra, lin. praeced. quod est proprium viventis. Mss. 3 rec., Deo.

Which is proper to God. As above, in the preceding line, "which is proper to a living being". Three recent manuscripts: "Deo".

(printed under page 42)

(9) ‹anchor: Quam mundi gubernatio› · lemma note, col 85–86

Quam mundi gubernatio. Mss. rec. et edd. addunt, quam cura viventium, quod non cohaeret cum aliis Lactantii verbis, et abest ab antiquioribus mss. Regio-Put., Bonon. et Tax.

Than the governance of the world. Recent manuscripts and editions add "than the care of living beings", which does not cohere with Lactantius's other words, and is absent from the older manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus, Bologna and Tax.

(printed under page 42)

(10) ‹anchor: Immobilis torpet› · lemma note, col 85–86

Immobilis torpet. Vide Notas ad lib. II, cap. 8. Conf. Not. lib. VI, cap. 17: Immobilis stupor mentis; de Ira, cap. 17: Qui Deum faciunt immobilem. BUN.

Lies motionless and torpid. See the notes on book II, chapter 8. Compare the notes on book VI, chapter 17: "a motionless stupor of mind"; De ira, chapter 17: "who make God motionless." BUN.

(printed under page 42)

(11) ‹anchor: Sed si nihil curat› · lemma note, col 85–86

Sed si nihil curat. Id est in multis mss. Extat autem in 1 Reg., 2 Bon., 2 Colb. aliisque, et in omnibus fere impressis. Vide infra semel et iterum, ergo nec cura ullius rei, nec providentia est in eo.

But if he cares for nothing. That is so in many manuscripts. It stands, moreover, in 1 Reg., 2 Bologna, 2 Colbert and others, and in almost all printed editions. See below, once and again: "therefore there is neither care for anything nor providence in him."

(printed under page 42)

(12) ‹anchor: Divinitatem› · lemma note, col 85–86

Divinitatem. In ms. Bov. dignitatem.

Divinity. In the Bov. manuscript, "dignitatem".

(printed under page 42)

(13) ‹anchor: Deo substantiam› · lemma note, col 85–86

Deo substantiam. Heumanno legendum videtur, (continues)

Substance to God. Heumann thinks one should read, (continues)

(printed under page 42)

Page

running head: 85 LIBER DE IRA D[EI] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A rare, sed ad tortoris; B De Deo, dequae ejus affectibus; C —Utique si Deus est... qui contraria (in the Variorum notae); D nes mss.; duobus rec. demptis (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "rare" of a word broken from col. 84; last word "at-" broken across the column break (atque). "dequae" UNSURE: the italic glyph looks like æ rather than e. Full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the edge) stands above the notes, not set. The Variorum notae at the page foot (Utique si Deus est auctor malorum...; Nocere posse...; Quod quia convenit...; Malefacere...; Atque nocere...; Ex hoc inquit...) are not set here; they belong to the later pass.

PL 7:86

nocere, quod ex affectu iracundiae plerumque nascitur, ademit ei etiam beneficentiam, quoniam videbat consequens esse, ut si habeat iram Deus, habeat et gratiam. Itaque ne illi vitium concederet, etiam virtutis fecit expertem. Ex hoc, inquit, beatus et incorruptus est, quia nihil curat, neque habet ipse negotium, neque alteri exhibet. Deus igitur non est, si nec movetur, quod est proprium viventis: nec facit aliquid impossibile homini, quod est proprium Dei, si omnino nullam habet voluntatem, nullum actum, nullam denique administrationem, quae Deo digna sit. Et quae major, quae dignior administratio Deo assignari potest, quam mundi gubernatio, maximeque generis humani, cui omnia terrena subjecta sunt.

to harm, which mostly arises from the emotion of anger, he took from Him also beneficence, since he saw that it follows that, if God has anger, He also has favour. And so, lest he grant Him a vice, he made Him devoid of virtue as well. From this, he says, He is blessed and incorruptible, because He cares for nothing, and neither has trouble Himself nor causes it to another. He is therefore not God, if He is not even moved, which is proper to a living being; nor does He do anything impossible for man, which is proper to God, if He has no will at all, no action, in short no administration that is worthy of God. And what greater, what worthier administration can be assigned to God than the governance of the world, and above all of the human race, to which all earthly things are subject?

Quae igitur in Deo potest esse beatitudo, si semper quietus, et immobilis torpet? si precantibus surdus, si colentibus caecus? Quid tam dignum, tam proprium Deo, quam providentia? Sed si nihil curat, nihil providet, amisit omnem divinitatem. Qui ergo totam vim, totam Deo substantiam tollit, quid aliud dicit,

What blessedness, then, can there be in God, if He is always at rest and lies inert and motionless? if He is deaf to those who pray, blind to those who worship? What is so worthy of God, so proper to God, as providence? But if He cares for nothing, foresees nothing, He has lost all divinity. He, then, who takes away from God all power, all substance, what else does he say,

Editors' notes and page, col. 86

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 86 (left edge cut off in the image)
marginal letters: A ‹que nocere, quod ex affectu›; B ‹Quae igitur in Deo potest›; C ‹vibusque sententiis, quas habet› (in the Variorum Notae); D ‹nisi in eo, quod sentit› (in the Variorum Notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: first word "que" is the end of a word broken from col. 85 (presumably ne-que), set as printed; full-width heading "[V]ARIORUM NOTAE" across the page below the text block, cut off at the left, not set; the Variorum Notae at the page foot (Versus sunt Lucretii... to Deo substantiam. Heumanno legendum videtur,) left for the later pass

PL 7:87

nisi Deum omnino non esse? Denique Marcus Tullius a Posidonio dictum refert, id Epicurum sensisse, nullos deos esse, sed ea, quae de diis locutus sit, depellendae invidiae causa dixisse: itaque verbis illum deos relinquere, re autem ipsa tollere, quibus nullum motum, nullum tribuit officium. Quod si ita est: quid eo fallacius? quod a sapiente et gravi viro debet esse alienum. Hic vero si aliud sensit, et aliud locutus est, quid aliud appellandus est, quam deceptor, bilinguis, malus, et propterea stultus? Sed non erat tam versutus Epicurus, ut fallendi studio ista loqueretur, cum haec etiam scriptis ad aeternam memoriam consignaret: sed ignorantia veritatis erravit. Inductus enim a principio verisimilitudine unius sententiae, necessario in ea, quae sequebantur, incurrit.

than that God does not exist at all? Finally, Marcus Tullius reports a saying of Posidonius, that Epicurus thought there were no gods, but that what he said about the gods he said for the sake of warding off ill will; and so in words he leaves the gods in place, but in reality itself he takes them away, since he assigns them no movement and no function. But if this is so, what is more deceitful than he? Yet this ought to be foreign to a wise and serious man. And if he thought one thing and said another, what else is he to be called than a deceiver, double-tongued, wicked, and therefore foolish? But Epicurus was not so cunning as to say these things out of a desire to deceive, since he also committed them to writing for everlasting remembrance; rather, he erred through ignorance of the truth. For, led on from the beginning by the plausibility of a single opinion, he necessarily ran into the things that followed from it.

Prima enim sententia fuit, iram in Deum non convenire. Quod cum illi verum et inexpugnabile videretur, non poterat consequentia recusare, quia uno affectu amputato, etiam caeteros affectus adimere Deo necessitas ipsa cogebat. Ita qui non irascitur, utique nec gratiâ movetur, quod est irae contrarium: jam si nec ira in eo, nec gratia est, utique nec metus, nec laetitia, nec moeror, nec misericordia. Una est enim ratio cunctis affectibus, una commotio, quae in Deum

For his first opinion was that anger does not befit God. Since this seemed to him true and unassailable, he could not refuse its consequences, because, once one emotion had been cut away, necessity itself compelled him to take the other emotions away from God as well. Thus he who is not angry is certainly not moved by favour either, which is the contrary of anger; and if there is neither anger nor favour in Him, then certainly there is neither fear, nor joy, nor grief, nor pity. For there is one principle for all the emotions, one movement, which in God's case

Editors' notes and page, col. 87

Footnotes

(printed under page 43)

(1) ‹anchor: Deo substantiam› · lemma note, col 87–88

(continued) Dei. Libri, Deo. Ita Salvianus lib. IV, cap. 9: Nam qui nihil aspici a Deo affirmant, prope est, ut cui aspectum adimunt, etiam substantiam tollant; et quem dicunt omnino nihil cernere, dicant etiam omnino non esse. BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(2) ‹anchor: Denique Marcus Tullius› · lemma note, col 87–88

Denique Marcus Tullius, etc. Sub finem lib. I de Natura deor.: Verius est igitur, nimirum illud, quod familiaris omnium nostrum Posidonius disseruit in libro quinto de Natura deorum, nullos esse deos Epicuro videri.

Lastly Marcus Tullius, etc. Near the end of De natura deorum book I: "It is truer, then, surely, as Posidonius, a friend of us all, argued in the fifth book of his On the Nature of the Gods, that Epicurus thought there were no gods."

(printed under page 43)

(3) ‹anchor: Refert› · lemma note, col 87–88

Refert. Vide Cicer. lib. I de Nat. deorum circa finem.

He reports. See Cicero, De natura deorum book I, near the end.

(printed under page 43)

(4) ‹anchor: Verbis illum deos relinquere, reipsa tollere› · lemma note, col 87–88

Verbis illum deos relinquere, reipsa tollere. Cicero cap. 1, in fine: Idque videns Epicurus, re tollit, oratione relinquit Deos; et lib. I de Natura deor., cap. 30: Epicurum, ne in offensionem Atheniensium caderet, verbis reliquisse deos, re sustulisse. BUN.

That he kept the gods in word, abolished them in fact. Cicero, chapter 1, at the end: "And seeing this, Epicurus abolishes the gods in fact and keeps them in speech"; and De natura deorum book I, chapter 30: "that Epicurus, so as not to give offence to the Athenians, kept the gods in word and abolished them in fact." BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(5) ‹anchor: Quid eo fallacius?› · lemma note, col 87–88

Quid eo fallacius? Eo, scilicet Epicuro, quid fallacius? Quod (fallacem esse) a sapiente... debet esse alienum. Mox infra Epicurum fallendi studio ista dixisse negat. Hinc Cicero lib. I de Nat. deor. cap. 31: pr. Sunt qui existiment, quod ille plane inscitia loquendi fecerit, fecisse consulto: de homine minime vafro (Lact. non versuto) male existimant. BUN.

What is more deceitful than he? "Than he", that is, than Epicurus, what is more deceitful? "Which (being deceitful) ought to be foreign... to a wise man." Just below he denies that Epicurus said these things from a wish to deceive. Hence Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 31, at the beginning: "There are those who think that what he plainly did from want of skill in speaking he did on purpose: they think ill of a man not at all crafty" (Lactantius: "not wily"). BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(6) ‹anchor: Consignaret› · lemma note, col 87–88

Consignaret. Ita restitui ex 9 impressis cunctisque mss. praeter Lips. in quo est consignaretur. In caeteris editis est consignemus. Francius malebat, consignarit.

He would set down. So I have restored it from 9 printed editions and all the manuscripts except Lips., in which it is "consignaretur". In the other editions it is "consignemus". Francius preferred "consignarit".

(printed under page 43)

(7) ‹anchor: Inductus enim› · lemma note, col 87–88

Inductus enim. Sic emendavi ex omnibus mss. et octo editis veteribus. Et res ita poscit. Caeteri impressi habent indoctus. — Inductus. Lib. III, cap. 17: Cum haec igitur cogitaret Epicurus, earum rerum velut iniquitate inductus... existimavit. Lips. 2 et Reimm. Inductus enim... vero legunt.

For, led on. So I have corrected it from all the manuscripts and eight old editions; and the matter so requires. The other printed editions have "indoctus" (untaught). — Led on. Book III, chapter 17: "When Epicurus therefore considered these things, led on as it were by the unfairness of these matters... he thought." Lips. 2 and Reimm. read "Inductus enim... vero".

(printed under page 43)

(8) ‹anchor: Unius sententiae› · lemma note, col 87–88

Unius sententiae. Expunxi ut inutilem falsae vocem, quam inserunt quamplurimi editi; respuunt autem omnes scripti, tres vet. edit. Rom., Parrhas., Cellar., Walch. — Unius sententiae. Ald., Crat., Gymn., Fas., Gryph., Betul., Torn., Thomas., Isaeus, Thys., Gall., Spark. unius falsae sententiae. Et erat omnino falsa: unde eam Lactantius refutat; at antiquiores libri non agnoscunt. BUN.

Of one opinion. I have struck out as useless the word "falsae", which very many editions insert; but all the manuscripts reject it, and the three old Roman editions, Parrhasius, Cellarius, Walch. — Of one opinion. Aldus, Cratander, Gymnicus, Fas., Gryphius, Betuleius, Tornaesius, Thomasius, Isaeus, Thysius, Gallaeus, Sparke: "of one false opinion". And it was altogether false, which is why Lactantius refutes it; but the older books do not recognize the word. BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(9) ‹anchor: Iram in Deum non convenire› · lemma note, col 87–88

Iram in Deum non convenire. Hanc locutionem, quae omnino Ciceroniana est, restitui ex omnibus prope mss. codicibus. In tribus rec. est in Deo; in 15 editis est Deo sine praepositione.

That anger does not befit God. This expression, which is wholly Ciceronian, I have restored from nearly all the manuscript codices. In three recent ones it is "in Deo"; in 15 editions it is "Deo" without the preposition.

(printed under page 43)

(10) ‹anchor: Consequentia recusare› · lemma note, col 87–88

Consequentia recusare. Sic reposui ex cunctis fere scriptis. In tribus mss. et 2 vet. edit. Rom. est recusari; in 3 rec. manu exaratis et multis editis resecare.

To refuse the consequences. So I have restored it from almost all the manuscripts. In three manuscripts and the two old Roman editions it is "recusari"; in 3 recent handwritten copies and many editions "resecare".

(printed under page 43)

(11) ‹anchor: Nec ira› · lemma note, col 87–88

Nec ira. Ita omnes mss. praeter 2 Reg. rec. in quibus est non ira, ut in editis.

Nor anger. So all the manuscripts except 2 recent Reg., in which it is "non ira", as in the editions.

(printed under page 43)

(12) ‹anchor: Quae in Deum cadere non potest› · lemma note, col 87–88

Quae in Deum cadere non potest. Scribit Lactantius haec verba ex mente Epicuri, non sua. BUN.

Which cannot befall God. Lactantius writes these words in Epicurus's sense, not his own. BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(13) ‹anchor: Sapientis hominis› · lemma note, col 87–88

Sapientis hominis. Epicuri, per ironiam sic dicti.

Of the wise man. Of Epicurus, so called in irony.

(printed under page 43)

(14) ‹anchor: Restitit› · lemma note, col 87–88

Restitit. Ms. Goth. perstitit; 2 Reg. rec. et edd., constitit. — Restitit. De Opif. c. 14: Circa hoc opus homo resistit; et cap. 7: Quibus mens si... resistere velit, tanquam retinaculis uteretur. BUN.

He stopped. The Goth. manuscript: "perstitit"; 2 recent Reg. and the editions: "constitit". — Restitit. De opificio chapter 14: "At this work man stops"; and chapter 7: "which the mind, if it wished... to stop, would use as reins." BUN.

(printed under page 43)

(15) ‹anchor: Quo perveniat› · lemma note, col 87–88

Quo perveniat. Mss. habent pervenias; 2 perveniret; plurimi editi, perveniatur. Quamplurimi mss. et 2 vett. edd. Rom. ut in textu perveniat, Epicurus scilicet.

Where he would come to. Manuscripts have "pervenias"; two "perveniret"; most editions "perveniatur". Very many manuscripts and the two old Roman editions have "perveniat", as in the text: Epicurus, that is.

(printed under page 43)

(16) ‹anchor: Impunitatem› · lemma note, col 87–88

Impunitatem, etc. Hanc sperare non potest, qui Deum novit omniscium, et justissimum. Nam et magistratus saepe, et ludimagister, et pater suorum delicta sine ira puniunt, promptiores ad veniam, nisi disciplina vel publica, vel domestica aliud flagitaret. Neque enim unus duntaxat finis puniendi, ratiove castigandi est, sed plures: quae, ut reipsa, ita nominibus quoque inter se distant. De quo lege Gell. I. VI, c. 14. BETUL.

Impunity, etc. No one who knows God to be all-knowing and most just can hope for it. For the magistrate too, often, and the schoolmaster, and the father, punish the faults of those in their charge without anger, being readier to pardon, unless discipline, public or domestic, demanded otherwise. For there is not one end only of punishing, or one manner of chastising, but several, which differ from one another in name as in fact. On which read Gellius, book VI, chapter 14. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 43)

(17) ‹anchor: Existimantur stoici› · lemma note, col 88

Existimantur stoici, etc. Reprehendit stoicos, quod Deo gratiam tribuant, clementem solum sibi fingant Deum, non item severum, iracundia ipsum privantes. Argumentum potissimum quo nititur, est: Quod omnia quae moventur, moveantur in utramque partem: Deum itaque, si moveatur gratia, moveri etiam ira. Hoc concederem, si sensus corporis utriusque affectionis oppositae particeps esset, ut: Quidquid sentit calorem, idem frigus quoque sentit. Sed in Deum (quia incorporeus est) nulla passio cadit: Ira passio est, et ob id imbecillitas. Gratia vero non modo, non passio est, sed virtus insuper, et virtus divina: quia χρηστότητος pars quae Deo soli recte, non ut accidens, sed ut proprium ἀχώριστον tribuitur. Ex quibus apparet, gratiam et iram in Deo, non (continues)

The Stoics are thought, etc. He censures the Stoics because they attribute favour to God and imagine God as merciful only, not likewise severe, depriving him of anger. The chief argument he relies on is this: that all things that are moved are moved in both directions; and so God, if he is moved by favour, is moved also by anger. I would grant this if the body's sense shared in both opposite affections, as: whatever feels heat feels cold too. But no passion befalls God, since he is incorporeal. Anger is a passion, and for that reason a weakness. Favour, however, is not only not a passion, but a virtue besides, and a divine virtue: since it is a part of goodness, which is rightly attributed to God alone, not as an accident but as an inseparable property. From which it appears that favour and anger in God, not (continues)

(printed under page 43)

Page

running head: 87 FIRM. LACTANTI (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹nisi Deum omnino› (in the gutter); B ‹Prima enim sententia› (in the gutter); C beside the Variorum notae ‹esse. Bun.›; D beside the notae ‹Consignaret. Ita restitui›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "esse" in line 3 has damaged type (e:se), read as esse; the paragraph break before "Prima enim sententia" is read from a slight indent and is UNSURE; "gratiâ" has an accent printed over the final a; the full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE stands below the text block and is cut off at the right edge, so it is not set; the Variorum notae (Dei. Libri, Deo ... to Iram in Deum non convenire) are page-foot commentary left for the later pass

PL 7:88

cadere non potest. Quod si nullus affectus in Deo est, quia quidquid afficitur, imbecillum est; ergo nec cura ullius rei, nec providentia est in eo.

cannot occur. But if there is no emotion in God, because whatever is affected is weak, then there is neither care of anything nor providence in Him.

Hucusque pervenit sapientis hominis disputatio; caetera, quae sequuntur; obticuit: scilicet, quia nec cura sit in eo, nec providentia; ergo nec cogitationem aliquam, nec sensum in eo esse ullum: quo efficitur, ut non sit omnino. Ita cum gradatim de⟨s⟩cendisset, in extremo gradu restitit, quia jam praecipitium videbat. Sed quid prodest reticuisse, ac periculum dissimulasse? Necessitas illum vel invitum cadere coegit. Dixit enim quod noluit, quia argumentum sic ordinavit, ut ad illud, quod evitabat, necessario deveniret. Vides igitur quo perveniat, ira sublata, et Deo adempta. Denique aut nullus id credit, aut admodum pauci, et quidem scelerati, ac mali, qui sperant peccatis suis impunitatem. Quod si et hoc falsum invenitur, nec iram in Deo esse, nec gratiam, veniamus ad illud, quod tertio loco positum est.

This is as far as the disputation of the wise man went; the rest, which follows, he passed over in silence: namely, that since there is neither care in Him nor providence, therefore there is neither any thought nor any sense at all in Him; from which it follows that He does not exist at all. Thus, when he had descended step by step, he halted at the last step, because he now saw the precipice. But what does it profit to have kept silent and to have concealed the danger? Necessity compelled him to fall even against his will. For he said what he did not wish to say, because he so arranged his argument that he necessarily arrived at that which he was trying to avoid. You see, therefore, where he comes to, once anger is removed and taken away from God. In short, either nobody believes this, or very few, and those indeed wicked and evil men, who hope for impunity for their sins. But if this too is found to be false, that there is neither anger nor favour in God, let us come to that which was placed in the third position.

CAPUT V.

Chapter V.

De Deo stoicorum sententia; de Ira et gratia ejus.

The opinion of the Stoics concerning God; on His anger and favour.

Existimantur stoici, et alii nonnulli, aliquanto

The Stoics, and certain others, are thought somewhat

Editors' notes and page, col. 88

Page

running head: …RM. LACTANTII (left part cut off at the image edge); column number 88
marginal letters: A cadere non potest. Quod si nullus; B dit, aut admodum pauci; C scriptis. In tribus mss. (in the notes); D Neque enim unus duntaxat (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "de⟨s⟩cendisset": the s is faint or damaged at "de-cen-"; "jam" printed with a stray mark above the a; the full-width line "…RIORUM NOTAE" (VARIORUM NOTAE) below the text block is not set; the editors' notes at the page foot of this column (quae omnino Ciceroniana…, Consequentia recusare…, Existimantur stoici…) are left for the later pass; the column ends mid-sentence at "aliquanto"

PL 7:89

melius de Divinitate sensisse, qui aiunt, gratiam in Deo esse, iram non esse. Favorabilis admodum, ac popularis oratio, non cadere in Deum hanc animi pusillitatem, ut ab ullo se laesum putet, qui laedi non potest; ut quieta illa, et sancta majestas concitetur, perturbetur, insaniat, quod est terrenae fragilitatis. Iram enim, commotionem mentis esse ac perturbationem, quae sit a Deo aliena. Quod si hominem quoque, qui modo sit sapiens et gravis, ira non deceat (si quidem, cum in animum cujusquam incidit, velut saeva tempestas tantos excitet fluctus, ut statum mentis immutet, ardescant oculi, os tremat, lingua titubet, dentes concrepent, alternis vultum maculet nunc suffusus rubor, nunc pallor albescens): quanto magis Deum non deceat tam foeda mutatio? Et si homo, qui habet imperium ac potestatem, late noceat per iram, sanguinem fundat, urbes subvertat, populos deleat, provincias ad solitudinem redigat; quanto magis Deum, qui habeat totius generis humani, et ipsius mundi potestatem, perditurum fuisse universa credibile sit, si irasceretur?

to have thought better of the Divinity, who say that there is favour in God, that there is no anger. A very winning and popular speech: that this pettiness of mind does not befall God, that He should think Himself injured by anyone, He Who cannot be injured; that that tranquil and holy majesty should be stirred up, disturbed, driven mad, which belongs to earthly frailty. For anger, [they say,] is a commotion and disturbance of the mind, which is foreign to God. But if anger does not befit even a man, provided he is wise and grave (since indeed, when it falls upon anyone's mind, like a savage storm it stirs up such great waves that it changes the state of the mind: the eyes blaze, the mouth trembles, the tongue stammers, the teeth clash, and the face is stained by turns, now by a spreading flush, now by a whitening pallor): how much more does so foul a change not befit God? And if a man who has command and power does harm far and wide through anger, sheds blood, overthrows cities, destroys peoples, reduces provinces to a wilderness; how much more credible is it that God, Who has power over the whole human race and over the world itself, would have destroyed all things if He were angry?

Abesse igitur ab eo tam magnum, tam perniciosum malum oportere. Et si absit ab eo ira, et concitatio, quia et deformis, et noxia est, nec cuiquam malefaciat, nihil aliud superesse, nisi ut sit lenis, tranquillus, propitius, beneficus, conservator. Ita enim demum et communis omnium pater, et optimus

So great and so pernicious an evil, therefore, must be far from Him. And if anger and agitation are absent from Him, because it is both unsightly and harmful, and He does evil to no one, nothing else remains but that He is gentle, tranquil, propitious, beneficent, a preserver. For only so, both the common father of all, and best

Editors' notes and page, col. 89

Footnotes

(printed under page 44)

(1) ‹anchor: Existimantur stoici› · lemma note, col 88

(continued) ut in magistratu, seu principe, contrario ex diametro esse. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 44)

(2) ‹anchor: Gratiam in Deo esse, iram non esse› · lemma note, col 89

Gratiam in Deo esse, iram non esse. Ut qui non velit obesse, ne possit, ut ait Senec. lib. II de Ira, ubi de hoc disserit. ISAEUS.

That there is favour in God, not anger. So that he who does not wish to harm cannot, as Seneca says in De ira book II, where he discusses this. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 44)

(3) ‹anchor: Favorabilis admodum› · lemma note, col 89

Favorabilis admodum. Ita antiquissimi et optimi mss. Regio-Put., 2 Bonon., 3 Colbert., Tax., Pen. Auctor noster favorabilis active posuit, quod rarum est. Admodum abest a 10 mss. et a 13 editis.

Very favourable. So the most ancient and best manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus, 2 Bologna, 3 Colbert, Tax., Pen. Our author used "favorabilis" in an active sense, which is rare. "Admodum" is absent from 10 manuscripts and 13 editions.

(printed under page 44)

(4) ‹anchor: Popularis oratio› · lemma note, col 89

Popularis oratio. Id est, quae populo grata est et accepta, quae studet voluntati populi. WALCH.

A popular argument. That is, one pleasing and acceptable to the people, which courts the people's will. WALCH.

(printed under page 44)

(5) ‹anchor: Animi pusillitatem› · lemma note, col 89

Animi pusillitatem. Mss. 6 rec. et 3 edd., pusillanimitatem.

Smallness of mind. Six recent manuscripts and 3 editions: "pusillanimitatem".

(printed under page 44)

(6) ‹anchor: Iram enim, commotionem mentis esse› · lemma note, col 89

Iram enim, commotionem mentis esse. Sufficiat semel monuisse, quoties iram Deo tribuimus, eo id sensu nos intelligere, quo Durandus lib. II, dist. 30, quaest. 2, ubi ait: Deus dicitur iratus, non secundum affectum, sed effectum, in quantum praeparat alicui poenam vel infligit. Duriuscule enim loquitur. Lactantius, cum irae affectum ita Deo competere affirmat, quatenus illi motum quemdam imprimat. SPARKIUS.

For anger is a disturbance of the mind. Let it suffice to have warned once that whenever we attribute anger to God, we understand it in the sense of Durandus, book II, distinction 30, question 2, where he says: "God is said to be angry not according to the affection but the effect, inasmuch as he prepares or inflicts punishment on someone." For Lactantius speaks rather harshly, when he asserts that the affection of anger belongs to God in such a way as to impress a certain motion on him. SPARKE.

(printed under page 44)

(7) ‹anchor: Siquidem cum in animum cujusquam incidit› · lemma note, col 89

Siquidem cum in animum cujusquam incidit, etc. Hieron. in Epist. ad Titum cap. I de irato homine: Torvo vultu, trementibus labiis, rugata fronte, effraenatis conviciis, facie inter pallorem ruboremque variata. Seneca de Ira, lib. I, cap. I: Multus ore toto rubor, exaestuante ab imis praecordiis sanguine: labia quatiuntur, dentes comprimuntur, horrent ac subriguntur capilli, spiritus coactus, stridens articulorum seipsos torquentium sonus, gemitus mugitusque, et parum explanatis vocibus sermo praeruptus, et complosae saepius manus, et pulsata humus pedibus, et totum concitum corpus, magnasque minas agens, foeda visu et horrenda facies depravantium se atque intumescentium. ELMENHORST.

For when it has fallen upon anyone's mind, etc. Jerome, on the Epistle to Titus, chapter 1, of the angry man: "With grim look, trembling lips, wrinkled brow, unbridled abuse, a face shifting between pallor and flush." Seneca, De ira book I, chapter 1: "Much redness over the whole face, as the blood boils up from the depths of the heart; the lips quiver, the teeth are clenched, the hair bristles and stands on end, the breath is forced, the joints creak as they twist themselves, groaning and bellowing, and speech broken off in ill-articulated words, the hands often clapped together, the ground struck with the feet, the whole body roused and making great threats: the foul and dreadful face of men who disfigure and swell themselves." ELMENHORST.

(printed under page 44)

(8) ‹anchor: Excitet fluctus› · lemma note, col 89

Excitet fluctus. Francius, excitat.

Should stir up waves. Francius: "excitat".

(printed under page 44)

(9) ‹anchor: Ardescant› · lemma note, col 89

Ardescant. Vide Senec. de Ira, initio lib. I, cap. 1.

Should blaze up. See Seneca, De ira, beginning of book I, chapter 1.

(printed under page 44)

(10) ‹anchor: Alternis› · lemma note, col 89

Alternis. Eleganter alternis absolute dicitur, pro eo quod fit per vices. Lucretius I, 1010: Ut sic alternis infinita omnia reddat. Plinius lib. V, ep. 18. Quae interdum alternis, et interdum simul facio. BUN.

By turns. "Alternis" is elegantly used absolutely for what happens in turn. Lucretius I, 1010: "So that thus by turns it may make all things infinite." Pliny, book V, letter 18: "Which I do sometimes by turns and sometimes together." BUN.

(printed under page 44)

(11) ‹anchor: Perditurum fuisse universa credibile sit› · lemma note, col 89

Perditurum fuisse universa credibile sit. Duas voces postremas addidi ex omnibus ferme mss. et 12 vet. editis. Absunt autem a mss. 5 et totidem impressis. — Credibile sit. Haec videntur necessaria. Ut enim modo supra dixit: Quod si hominem ... non deceat ... quanto magis Deum non deceat; sic in applicatione. BUN.

It would be credible that he would have destroyed everything. I have added the last two words from almost all the manuscripts and 12 old editions. They are absent, however, from 5 manuscripts and as many printed. — Credibile sit. These words seem necessary. For as he said just above: "But if it does not befit a man ... how much less does it befit God"; so in the application. BUN.

(printed under page 44)

(12) ‹anchor: Malefaciat› · lemma note, col 89

Malefaciat. Mss. 3, malefacit; Clarom., malefaciet.

Should do harm. Three manuscripts: "malefacit"; Clermont: "malefaciet".

(printed under page 44)

(13) ‹anchor: Nihil aliud superesse› · lemma note, col 89

Nihil aliud superesse. Sic lego ex mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg. aliisque et edit. Is. Et sic legendum esse patet ex praecedentibus. In multis tum scriptis, tum impressis legitur abest.

That nothing else remains. So I read from the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 Reg. and others, and Isaeus's edition. And that it should be read so is clear from what precedes. In many manuscripts and printed editions alike one reads "abest".

(printed under page 44)

(14) ‹anchor: Communis omnium pater› · lemma note, col 89

Communis omnium pater. Ut lib. V, cap. 8: communem omnium patrem Deum. Elegantia Terentiana. Vide Not. ad Lact. lib. III, cap. 18. BUN.

The common father of all. As in book V, chapter 8: "God, the common father of all." A Terentian elegance. See the notes on Lactantius book III, chapter 18. BUN.

(printed under page 44)

(15) ‹anchor: Et optimus maximus› · lemma note, col 89

Et optimus maximus. Ita mss. 5 Reg. inter quos est antiq. Regio-Put. et ed. Rom. 1470, Cellar., Walch. Aliis est, et vere maximus. — Maximus. In ms. Bov. est maximusque.

And best and greatest. So 5 Reg. manuscripts, among them the ancient Regio-Puteanus, and the Roman edition of 1470, Cellarius, Walch. In others it is "and truly greatest". — Greatest. In the Bov. manuscript it is "maximusque".

(printed under page 44)

(16) ‹anchor: Ornatur› · lemma note, col 89–90

Ornatur. Ita cum editis Rom. 1470 ac Cellar. omnes mss. praeter 2 rec. in quibus est honoratur, ut in impressis multis.

Is adorned. So, with the Roman edition of 1470 and Cellarius, all the manuscripts except 2 recent ones, in which it is "honoratur", as in many printed editions.

(printed under page 44)

(17) ‹anchor: Benedictis omnibus votisque celebratur› · lemma note, col 89–90

Benedictis omnibus votisque celebratur. Sic lego cum editis cunctisque mss. praeter 2 rec. quibus est, ornatur benedictis, votisque omnibus celebratur.

Is honoured with all blessings and prayers. So I read with the editions and all the manuscripts except 2 recent ones, which have "is adorned with blessings, and honoured with all prayers".

(printed under page 44)

(18) ‹anchor: In parte› · lemma note, col 89–90

In parte. Lond., Reg., in partem. At prius est rectius. Lib. III, cap. 6: in parte sustulerant. Lib. VII, cap. 22: in parte corruperint ... in parte consentiunt. BUN.

In part. Lond. and Reg.: "in partem". But the former is more correct. Book III, chapter 6: "they had removed in part". Book VII, chapter 22: "they corrupted in part ... in part they agree." BUN.

(printed under page 44)

(19) ‹anchor: Naturam rei› · lemma note, col 89–90

Naturam rei. Francius. Forte legendum Dei. Ms. Clarom., rerum.

The nature of the thing. Francius: perhaps one should read "Dei". The Clermont manuscript: "rerum".

(printed under page 44)

(20) ‹anchor: Ita qui bonos diligit› · lemma note, col 90

Ita qui bonos diligit, etc. Tres mss. Reg. sequentia verba respuunt, et malos odit, et qui malos non odit.

So he who loves the good, etc. Three Reg. manuscripts reject the following words, "and hates the wicked, and he who does not hate the wicked".

(printed under page 44)

(21) ‹anchor: Natura ista connexa sunt› · lemma note, col 90

Natura ista connexa sunt. Lond., Reg., Reim., (continues)

These things are joined by nature. Lond., Reg., Reim., (continues)

(printed under page 44)

Page

running head: 89 LIBER DE IRA DE[I] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A melius de Divinitate sensisse, qui aiunt, gratiam in; B homo, qui habet imperium ac potestatem, late no-; C ut in magistratu, seu principe, contrario ex diametro (notes); D Lactantius, cum irae affectum ita Deo competere affirmet (notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence ("melius") and ends mid-sentence ("et optimus"); "universa" partly damaged in the type but legible; stray mark after "Deo esse," ignored; heading "VARIORUM NOTAE." and the Variorum notae at the page foot not set (later pass)

PL 7:90

maximus dici poterit, quod expetit divina coelestisque natura. Nam si inter homines laudabile videtur prodesse potius quam nocere, vivificare quam occidere, salvare, quam perdere, nec immerito innocentia inter virtutes numeratur et qui haec fecerit, diligitur, praefertur, ornatur, benedictis omnibus votisque celebratur, denique ob merita et beneficia Deo simillimus judicatur; quanto magis ipsum Deum par est, divinis perfectisque virtutibus praecellentem, atque ab omni terrena labe summotum, divinis et coelestibus beneficiis omne genus hominum promereri? Speciose ista, populariterque dicuntur, et multos illiciunt ad credendum: sed qui haec sentiunt, ad veritatem quidem propius accedunt; sed in parte labuntur, naturam rei parum considerantes. Nam si Deus non irascitur impiis et injustis, nec pios utique justosque diligit. Ergo constantior est error illorum, qui et iram simul, et gratiam tollunt. In rebus enim diversis, aut in utramque partem moveri necesse est, aut in neutram. Ita qui bonos diligit, et malos odit, et qui malos non odit, nec bonos diligit: quia et diligere bonos, ex odio malorum venit; et malos odisse, ex bonorum charitate descendit. Nemo est qui amet vitam sine odio mortis, nec appetat lucem, nisi qui tenebras fugit. Adeo natura ista connexa sunt, ut alterum sine altero fieri nequeat.

greatest will He be able to be called, which the divine and heavenly nature requires. For if among men it seems praiseworthy to help rather than to harm, to give life rather than to kill, to save rather than to destroy, and innocence is not undeservedly numbered among the virtues, and he who has done these things is loved, preferred, adorned, celebrated with all blessings and prayers, and finally on account of his merits and benefits is judged most like God; how much more is it fitting that God Himself, excelling in divine and perfect virtues and removed from every earthly stain, should win the favour of the whole race of men by divine and heavenly benefits? These things are said attractively and in a popular manner, and they entice many to believe: but those who hold these views come nearer indeed to the truth, yet they slip in part, giving too little consideration to the nature of the matter. For if God is not angry with the impious and unjust, neither does He love the pious and just. Therefore more consistent is the error of those who take away both anger and favour at once. For in opposite matters one must be moved either to both sides or to neither. Thus he who loves the good also hates the wicked, and he who does not hate the wicked does not love the good either: because loving the good comes from hatred of the wicked, and hating the wicked descends from love of the good. There is no one who loves life without hatred of death, nor who seeks light except one who flees darkness. So closely are these things connected by nature that the one cannot come about without the other.

Si quis Dominus habens in familia servos, bonum

If any master, having slaves in his household, a good

Editors' notes and page, col. 90

Page

running head: [LIB]ER DE IRA DEI. 90
marginal letters: A maximus dici poterit; B Deus non irascitur impiis; C Ut sic alternis infinita omnia reddat (in the notes); D Et optimus maximus. Ita mss. (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence with "maximus" (preceding word on col. 89); full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" across both columns not set; editors' Variae lectiones/notes at page foot not set (later pass); "connexa" shows a stray mark over final a, set without accent

PL 7:91

ac malum, non utique aut ambos odit, aut ambos beneficiis et honore prosequitur; quod si f⟨a⟩ciet, et iniquus et stultus est: sed bonum et alloquitur amice, et ornat, et domi ac familiae suisque omnibus rebus praeficit; malum vero maledictis, verberibus, nuditate, fame, siti, compedibus punit, ut et hic exemplo caeteris sit ad non peccandum, et ille ad promerendum, ut alios metus coerceat, alios honor provocet. Qui ergo diligit, et odit; qui odit, et diligit; sunt enim, qui diligi debeant, sunt qui odio haberi. Et sicut is, qui diligit, confert bona in eos, quos diligit: ita qui odit, irrogat mala iis, quos odio habet; quod argumentum, quia verum est, dissolvi nullo pacto potest. Vano ergo et falsa est sententia eorum, qui cum alterum Deo tribuant, alterum detrahunt, non minus, quam illorum qui utrumque detrahunt. Sed illi, ut ostendimus, ex parte non errant, sed id quod melius est ex duobus retinent. Ii vero, quos ratio et veritas argumenti hujus inducit, falsa omnino sententia suscepta, in maximum errorem cadunt. Non enim sic oportebat eos argumentari: Quia Deus non irascitur, ergo nec gratia commovetur; sed ita, Quia Deus gratia movetur, ergo et irascitur. Si enim certum et indubitatum fuisset, non irasci Deum, tunc ad illud alterum veniri esset necesse. Cum autem magis sit ambiguum de ira, pene manifestum de

and a bad one, he certainly does not either hate both or pursue both with benefits and honour; and if he does so, he is both unjust and foolish: but the good one he both addresses in a friendly way, and honours, and sets over his house and household and all his affairs; the bad one, however, he punishes with curses, blows, nakedness, hunger, thirst and fetters, so that the latter may be an example to the rest for not sinning, and the former for deserving well, so that fear may restrain some and honour may spur on others. He, therefore, who loves also hates; he who hates also loves; for there are those who ought to be loved, and there are those who ought to be held in hatred. And just as he who loves confers good things on those whom he loves, so he who hates inflicts evils on those whom he holds in hatred; and this argument, because it is true, can in no way be refuted. Vain, therefore, and false is the opinion of those who, while they attribute the one to God, take away the other, no less than that of those who take away both. But the former, as we have shown, are in part not in error, but retain that which is the better of the two. These others, however, whom the reasoning and truth of this argument leads on, having adopted an altogether false opinion, fall into the greatest error. For they ought not to have argued thus: Because God is not angry, therefore neither is He moved by kindness; but thus: Because God is moved by kindness, therefore He is also angry. For if it had been certain and beyond doubt that God is not angry, then it would have been necessary to come to that other [conclusion]. But since it is rather doubtful concerning anger, [and] almost manifest concerning

Editors' notes and page, col. 91

Footnotes

(printed under page 45)

(1) ‹anchor: Natura ista connexa sunt› · lemma note, col 90

(continued) Goth., Natura ista connexa est, quasi natura esset nominativus; sed est ablativus. Imitatur Quintilianum, ex quo citavit lib. VI, c. 23: Quae inter se natura connexa sunt. BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(2) ‹anchor: Verberibus, nuditate› · lemma note, col 91

Verberibus, nuditate, etc. Respexit ad Cyprian. ad Demetrianum: Servum flagellis, verberibus, fame, siti, nuditate, frequenter ferro et carcere adfligis et crucias. Conf. Lact. lib. V, cap. 18, lib. VII, c. 27. BUN.

With blows, with nakedness, etc. He had in view Cyprian, To Demetrianus: "You afflict and torture your slave with whips, blows, hunger, thirst, nakedness, often with the sword and prison." Compare Lactantius book V, chapter 18; book VII, chapter 27. BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(3) ‹anchor: Qui odit, et diligit› · lemma note, col 91

Qui odit, et diligit. In quamplurimis editis est, et qui odit et diligit.

Who hates and loves. In very many editions it is "and who hates and loves".

(printed under page 45)

(4) ‹anchor: Qui cum alterum Deo tribuant, alterum detrahunt› · lemma note, col 91

Qui cum alterum Deo tribuant, alterum detrahunt. In mss. 11 deest alterum Deo detrahunt. Sex alii, qui alterum Deo tribuunt.

Who, while they attribute the one to God, take away the other. In 11 manuscripts "alterum Deo detrahunt" is missing. Six others: "qui alterum Deo tribuunt".

(printed under page 45)

(5) ‹anchor: Non minus, quam illorum utrumque detrahunt› · lemma note, col 91

Non minus, quam illorum utrumque detrahunt. Sic legunt mss. et edit. Thomas. atque hanc esse genuinam lectionem, censeo. Si editorum recipiatur lectio, quam illorum qui utrumque, expuncto τὸ detrahunt, sensus erit obscurior, poteritque aeque ad tribuunt referri, quod scopo Lactantii repugnaret. Ex ISAEO.

No less than those who take away both. So the manuscripts and Thomasius's edition read, and I judge this to be the genuine reading. If the editors' reading "than those who both" is adopted, with "detrahunt" struck out, the sense will be more obscure, and could equally be referred to "tribuunt", which would go against Lactantius's purpose. From ISAEUS.

(printed under page 45)

(6) ‹anchor: Illi› · lemma note, col 91

Illi. Scilicet stoici. BUN.

They. That is, the Stoics. BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(7) ‹anchor: Sed id quod melius est› · lemma note, col 91

Sed id quod melius est. Francius, et id.

But that which is better. Francius: "et id".

(printed under page 45)

(8) ‹anchor: Ii vero› · lemma note, col 91

Ii vero. Scil. Epicurei, qui utrumque detrahunt. BUN.

But these. That is, the Epicureans, who take away both. BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(9) ‹anchor: Falsa omnino sententia suscepta› · lemma note, col 91

Falsa omnino sententia suscepta. Deest sententia in 11 mss. rec. et in ed. Rom. 1470 et 1474. Pro omnino 1 Clarom. habet animo; abestque sententia. — Apud Buneman. vero legitur: Ob falsa omnino suscepta. Ven., utraque 1478 1515 et recentiores omnes, falsa omnino sententia suscepta. Bene, si addicerent mss. Confer c. 6, sententia. Iterum Lact. de Ira, cap. 6, quod a philosophis nec susceptum est. Lib. II, cap. 17: Sic eum, qui in principio falsum susceperat, consequentium rerum necessitas ad deliramenta perduxit. BUN.

An opinion wholly false having been adopted. "Sententia" is missing in 11 recent manuscripts and in the Roman editions of 1470 and 1474. For "omnino" one Clermont has "animo", and "sententia" is absent. — In Bunemann, however, one reads: "Because of things wholly false having been adopted." Venice, both 1478, 1515 and all the more recent: "an opinion wholly false having been adopted." Good, if the manuscripts supported it. Compare chapter 6, "opinion". Again Lactantius, De ira chapter 6: "which was not even adopted by the philosophers." Book II, chapter 17: "So the necessity of consequences led him who at the beginning had adopted a falsehood into ravings." BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(10) ‹anchor: Pene manifestum› · lemma note, col 91

Pene manifestum. Francius, forte bene aut plene.

Almost manifest. Francius: perhaps "bene" or "plene".

(printed under page 45)

(11) ‹anchor: Absurdum ... ex incerto certum ... subvertere› · lemma note, col 91

Absurdum ... ex incerto certum ... subvertere, etc. Lib. II, cap. 9: Sic ... illud assumpsit ... cum id multo esset incertius, quam illud, propter quod assumptum est ... Ex falso maluit colligere quod falsum est, quam ex vero, quod verum. Et cum debeant incerta de certis probari, hic probationem sumpsit ex incerto ad evertendum quod erat certum. BUN.

It is absurd ... to overturn the certain from the uncertain, etc. Book II, chapter 9: "So ... he assumed that ... though it was far more uncertain than the thing for whose sake it was assumed ... He preferred to infer what is false from the false rather than what is true from the true. And whereas uncertain things ought to be proved from certain ones, he took his proof from the uncertain to overturn what was certain." BUN.

(printed under page 45)

(12) ‹anchor: Sententia est› · lemma note, col 91–92

Sententia est. Additum est ex cunctis mss. et compluribus editis.

It is an opinion. "Est" is added from all the manuscripts and several editions.

(printed under page 45)

(13) ‹anchor: In eo› · lemma note, col 91–92

In eo. 3 Colbert. Clarom. a secunda manu, et ed. Gymnic. in ea. Clarom. a prima manu, in qua.

In it. Three Colbert, Clermont in the second hand, and Gymnicus's edition: "in ea". Clermont in the first hand: "in qua".

(printed under page 45)

(14) ‹anchor: Nam neque honos ullus deberi potest Deo› · lemma note, col 91–92

Nam neque honos ullus deberi potest Deo, etc. Simili modo in Hieremiam Origenes benignum Deum dicit, ne desperemus; severum, ne benignitatem contemnamus. Sed quemadmodum Cicero in Officiis docet, virum bonum non peccare, etiam impunitate proposita? Oderunt enim peccare boni virtutis amore; et contra, oderunt peccare mali formidine poenae. Quid quod Paulus etiam ait, Justis legem non esse positam? Benignitas Dei contemptum sui adeo non gignit, ut (si Paulo credimus) Deus suam erga nos charitatem tum maxime commendarit, cum adhuc peccatores essemus. Porro si haec sive Lactantii, sive Origenis sententia rata esset, irrita fieret tota Pauli de praedestinatione disputatio. Nam deest in 12 mss. et 4 editis. In Em. est ulli. Et Heuman. putat delendum esse punctum post versatur.

For no honour can be owed to God, etc. In like manner Origen, on Jeremiah, says that God is kind so that we may not despair, and severe so that we may not despise his kindness. But does not Cicero teach in the Offices that a good man does not sin even when impunity is offered? For the good hate to sin from love of virtue; and on the other hand the wicked hate to sin from fear of punishment. What of Paul's saying too, that the law is not laid down for the just? God's kindness is so far from breeding contempt of itself that (if we believe Paul) God commended his love towards us most of all when we were still sinners. Further, if this opinion, whether Lactantius's or Origen's, were valid, Paul's whole discussion of predestination would be made void. "Nam" is missing in 12 manuscripts and 4 editions. In Em. it is "ulli". And Heumann thinks the full stop after "versatur" should be deleted.

(printed under page 45)

(15) ‹anchor: Si non irascitur› · lemma note, col 91–92

Si non irascitur, etc. Deum irasci testantur multa Scripturae loca. At notandum, iram non esse passionem violentam in Deo, sed voluntatem puniendi, et Deo attribui effective, non affective, ut loquuntur; hoc est, Deum facere quod irati faciunt, non vero propterea affici aliqua perturbatione animi, quemadmodum homines irati. GAL.

If he is not angry, etc. Many places of Scripture testify that God is angry. But it should be noted that anger in God is not a violent passion but the will to punish, and is attributed to God effectively, not affectively, as they say; that is, God does what angry men do, but is not on that account affected by any disturbance of mind, as angry men are. GALLAEUS.

(printed under page 45)

(16) ‹anchor: Ut vagetur› · lemma note, col 91–92

Ut vagetur. Mss. Ultr., Brun., ut evagetur. Edd., Ald., Fasitel., Tornes., ut vagatur.

That he may roam. The manuscripts Ultr. and Brun.: "ut evagetur". The editions of Aldus, Fasitelius, Tornaesius: "ut vagatur".

(printed under page 45)

(17) ‹anchor: Nihil inter hominem› · lemma note, col 92

Nihil inter hominem. Ita mss. 2 Bonon., Tax., 3 Colb. totidemque editi. In aliis corrupte legitur non nihil, quod sententiae Lactantii repugnat.—Nihil inter hominem, etc. Ita B. T. quod corrupte in nonnullis legitur nonnihil, etc. Id sententiae Lactantii repugnat, qui hoc loco resipiscit ab errore alias habito, rationem mutis etiam inesse, de quo disserui secundo Instit., cap. 3. ISAEUS.

No difference between man. So the manuscripts 2 Bologna, Tax., 3 Colbert and as many editions. In others it is corruptly read "non nihil", which goes against Lactantius's view. — No difference between man, etc. So B. and T.; in some it is corruptly read "nonnihil", etc. That goes against the view of Lactantius, who in this place comes back to his senses from an error held elsewhere, that reason is present even in dumb animals, on which I discoursed at Institutes II, chapter 3. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 45)

(18) ‹anchor: Rationale animal› · lemma note, col 92

Rationale animal, etc. Non dissimilia sunt, quae Aristoteles in primo de Anima, Anaxagorae dogmata (continues)

A rational animal, etc. Not unlike are the doctrines of Anaxagoras that Aristotle, in the first book On the Soul, (continues)

(printed under page 45)

Page

running head: 91 FIRM. LACTANTII (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ac malum, non utique aut ambos odit, aut ambos; B non minus, quam illorum qui utrumque detrahunt; C beside the notes, nominativus; sed est ablativus. Imitatur Quintilia- / num, ex quo citavit; D beside the notes, Sed id quod melius est. Francius, et id.
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: f⟨a⟩ciet has its a damaged in the print. Vano is read as printed and should probably be Vana; this is unsure. The VARIORUM NOTAE heading is printed full width and is cut off at the image edge, so it is not set; the Variorum notes below it are left for the later pass. There is no editors' matter in the text block.

PL 7:92

gratia; absurdum est, ex incerto certum velle subvertere, cum sit promptius, de certis incerta firmare.

kindness; it is absurd to wish to overturn the certain from the uncertain, when it is readier to confirm uncertain things from certain ones.

CAPUT VI.

Chapter VI.

Quod Deus irascatur.

That God is angry.

Hae sunt de Deo philosophorum sententiae. Aliud praeterea nihil quisquam dixit. Quod si haec, quae dicta sunt, falsa esse deprehendimus, unum illud extremum superest, in quo solo possit veritas inveniri, quod a philosophis nec susceptum est unquam, nec aliquando defensum; consequens esse, ut irascatur Deus, quoniam gratia commovetur. Haec tuenda nobis et asserenda sententia est. In eo enim summa omnis, et cardo religionis pietatisque versatur. Nam neque honos ullus deberi potest Deo, si nihil praestat colenti, nec ullus metus, si non irascitur non colenti.

These are the opinions of the philosophers about God. Nobody has said anything else besides. But if we find that these things which have been said are false, there remains that one last [position], in which alone the truth can be found, which has never been taken up by the philosophers nor at any time defended: that it follows that God is angry, since He is moved by kindness. This opinion must be defended and asserted by us. For on it turns the whole sum and hinge of religion and piety. For neither can any honour be owed to God if He bestows nothing on the one who worships Him, nor any fear if He is not angry with the one who does not worship Him.

CAPUT VII.

Chapter VII.

De Homine et Brutis, ac Religione.

On Man and the Brutes, and on Religion.

Cum saepe philosophi per ignorantiam veritatis a ratione desciverint, atque in errores inciderint inextricabiles (id enim solet his evenire, quod viatori viam nescienti et non fatenti se ignorare, ut vagetur, dum percontari obvios erubescit) illud tamen nullus philosophus asseruit unquam, nihil inter hominem et pecudem interesse; nec omnino quisquam, modo qui sapiens videri vellet, rationale animal cum mutis et

Although the philosophers have often, through ignorance of the truth, fallen away from reason and fallen into inextricable errors (for that usually happens to them which happens to a traveller who does not know the way and does not admit that he does not know it, namely that he wanders about, while he is ashamed to ask those he meets), yet no philosopher has ever asserted this, that there is no difference between man and beast; nor has anyone at all, provided he wished to seem wise, made the rational animal equal to the dumb and

Editors' notes and page, col. 92

Page

running head: …RM. LACTANTII 92
marginal letters: A gratia; absurdum est; B lenti, nec ullus metus; C evertendum quod erat certum (in the notes); D dum esse punctum post versatur (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence with "gratia" continued from col. 91; running head cut at left edge of image, its first word not visible, LACTANTII read from blurred "LACTANTH"; "promptius" read through worn type (looks like promptins), taken as damaged type, unsure; full-width line "[V]ARIORUM NOTAE" heading the page-foot notes, cut off at left, not set; Variorum notes below not set (later pass); column ends mid-sentence at "mutis et"

PL 7:93

irrationabilibus coaequavit: quod faciunt quidam imperiti, atque ipsis pecudibus similes, qui cum ventri ac voluptati se velint tradere; aiunt, eadem ratione se natos, qua universa quae spirant; quod dici ab homine nefas est. Quis enim tam indoctus est, ut nesciat, quis tam imprudens, ut non sentiat, aliquid inesse in homine divini? Nondum venio ad virtutes animi et ingenii, quibus homini cum Deo manifesta cognatio est. Nonne ipsius corporis status et oris figura declarat, non esse nos cum mutis pecudibus aequales? Illarum natura in humum pabulumque prostrata est; nec habet quidquam commune cum coelo, quod non intuetur. Homo autem recto statu, ore sublimi, ad contemplationem mundi excitatus, confert cum Deo vultum; et rationem ratio cognoscit.

irrational [creatures]: which certain ignorant men do, men like the very cattle, who, since they wish to give themselves over to the belly and to pleasure, say that they were born by the same principle as all things that breathe; which it is impious for a human being to say. For who is so unlearned as not to know, who so imprudent as not to perceive, that there is something divine in man? I do not yet come to the virtues of mind and intellect, by which man has a manifest kinship with God. Do not the very posture of the body and the shape of the face declare that we are not on a level with the dumb cattle? Their nature is bent down towards the ground and fodder, and has nothing in common with the sky, which it does not look upon. But man, with upright posture and lofty face, roused to the contemplation of the world, sets his countenance alongside God; and reason recognizes reason.

Propterea nullum est animal, ut ait Cicero (I de Legibus) praeter hominem, quod habeat aliquam notitiam Dei. Solus enim sapientia instructus est, ut religionem solus intelligat; et haec est hominis atque mutorum, vel praecipua, vel sola distuntia. Nam caetera, quae videntur hominis esse propria, et si non sint talia in mutis, tamen similia videri possunt. Proprius

Therefore there is no animal, as Cicero says (On the Laws 1), except man, which has any knowledge of God. For he alone is furnished with wisdom, so that he alone understands religion; and this is the chief, or else the only, difference between man and the dumb [animals]. For the other things which seem to be proper to man, even if they are not such in the dumb [animals], can nevertheless seem similar. Proper

Editors' notes and page, col. 93

Footnotes

(printed under page 46)

(1) ‹anchor: Rationale animal› · lemma note, col 92

(continued) fuisse refert; nempe universis tam majorum quam minorum gentium animalibus mentem esse dicens, non tamen eam, cui prudentia tribuitur, quae ne cunctis quidem hominibus insit. Haec eadem fere de Anaxagora Plutarchus in V Placitorum, cap. 20. BETUL.

(printed under page 46)

(2) ‹anchor: Coaequavit› · lemma note, col 93–94

Coaequavit. Sic reposui ex mss. et edit. vet. Rom., Florent., Junt., Is., Cellar., Caeteri impressi habent coaequaverit; et pro similes mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg. rec., 2 Colb. et Tax. habent, simillimi.

Made equal. So I have restored it from the manuscripts and the old Roman edition, the Florentine, the Junta, Isaeus, Cellarius. The other printed editions have "coaequaverit"; and for "similes" the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 recent Reg., 2 Colbert and Tax. have "simillimi".

(printed under page 46)

(3) ‹anchor: Aequales› · lemma note, col 93–94

Aequales. Expungunt nos plerique mss. quorum sex, scilicet Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg., 2 Colbert., 1 Clarom., 8 Brun. habent, oris figura declarat, non esse cum mutis pecudibus aequalis.

Equal. Most manuscripts strike out "nos"; six of them, namely the Regio-Puteanus, 1 other Reg., 2 Colbert, 1 Clermont, 8 Brun., have "the form of his face shows that he is not equal with the dumb beasts".

(printed under page 46)

(4) ‹anchor: Habet› · lemma note, col 93–94

Habet. Mss. 4 rec., habet... intuentur. Francius, forte leg. habent... intuentur.

He has. Four recent manuscripts: "habet... intuentur". Francius: perhaps read "habent... intuentur".

(printed under page 46)

(5) ‹anchor: Homo autem recto statu› · lemma note, col 93–94

Homo autem recto statu. Lactantius supra lib. VII cap. 9 Divin. Instit.: Cujus corpus ab humo excitatum, vultus sublimis, status rectus originem suam quaerit. Quod autem dicit, Confert cum Deo vultum, intellige cum meditatur de similitudine, quae ei communis est cum Deo, ait Walchius.

But man, with upright stance. Lactantius above, Divine Institutes book VII, chapter 9: "whose body, raised from the ground, whose lofty face and upright stance seek their origin." As for his saying "he joins his face with God", understand: when he meditates on the likeness that he has in common with God, says Walch.

(printed under page 46)

(6) ‹anchor: Confert cum Deo vultum› · lemma note, col 93–94

Confert cum Deo vultum. Walchii emendatio: Confert ad Deum vultum, non admittenda in loco sano, maxime cum Lactantius eadem phrasi usus sit lib. II, cap. 2: Corpus idcirco rectum accepistis, quo oculos atque mentes cum eo, qui fecit, conferre possetis. BUN.

He joins his face with God. Walch's emendation, "he turns his face to God", is not to be admitted in a sound passage, especially since Lactantius used the same phrase in book II, chapter 2: "You received an upright body so that you might join your eyes and minds with him who made you." BUN.

(printed under page 46)

(7) ‹anchor: Et rationem ratio cognoscit› · lemma note, col 93–94

Et rationem ratio cognoscit. Francius malebat, et rationem ratione cognoscit.—Rationem ratio cognoscit. Sensus est, rationem divinam (sive Deum, qui et ipse ratio dicitur, lib. I, cap. 5), ratio hominis (sive homo rationalis) cognoscit. BUN.

And reason knows reason. Francius preferred "and knows reason by reason". — Reason knows reason. The sense is: the reason of man (or rational man) knows the divine reason (or God, who is himself also called reason, book I, chapter 5). BUN.

(printed under page 46)

(8) ‹anchor: Hominis esse propria› · lemma note, col 93–94

Hominis esse propria. Legitur homini, etc., et notam sequentem exhibet.—Homini esse propria. Ita statim, proprius homini sermo; postea, risus... est homini proprius; denique, quid tam homini proprium; et loco gemino lib. III, cap. 10: Quae putantur esse homini propria. BUN.

Are proper to man. "Homini" is read, etc., and he gives the following note. — Proper to man. So immediately: "speech proper to man"; later, "laughter... is proper to man"; finally, "what is so proper to man"; and in the twin passage, book III, chapter 10: "the things thought to be proper to man." BUN.

(printed under page 46)

(9) ‹anchor: Similia› · lemma note, col 93–94

Similia. Seneca lib. de Ira, c. 3: Muta animalia humanis affectibus carent: habent autem similes illis quosdam impulsus. Adde reliqua, et Arnob. lib. 7, Vossium, lib. III Idol. cap. 44. BUN.

Similar things. Seneca, De ira, chapter 3: "Dumb animals lack human affections, but they have certain impulses like them." Add the rest, and Arnobius book 7, Vossius, De idololatria book III, chapter 44. BUN.

(printed under page 46)

(10) ‹anchor: Tamen et in illis quaedam similitudo sermonis› · lemma note, col 93–94

Tamen et in illis quaedam similitudo sermonis. Francius, tamen est. Huic sententiae similia habet Lucret. lib. V, et Basil. Mag. Oration. 8. Hexamen. et in 9 ubi similitudinem quamdam ratiocinationis in canibus esse praeclare demonstrat; sicut et B. Ambros. lib. VI. Hexam. cap. 4 per ὑποτύπωσιν quamdam, proponit nobis canem venaticum συλλογιζόμενον in compito multifido: de quo praeclare disserunt et Franc. Vallesius l. V de Sacra Philosophia. Cl. Vossius in lib. de Idololat.

Yet in them too there is a certain likeness of speech. Francius: "tamen est". Lucretius, book V, has things like this thought, and Basil the Great, Hexaemeron oration 8, and in the 9th, where he shows admirably that there is a certain likeness of reasoning in dogs; as blessed Ambrose also, Hexaemeron book VI, chapter 4, by a kind of vivid sketch, sets before us a hunting dog reasoning at a many-branched crossroads; on which Francisco Vallés, De sacra philosophia book V, and the illustrious Vossius, in his book De idololatria, also discourse admirably.

(printed under page 46)

(11) ‹anchor: Nam et dignoscunt invicem se vocibus› · lemma note, col 93–94

Nam et dignoscunt invicem se vocibus; et, cum irascuntur, edunt sonum. In mss. 14 et 2 vet. edit. Rom. legitur, Nam et dignoscuntur, edunt sonum. Minus bene. Sensus imperfectus.

For they recognize one another by their voices; and when they are angry they give out a sound. In 14 manuscripts and the two old Roman editions one reads, "For they are recognized, they give out a sound". Less well; the sense is incomplete.

(printed under page 46)

(12) ‹anchor: Nobis... voces eorum... inconditae› · lemma note, col 93–94

Nobis... voces eorum... inconditae... Rost., Ven. 1471, 72, utraque 78, 93, 97, Pier., Parrh., Paris., incognitae; ut Senec. I de Ira, cap. 1, parum explanatae voces. BUN.

To us... their voices... are inarticulate... Rost., Venice 1471, 1472, both of 1478, 1493, 1497, Pier., Parrh., Paris: "incognitae" (unknown); as Seneca, De ira I, chapter 1, "ill-articulated words". BUN.

(printed under page 46)

(13) ‹anchor: Quae se intelligunt› · lemma note, col 93–94

Quae se intelligunt. Recte quae; nam de mutis animalibus loquitur. Verum error est in 8 editis et 12 mss. ubi legitur qui se intelligunt.

Which understand one another. "Quae" is right, for he is speaking of dumb animals. But there is an error in 8 editions and 12 manuscripts, where one reads "qui se intelligunt".

(printed under page 46)

(14) ‹anchor: In omni affectu› · lemma note, col 93–94

In omni affectu. Editi sex effectu.

In every affection. Six editions: "effectu".

(printed under page 46)

(15) ‹anchor: Aures demulcent› · lemma note, col 93–94

Aures demulcent. Id est, demittunt. Horat., lib. II, od. 13: ...... Illis carminious stupens Demittit atras bellua centiceps. Aures. TURNEBIUS.

They stroke down their ears. That is, they lower them. Horace, book II, ode 13: "...... Spellbound by those songs, the hundred-headed beast lowers its black ears." TURNEBUS.

(printed under page 46)

(16) ‹anchor: Providentia futuri› · lemma note, col 93–94

Providentia futuri. Et infra, provident in futurum. Francius, forte providentia... et praevident.

Foresight of the future. And below, "they provide for the future". Francius: perhaps "providentia... et praevident".

(printed under page 46)

(17) ‹anchor: Ingentem farris acervum› · lemma note, col 93–94

Ingentem farris acervum, etc. Virgilius hac similitudine laborantium operas describit Georgic. primo; Populatque ingentem farris acervum: Curculio, atque inopi metuens formica senectae. Vide Horat. ad Mecoenatem, sat. I: ....... Sicut, Parvula nam exemplo est magni formica laboris, Ore trahit quodcumque potest, atque addit acervo Quem struit, haud ignara, ac non incauta futuri. Quid quod Salomon pigrum formicae exemplo ad operas excitat, Proverb., c. VI, et trigesimo colligit etiam industriae animalium exempla. Caeterum de formicarum industria Aesopi apologus est. De hujus natura consulendus est Plinius l. XI, c. Deest, Aelianus, lib. VIII; Aristot., lib. I, Hist. Animalium, cap. 11. BETULEIUS.

A huge heap of grain, etc. Virgil describes the toil of workers with this comparison in the first Georgic: "And the weevil plunders a huge heap of grain, and the ant fearful of a needy old age." See Horace to Maecenas, Satire 1: "...... Just as the tiny ant, an example of great toil, drags with its mouth whatever it can and adds it to the heap it builds, not unaware nor careless of the future." What of Solomon, who rouses the sluggard to work by the example of the ant, Proverbs chapter 6, and in the thirtieth also gathers examples of the industry of animals? Besides, there is Aesop's fable on the industry of ants. On its nature consult Pliny book XI, chapter [number missing as printed], Aelian book VIII; Aristotle, History of Animals book I, chapter 11. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 46)

(18) ‹anchor: Cum populant› · lemma note, col 93–94

Cum populant. Ex vetustissimo et optimo ms. Regio-Put. restitui cum populant, nec aliter legitur apud (continues)

When they plunder. From the very old and excellent Regio-Puteanus manuscript I have restored "cum populant", and it is read no otherwise in (continues)

(printed under page 46)

Page

running head: 93 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹irrationabilibus coaequavit›; B ‹Propterea nullum est animal›; C ‹Coaequavit. Sic reposui› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹que mentes cum eo, qui fecit› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
misprints kept as printed: "distuntia" (for distantia)
other: column ends with the word Pro- broken across the column break; "et si" printed as two words, set as printed; spacing in "rationese" and "nefasest" treated as tight setting, not as joined words; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" stands between the text and the notes and is cut off at the image edge, so it is not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (Betul., Bun., Walchius, etc.) are left for the later pass; editors' matter set: (none)

PL 7:94

homini sermo est : tamen et in illis quaedam similitudo sermonis. Nam et dignoscunt invicem se vocibus; et, cum irascuntur, edunt sonum jurgio similem; et, cum se ex intervallo vident, gratulandi officium voce declarant. Nobis quidem voces eorum videntur inconditae, sicut illis fortasse nostrae : sed ipsis, quae se intelligunt, verba sunt; denique in omni affectu certas vocis notas exprimunt, quibus habitum mentis ostendant. Risus quoque est homini proprius; et tamen videmus in aliis animalibus quaedam signa laetitiae, cum ad lusum gestiunt, aures demulcent, rictum contrahunt, frontem serenant, oculos in lasciviam resolvunt. Quid tam proprium homini, quam ratio, et providentia futuri? Atqui sunt animalia, quae latibulis suis diversos et plures exitus pandant, ut si quod periculum inciderit, fuga pateat obsessis; quod non facerent, nisi inesset illis intelligentia et cogitatio. Alia provident in futurum; ut

to man is speech: yet in them too there is a certain likeness of speech. For they both recognize one another by their voices; and, when they are angry, they give out a sound like a quarrel; and, when they see one another from a distance, they declare the duty of greeting by their voice. To us indeed their voices seem disordered, as perhaps ours seem to them: but to themselves, who understand one another, they are words; in short, in every feeling they express definite marks of the voice, by which to show the state of their mind. Laughter also is proper to man; and yet we see in other animals certain signs of gladness, when they long for play, smooth down their ears, draw back their jaws, make their brow serene, relax their eyes into playfulness. What is so proper to man as reason and foresight of the future? Yet there are animals which open various and several exits to their lairs, so that, if any danger should befall, flight may lie open to them when besieged; which they would not do unless intelligence and thought were in them. Others provide for the future; as

Ingentem formicae farris acervum

the ants a huge heap of spelt,

Cum populant, hyemis memores, tectoque reponunt;

when they plunder it, mindful of winter, and store it under cover;

ut apes, quae

as bees, which

Editors' notes and page, col. 94

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 94 (left edge cut off; column number partly damaged)
marginal letters: A ‹prius homini sermo est›; B ‹quod periculum inciderit›; C ‹Nam et dignoscunt invicem se vocibus (in the Variorum notae)›; D ‹Ingentem farris acervum, etc. (in the Variorum notae)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (prius homini sermo est) and ends mid-sentence (ut apes, quae); the verse quotation (Virgil, Aeneid 4.402-403) is set one line per verse; the full-width heading [V]ARIORUM NOTAE, cut off at the left edge, stands between the text and the notes and is not set; the Variorum notae below it (Commentarius) are left for the later pass; Google digitization watermark and OCR watermark at the foot not set

PL 7:95

Patriam solae, et certos novere penates,

alone know a homeland and settled household gods,

Venturaeque hyemis memores, aestate laborem

and, mindful of the winter to come, in summer they undertake labour

Experiuntur, et in medium quaesita reponunt.

and store up for the common stock what they have gathered.

Longum est, si exequi velim, quae a singulis generibus animalium fieri soleant humanae solertiae simillima. Quod si horum omnium, quae adscribi homini solent, in mutis quoque deprehenditur similitudo, apparet solam esse religionem, cujus in mutis nec vestigium aliquod, nec ulla suspicio inveniri potest. Religionis enim est propria justitia, quam nullum aliud animal attingit. Homo enim solus imperat; caetera sibi conciliata sunt. Justitiae autem Dei cultus adscribitur; quem qui non suscipit, hic a natura hominis alienus, vitam pecudum sub humana specie vivet. Cum vero a caeteris animalibus hoc pene solo differamus, quod soli omnium divinam vim potestatemque sentimus, in illis autem nullus sit intellectus Dei: certe illud fieri non potest, ut in hoc vel muta plus sapiant, vel humana natura desipiat; cum homini ob sapientiam et cuncta quae spirant, et omnis rerum natura subjecta sit. Quare si ratio, si vis hominis hoc praecellit et superat caeteras animantes, quod solus notitiam Dei capit, apparet religionem nullo modo posse dissolvi.

It would be a long task if I wished to go through the things, most like human skill, that are commonly done by the individual kinds of animals. But if a likeness of all these things which are usually ascribed to man is found in the dumb creatures also, it is clear that religion alone is that of which neither any trace nor any suspicion can be found in the dumb creatures. For justice is proper to religion, and no other animal attains to it. For man alone commands; the other things have been brought into alliance with him. Now to justice the worship of God is assigned; and he who does not take it up, being estranged from the nature of man, will live the life of cattle under a human form. But since we differ from the other animals in almost this alone, that we alone of all perceive the divine force and power, whereas in them there is no understanding of God, it certainly cannot be that in this either the dumb creatures are wiser or human nature is foolish, since, on account of wisdom, both all things that breathe and the whole nature of things are subject to man. Wherefore if reason, if the power of man excels and surpasses the other living creatures in this, that he alone grasps the knowledge of God, it is clear that religion can in no way be dissolved.

Editors' notes and page, col. 95

Footnotes

(printed under page 47)

(1) ‹anchor: Cum populant› · lemma note, col 94

(continued) Virgilium, IV Aeneid., vs. 403 et Georgic. I, vs. 185, populat, per archaismum, cum veteres et populo active posuerint, observante Servio. Is. Nonium cap. 7, n. 26. Ex WALCHIO.—In caeteris Lactantii mss. et editis est comportunt. Aristotel., libro I de Hist. Animalium, c. 1. BETUL.

(printed under page 47)

(2) ‹anchor: Ut apes, quae patriam solae› · lemma note, col 95–96

Ut apes, quae patriam solae, etc. Georg. quarto, quo libro apum regnum describit. Consule Plin., lib. II Naturalis Historiae, c. 5; Varron., de Re rust., l. III, c. 16; Columellam, l. X a capite 11 usque ad fin.; Palladium, l. I, c. 37, et l. VI, c. 8; Constantinum, l. XV, capitibus aliquot; Arist., de Nat. Animal., l. V, c. 21 et 22, et l. 9, c. 14. Lege ad haec omnino Theodoreti, sermonem quintum, quo ex animalium industria providentiam probat, sacrarum litterarum testimoniis ubique instructus. ID.

As bees, which alone [know] a fatherland, etc. Georgics book four, in which he describes the kingdom of the bees. Consult Pliny, Natural History book II, chapter 5; Varro, De re rustica book III, chapter 16; Columella, book X from chapter 11 to the end; Palladius, book I, chapter 37, and book VI, chapter 8; Constantine, book XV, several chapters; Aristotle, On the Nature of Animals, book V, chapters 21 and 22, and book 9, chapter 14. On these, by all means read Theodoret's fifth discourse, in which he proves providence from the industry of animals, everywhere equipped with the testimonies of sacred Scripture. THE SAME.

(printed under page 47)

(3) ‹anchor: Longum est, si exequi velim› · lemma note, col 95–96

Longum est, si exequi velim. Non ineleganter. Sic Cicero, l. II de Nat. deor., c. 64: Longum est... persequi. Lactantius iterum de Ira, c. 11: Longum est singulorum sententias persequi; Epit., c. 14: Longum est recensere. BUN.

It would be long if I wished to go through it. Not inelegantly. So Cicero, De natura deorum book II, chapter 64: "It is long... to go through." Lactantius again, De ira chapter 11: "It is long to go through the opinions of each"; Epitome chapter 14: "It is long to review." BUN.

(printed under page 47)

(4) ‹anchor: In mutis quoque› · lemma note, col 95–96

In mutis quoque. Ita legendum esse ostendunt omnes prope mss. et textus ipse. In 4 mss. rec. et in editis amanuensium errore legitur multis.

In dumb animals too. Nearly all the manuscripts and the text itself show that it should be read so. In 4 recent manuscripts and in the editions, by the copyists' error, one reads "multis".

(printed under page 47)

(5) ‹anchor: Religionis enim est propria justitia› · lemma note, col 95–96

Religionis enim est propria justitia. Addidi enim ex mss. antiq. Cauch., 1 Colb. et 3 Reg. necnon ex omnibus fere impressis. Quod melius cohaeret.

For justice is proper to religion. I have added "enim" from the old manuscripts Cauch., 1 Colbert and 3 Reg., and from almost all the printed editions. It coheres better.

(printed under page 47)

(6) ‹anchor: Quam nullum aliud animal attingit› · lemma note, col 95–96

Quam nullum aliud animal attingit. Plerique mss. et 3 editi habent quae.—Hanc ultimam lectionem habet Buneman., et exhibet notam sequentem: — Quae nullum aliud animal attingit. Rectissime et elegantissime. Lib. III, c. 11: Quae (immortalitas) nec aliud animal, nec corpus attingit; Epit., c. 33: Quia et pecudes attingit hoc duplex bonum? Ibid. Antea: Sed hoc bonum muta contingit. Cicero, l. I. de Nat. deor., Labor Deum non attingit; lib. III, de Natur. deor., cap. 15: Quorum Deum nihil attingit. BUN.

Which no other animal attains. Most manuscripts and 3 editions have "quae". — Bunemann has this last reading and gives the following note: — Which no other animal attains. Most rightly and elegantly. Book III, chapter 11: "which (immortality) neither any other animal nor body attains"; Epitome chapter 33: "Since this double good reaches the beasts too?" Ibid., before: "But this good befalls the dumb animals." Cicero, De natura deorum book I: "Toil does not reach God"; De natura deorum book III, chapter 15: "None of which reaches God." BUN.

(printed under page 47)

(7) ‹anchor: Homo enim solus impertit... conciliata sunt› · lemma note, col 95–96

Homo enim solus impertit... conciliata sunt. Non quadrant, inquit Heumannus. Quare credo, glossema hoc esse inferius adscriptum a quopiam ad haec verba: Homini cuncta subjecta sunt. Genuinum vero esse hunc locum, liquido constat ex Epit., c. 55, ubi dicit, solam esse justitiam, quae nec sibi tantum conciliata sit, nec occulta, sed foras tota promineat, et ad benefaciendum prona sit, ut quamplurimis prosit. — Caetera sibi conciliata sunt. L. V, c. 17: In omnibus enim videmus animalibus, quia sapientia carent, conciliatricem sui esse naturam. Nocent aliis, ut sibi prosint. Cic., III Fin., c. 5: Simul atque natum sit animal, ipsum sibi conciliari et commendari ad se conservandum; lib. I de Nat. deor., c. 27: Non vides, quam blanda conciliatrix, et quasi sui sit lena natura. Illud sibi conciliatum esse vel decies Seneca in una epist. 121 inculcavit. BUN.

For man alone imparts... are attached to themselves. "They do not fit," says Heumann. "So I believe this is a gloss written lower down by someone against the words: All things are subject to man." But that the passage is genuine is plainly established from the Epitome, chapter 55, where he says that justice alone is neither attached to itself only, nor hidden, but stands out wholly to the outside and is inclined to doing good, so as to benefit as many as possible. — The other creatures are attached to themselves. Book V, chapter 17: "For in all animals we see, because they lack wisdom, that nature attaches them to themselves. They harm others to benefit themselves." Cicero, De finibus III, chapter 5: "As soon as an animal is born, it is attached and commended to itself for its own preservation"; De natura deorum book I, chapter 27: "Do you not see what a coaxing match-maker nature is, and as it were her own procuress?" Seneca drove home that "being attached to oneself" as many as ten times in the single letter 121. BUN.

(printed under page 47)

(8) ‹anchor: Vitam pecudum vivet› · lemma note, col 95–96

Vitam pecudum vivet. Sic cum quarto casu vivere, dixit Lactantius Divin. Institut., l. V, c. 8, et l. VII, c. 24. In 7 editis pro vivet legitur vivit.

He will live the life of beasts. So Lactantius used "vivere" with the accusative, Divine Institutes book V, chapter 8, and book VII, chapter 24. In 7 editions "vivit" is read for "vivet".

(printed under page 47)

(9) ‹anchor: In illis... nullus intellectus Dei› · lemma note, col 95–96

In illis... nullus intellectus Dei. Vide not. ad c. 12: Divinitatis intellectus... quo differimus a belluis. BUN.

In them... no understanding of God. See the note on chapter 12: "the understanding of the divine... by which we differ from beasts." BUN.

(printed under page 47)

(10) ‹anchor: Si ratio, si vis hominis› · lemma note, col 95–96

Si ratio, si vis hominis. Ita restitui ex omnibus prope mss. et 8 vet. editis, mentis vis ac ratio, apud Cicer. 1 de Nat. deor. 26. Alii jus.

If the reason, if the power of man. So I have restored it from nearly all the manuscripts and 8 old editions; "the power and reason of the mind", in Cicero, De natura deorum I, 26. Others have "jus".

(printed under page 47)

(11) ‹anchor: Nam privata› · lemma note, col 95–96

Nam privata. Ita quamplurimi mss. et 8 editi, ac Lucretius ipse Scripti 9 rec. et sex impressi, jam privata.

For deprived. So very many manuscripts and 8 editions, and Lucretius himself. Nine recent manuscripts and six printed editions: "jam privata".

(printed under page 47)

(12) ‹anchor: Nil indiga nostri› · lemma note, col 95–96

Nil indiga nostri. Mss. 6 et 2 edit., nihil.

In no need of us. Six manuscripts and 2 editions: "nihil".

(printed under page 47)

(13) ‹anchor: Nihil cuiquam boni› · lemma note, col 95–96

Nihil cuiquam boni. Sic restitui ex mss. 2 Bonon., 3 Reg. inter quos est Regio-Put., 3 Colb., Baluz., Goth., Ultr., Lips., Em., Brun. et 5 edit. In mss. Cauc., 1 Colb., Pen., Clarom. est, nihil umquam cuiquam boni; in rec. 3 Reg., 1 Colb., Cant. et 10 excusis legitur, nihil unquam boni; in 1 Colb. pro boni, est homini.

No good to anyone. So I have restored it from the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 3 Reg. (among them the Regio-Puteanus), 3 Colbert, Baluze, Goth., Ultr., Lips., Em., Brun. and 5 editions. In the manuscripts Cauc., 1 Colbert, Pen., Clermont it is "never any good to anyone"; in 3 recent Reg., 1 Colbert, Cant. and 10 printed copies one reads "never any good"; in 1 Colbert, for "boni" there is "homini".

(printed under page 47)

(14) ‹anchor: Sacrificia facere, dona conferre› · lemma note, col 95–96

Sacrificia facere, dona conferre. Haec 4 verba desiderantur in mss. 20 rec. et in 3 ed. Rom. Sunt autem in antiquissimis Regio-Put. 2 Bonon. aliisque multis, et 12 editis.—Templa aedificare, sacrificia facere, dona conferre, rem. Lact., l. VI, c. 25: Apud istos, qui nullo modo rationem divinitatis intelligunt, donum est, quidquid auro argentoque fabricatur; item, quidquid purpura et serico texitur: sacrificium est victima, et quaecumque in ara cremantur. Confer. l. VI, c. 1; Epit., c. 58 integro. BUN.

To offer sacrifices, to bestow gifts. These 4 words are lacking in 20 recent manuscripts and in the 3 Roman editions. But they are in the very ancient Regio-Puteanus, 2 Bologna and many others, and in 12 editions. — To build temples, to offer sacrifices, to bestow gifts, property. Lactantius, book VI, chapter 25: "Among those who in no way understand the nature of divinity, a gift is whatever is wrought of gold and silver; likewise whatever is woven of purple and silk; a sacrifice is a victim, and whatever is burned on the altar." Compare book VI, chapter 1; Epitome, the whole of chapter 58. BUN.

(printed under page 47)

(15) ‹anchor: Cicero› · lemma note, col 96

Cicero. Cic., l. I de Nat. deor. ad finem.

Cicero. Cicero, De natura deorum book I, at the end.

(printed under page 47)

(16) ‹anchor: Quando prodesse› · lemma note, col 96

Quando prodesse. Ita fere omnes mss. et editi pro quandoquidem, quod perperam substituerunt scripti sex et editi quatuor, seu pro quoniam, ut apud Ciceronem lib. II Offic. cap. 58, et lib. V Epist. Fam. 20.

Since to help. So almost all the manuscripts and editions, for "quandoquidem", which six manuscripts and four editions wrongly substituted, or for "quoniam", as in Cicero, De officiis book II, chapter 58, and Letters to Friends book V, 20.

(printed under page 47)

Page

running head: 95 FIRM. LACTANT (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹Patriam solae, et certos novere penates›; B ‹differamus, quod soli omnium divinam›; C ‹malium, c. 1. Betul.› (in the notes); D ‹Religionis enim est propria justitia. Addidi› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the three verse lines (Virgil, Georg. 4.155-157) are set one line each, as printed; the heading VARIORUM NOTAE runs across the page above the foot commentary and is not set; the Variorum notae commentary at the page foot (Virgilium, IV Aeneid., ...) is left for the later pass; no editors' matter in the text block

PL 7:96

CAPUT VIII.

Chapter VIII.

De religione.

On religion.

Dissolvitur autem religio, si credamus Epicuro illa dicenti:

But religion is destroyed if we believe Epicurus when he says these things:

Omnis enim per se divum natura necesse est,

For the whole nature of the gods must of necessity of itself

Immortali aevo summa cum pace fruatur,

enjoy immortal life in the highest peace,

Semota a nostris rebus, sejunctaque longe.

removed from our affairs and separated far away.

Nam privata dolore omni, privata periclis,

For, free from all pain, free from dangers,

Ipsa suis pollens opibus, nihil indiga nostri,

strong in its own resources, needing nothing of us,

Nec bene pro meritis capitur, nec tangitur ira.

it is neither won over by good deserts nor touched by anger.

Quae cum dicit, utrum aliquem cultum Deo putat esse tribuendum, an evertit omnem religionem? Si enim Deus nihil cuiquam boni tribuit, si colentis obsequio nullam gratiam refert, quid tam vanum, tam stultum, quam templa aedificare, sacrificia facere, dona conferre, rem familiarem minuere, ut nihil assequamur? Atenim naturam excellentem honorari oportet. Quis honos deberi potest nihil curanti et ingrato? An aliqua ratione obstricti esse possumus ei, qui nihil habeat commune nobiscum? «Deus, inquit Cicero, si talis est, ut nulla gratia, nulla hominum charitate teneatur, valeat. Quid enim dicam, propitius sit? esse enim propitius potest nemini.» Quid contemptius dici potuit in Deum? Valeat, inquit; id est, abeat et recedat, quando prodesse nulli potest. Quod si negotium

When he says these things, does he think that some worship ought to be rendered to God, or does he overturn all religion? For if God bestows nothing of good on anyone, if He returns no gratitude for the homage of the worshipper, what is so empty, so foolish, as to build temples, offer sacrifices, bestow gifts, diminish our estate, only to obtain nothing? But [it is said] an excellent nature ought to be honoured. What honour can be owed to one who cares for nothing and is ungrateful? Or can we in any way be bound to one who has nothing in common with us? "God," says Cicero, "if He is such that He is held by no favour, by no love of men, farewell to Him. For why should I say, may He be propitious? For He can be propitious to no one." What more contemptuous thing could have been said against God? Farewell to Him, he says; that is, let Him go away and withdraw, since He can benefit no one. But if business is something

Editors' notes and page, col. 96

Page

running head: [cut off at left] IRM. LACTANTII 96
marginal letters: A CAPUT VIII.; B Atenim naturam excellentem; C naturam. Nocent aliis (in the notes); D Cauc., 1 Colb. (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 7:97

Deus nec habet, nec exhibet, cur non ergo delinquamus, quoties hominum conscientiam fallere licebit, ac leges publicas circumscribere? Ubicumque nobis latendi occasio arriserit, consulamus rei, auferamus aliena, vel sine cruore, vel etiam cum sanguine si praeter leges nihil est amplius quod colendum sit.

God neither has nor shows, why then should we not do wrong, whenever it will be possible to deceive the knowledge of men and to get round the public laws? Wherever an opportunity of concealment has smiled upon us, let us look to our own interest, let us carry off what belongs to others, either without bloodshed or even with blood, if beyond the laws there is nothing further that must be revered.

Haec dum sentit Epicurus, religionem funditus delet; qua sublata, confusio ac perturbatio vitae sequetur. Quod si religio tolli non potest, ut et sapientiam, ⟨q⟩ua distamus a belluis, et justitiam retineamus, qua communis vita sit tutior; quomodo Religio ipsa sine metu teneri aut custodiri potest? Quod enim non metuitur, contemnitur: quod contemnitur, utique non colitur. Ita fit, ut religio, et majestas, et honor metu constet: metus autem non est, ubi nullus irascitur. Sive igitur gratiam Deo, sive iram, sive utrumque detraxeris, religionem tolli necesse est, sine qua vita hominum stultitia, scelere, immanitate completur. Multum enim refraenat homines conscientia, si credamus nos in conspectu Dei vivere; si non tantum quae gerimus, videri desuper, sed etiam quae cogitamus, aut loquimur, audiri a Deo putemus. Atenim prodest id credere, ut quidam putant, non veritatis gratia, sed utilitatis; quoniam leges conscientiam punire non possunt, nisi aliquis desuper terror impendeat ad cohibenda peccata. Falsa est igitur omnis religio et divinitas nulla est. Sed a viris prudentibus universa conficta sunt, quo rectius innocentiusque vivatur. Magna haec, et a materia quam proposuimus

While Epicurus holds these views, he destroys religion from its foundations; and once it is taken away, confusion and disorder of life will follow. But if religion cannot be removed, so that we may retain both wisdom, by which we differ from the beasts, and justice, by which common life may be safer, how can Religion itself be held or guarded without fear? For what is not feared is despised; what is despised is certainly not worshipped. Thus it comes about that religion, and majesty, and honour rest upon fear; but there is no fear where no one is angry. Whether, then, you take away from God favour, or anger, or both, religion must necessarily be removed, without which the life of men is filled with folly, crime and savagery. For conscience greatly restrains men, if we believe that we live in the sight of God; if we suppose that not only what we do is seen from above, but also what we think or say is heard by God. But, some think, it is profitable to believe this not for the sake of truth but for the sake of utility, since the laws cannot punish the conscience unless some terror hangs over from above to restrain sins. All religion, then, is false, and there is no divinity; but everything was invented by prudent men, so that life might be lived more rightly and more innocently. This is a great matter, and from the subject which we have set before us

Editors' notes and page, col. 97

Footnotes

(printed under page 48)

(1) ‹anchor: Arriserit, consulamus rei› · lemma note, col 97

Arriserit, consulamus rei. Haec duo postrema verba absunt a 15 mss. et vet. edit. Rom.

Should have smiled on us, let us look to our interest. These last two words are absent from 15 manuscripts and the old Roman edition.

(printed under page 48)

(2) ‹anchor: Quod colendum sit› · lemma note, col 97

Quod colendum sit. Ita mss. pene omnes et veteres editi. In 4 scriptis rec. et editis multis verendum sit. Utraque lectio bona. 2 Mss. rec. levissima mutatione, dolendum sit.

Which is to be worshipped. So nearly all the manuscripts and the old editions. In 4 recent manuscripts and many editions, "verendum sit" (is to be feared). Both readings are good. Two recent manuscripts, by a very slight change: "dolendum sit".

(printed under page 48)

(3) ‹anchor: Sentit Epicurus› · lemma note, col 97

Sentit Epicurus. 2 Reg. et edit. Rom. 1470, Sentit Lucretius. Et quidem Epicuri echo est Lucretius.

Epicurus holds. Two Reg. and the Roman edition of 1470: "Lucretius holds". And indeed Lucretius is Epicurus's echo.

(printed under page 48)

(4) ‹anchor: Sequetur› · lemma note, col 97

Sequetur. Ita cuncti mss., praeter 2 rec. in quibus est ut, in editis, sequitur.

It will follow. So all the manuscripts, except 2 recent ones in which it is, as in the editions, "sequitur".

(printed under page 48)

(5) ‹anchor: Ut et sapientiam. Qua distamus a belluis, et justitiam› · lemma note, col 97

Ut et sapientiam. Qua distamus a belluis, et justitiam. Quatuor postrema verba desiderantur in 20 mss. et 7 editis. — Qua distamus a belluis, et justitiam. L. III, cap. 10: et 11 maxime de Ira, cap. 11: Diximus, religione sublata, nec sapientiam teneri posse, nec justitiam, dum divinitatis intellectus, quo differimus a belluis, in homine solo reperiatur; quae verba aperte nostrum locum respiciunt. BUN.

As also wisdom, by which we differ from beasts, and justice. The last four words are lacking in 20 manuscripts and 7 editions. — By which we differ from beasts, and justice. Book III, chapter 10, and 11; above all De ira chapter 11: "We have said that, if religion is removed, neither wisdom nor justice can be held, since the understanding of the divine, by which we differ from beasts, is found in man alone"; words which plainly have our passage in view. BUN.

(printed under page 48)

(6) ‹anchor: Non veritatis gratia› · lemma note, col 97

Non veritatis gratia, etc. Sic enim Numam, Scipionem et alios religionem simulasse Valerius exemplis docet. BETUL. — Idque ut morosos populos timore deorum ad legum observantiam adigerent.

Not for the sake of truth, etc. For thus Valerius teaches by examples that Numa, Scipio and others feigned religion. BETULEIUS. — And this so as to drive unruly peoples, by fear of the gods, to observance of the laws.

(printed under page 48)

(7) ‹anchor: Sed utilitatis› · lemma note, col 97

Sed utilitatis. Regio-Put. utilitati. Mss. 13, utilitate.

But of expediency. The Regio-Puteanus: "utilitati". Thirteen manuscripts: "utilitate".

(printed under page 48)

(8) ‹anchor: Terror impendeat› · lemma note, col 97

Terror impendeat. Ita omnes ferme mss. et 6 editi. Scripti tres rec. et 7. excusi mendose impendat. 2 Reg. rec. et ed. Rom. 1470, impediat. 1 Colbert. tortor impendat.

Terror should hang over. So almost all the manuscripts and 6 editions. Three recent manuscripts and 7 printed copies wrongly "impendat". Two recent Reg. and the Roman edition of 1470: "impediat". One Colbert: "tortor impendat".

(printed under page 48)

(9) ‹anchor: Conficta sunt› · lemma note, col 97

Conficta sunt. Sic reposui ex cunctis pene mss. et 3 editis. In 10 scriptis et 12 impressis legitur confecta sunt. — Conficta sunt. Ut Arnobius l. VII: Religionibus artifex in comminiscendis Numa. Lactantius imitatur Ciceron. l. I de Nat. deor., cap. 52: Quid ii, qui dixerunt, totam de diis immortalibus opinionem fictam esse ab hominibus sapientibus. BUN.

Have been invented. So I have restored it from nearly all the manuscripts and 3 editions. In 10 manuscripts and 12 printed editions one reads "confecta sunt". — Conficta sunt. As Arnobius, book VII: "Numa, a craftsman in devising religions." Lactantius imitates Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 52: "What of those who said that the whole notion of the immortal gods was invented by wise men?" BUN.

(printed under page 48)

(10) ‹anchor: Quamvis breviter› · lemma note, col 97–98

Quamvis breviter. Ita omnes prope mss. et 6 vetustiores editi, ac Cellar., Walch. In 3 rec. mss. et 10 impressis est, quam breviter.

However briefly. So nearly all the manuscripts and 6 older editions, and Cellarius and Walch. In 3 recent manuscripts and 10 printed editions it is "quam breviter".

(printed under page 48)

(11) ‹anchor: Protagoras› · lemma note, col 97–98

Protagoras, etc. Vide Laertium. De Protagora dictum est lib. I Institut. c. 2. Refertur etiam ab Arnobio, lib. VIII adversus Gentes. Similes catalogi sunt apud Cicer. de Natura deorum primo; et inter ecclesiasticos scriptores, apud Epiphanium in Epitome, apud Eusebium de Praeparat. Evangel. lib. XIV cap. 1. Irenaeus lib. II cap. 19. Anaxagoram ἄθεον nominat, nisi lectio sit mendosa; quod non puto. BETULEIUS. — Cicero lib. I de Nat. deor. c. 23: Abderites Protagoras, sophistes temporibus illis vel maximus, cum in principio libri sic posuisset: De Divis neque ut sint, neque ut non sint, habeo dicere; Atheniensium jussu urbe atque agro est exterminatus, librique ejus in concione combusti.

Protagoras, etc. See Laertius. Protagoras was spoken of in Institutes book I, chapter 2. He is also mentioned by Arnobius, Against the Nations book VIII. There are similar catalogues in Cicero, De natura deorum book one; and among the church writers, in Epiphanius's Epitome and in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel book XIV, chapter 1. Irenaeus, book II, chapter 19, calls Anaxagoras godless, unless the reading is faulty, which I do not think. BETULEIUS. — Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 23: "Protagoras of Abdera, perhaps the greatest sophist of those times, having put at the beginning of his book: Concerning the gods I can say neither that they are nor that they are not, was banished from the city and its territory by order of the Athenians, and his books were burned in the assembly."

(printed under page 48)

(12) ‹anchor: Temporibus Socratis› · lemma note, col 97–98

Temporibus Socratis. Teste Laertio, floruit Olympiade LXXIV. Sed hanc librorum exustionem Euseb. in Chronicis anno tertio Olympiadis LXXXIV ponit, et floruit sane tum Socrates, et eum Socratis fuisse synchronon testatur etiam Platonis Dialogus, qui Protagorae nomine inscriptus fuit. Quanquam de hoc quaestio est apud Macrob. lib. I Sat. cap. 1. BETULEIUS.

In the times of Socrates. According to Laertius, he flourished in the 74th Olympiad. But Eusebius in the Chronicle puts this burning of the books in the third year of the 84th Olympiad, and Socrates was certainly flourishing then; and that he was Socrates's contemporary is attested also by Plato's dialogue entitled with the name Protagoras. There is, however, a question about this in Macrobius, Saturnalia book I, chapter 1. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 48)

(13) ‹anchor: Et libros ejus in concione› · lemma note, col 97–98

Et libros ejus in concione, etc. Vide quae supra diximus ad cap. 22 lib. I. Ex hoc loco corrigendus locus Minutii Felic. ubi nonnulli legunt, scripta ejus deriserint, legendum, deusserint. Patet hoc ex Lactant. etiam ex Diogene Laert. qui de omni hac re disserit. Vide et Ciceronem lib. I de Natura deorum.

And his books in the assembly, etc. See what we said above on book I, chapter 22. From this place the passage of Minucius Felix should be corrected, where some read "they mocked his writings"; one should read "they burned them up". This is clear from Lactantius, and also from Diogenes Laertius, who discusses this whole matter. See also Cicero, De natura deorum book I.

(printed under page 48)

(14) ‹anchor: Et auditor ejus Plato› · lemma note, col 97–98

Et auditor ejus Plato, etc. Quam inconstanter autem is de rebus divinis disseruerit, non modo Velleius Epicureus apud Ciceronem objicit, sed etiam Euseb. de Praep. Evang. lib. XIII collatione scriptorum ipsius diligenti evidenter demonstrat. BETUL.

And his hearer Plato, etc. How inconsistently he discoursed on divine things, not only Velleius the Epicurean objects in Cicero, but Eusebius too, Preparation for the Gospel book XIII, shows plainly by a careful comparison of his writings. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 48)

(15) ‹anchor: Insecabilibus› · lemma note, col 98

Insecabilibus. Atomis scilicet.

Indivisible. That is, atoms.

(printed under page 48)

Page

running head: 97 LIBER DE IRA D[EI] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹Deus nec habet, nec exhibet›; B ‹lus irascitur. Sive igitur gratiam›; C ‹vivatur. Magna haec, et a materia›; D ‹homine solo reperiatur; quae verba› (beside the Variorum notae, not the text block)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: first letter of "⟨q⟩ua distamus" lost (line begins with a gap); "Ubicumque" and "sanguine" read through worn type; column ends mid-sentence at "proposuimus"; the heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" printed across the page (cut off at the right edge) not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (Arriserit, consulamus rei ... Bun.) left for the later pass

PL 7:98

aliena quaestio est: sed quia necessario incidit, debet quamvis breviter attingi.

a foreign question; but since it has necessarily come up, it ought to be touched upon, however briefly.

CAPUT IX.

Chapter IX.

De providentia Dei, deque sententiis illi repugnantibus.

On the providence of God, and on the opinions opposed to it.

Cum sententiae philosophorum prioris temporis de providentia consensissent, nec ulla esset dubitatio, quin mundus a Deo, et ratione esset instructus, et ratione regeretur: primus omnium Protagoras ext⟨i⟩tit temporibus Socratis, qui sibi diceret non liquere, utrum esset aliqua divinitas, necne. Quae disputatio ejus adeo impia, et contra veritatem et religionem judicata est, ut et ipsum Athenienses expulerint suis finibus, et libros ejus in concione, quibus haec continebantur, exusserint. De cujus sententia non est opus disputare, quia nihil certi pronuntiavit. Post haec Socrates, et auditor ejus Plato, et qui de schola Platonis, tanquam rivuli diversas in partes profluxerunt; stoici et peripatetici, in eadem fuere sententia, qua priores.

Although the opinions of the philosophers of earlier time had agreed concerning providence, and there was no doubt that the world had both been fashioned by God with reason and was governed by reason, Protagoras, first of all, arose in the times of Socrates, who said that it was not clear to him whether there was any divinity or not. This argument of his was judged so impious, and contrary both to truth and to religion, that the Athenians both expelled him himself from their territory and burned in the assembly his books in which these things were contained. Concerning his opinion there is no need to argue, since he declared nothing certain. After these things Socrates, and his hearer Plato, and those who flowed out from the school of Plato like streams in different directions, the Stoics and Peripatetics, were of the same opinion as their predecessors.

Postea vero Epicurus Deum quidem esse dixit, quia necesse sit esse aliquid in mundo praestans, et eximium, et beatum; providentiam tamen nullam: itaque mundum ipsum nec ratione ulla, nec arte, nec fabrica instructum, sed naturam rerum quibusdam minutis seminibus et insecabilibus conglobatam. Quo quid repugnantius dici possit, non video. Etenim si est Deus, utique providens est, ut Deus; nec aliter ei potest divinitas attribui, nisi et praeterita teneat, et

But afterwards Epicurus said that God indeed exists, because it is necessary that there be something in the world that is pre-eminent, and excellent, and blessed; yet that there is no providence: and so [he held] that the world itself was fashioned neither by any reason, nor by art, nor by workmanship, but that the nature of things was massed together from certain minute and indivisible seeds. I do not see what could be said more self-contradictory than this. For if God exists, He is certainly provident, as God; nor can divinity be attributed to Him otherwise than if He both holds the past, and

Editors' notes and page, col. 98

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 98
marginal letters: A ‹aliena quaestio est›; B ‹disputare, quia nihil certi›; C ‹potest divinitas attribui›; D ‹Temporibus Socratis. Teste Laertio› (D stands in the Variorum notae at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (aliena) and ends mid-sentence (et). "ext⟨i⟩tit": gap in the type where the i should be. "tencat" read as teneat (worn type). "diversasin" and "Decujus" set with spaces as words. Running head cut at the left edge of the image. Full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" across the page foot not set; the Variorum notae below it (Quamvis breviter ... Insecabilibus) are left for the later pass.

PL 7:99

praesentia sciat, et futura prospiciat. Cum igitur providentiam sustulit, etiam Deum negavit esse. Cum autem Deum esse professus est, et providentiam simul esse concessit. Alterum enim sine altero nec esse prorsus, nec intelligi potest. Verum iis postea temporibus, quibus jam philosophia defloruerat, extitit Melius quidam Diagoras, qui nullum esse omnino Deum diceret, ob eamque sententiam nominatus est ἄθεος; item Cyrenaeus Theodorus: ambo quia nihil novi poterant reperire, omnibus jam dictis et inventis, maluerunt vel contra veritatem id negare, in quo priores universi sine ambiguitate consenserant. Ii sunt, qui tot saeculis, tot ingeniis assertam atque defensam providentiam calumniati sunt. Quid ergo? utrumne istos minutos et inertes philosophos ratione, an vero auctoritate praestantium virorum refellemus? an potius utroque? Sed properandum est, ne longius a materia divagetur oratio.

knows the present and foresees the future. Therefore, when he did away with providence, he also denied that God exists. But when he professed that God exists, he at the same time also granted that there is providence. For the one without the other can neither exist at all nor be understood. But in later times, when philosophy had already lost its bloom, there arose a certain Diagoras of Melos, who said that there is no God at all, and on account of that opinion was called átheos, "godless"; likewise Theodorus of Cyrene: both, because they could find nothing new, everything having already been said and discovered, preferred to deny, even against the truth, that on which all their predecessors had agreed without any doubt. These are the men who have slandered the providence asserted and defended through so many ages by so many minds. What then? Shall we refute these petty and sluggish philosophers by reason, or by the authority of eminent men? Or rather by both? But we must hasten, lest the discourse wander too far from its subject.

Editors' notes and page, col. 99

Footnotes

(printed under page 49)

(1) ‹anchor: Cum autem Deum esse professus est› · lemma note, col 99

Cum autem Deum esse professus est. Additum autem ex omnibus mss. et multis editis, quod in caeteris deerat. Ms. 1 Bon. antiq. legit confessus est.

But when he professed that God exists. "Autem" has been added from all the manuscripts and many editions, since it was missing in the rest. One old Bologna manuscript reads "confessus est" (confessed).

(printed under page 49)

(2) ‹anchor: Defloruerat› · lemma note, col 99

Defloruerat, etc. Diagoras tamen ab Eusebio eadem Olympiade ponitur, qua Protagoram supra a Laertio positum esse diximus, id est LXXIV. Theodorus autem Olympiade CXVIII, cum Epicurus vix paucis annis antiquior fuerit. Nam Laertius ejus obitum in Olympiade CVII posuit: quanquam Eusebius eum Olymp. CXVIII floruisse referat. BETULEIUS.

Had lost its bloom, etc. Diagoras, however, is put by Eusebius in the same Olympiad in which, as we said above, Protagoras was put by Laertius, that is, the 74th. Theodorus, however, in the 118th Olympiad, since Epicurus was scarcely a few years older. For Laertius put his death in the 107th Olympiad, although Eusebius reports that he flourished in the 118th Olympiad. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 49)

(3) ‹anchor: Melius quidam Diagoras› · lemma note, col 99

Melius quidam Diagoras. Melius a patria, sicut infra Cyrenaeus Theodorus. Mss. 1 Reg. antiq. habet Aellius; 1 Bonon. antiquior, et 8 alii ac 2 vet. ed. Rom., Alius; Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg., 2 Colbert., Goth., Navar., Gat., Marm., Ultr., Pen., Brun., Aelius; ms. Tornesianus et ed. Genev. Metius, quod existimo vitiose a librario scriptum pro Melius, sicut vocatur a Cicerone, lib. I, de Nat. deor. Ms. Baluz. et 15 excusi, Extitit Athenis quidam Diagoras. Nec contemnenda haec lectio: Suidas enim ad v. Diagoras, refert Diagoram post captam Melum (unde Melius dictus est) secessisse Athenas. Mss. 1 Reg. rec., Clarom., 1 Sorbon., 3 Colb. legunt Extitit Atheus quidam et Diagoras, nisi quod particula et a duobus prioribus abest. Caeterum de hoc Diagora vide quae notata sunt ad initium, cap. 2, lib. I Divin. Institut. — Athenis quidam Diagoras. Vulgata est lectio pene omnium librorum, a qua discedere non ausus sum. P. tamen habet, Aelius quidam Diagoras, et B., alius quidam, unde quis suspicari possit legendum esse: Melius quidam Diagoras; nam Melium quidem vocat eum Cicero initio I de Nat. Deor. ubi haec ipsa pertractat; Plutarch. I Placitor., cap. 7; Sext. Empyric.; Pyrrhon., Hypotyp. lib. III, c. 24; Arnob. IV, Minucius et alii. Quod autem Lactantius, et nostratium alii permulti Diagoram, Theodorum et caeteros, de quibus etiam lib. I, Institut., cap. 2, ἀθέους, hoc est absque Deo cognominent, videndum est, ne forte a christianis etiam in eosdem bonos ac doctos viros vetus ethnicorum calumnia importetur; cum enim hi deorum multitudinem totque monstra atque portenta, quae stulta colebat gentilitas, irriderent, putati sunt ἄθεοι, et nullum omnino deum credidisse, quod queritur quidem certe ac miratur et Clemens Alexandrinus. ISAEUS.

A certain Diagoras of Melos. "Of Melos" from his homeland, as below "Theodorus of Cyrene". One old Reg. manuscript has "Aellius"; one older Bologna, 8 others and the two old Roman editions "Alius"; the Regio-Puteanus, 1 other Reg., 2 Colbert, Goth., Navar., Gat., Marm., Ultr., Pen., Brun. "Aelius"; the Tornaesius manuscript and the Geneva edition "Metius", which I judge was written faultily by a copyist for "Melius", as Cicero calls him in De natura deorum book I. The Baluze manuscript and 15 printed copies: "There was at Athens a certain Diagoras." Nor is this reading to be despised: for Suidas, under the word Diagoras, reports that Diagoras withdrew to Athens after the capture of Melos (whence he was called "of Melos"). The manuscripts 1 recent Reg., Clermont, 1 Sorbonne, 3 Colbert read "There was a certain atheist, and Diagoras", except that the particle "et" is missing from the first two. For the rest, on this Diagoras see what was noted at the beginning, chapter 2, Divine Institutes book I. — A certain Diagoras at Athens. This is the common reading of nearly all books, from which I have not dared to depart. P., however, has "a certain Aelius Diagoras", and B. "a certain other", from which one might suspect that one should read "a certain Diagoras of Melos"; for Cicero indeed calls him "of Melos" at the beginning of De natura deorum I, where he treats these very things; Plutarch, Placita I, chapter 7; Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism book III, chapter 24; Arnobius IV, Minucius and others. But as for Lactantius and very many others of ours calling Diagoras, Theodorus and the rest (of whom also Institutes book I, chapter 2) "atheists", that is, men without God, one must take care lest the old calumny of the pagans be brought by Christians too against these same good and learned men; for since they mocked the multitude of the gods and all the monsters and prodigies that foolish paganism worshipped, they were thought atheists and to have believed in no god at all; something which Clement of Alexandria too certainly complains of and wonders at. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 49)

(4) ‹anchor: Cyrenaeus Theodorus› · lemma note, col 99

Cyrenaeus Theodorus. Meruit et hic τοῦ ἀθέου epitheton, eodem Epiphanio teste. Et sic legendum censeo in Chronicis Eusebii, ubi Theodorus Athenaeus legitur; nec mihi tempora refragantur. Augustinus contra litteras Petiliani Donatistae libro secundo putat, in hunc Theodorum esse dictum hoc Psalmi: Dixit stultus, quod non est Deus. BETUL.

Theodorus of Cyrene. He too earned the epithet "the atheist", on the same Epiphanius's testimony. And so I think one should read in Eusebius's Chronicle, where "Theodorus the Athenian" is read; nor do the dates tell against me. Augustine, in the second book Against the Letters of Petilian the Donatist, thinks that this word of the Psalm was spoken against this Theodorus: "The fool has said, There is no God." BETUL.

(printed under page 49)

(5) ‹anchor: Maluerunt vel contra veritatem› · lemma note, col 99

Maluerunt vel contra veritatem. Vel, quod hic est pro etiam, Gallice même, abest a 10 mss. totidemque editis.

They preferred, even against the truth. "Vel", which here stands for "etiam", in French "même" (even), is absent from 10 manuscripts and as many editions.

(printed under page 49)

(6) ‹anchor: Id negare› · lemma note, col 99–100

Id negare. Mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg. rec., 2 Colb., Tax., Baluz., id denegare.

To deny it. The manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 recent Reg., 2 Colbert, Tax., Baluze: "id denegare".

(printed under page 49)

(7) ‹anchor: Qui tot saeculis, tot ingeniis› · lemma note, col 99–100

Qui tot saeculis, tot ingeniis. Haec lectio 4 vet. editorum, et omnium mss. est, praeter 1 Reg. rec. in quo, ut et in 15 editis, est saeculis et ingeniis. —Tot saeculis, tot ingeniis. Tot saeculis sumo in auferendi, at tot ingeniis dandi casu, pro a tot ingeniis. L. IV, cap. 2: Tot ingeniis totque temporibus summo studio et labore quaesita sapientia. Epit., cap. 40, in fin. dixit, veritatem tot ingeniis, tot aetatibus requisitam. BUN.

Which in so many ages, by so many minds. This is the reading of 4 old editions and of all the manuscripts except 1 recent Reg., in which, as also in 15 editions, it is "in ages and by minds". — In so many ages, by so many minds. I take "tot saeculis" in the ablative, but "tot ingeniis" in the dative, for "by so many minds". Book IV, chapter 2: "wisdom sought by so many minds and through so many times with the utmost zeal and toil." Epitome chapter 40, at the end, he said: "the truth sought by so many minds, through so many ages." BUN.

(printed under page 49)

(8) ‹anchor: Auctoritate praestantium› · lemma note, col 99–100

Auctoritate praestantium. Hi erant maximarum sectarum principes, quos infra adducit ante capitis 10 finem, et cap. 11. Mss. 12 cum edit. Rom., 1470, legunt veritate, alter virtute.

By the authority of eminent men. These were the founders of the greatest sects, whom he brings forward below before the end of chapter 10, and in chapter 11. Twelve manuscripts with the Roman edition of 1470 read "veritate", another "virtute".

(printed under page 49)

(9) ‹anchor: Utroque› · lemma note, col 99–100

Utroque. Ita mss. et editi. Francius forte legendum putat, utraque.

In both. So the manuscripts and editions. Francius thinks perhaps one should read "utraque".

(printed under page 49)

(10) ‹anchor: Divagetur› · lemma note, col 99–100

Divagetur. Ita mss. prope omnes cum 7 editis; in caeteris vulgatis est devagetur; in 1 Reg. rec. evagetur; in 1 Colb. et Clarom. a prima manu dirigatur.

Should wander off. So nearly all the manuscripts with 7 editions; in the other printed texts it is "devagetur"; in 1 recent Reg. "evagetur"; in 1 Colbert and Clermont in the first hand "dirigatur".

(printed under page 49)

(11) ‹anchor: Straton› · lemma note, col 100

Straton. Straton Lampsacenus, Arcesilai filius, auditor Theophrasti, fuit praeceptor Ptolemaei Philadelphi: vir acri ingenio, qui cum maxime necessariam philosophiae partem, quae posita est in virtute et in moribus, reliquisset, totum se ad investigationem naturae contulit; unde Physici cognomentum assecutus est. Floruit Olymp. 123. Ejus vitam scribit Laert. libro V. Multa hujus mentio passim fit apud Ciceronem, unde etiam haec transcripta sunt; haec enim fere ad verbum leguntur in primo libro de Natura deorum. BETULEIUS.—Vide eumdem Ciceronem in Lucullo ad finem.

Strato. Strato of Lampsacus, son of Arcesilaus, a hearer of Theophrastus, was the teacher of Ptolemy Philadelphus: a man of keen mind who, having left aside the most necessary part of philosophy, which consists in virtue and morals, gave himself wholly to the investigation of nature; whence he gained the surname "the Physicist". He flourished in the 123rd Olympiad. Laertius writes his life in book V. He is mentioned often here and there in Cicero, from whom these words too are copied; for they are read almost word for word in the first book of De natura deorum. BETULEIUS. — See the same Cicero in the Lucullus, near the end.

(printed under page 49)

(12) ‹anchor: Vim gignendi et minuendi› · lemma note, col 100

Vim gignendi et minuendi. Plenius Cicero, l. I, de Nat. Deorum, cap. 13: Nec audiendus... Strato, is qui Physicus appellatur, qui omnem vim divinam in natura sitam esse censet, quae causas gignendi, augendi, minuendi habeat: sed careat omni sensu et figura. BUN.

The power of begetting and diminishing. More fully Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 13: "Nor is Strato to be heard..., he who is called the Physicist, who holds that all divine power resides in nature, which contains the causes of begetting, increasing and diminishing, but lacks all sense and form." BUN.

(printed under page 49)

(13) ‹anchor: Concursu fortuito› · lemma note, col 100

Concursu fortuito. Abest fortuito a 13 mss. et a 2 vet. edit. Rom. Sed est in aliis, apud eumdem Lactantium, Epitom., cap. 36 et apud Ciceronem, lib. I de Nat. deor., cap. 24, seu n. 66.

By chance concourse. "Fortuito" is absent from 13 manuscripts and from the two old Roman editions. But it is in others, in the same Lactantius, Epitome chapter 36, and in Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 24, or no. 66.

(printed under page 49)

(14) ‹anchor: Totum coiisse mundum› · lemma note, col 100

Totum coiisse mundum. Bene, ut patet ex praecedentibus et sequentibus. In 11 scriptis et ed. Is. cohaesisse. Bona utraque lectio.

That the whole world came together. Rightly, as is clear from what precedes and follows. In 11 manuscripts and Isaeus's edition, "cohaesisse". Both readings are good.

(printed under page 49)

(15) ‹anchor: An solus Leucippus oculos habuit?› · lemma note, col 100

An solus Leucippus oculos habuit? Francius, Oculos an, Pari, solus habes? Licet Laertius in Leucippo nullam de atomis mentio- (continues)

Did Leucippus alone have eyes? Francius: "Have you alone eyes, Paris?" Although Laertius, in his Leucippus, [makes] no mention of atoms (continues)

(printed under page 49)

Editors' prose

(none)

Page

running head: 99 FIRM. LACTANT[II] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹videntiam sustulit, etiam Deum negavit esse›; B ‹utroque? Sed properandum est›; C ‹Ælius; 1 Bonon. antiquior› (in the notes); D ‹tractat; Plutarch. 1 Placitor.› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the full-width heading VARIORUM NOT[AE] below the text block is cut off at the image edge and not set; the Variorum notae beneath it (Cum autem Deum esse professus est ... in hunc Theodorum esse dictum hoc Psalmi: Dixit) are page-foot commentary, left for the later pass; the question mark after utroque is printed in damaged or odd type, set as ?

PL 7:100

CAPUT X.

Chapter X.

De Mundi ortu et rerum natura, et Dei providentia.

On the origin of the World and the nature of things, and on the providence of God.

Qui nolunt divina providentia factum esse mundum, aut principiis inter se temere coeuntibus dicunt esse concretum, aut repente natura extitisse; naturam vero (ut Straton) habere in se vim gignendi et minuendi: sed eam nec sensum habere ullum, nec figuram, ut intelligamus, omnia quasi sua sponte esse generata, nullo artifice, nec auctore. Utrumque vanum et impossibile. Sed hoc evenit ignorantibus veritatem, ut quidvis potius excogitent, quam id sentiant quod ratio deposcit. Primum minuta illa semina, quorum concursu fortuito totum coiisse mundum loquuntur, ubi aut unde sint, quaero. Quis illa vidit unquam? quis sensit? quis audivit? An solus Leucippus oculos habuit? solus mentem? qui profecto solus omnium caecus et excors fuit, qui ea loqueretur,

Those who do not want the world to have been made by divine providence say either that it was formed from first principles coming together at random, or that it came into being suddenly by nature; and that nature (as Straton [holds]) has in itself the power of generating and diminishing, but that it has no sense at all, nor any shape, so that we are to understand that all things were generated as if of their own accord, with no craftsman and no author. Both are empty and impossible. But this happens to those who are ignorant of the truth, that they devise anything whatever rather than think what reason demands. First, those minute seeds, by whose chance concourse they say the whole world came together: where or whence are they, I ask. Who ever saw them? who perceived them? who heard them? Did Leucippus alone have eyes? alone a mind? he who surely alone of all men was blind and senseless, in saying such things,

Editors' notes and page, col. 100

Page

running head: [F]IRM. LACTANTII (cut off at the left edge; the column number 100 at right)
marginal letters: A ‹CAPUT X.›; B ‹pus oculos habuit? solus mentem?›; C ‹quaesita sapientia. Epit., cap. 40› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹nem, unde etiam haec transcripta sunt› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: first word read as "nolunt" though the worn type looks like "uolunt" (n/u indistinct throughout this scan); full-width line "VARIORUM NOTAE." below the text block not set; the Variorum notae (Betul., Bun., variants on utroque, divagetur, Straton, etc.) at the page foot not set (later pass); text block ends mid-sentence at "loqueretur,"; fragments of column 99 visible at left not set

PL 7:101

quae nec aeger quisquam delirare, nec dormiens posset somniare.

which no sick man could rave, nor any sleeper dream.

Quatuor elementis constare omnia philosophi veteres disserebant: ille noluit, ne alienis vestigiis videretur insistere. Sed ipsorum elementorum alia voluit esse primordia, quae nec videri possint, nec tangi, nec ulla corporis parte sentiri. Tam minuta sunt, inquit, ut nulla sit acies ferri tam subtilis, qua secari ac dividi possint, unde illis nomen imposuit atomorum. Sed occurrebat ei, quod si una esset omnibus eademque natura, non possent res efficere diversas, tanta varietate, quantam videmus inesse mundo. Dixit ergo, laevia esse, et aspera, et rotunda, et angulata, et hamata. Quanto melius fuerat tacere, quam in usus tam miserabiles, tam inanes, habere linguam: et quidem vereor, ne non minus delirare videatur, qui haec putet refellenda. Respondeamus tamen velut aliquid dicenti. Si lenia sunt et rotunda, utique non possunt invicem se apprehendere, ut aliquod corpus efficiant; ut si quis milium velit in unam coagmentationem constringere, lenitudo ipsa granorum in massam coire non sinat. Si aspera et angulata sunt, et hamata, ut possint cohaerere; dividua ergo et secabilia sunt: hamos enim necesse est et angulos eminere, ut possint amputari.

The ancient philosophers held that all things consist of four elements: he refused this, so as not to seem to tread in the footsteps of others. But he would have it that the elements themselves have other first beginnings, which can neither be seen, nor touched, nor perceived by any part of the body. They are so minute, he says, that there is no edge of iron so fine that they could be cut and divided by it, whence he gave them the name of atoms. But it occurred to him that if all had one and the same nature, they could not produce diverse things with so great a variety as we see to be in the world. He said, therefore, that they are smooth, and rough, and round, and angular, and hooked. How much better it would have been to keep silent than to have a tongue for uses so wretched, so empty: and indeed I fear that he who thinks these things need refuting may seem to rave no less. Let us nevertheless answer him as though he were saying something. If they are smooth and round, they certainly cannot lay hold of one another so as to make up some body; just as, if someone wished to press millet together into a single mass, the very smoothness of the grains would not let them come together into a lump. If they are rough and angular, and hooked, so that they can cohere, then they are divisible and capable of being cut: for the hooks and angles must stand out, so that they can be cut off.

Editors' notes and page, col. 101

Footnotes

(printed under page 50)

(1) ‹anchor: An solus Leucippus oculos habuit?› · lemma note, col 100

(continued) nem faciat, et Plutarchus eos ad Democritum auctorem referat, Arist. tamen in primo τῆς Γενέσεως Democritum et Leucippum plerumque in hoc dogmate conjungit. Atque item Cicero in primo de Natura deorum: Ista enim flagitia Democriti, sive etiam ante Leucippi; esse corpuscula quaedam laevia, alia aspera, rotunda alia, partim autem angulata, et quaedam pyramidata, curvata quaedam, et quasi adunca: ex his effectum esse coelum atque terras, nulla cogente natura, sed concursu quodam fortuito. Hoc deinde dogma Epicurus etiam amplexus est: sicut nihil in Physicis Epicuri fuit, quod non habuerit a Democrito. Quanquam, ut in 1, de Finibus idem Cicero scribit, quae Democriti Epicurus corrigere vult, ea depravare videatur. Ita Democriti atomi motum ex aeterno tempore habent, Epicurei declinationem. Cujus differentiae etiam Augustinus meminit, ubi de inanibus et inutilibus quaestionibus scribit. BETUL. — Vide lib. III Div. Institut., cap. 17. — An solus Leucippus. Cicero de hoc, lib. I de Natura deor., cap. 24, tradidit: Ista flagitia Democriti, sive etiam ante Leucippi, esse corpuscula quaedam laevia, alia aspera, rotunda alia, partim autem angulata, curvata quaedam, et quasi adunca; ex his effectum esse coelum atque terram, nulla cogente natura, sed concursu quodam fortuito. CELL.

(printed under page 50)

(2) ‹anchor: Posset somniare› · lemma note, col 101

Posset somniare. Ita reposui ex 5 vet. edd. et omnibus mss. praeter 1 Colbert. cui est ut 12 editis, possit.

Could dream. So I have restored it from 5 old editions and all the manuscripts except 1 Colbert, which, like 12 editions, has "possit".

(printed under page 50)

(3) ‹anchor: Quatuor elementis› · lemma note, col 101

Quatuor elementis, etc. Non quidem omnes philosophi in hoc consentiunt. Empedocles et Anaxagoras primi fuerunt, qui quatuor elementa asseruerunt: qui tamen illi constant et solvuntur concordia et discordia. Quod Aristotelis reprehensionem non evitat, qui et ipse quintam essentiam fovet. BETULEIUS.

Four elements, etc. Not all philosophers agree on this. Empedocles and Anaxagoras were the first to assert four elements, which however, for them, are held together and dissolved by concord and discord. This does not escape the censure of Aristotle, who himself also favours a fifth essence. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 50)

(4) ‹anchor: Laevia esse et aspera› · lemma note, col 101

Laevia esse et aspera, etc. Hae sunt particulae cartesianae.

That they are smooth and rough, etc. These are the Cartesian particles.

(printed under page 50)

(5) ‹anchor: Et angulata, et hamata› · lemma note, col 101

Et angulata, et hamata. Abest et angulata a recentioribus mss. 4 reg., 4 Colb., Goth., Lips., Marm., 1 Sorbon., Clarom. et Brun. Sed adesse debet, ut legenti mox patebit. — Et rotunda, et angulata, et hamata. Recepi, quia ita magis conveniunt cum sequentibus, ubi haec quinque repetuntur: Si laevia et rotunda, aspera, et angulata, et hamata sunt. Iterum Epit., cap. 36. Si hamata et angulata, ergo secabilia sunt. Noster habet a Cicerone, lib. I de Nat. deor., cap. 24: esse corpuscula quaedam laevia, alia aspera, rotunda alia, partim autem angulata, hamata. BUN.

Both angular and hooked. "Et angulata" is absent from the more recent manuscripts, 4 Reg., 4 Colbert, Goth., Lips., Marm., 1 Sorbonne, Clermont and Brun. But it must be present, as will soon be clear to the reader. — Both round, and angular, and hooked. I have adopted it, because so they agree better with what follows, where these five are repeated: "If they are smooth and round, rough, and angular, and hooked." Again Epitome chapter 36: "If hooked and angular, then they are divisible." Our author has it from Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 24: "that there are certain little bodies, some smooth, others rough, others round, some angular, hooked." BUN.

(printed under page 50)

(6) ‹anchor: Aliquid dicenti› · lemma note, col 101

Aliquid dicenti. Mss. 12 rec. et edit. Rom. 1470, aliqua dicenti.

To one saying something. Twelve recent manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470: "aliqua dicenti".

(printed under page 50)

(7) ‹anchor: Lenia sunt et rotunda› · lemma note, col 101

Lenia sunt et rotunda. Mss. 3 Reg., 4 Colb. et editi levia, male.

They are smooth and round. Three Reg. manuscripts, 4 Colbert and the editions have "levia" (light), wrongly.

(printed under page 50)

(8) ‹anchor: Lenitudo ipsa granorum› · lemma note, col 101

Lenitudo ipsa granorum. Sic a me restitutum ex mss. fere omnibus et vet. edit. Rom., Scripti 4 rec. cunctique pene impressi, levitudo.

The very smoothness of the grains. So restored by me from almost all the manuscripts and the old Roman edition. Four recent manuscripts and nearly all printed editions: "levitudo".

(printed under page 50)

(9) ‹anchor: Si aspera et angulata sunt et hamata› · lemma note, col 101

Si aspera et angulata sunt et hamata, etc. Ita mss. veterrimi 2 Bonon. et Regio-Put. Alii 12 et 2 edd. addunt, inquit; et cum eis alteri 8 scripti et impressi 10 expuncto si.

If they are rough and angular and hooked, etc. So the very old manuscripts 2 Bologna and the Regio-Puteanus. Twelve others and 2 editions add "inquit"; and with them another 8 manuscripts and 10 printed editions, with "si" struck out.

(printed under page 50)

(10) ‹anchor: Hamos enim... et angulos› · lemma note, col 101

Hamos enim... et angulos. Sic restitui in quarto casu ex multis antiquioribus et melioribus mss. et edit. vet. Rom. ac Cellar. In caeteris impressis et 5 scriptis rec. est hamis... et angulis.

For the hooks... and angles. So I have restored it in the accusative from many older and better manuscripts and the old Roman edition and Cellarius. In the other printed editions and 5 recent manuscripts it is "hamis... et angulis".

(printed under page 50)

(11) ‹anchor: Pulveris minutias› · lemma note, col 101–102

Pulveris minutias. Mss. 7, micas.

Specks of dust. Seven manuscripts: "micas".

(printed under page 50)

(12) ‹anchor: Perfectae insaniae› · lemma note, col 101–102

Perfectae insaniae. Mss. 6 pertectae; 1 al., protectae.

Of utter madness. Six manuscripts: "pertectae"; one other: "protectae".

(printed under page 50)

(13) ‹anchor: Nihil videtur ulterius dici posse› · lemma note, col 101–102

Nihil videtur ulterius dici posse. Rectius, ut puto, ex 2 mss. Bonon., 1 Reg., 2 Colbert. Baluz. quam adjici caeterorum; nam cum verbo adjici inutile esset ulterius.

Nothing further seems able to be said. More correctly, I think, from 2 Bologna manuscripts, 1 Reg., 2 Colbert, Baluze, than "adjici" of the rest; for with the verb "adjici" "ulterius" would be useless.

(printed under page 50)

(14) ‹anchor: Quod adderet› · lemma note, col 101–102

Quod adderet. Sic reposui ex mss. In editis est quid.

That he might add. So I have restored it from the manuscripts. In the editions it is "quid".

(printed under page 50)

(15) ‹anchor: Vacare› · lemma note, col 101–102

Vacare. Id est, vacuum esse. FRANCIUS.

To be void. That is, to be empty. FRANCIUS.

(printed under page 50)

(16) ‹anchor: Innumerabiles esse mundos› · lemma note, col 101–102

Innumerabiles esse mundos. Πολλοὺς κόσμους Philoni, ἀπείρους Laertio et Plut., κόσμον ἄπειρον Epiphanio, Democritici mundi proverbio locum fecere. Plut. in Placitis libro II, cap. 1 Democritus, Epicurus, eorumque discipulus Metrodorus, innumerabiles in infinito mundos per omnem ejus complexum in immensum exspatiantem dixerunt. BETULEIUS.

That there are innumerable worlds. "Many worlds" in Philo, "infinite" in Laertius and Plutarch, "an infinite world" in Epiphanius: the worlds of Democritus gave rise to a proverb. Plutarch, Placita book II, chapter 1: Democritus, Epicurus and their disciple Metrodorus said there are innumerable worlds in the infinite, spreading out immeasurably through its whole embrace. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 50)

(17) ‹anchor: Ac primum requiro› · lemma note, col 102

Ac primum requiro. Mss. 8: At primum requiro.

And first I ask. Eight manuscripts: "At primum requiro".

(printed under page 50)

(18) ‹anchor: Istorum seminum vel ratio, vel origo› · lemma note, col 102

Istorum seminum vel ratio, vel origo, etc. Τὰς ἀτόμους etiam Virgilius et Lucretius semina nominarunt; Lucret. non longe ab initio libri primi.

Either the nature or the origin of these seeds, etc. Virgil and Lucretius too called the atoms "seeds"; Lucretius not far from the beginning of the first book.

(printed under page 50)

Page

running head: 101 LIBER DE IRA DE[I] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A quae nec aeger quisquam delirare (printed at the line's end, in the gutter); B linguam: et quidem vereor; C referat, Arist. tamen (in the Variorum Notae); D partim autem angulata, curvata (in the Variorum Notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: first word printed with damaged type ("qu.e"), set quae; "posset" in line 2 damaged but legible; "cohaerere" looks like "cobaerere" in the image, taken as a damaged h, UNSURE; "lenia" kept as printed (the editors discuss the variant Lenia/Lenit- in the notes); the full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE and the editors' notes beneath it (Commentarius at the page foot) not set, left for the later pass

PL 7:102

Itaque quod amputari ac divelli potest, et videri poterit et teneri. « Haec, inquit, per inane irrequietis motibus volitant, et huc, atque illuc feruntur, sicut pulveris minutias videmus in sole, cum per fenestram radios ac lumen immiserit. Ex his arbores et herbae, et fruges omnes oriuntur: ex his animalia et aqua, ignis et universa gignuntur, et rursus in eadem resolvuntur. » Ferri hoc potest, quam diu de rebus parvis agitur. Ex his etiam mundus ipse concretus est. Implevit numerum perfectae insaniae; nihil videtur ulterius dici posse: sed invenit tamen ille quod adderet. « Quoniam est omne, inquit, infinitum, nec potest quidquam vacare; necesse est ergo innumerabiles esse mundos. » Quae tanta vis fuerat atomorum, ut moles tam inaestimabiles ex tam minutis conglobarentur? Ac primum requiro, quae sit istorum seminum, vel ratio, vel origo. Si enim ex illis sunt omnia, ipsa igitur unde esse dicemus? quae natura tantam copiam ad efficiendos innumerabiles mundos subministrabit? Sed concedamus, ut impune de mundis deliraverit: de hoc loquamur, in quo sumus, et quem videmus. Ait, omnia ex individuis corpusculis fieri.

Therefore what can be cut off and torn apart will also be able to be seen and held. "These," he says, "fly about through the void with restless motions, and are carried hither and thither, just as we see specks of dust in the sun, when it has sent its rays and light in through a window. From these arise trees and plants and all crops; from these animals and water, fire and all things are generated, and they are dissolved again into the same." This can be tolerated as long as the discussion concerns small things. From these, also, the world itself has been compacted. He has filled up the measure of complete madness; it seems that nothing further could be said; yet he found something to add. "Since the whole," he says, "is infinite, and nothing can be empty, it is therefore necessary that there be innumerable worlds." What power of the atoms was so great that masses so beyond reckoning should be rolled together out of things so minute? And first I ask what the nature or the origin of these seeds is. For if all things come from them, from where, then, shall we say that they themselves come? What nature will supply so great an abundance for producing innumerable worlds? But let us grant that he has raved about worlds with impunity: let us speak of this one in which we are and which we see. He says that all things come into being from indivisible little bodies.

Si hoc ita esset, nulla res unquam sui generis semine indigeret. Sine ovis alites nascerentur, ac ova

If this were so, nothing would ever need the seed of its own kind. Birds would be born without eggs, and eggs

Editors' notes and page, col. 102

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 102 (left part of the head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A Itaque quod amputari; B minutis conglobarentur; C rotunda, aspera, et angulata (in the Variorum notae, not set); D beside the gap before Perfectae insaniae (in the Variorum notae, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column ends mid-sentence at "ac ova"; "VARIORUM NOTAE" at the page foot (Lenia sunt et rotunda ... Lucret. non longe ab initio libri primi) left for the later pass; the heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" runs across both columns and is cut off at the left edge, so it is not set; "quam diu" is printed as two words; "sui" has a stray accent mark (suí), probably damaged type; left-column fragments (column 101) visible at the edge are not set

PL 7:103

sine partu, item caetera viventia sine coitu: arbores, et quae gignuntur e terra, propria semina non haberent, quae nos quotidie tractamus, et serimus. Cur ex frumento seges nascitur, et rursus ex segete frumentum? Denique si atomorum coitio et conglobatio efficeret omnia, in aere universa concrescerent; si quidem per inane atomi volitant: cur sine terra, sine radicibus, sine humore, sine semine, non herba, non arbor, non fruges oriri augerique possunt? Unde apparet, nihil ex atomis fieri; quandoquidem unaquaeque res habet propriam certamque naturam, suum semen, suam legem ab exordio datam. Denique Lucretius, quasi oblitus atomorum, quas asserebat, ut redargueret eos, qui dicunt ex nihilo fieri omnia, his argumentis usus est, quae contra ipsum valerent. Sic enim dixit:

without birth, and likewise the other living things without coupling: trees, and the things which are produced from the earth, would not have their own seeds, which we handle and sow every day. Why does a crop spring from grain, and grain in turn from a crop? Then again, if the coming together and massing of atoms brought all things about, all things would grow together in the air, since indeed the atoms fly about through the void: why can neither grass, nor tree, nor crops arise and increase without earth, without roots, without moisture, without seed? From which it is evident that nothing comes into being from atoms, since each thing has its own fixed nature, its own seed, its own law given from the beginning. Then again Lucretius, as though forgetful of the atoms which he was asserting, in order to refute those who say that all things come into being from nothing, used these arguments, which would tell against himself. For he spoke thus:

Nam si de nihilo fierent, ex omnibu rebus / Omne genus nasci posset nil semine egeret.

For if they came into being from nothing, from all things / Every kind could be born, nothing would need seed.

Item postea,

Likewise afterwards,

Nil igitur fieri de nilo posse fatendum est / Semine quando opus est rebus, quo quaeque creatae / Aeris in teneras possint proferrier auras.

It must therefore be admitted that nothing can come into being from nothing, / Since things need seed, by which, once created, each of them / May be brought forth into the soft breezes of the air.

Quis hunc putet habuisse cerebrum, cum haec diceret, nec videret sibi esse contraria? Nihil enim per atomos fieri exinde apparet, quod semen cujusque rei certum est; nisi forte et ignis, et aquae naturam ex atomis esse credemus. Quid, quod durissimi rigoris materiae, si ictu vehementiore collidantur, ignis excutitur? Num in ferro aut silice atomi latent? Quis inclusit? aut cur sua sponte non emicant; aut quomodo semina ignis in materia frigidissima permanere potuerunt?

Who would think that this man had a brain, when he said these things and did not see that they were contrary to himself? For that nothing comes into being through atoms is evident from this, that the seed of each thing is fixed; unless perhaps we shall believe that the nature both of fire and of water is from atoms. What of the fact that, if materials of the hardest rigidity are struck together with a rather violent blow, fire is struck out? Do atoms lie hidden in iron or in flint? Who shut them in? Or why do they not leap forth of their own accord; or how were the seeds of fire able to remain in a most cold material?

Editors' notes and page, col. 103

Footnotes

(printed under page 51)

(1) ‹anchor: Non herba› · lemma note, col 103

Non herba. Sic reposui ex mss. et editis vet. Rom. Gymnic., Cellar. In caeteris editis legitur, non herbae.

Not grass. So I have restored it from the manuscripts and the old Roman editions, Gymnicus, Cellarius. In the other editions one reads "non herbae".

(printed under page 51)

(2) ‹anchor: Augerique possunt› · lemma note, col 103

Augerique possunt. Mss. 14 et 13 edd., aut generari possunt.

And can be increased. Fourteen manuscripts and 13 editions: "or can be generated".

(printed under page 51)

(3) ‹anchor: Fieri de nilo› · lemma note, col 103

Fieri de nilo. Lips. 2, Reimm., Rost., Ven. 1471 de nullo. Bonon., Goth., Ven. utraque 1478, Betul., Torn., Walch., fieri de nihilo posterius repugnat versui; prius de nullo Lucretii mori, qui libenter nihilum in nilum contrahit, exempli gratia, ..... Ad nilum quaeque reverti; Et vers. 674: Ne tibi res redeant ad nilum funditus omnes.

To come from nothing. Lips. 2, Reimm., Rost., Venice 1471: "de nullo". Bologna, Goth., both Venice editions of 1478, Betuleius, Tornaesius, Walch: "fieri de nihilo". The latter is at odds with the verse; the former, "de nullo", with Lucretius's custom, who readily contracts "nihilum" to "nilum", for example: "..... that each thing returns to nothing"; and line 674: "lest all things return utterly to nothing for you."

(printed under page 51)

(4) ‹anchor: Fatendum est› · lemma note, col 103

Fatendum est. Mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg., rec., 3 Colbert., Pen., Clarom., putandum est. 1 Sorbon., sciendum est.

It must be admitted. The manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 recent Reg., 3 Colbert, Pen., Clermont: "putandum est". One Sorbonne: "sciendum est".

(printed under page 51)

(5) ‹anchor: Quis hunc putet habuisse cerebrum?› · lemma note, col 103

Quis hunc putet habuisse cerebrum? Sic ex mss. fere omnibus restitui; in 4 rec. et in editis legitur putat. Habuisse cerebrum, id est rationem et sanam mentem; nam veteres in cerebro dixerunt animi esse sedem. Cic. Tuscul. I, cap. 9. — Habuisse cerebrum. Eleganter, ut Phaedrus de Larva lib. I, 7, 2: O quanta species, inquit, cerebrum non habet. Ubi vide Bunemannum in novo commentario. Iterum Lact. epit. cap. 54: Homines inanis cerebri; de Opif. cap. 16: Alii sedem ejus (mentis) in cerebro esse dixerunt. BUN.

Who would think he had a brain? So I have restored it from almost all the manuscripts; in 4 recent ones and in the editions one reads "putat". "Had a brain", that is, reason and a sound mind; for the ancients said the seat of the soul was in the brain. Cicero, Tusculans I, chapter 9. — Had a brain. Elegantly, as Phaedrus on the Mask, book I, 7, 2: "O what a face," he says, "it has no brain." See Bunemann there in the new commentary. Again Lactantius, Epitome chapter 54: "men of empty brain"; De opificio chapter 16: "Others said its (the mind's) seat was in the brain." BUN.

(printed under page 51)

(6) ‹anchor: Credemus› · lemma note, col 103

Credemus. 1 Colbert., credimus; 1 al. Colbert. et Brun., credamus.

We shall believe. One Colbert: "credimus"; another Colbert and Brun.: "credamus".

(printed under page 51)

(7) ‹anchor: Ignis excutitur› · lemma note, col 103

Ignis excutitur. Sic omnes scripti editique, praeter Ven. primam 1478, excutitur, prave. Mallem, si libri annuerent, excuditur, ut Virg. I Aen. 174: Ac primum silicis scintillam excudit Achates. BUN.

Fire is struck out. So all the manuscripts and editions, except the first Venice of 1478, "excutitur", wrongly. I should prefer, if the books agreed, "excuditur", as Virgil, Aeneid I, 174: "And first Achates struck a spark from the flint." BUN.

(printed under page 51)

(8) ‹anchor: Orbem vitreum› · lemma note, col 103–104

Orbem vitreum, etc. Haec cristalli natura est, quae nihil aliud est, quam aqua in lapidis duritiem frigore et vetustate congelata. Vide Marbodaeum cum suis commentatoribus. De ignis natura Theophrasti liber extat. Sunt similes ignis eliciendi rationes apud Plin. et Lucretium ipsum, atque etiam apud Senecam in Natural. quaest. BETUL.

A glass sphere, etc. This is the nature of crystal, which is nothing other than water frozen into the hardness of stone by cold and age. See Marbod with his commentators. A book of Theophrastus on the nature of fire survives. There are similar ways of drawing out fire in Pliny and Lucretius himself, and also in Seneca's Natural Questions. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 51)

(9) ‹anchor: Credendum est› · lemma note, col 103–104

Credendum est. Mss. 5, credent.

It must be believed. Five manuscripts: "credent".

(printed under page 51)

(10) ‹anchor: Atqui de sole ignis› · lemma note, col 103–104

Atqui de sole ignis, etc. Hallucinatur Lactantius: experientia contrarium testatur.

And yet fire from the sun, etc. Lactantius is mistaken: experience testifies the contrary.

(printed under page 51)

(11) ‹anchor: Cerae inhalaveris› · lemma note, col 103–104

Cerae inhalaveris. Mss. I, Reg. rec., 3 Colbert. et Baluz., Si cerae in alveariis.

You should breathe on wax. The manuscripts 1 recent Reg., 3 Colbert and Baluze: "If on wax in the hives."

(printed under page 51)

(12) ‹anchor: Vapor levis› · lemma note, col 103–104

Vapor levis. Mss. Goth., lenis; 1 Bonon. antiq., lene.

A light vapour. The Goth. manuscript: "lenis"; one old Bologna: "lene".

(printed under page 51)

(13) ‹anchor: Aut maris› · lemma note, col 103–104

Aut maris. Mss. 6 et maris.

Or of the sea. Six manuscripts: "et maris".

(printed under page 51)

(14) ‹anchor: Quid ego› · lemma note, col 103–104

Quid ego. Sic legendum ex vet. mss. 1 Bonon., Cauc. Caeteri et edd. habent ergo; Brun., igitur.

What [shall] I. So it should be read from the old manuscripts 1 Bologna and Cauc. The others and the editions have "ergo"; Brun. "igitur".

(printed under page 51)

(15) ‹anchor: Deinde› · lemma note, col 104

Deinde. Ita reposui ex omnibus mss. praeter 3 rec. in quibus est Denique, ut in editis.

Next. So I have restored it from all the manuscripts except 3 recent ones, in which it is "Denique", as in the editions.

(printed under page 51)

(16) ‹anchor: Si ex invisibilibus sunt, quae non videntur› · lemma note, col 104

Si ex invisibilibus sunt, quae non videntur, nemo videt? Sic legendum ex utroque Bonon., 3 Colbert., Baluz. et Tax., non ut alii, si ex invisibilibus sunt, quae videntur, cur igitur nemo videt? Utitur argumento a contrariis: si ea quae non videntur, manant a corporibus invisibilibus; ergo quae videntur, prodeunt ex visibilibus; ea igitur cur non videntur? ISAEUS.

If the things that are not seen come from invisible things, does no one see? So it should be read from both Bologna manuscripts, 3 Colbert, Baluze and Tax., not as the others, "if the things that are seen come from invisible things, why then does no one see?" He uses an argument from contraries: if the things that are not seen flow from invisible bodies, then the things that are seen come from visible ones; why then are these not seen? ISAEUS.

(printed under page 51)

(17) ‹anchor: Consideret› · lemma note, col 104

Consideret. Mss. 7 consideres.

He should consider. Seven manuscripts: "consideres".

(printed under page 51)

(18) ‹anchor: Tractabilia› · lemma note, col 104

Tractabilia. Mss. 16 inter quos est Regio-Put. habent tactibilia; Bonon. antiq., tactilia; 2 Colb., tactabilia; 2 Reg. rec. et ed. Rom. 1470, intactibilia; al. ed. (continues)

Tangible. Sixteen manuscripts, among them the Regio-Puteanus, have "tactibilia"; the old Bologna "tactilia"; 2 Colbert "tactabilia"; 2 recent Reg. and the Roman edition of 1470 "intactibilia"; another edition (continues)

(printed under page 51)

Page

running head: 103 FIRM. LACTANT (cut off at the image's right edge)
marginal letters: A sine partu, item caetera viventia; B contra ipsum valerent. Sic enim dixit; C modo semina ignis in materia frigidissima; D (in the page-foot notes, beside "Ne tibi res redeant ad nilum funditus omnes")
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE", cut off at the right edge, stands below "potuerunt?" and is not set; the editors' notes beneath it (Non herba, Augerique possunt, Fieri de nilo, etc.) are page-foot apparatus left for the later pass; "omnibu" in the Lucretius quotation is the poet's elided form as printed, not a misprint; the two verse quotations are each set as one paragraph, with " / " marking the verse divisions; spacing before punctuation has been normalized

PL 7:104

Omitto silicem ac ferrum. Orbem vitreum plenum aquae si tenueris in sole, de lumine, quod ab aqua refulget, ignis accenditur etiam in durissimo frigore. Num etiam in aqua ignem esse credendum est? atqui de sole ignis ne aestate quidem accendi potest. Si cerae inhalaveris, vel si vapor levis aliquid attigerit, aut crustam marmoris, aut laminam, paulatim per minutissimos rores aqua concrescit. Item de halitu terrae aut maris nebula existit: quae aut dispersa humefacit quidquid texerit; aut collecta, in arduos montes in sublime vento rapta, stipatur in nubem, atque imbres maximos dejicit. Ubi ergo dicimus liquores natos esse? Num in vapore? Num in halitu? Num in vento? Atqui nihil potest consistere in eo, quod nec tangitur, nec videtur. Quid ego de animalibus loquar, in quorum corporibus nihil sine ratione, sine ordine, sine utilitate, sine specie figuratum videmus; adeo ut solertissima, et diligentissima omnium partium membrorumque descriptio, casum ac fortunam repellat. Sed putemus artus et ossa et nervos et sanguinem de atomis posse concrescere. Quid sensus, cogitatio, memoria, mens, ingenium, quibus seminibus coagmentari possunt? minutissimis, inquit. Sunt ergo alia majora. Quomodo igitur insecabilia?

I pass over flint and iron. If you hold a glass sphere full of water in the sun, fire is kindled from the light that is reflected from the water, even in the hardest frost. Must we then believe that there is fire even in water? And yet from the sun fire cannot be kindled even in summer. If you breathe upon wax, or if a light vapour has touched anything, whether a slab of marble or a metal plate, water gradually gathers there in the most minute drops of dew. Likewise, from the exhalation of the earth or of the sea a mist arises, which, when dispersed, moistens whatever it has covered, or, when gathered together and carried aloft by the wind onto lofty mountains, is packed into a cloud and casts down very great rains. Where then do we say that liquids are born? In the vapour? In the exhalation? In the wind? Yet nothing can subsist in that which is neither touched nor seen. Why should I speak of animals, in whose bodies we see nothing formed without reason, without order, without usefulness, without beauty, so that the most skilful and most careful arrangement of all the parts and members rules out chance and fortune? But let us suppose that limbs and bones and sinews and blood can grow together out of atoms. What of sense, thought, memory, mind and intellect: from what seeds can they be compacted? From the most minute, he says. Then there are others that are larger. How then are they indivisible?

Deinde, si ex invisibilibus sunt, quae non videntur, consequens est, ut ex visibilibus sint, quae videntur; cur igitur nemo videt? Sed sive invisibilia quae sunt in homine consideret, sive tractabilia, quae veniunt sub aspectum, ratione utraque constare quis non videt? Quomodo ergo sine ratione coeuntia possunt aliquid efficere rationale? Videmus enim nihil

Next, if the things that are not seen come from invisible things, it follows that the things that are seen come from visible ones. Why then does no one see them? But whether one considers the invisible things that are in man or the tangible ones that come under sight, who does not see that both kinds are constituted by reason? How then can things that come together without reason produce anything rational? For we see that nothing

Editors' notes and page, col. 104

Page

running head: IRM. LACTANTII (cut off at left edge), column number 104
marginal letters: A ‹Omitto silicem ac ferrum›; B ‹libus loquar, in quorum›; C ‹non videt? Quomodo ergo›; D ‹experientia contrarium testatur› (in the Variorum notes at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: The full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE." across the page is not set. The Variorum notes below it, beginning "annuerent, excuditur", are left for the later pass. "Num" (line 4 of the text) appears to carry a stray accent mark (Núm), which is taken as a speck and set as Num. The column ends mid-sentence at "nihil".

PL 7:105

esse in omni mundo, quod non habeat in se maximam mirabilemque rationem. Quae, quia supra hominis sensum et ingenium est, cui rectius, quam divinae providentiae tribuenda est? An simulacrum hominis et statuam ratio et ars fingit; ipsum hominem de frustis temere concurrentibus fieri putabimus? Et quid simile veritatis in ficto, cum summum et excellens artificium nihil aliud, nisi umbram et extrema corporis lineamenta possit imitari? Num potuit humana solertia dare operi suo aut motum aliquem, aut sensum? Omitto usum videndi, audiendi, odorandi, caeterorumque membrorum, vel apparentium, vel latentium, mirabiles utilitates. Quis artifex potuit, aut cor hominis, aut vocem, aut ipsam fabricare sapientiam? Quisquamne igitur sanus existimat, quod homo ratione et consilio facere non possit, id concursu atomorum passim cohaerentium perfici potuisse? Vides in quae deliramenta inciderint, dum nolunt effectionem curamque rerum Deo dare.

exists in the whole world which does not hold within itself the greatest and most wonderful design. And since this is above the sense and intellect of man, to what is it more rightly to be attributed than to divine providence? Do reason and art fashion the likeness and statue of a man, and shall we think that man himself is made from fragments running together at random? And what likeness of truth is there in a fashioned thing, since the highest and most excellent art can imitate nothing other than the shadow and the outermost outlines of the body? Could human skill give its work either any motion or sense? I pass over the use of seeing, hearing, smelling, and the wonderful usefulness of the other members, whether visible or hidden. What craftsman has been able to fabricate either the heart of a man, or the voice, or wisdom itself? Does anyone in his right mind, then, think that what man cannot do by reason and counsel could have been accomplished by the concourse of atoms cohering here and there? You see into what absurdities they have fallen, while they are unwilling to grant to God the making and care of things.

Concedamus tamen his, ut ex atomis fiant quae terrena sunt: num etiam coelestia? Deos aiunt incorruptos, aeternos, beatos esse; solisque dant immunitatem, ne concursu atomorum concreti esse videantur. Si enim dii quoque ex illis constitissent, dissipabiles fierent, seminibus aliquando resolutis, atque in naturam suam revertentibus. Ergo si est aliquid, quod atomi non effecerint, cur non caetera eodem modo intelligamus? Sed, quaero, antequam mundum primordia ista generarent, cur sibi dii habitaculum non aedificaverint? Videlicet nisi atomi coiissent, coelumque fecissent, adhuc dii per medium inane penderent. Quo igitur consilio, qua ratione

Let us nevertheless grant them that the things which are earthly are made from atoms: are the heavenly things also? They say that the gods are incorruptible, eternal and blessed; and to them alone they grant exemption, so that they may not seem to have been compounded by the concourse of atoms. For if the gods too had been composed of them, they would become dissoluble, the seeds being at some time released and returning to their own nature. Therefore if there is something which the atoms have not made, why should we not understand the rest in the same way? But, I ask, before those first beginnings generated the world, why did the gods not build a dwelling for themselves? Evidently, unless the atoms had come together and made the heaven, the gods would still be hanging through the midst of the void. By what counsel, then, by what reason

Editors' notes and page, col. 105

Footnotes

(printed under page 52)

(1) ‹anchor: Tractabilia› · lemma note, col 104

(continued) Rom. 1474, intactabilia; altera Rom. 1468 cum caeteris impressis ac scriptis tractabilia, ut in textu. Unde liquet, sicut ex variis lectionibus aliis, tres Romanas editiones a se invicem diversas. Sed et alibi legimus apud Lactantium lib. V Divin. Institut., cap. 22, oculis manuque tractabile; ubi vide Not. ad lib. de Opificio, cap. 1 manu et oculis contrectare.

(printed under page 52)

(2) ‹anchor: Extrema corporis lineamenta› · lemma note, col 105

Extrema corporis lineamenta. Lond., Reg., Reimm. et omnes libri, extrema. Recte ergo ex hoc loco D. Bouhier monet adversus Davisium; etiam in Cicerone lib. I de Nat. Deor., cap. 44: Lineamenta duntaxat extremis servandum esse. Pari modo Lact. lib. V, cap. 2. Lineamenta et summam figuram dixit. BUN.

The outermost outlines of the body. Lond., Reg., Reimm. and all the books: "extrema". Rightly, then, does M. Bouhier from this passage advise against Davies, that also in Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 44, [one should read] "that the outlines are to be kept only at the outermost parts". In the same way Lactantius, book V, chapter 2, spoke of "outlines and the outermost shape". BUN.

(printed under page 52)

(3) ‹anchor: Omitto› · lemma note, col 105

Omitto. Ms. 1 Bon. antiq., Mitto. Pro usum videndi, in edit. Venet. Trid. Florent. est sensum videndi, male, mox enim vox sensum praecessit.

I pass over. One old Bologna manuscript: "Mitto". For "the use of seeing", the Venice, Trent and Florence editions have "the sense of seeing", wrongly, for the word "sensum" came just before.

(printed under page 52)

(4) ‹anchor: Effectionem› · lemma note, col 105

Effectionem. Rara vox, quae tamen reperitur apud Ciceronem, lib. II de Finibus, cap. 45, et lib. III, cap. 24, artis effectio.

The making. A rare word, which is however found in Cicero, De finibus book II, chapter 45, and book III, chapter 24: "the making of art".

(printed under page 52)

(5) ‹anchor: Si enim dii quoque ex illis constitissent› · lemma note, col 105

Si enim dii quoque ex illis constitissent. Sic restitui ex quamplurimis mss. inter quos sunt antiquissimi 1 Bonon. et Reg.-Put. In 6 scriptis et editis legitur, deos quoque ex illis constituissent; in 3 Reg. rec., Clarom., ed. Rom. 1470, deos... constituisset.

For if the gods too had consisted of them. So I have restored it from very many manuscripts, among them the most ancient, 1 Bologna and the Regio-Puteanus. In 6 manuscripts and the editions one reads "had constituted the gods too from them"; in 3 recent Reg., Clermont, and the Roman edition of 1470, "deos... constituisset".

(printed under page 52)

(6) ‹anchor: Dissipabiles› · lemma note, col 105

Dissipabiles. Haec vox vix occurrit apud alios scriptores: nihilominus extat apud Ciceronem, lib. III de Natura deor., cap. 12: Aer natura cedens est maxime et dissipabilis.

Capable of dispersal. This word scarcely occurs in other writers; nevertheless it is found in Cicero, De natura deorum book III, chapter 12: "Air is by nature most yielding and capable of dispersal."

(printed under page 52)

(7) ‹anchor: Revertentibus› · lemma note, col 105

Revertentibus. Mss. 2 Bon., Tax., 1 Colb., recurrentibus.

Returning. The manuscripts 2 Bologna, Tax., 1 Colbert: "recurrentibus".

(printed under page 52)

(8) ‹anchor: Primordia ista generarent› · lemma note, col 105

Primordia ista generarent. 1 Bonon. antiq. generassent.

These first beginnings should generate. One old Bologna: "generassent".

(printed under page 52)

(9) ‹anchor: Non aedificaverint› · lemma note, col 105

Non aedificaverint. Mss. 7 et 4 editi, non aedificaverunt. — Quaero cur non... aedificaverint. Rost., Ven. 1471-1515, et Paris., Quaero... cur non aedificaverunt. Haud male, judice Heumanno, qui nec prius Lactantio indignum ex supradictis censet. Mihi prius solum Lact. dignum videtur, qui, ubi non corruptus, semper post quaero cur, conjunctivum ponit. Sic lib. II, cap. 4, restitui: Quaero cur illi.... Sacrilegia non vindicaverint; lib. III, cap. 13: Solent quaerere, cur... reperiantur. Cicero, lib. I de Nat. deor., cap. 9: Sciscitor, cur mundi aedificatores repente extiterint.... quaero, cur Pronoea vestra cessaverit; de Fato, cap. 8: Quaero.... cur non possint. BUN.

Did not build. Seven manuscripts and 4 editions: "non aedificaverunt". — I ask why they did not... build. Rost., Venice 1471–1515 and Paris: "Quaero... cur non aedificaverunt". Not bad, in the judgement of Heumann, who does not think the former unworthy of Lactantius either, from what was said above. To me only the former seems worthy of Lactantius, who, where he is not corrupted, always puts the subjunctive after "quaero cur". So in book II, chapter 4, I restored: "I ask why they.... did not punish sacrileges"; book III, chapter 13: "They are wont to ask why... are found." Cicero, De natura deorum book I, chapter 9: "I inquire why the builders of the world suddenly appeared.... I ask why your Providence was idle"; De fato chapter 8: "I ask.... why they cannot." BUN.

(printed under page 52)

(10) ‹anchor: Terra conglobaretur› · lemma note, col 105–106

Terra conglobaretur. Ita mss. antiquiores et potiores Bonon., Regio-Put. aliique, et ed. Is. At scripti 12 rec. et editi terrae conglobarentur.

The earth was rolled into a ball. So the older and better manuscripts, Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus and others, and Isaeus's edition. But 12 recent manuscripts and the editions: "terrae conglobarentur".

(printed under page 52)

(11) ‹anchor: Subtilibus exiguis› · lemma note, col 105–106

Subtilibus exiguis. Legitur vero subtilius exiguis apud Buneman., inque hanc vocem notam sequentem habet.— Subtilius exiguis Betul., Torn., 1587-1613, Genev. 1650, Walch., Subtilibus et exiguis. Lond., Reg, et Goth., Sabtilibus exiguis. Frequenter ita Arnobius, frequentius Minucius, ac vix semel atque iterum ita Lactantius. Ita Goth. minora, humilia, ubi plures, minora et humilia: unde secutus sum Lond. et Goth membranas: Subtilius exiguis, pro subtilissimis, minutissimis. BUN.

Fine and tiny. "Subtilius exiguis" is however the reading in Bunemann, and he has the following note on this word. — Subtilius exiguis: Betuleius, Tornaesius 1587–1613, Geneva 1650, Walch: "Subtilibus et exiguis". Lond., Reg. and Goth.: "Sabtilibus [sic] exiguis". Arnobius often writes so, Minucius more often, and Lactantius scarcely once or twice. So Goth. has "minora, humilia" where most have "minora et humilia": hence I have followed the Lond. and Goth. parchments: "subtilius exiguis", for "most fine, most minute". BUN.

(printed under page 52)

(12) ‹anchor: Tam subtilem› · lemma note, col 105–106

Tam subtilem, Mss. 6 et 2 edd. addunt tamque mirabilem; Cauc. et 9 editi, tam subtiliter a non sentiente natura formari.

So fine. Six manuscripts and 2 editions add "and so wonderful"; Cauc. and 9 editions: "to be formed so finely by an unfeeling nature".

(printed under page 52)

(13) ‹anchor: Si mentem non habet› · lemma note, col 106

Si mentem non habet. Cicero de Nat. deor., II, diversas de natura sententias seu definitiones describit: unam eorum, qui naturam censent vim quamdam sine ratione cientem motus in corporibus (continues)

If it has no mind. Cicero, De natura deorum II, describes various opinions or definitions of nature: one, of those who hold nature to be a certain force without reason, stirring motions in bodies (continues)

(printed under page 52)

Page

running head: 105 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the image edge; presumably LIBER DE IRA DEI)
marginal letters: A esse in omni mundo; B quod homo ratione et consilio; C coiissent, coelumque fecissent; D beside the line "Bun." in the Variorum Notae
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column ends mid-word "ra-" (ratione) at the column break; the full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the image edge) below the text is not set; the Variorum Notae below it (Rom. 1474, intactabilia ...) and the signature "PATROL. VII." are left for the later pass; "omni" in the first line is printed with damaged type but reads clearly

PL 7:106

de confuso acervo se atomi congregaverunt, ut ex aliis inferius terra conglobaretur, coelum desuper tenderetur, tanta siderum varietate distinctum, ut nihil unquam excogitari possit ornatius? Tanta ergo qui videat et talia, potest existimare nullo effecta esse consilio, nulla providentia, nulla ratione divina; sed ex atomis subtilibus, exiguis concreta esse tanta miracula? Nonne prodigio simile est aut natum esse hominem, qui haec diceret, aut extitisse, qui crederet? ut Democritum, qui auditor ejus fuit, vel Epicurum, in quem vanitas omnis de Leucippi fonte profluxit. At enim (sicut alii dicunt) natura mundus effectus est, quae sensu et figura caret. Hoc vero multo est absurdius. Si natura mundum fecit, consilio et ratione fecerit, necesse est; is enim facit aliquid, qui aut voluntatem faciendi habet, aut scientiam. Si caret sensu ac figura, quomodo potest ab ea fieri, quod et sensum habeat et figuram? nisi forte quis arbitretur, animalium fabricam tam subtilem a non sentiente formari animarique potuisse; aut istam coeli speciem, tam providenter ad utilitates viventium temperatam, nescio quo casu, sine conditore, sine artifice, subito extitisse.

did the atoms gather themselves together out of a confused heap, so that from some of them the earth was rolled into a ball below, and the sky was stretched out above, marked out with such a variety of stars that nothing more ornate could ever be devised? Can anyone, then, who sees things so great and of such a kind, suppose that they were brought about by no design, no providence, no divine reason, but that such great marvels were compacted out of fine and tiny atoms? Is it not like a portent either that a man was born who would say these things, or that one appeared who would believe them? as Democritus, who was his hearer, or Epicurus, into whom all the vanity flowed from the fountain of Leucippus. But indeed (as others say) the world was made by nature, which lacks sense and shape. This, however, is far more absurd. If nature made the world, it must have made it by design and reason; for he makes something who has either the will to make it or the knowledge. If it lacks sense and shape, how can that be made by it which has both sense and shape? unless perhaps someone should think that the structure of living creatures, so finely wrought, could have been formed and given life by something without sensation; or that this appearance of the sky, so providently tempered for the benefit of living things, sprang up suddenly by some chance or other, without a founder, without a craftsman.

« Si quid est, inquit Chrysippus, quod efficiat ea, quae homo, licet ratione sit praeditus, facere non possit, id profecto est majus, et fortius, et sapientius homine. » Homo autem non potest facere coelestia; ergo illud, quod haec efficiet vel effecerit, superat hominem arte, consilio, prudentia, potestate. Quis igitur potest esse, nisi Deus? Natura vero, quam veluti matrem esse rerum putant, si mentem non habet, nihil efficiet unquam, nihil molietur. Ubi

« If there is anything, says Chrysippus, which brings about those things which man, although he is endowed with reason, cannot do, that is surely greater, and stronger, and wiser than man. » But man cannot make the heavenly things; therefore that which will bring these about or has brought them about surpasses man in skill, design, prudence and power. Who, then, can it be, if not God? Nature, however, which they suppose to be as it were the mother of things, if it has no mind, will never bring anything about, will undertake nothing. Where

Editors' notes and page, col. 106

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 106 (cut off at the left edge of the image)
marginal letters: A ‹tione de confuso acervo›; B ‹quid, qui aut voluntatem›; C ‹quam veluti matrem esse›; D ‹Terra conglobaretur. Ita mss.› (in the Variorum Notae at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "tione", broken from the word at the foot of col. 105; "profecto" and "Homo" faintly printed but legible; "efficiet vel effecerit" set as printed; the full-width heading "[V]ARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at left) and the editors' notes below it ("Non aedificaverint. Mss. 7...") are page-foot apparatus, not set here; "Digitized by Google" and scanner stamp at foot not set

PL 7:107

enim non est cogitatio, nec motus est ullus, nec efficacia. Si autem consilio utitur ad incipiendum aliquid, ratione ad disponendum, arte ad efficiendum, virtute ad consummandum, potestate ad regendum et continendum; cur natura potius quam Deus nominetur? Aut si concursus atomorum, vel carens mente natura, ea, quae videmus, effecit, quaero cur facere coelum potuerit, urbem aut domum non potuerit? cur montes marmoris fecerit, columnas et simulacra non fecerit? Atqui non debuerant atomi etiam ad haec efficienda concurrere; siquidem nullam positionem relinquunt, quam non experiantur. Nam de natura, quae mentem non habeat, non est mirandum, quod haec facere oblita sit. Quid ergo est? Utique Deus, cum inchoaret hoc opus mundi, quo nihil potest esse nec dispositius ad ordinem, nec aptius ad utilitatem, nec ornatius ad pulchritudinem, nec majus ad molem, quae fieri ab homine non poterant, ⟨f⟩ecit ipse; in quibus etiam hominem ipsum, cui particulam de sua sapientia dedit; et instruxit eum ratione, quantum fragilitas terrena capiebat, ut ipse sibi efficeret, quae ad usus suos essent necessaria.

indeed there is no thought, there is neither any motion nor any efficacy. But if it uses counsel to begin something, reason to arrange it, art to accomplish it, power to complete it, authority to rule and hold it together, why should it be named nature rather than God? Or if the concourse of atoms, or a nature lacking mind, produced the things which we see, I ask why it was able to make the sky, yet was not able to make a city or a house? Why did it make mountains of marble, yet did not make columns and statues? And yet should not the atoms have come together to produce these things too, since they leave no arrangement untried? For as to a nature which has no mind, it is no wonder that it forgot to make these things. What then is the case? Certainly God, when He began this work of the world, than which nothing can be either better arranged for order, or more fitted for usefulness, or more adorned for beauty, or greater in mass, Himself made the things which could not be made by man; among which [He made] also man himself, to whom He gave a small portion of His own wisdom; and He furnished him with reason, as far as earthly frailty could contain it, so that he might produce for himself the things which would be necessary for his own uses.

Editors' notes and page, col. 107

Footnotes

(printed under page 53)

(1) ‹anchor: Si mentem non habet› · lemma note, col 106

(continued) necessarios; alteram eorum, qui definiunt vim rationis atque ordinis participem, tamquam via progredientem, declarantemque quid cujusque caussa res efficiat, quid sequatur, cujus solertiam nulla ars, nulla manus, nemo opifex consequi possit imitando. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 53)

(2) ‹anchor: Nec motus› · lemma note, col 107–108

Nec motus, etc. Atqui natura Zenonis artifex, opifex, consultrix, et provida utilitatum opportunitatumque omnium mundi, omnes motus habet voluntarios, conatusque et appetitiones, quas ὁρμάς graece vocant. Cic. de Nat. deor., lib. II. BETUL.

Nor motion, etc. And yet Zeno's nature, artist, craftsman, counsellor, and provider of all the world's uses and conveniences, has all its motions voluntary, and strivings and appetites, which in Greek they call impulses. Cicero, De natura deorum book II. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 53)

(3) ‹anchor: Consilio› · lemma note, col 107–108

Consilio. Mss. 7 addunt suo, quod ab aliis et a vulgatis abest, necnon a caeteris periodi membris.

By counsel. Seven manuscripts add "suo", which is absent from the others and from the printed texts, and from the other members of the period.

(printed under page 53)

(4) ‹anchor: Effecit› · lemma note, col 107–108

Effecit. Mss. 2 Colb., Clarom., ed. Gymnic. et Spark., efficit.

Brought about. The manuscripts 2 Colbert, Clermont, and the editions of Gymnicus and Sparke: "efficit".

(printed under page 53)

(5) ‹anchor: Cur.... caelum potuerit, urbem... non potuerit?› · lemma note, col 107–108

Cur.... caelum potuerit, urbem... non potuerit? Haec similia illis Ciceronis lib. II de Natura deorum, c. 37: Quod si mundum efficere potest concursus atomorum, cur porticum, cur templum, cur domum, cur urbem non potest? quae sunt minus operosa, et multo quidem faciliora. BUN.

Why.... could it [make] the heaven, and could not [make] a city? This is like Cicero's words, De natura deorum book II, chapter 37: "But if a concourse of atoms can make a world, why can it not make a portico, a temple, a house, a city, which are less laborious and indeed much easier?" BUN.

(printed under page 53)

(6) ‹anchor: Atqui non debuerant atomi› · lemma note, col 107–108

Atqui non debuerant atomi. Ita restitui ex mss. antiquissimis et opt. 2 Bon., 3 Reg., 5 Colbert., Clarom., Baluz., Brun., faventibus 3 aliis a quibus abest negatio. In 3 scriptis rec. et 10 edd. pro debuerant, est potuerant; in aliis quatuor impressis potuerunt. Bunemann. legit debuerant, omisso non: « Editi, inquit, habent, atqui potuerant. Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2, 3, Reimm.: atqui non debuerant. Tum non, pro nonne sumendum. Sed Bon., Tax., Pen., Emman.: Atqui debuerant. »

And yet the atoms ought not. So I have restored it from the most ancient and best manuscripts, 2 Bologna, 3 Reg., 5 Colbert, Clermont, Baluze, Brun., with the support of 3 others from which the negative is absent. In 3 recent manuscripts and 10 editions, for "debuerant" there is "potuerant"; in four other printed editions "potuerunt". Bunemann reads "debuerant" with "non" omitted: "The editions," he says, "have 'and yet they could'. Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2 and 3, Reimm.: 'and yet they ought not'. Then 'non' is to be taken for 'nonne'. But Bon., Tax., Pen., Emman.: 'And yet they ought.'"

(printed under page 53)

(7) ‹anchor: Nullam positionem› · lemma note, col 107–108

Nullam positionem. De Opific., cap. 6: Si primordia nullum genus positionis inexpertum relinquunt. BUN.

No arrangement. De opificio chapter 6: "If the first beginnings leave no kind of arrangement untried." BUN.

(printed under page 53)

(8) ‹anchor: Quantum fragilitas terrena capiebat› · lemma note, col 107–108

Quantum fragilitas terrena capiebat. Sic restitui ex cunctis mss. et 10 editis. Caeteri vulgati legunt cupiebat.

As far as earthly frailty admitted. So I have restored it from all the manuscripts and 10 editions. The other printed texts read "cupiebat".

(printed under page 53)

(9) ‹anchor: Ad usus...necessaria› · lemma note, col 107–108

Ad usus...necessaria. Ita jungit constanter. Lib. I: Derelictis ad tutelam vitae necessariis; Epit., cap. 56: princ.: Necessarium ad salutem. Seneca, ep. 8: Multis ad quotidianum usum necessariis opus est. BUN.

Necessary... for use. So he joins them consistently. Book I: "having abandoned what is necessary for the protection of life"; Epitome chapter 56, beginning: "necessary for salvation". Seneca, letter 8: "There is need of many things necessary for daily use." BUN.

(printed under page 53)

(10) ‹anchor: Animus.... rector corporis› · lemma note, col 107–108

Animus.... rector corporis. Lib. II, cap. 12, lib. VI, c. 1; de Opif., c. 1; Sallust. Jug. I, 3. BUN.

The soul.... ruler of the body. Book II, chapter 12; book VI, chapter 1; De opificio chapter 1; Sallust, Jugurtha I, 3. BUN.

(printed under page 53)

(11) ‹anchor: Ad usus suos› · lemma note, col 107–108

Ad usus suos. Sequor antiquiores et potiores mss. 2 Bonon., Regio-Put. aliosque multos, et edd. Is. In caeteris editis et 10 scriptis rec. est in usus suos.

For its uses. I follow the older and better manuscripts, 2 Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus and many others, and Isaeus's edition. In the other editions and 10 recent manuscripts it is "in usus suos".

(printed under page 53)

(12) ‹anchor: Corpus hominis ex humo fictum est› · lemma note, col 107–108

Corpus hominis ex humo fictum est. Cum. vet. ed. Rom. sic ferunt omnes mss. praeter 1 Reg. rec. et Clarom. a prima manu, quibus est, ut in editis, factum est. Vide infra fictum esse.

The body of man was moulded from the earth. With the old Roman edition, all the manuscripts have it so, except 1 recent Reg. and Clermont in the first hand, which have, as in the editions, "factum est". See below, "fictum esse".

(printed under page 53)

(13) ‹anchor: Unde homo nomen accepit› · lemma note, col 107–108

Unde homo nomen accepit. Allusio est, non verum etymon, quod est ab Hebraeo petendum, FRANCIUS.—Vide Lactantium supra lib. II Divin. Institut., c. 11, et Vossii Etymologicon Linguae Latinae. In editis 7 deest homo.

Whence man took his name. It is an allusion, not the true etymology, which must be sought from the Hebrew. FRANCIUS. — See Lactantius above, Divine Institutes book II, chapter 11, and Vossius's Etymologicon of the Latin Language. In 7 editions "homo" is missing.

(printed under page 53)

(14) ‹anchor: M. Cicero in Tusculanis et in Consolatione› · lemma note, col 107–108

M. Cicero in Tusculanis et in Consolatione. In Tusculanis Quaestionibus, lib. I, c. 27 ex libro suo de Consolatione, quae sequuntur verba produxit. Ait enim: Hanc nos sententiam secuti, his ipsis verbis in Consolatione haec expressimus: Animorum nulla in terris, etc. CELL.

Marcus Cicero in the Tusculans and in the Consolation. In the Tusculan Disputations, book I, chapter 27, he brought forward the following words from his book On Consolation. For he says: "Following this opinion, we expressed it in these very words in the Consolation: Of souls there is no [origin] on earth," etc. CELLARIUS.

(printed under page 53)

(15) ‹anchor: Nihil est enim, inquit› · lemma note, col 107–108

Nihil est enim, inquit. In 12. mss. rec. et 7 edd. desideratur enim, quod est in caeteris codicibus, et apud Ciceronem in fragmentis de Consolatione.

For there is nothing, he says. In 12 recent manuscripts and 7 editions "enim" is lacking, which is in the other codices and in Cicero in the fragments of the Consolation.

(printed under page 53)

(16) ‹anchor: Atque fictum esse› · lemma note, col 107–108

Atque fictum esse. Ita mss. edit. Betul. ac Cicero ipse, In 2 Reg. rec. et editis est factum.

And moulded. So the manuscripts, Betuleius's edition, and Cicero himself. In 2 recent Reg. and the editions it is "factum".

(printed under page 53)

(17) ‹anchor: Nihilne aut humidum quidem› · lemma note, col 107–108

Nihilne aut humidum quidem. Ita Cicero. Accedunt mss. 2 Reg. antiq., 5 Colb., Baluz., Brun., in quibus est nihilne humidum quidem; in Bonon. antiq. et 4 aliis nihilve aut humidum quidem.

Nor anything moist even. So Cicero. The manuscripts 2 old Reg., 5 Colbert, Baluze, Brun. agree, in which it is "nihilne humidum quidem"; in the old Bologna and 4 others "nihilve aut humidum quidem".

(printed under page 53)

(18) ‹anchor: Flabile› · lemma note, col 107–108

Flabile. Id est, aerium. FRANCIUS.

Breathy. That is, airy. FRANCIUS.

(printed under page 53)

(19) ‹anchor: His enim naturis nihil inest› · lemma note, col 107–108

His enim naturis nihil inest. Ita mss. cum vet. ed. Rom. 1470, Venet. 1490. In 2 Colb., Baluz. et in 10 impressis legitur, His enim innatum nihil est. — His enim in naturis. Eleganter Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2, cum Cicerone, in naturis. BUN.

For in these natures there is nothing. So the manuscripts with the old Roman edition of 1470 and Venice 1490. In 2 Colbert, Baluze and in 10 printed editions one reads "For in these there is nothing innate." — For in these natures. Elegantly Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips. 2, with Cicero: "in naturis". BUN.

(printed under page 53)

(20) ‹anchor: Quod› · lemma note, col 107–108

Quod, etc. Sic cum mss. 2 Bonon., Tax., 2 Colb., Baluz., Clarom. a secunda manu, edit. Crat., Graph., Cellar., Walch., Cicero ipse. Caeteri, quo, et.

Which, etc. So with the manuscripts 2 Bologna, Tax., 2 Colbert, Baluze, Clermont in the second hand, the editions of Cratander, Gryphius (printed "Graph."), Cellarius, Walch, and Cicero himself. The others: "quo, et".

(printed under page 53)

(21) ‹anchor: Praevideat› · lemma note, col 107–108

Praevideat. Sic lego cum mss. 1 Bon.... antiq., Pen. et ipso Cicerone. Clarom. prima manu, pervideat. Caeteri, provideat.

Should foresee. So I read with the manuscripts 1 old Bologna, Pen., and Cicero himself. Clermont in the first hand: "pervideat". The others: "provideat".

(printed under page 53)

(22) ‹anchor: Nec enim inveniuntur› · lemma note, col 107–108

Nec enim inveniuntur. Ita constanter omnes mss. et impressi, praeter 4 edd. rec. in quibus est, invenietur, ut apud Ciceronem. Buneman. vero legit, invenietur, et notam sequentem exhibet: — Nec enim invenietur unquam. Habebant, inveniuntur unquam, plures libri; solus Betul. nec enim inveniuntur (continues)

For they are not found. So consistently all the manuscripts and printed editions, except 4 recent editions in which it is "invenietur", as in Cicero. Bunemann, however, reads "invenietur" and gives the following note: — For it will never be found. Most books had "inveniuntur unquam"; Betuleius alone "nec enim inveniuntur" (continues)

(printed under page 53)

Page

running head: 107 FIRM. LACTANT[...] (cut off at the image edge; the first digit of 107 is poorly printed and looks like 4)
marginal letters: A ‹enim non est cogitatio›; B ‹mundi, quo nihil potest›; C ‹Nec motus, etc. Atqui natura› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹potuerant ; in aliis quatuor› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "⟨f⟩ecit": the first letter is broken and reads like "l", taken as damaged type rather than a misprint; the full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the right edge) stands below the text block and is not set; the Variorum notae below it (Betuleius, Bunemann, manuscript variants) belong to the page-foot apparatus and are left for the later pass; the column ends with a complete sentence

PL 7:108

Si vero in hujus mundi (ut ita dixerim) republica nulla providentia est, quae regat, nullus Deus, qui administret, nec omnino sensus ullus in hac rerum natura pollet; unde igitur mens humana tam solers, tam intelligens orta esse credetur? Si enim corpus hominis ex humo fictum est, unde homo nomen accepit; animus ergo qui s⟨a⟩pit, qui rector est corporis, cui membra obsequuntur tanquam regi et imperatori, qui nec aspici, nec comprehendi potest, non potuit ad hominem nisi a sapiente natura pervenire. Sed sicut omne corpus mens et animus gubernat: ita et mundum Deus. Nec enim verisimile est, ut minora et humilia regimen habeant, majora et summa non habeant. Denique M. Cicero in Tusculanis, et in Consolatione: « Animorum (inquit) nulla in terris origo inveniri potest. Nihil est enim, inquit, in animis mistum atque concretum, aut quod ex terra natum atque fictum esse videatur; nihilne aut humidum quidem, aut flabile, aut igneum. His enim naturis nihil inest, quod vim memoriae, mentis, cogitationis habeat, quod et praeterita teneat, et futura praevideat, et complecti possit praesentia, quae sola divina sunt. Nec enim inveniuntur unquam, unde ad

But if in the commonwealth of this world (so to speak) there is no providence to rule it, no God to administer it, and no sense at all prevails in this nature of things, from where then will the human mind, so skilful and so intelligent, be believed to have arisen? For if the body of man is fashioned from the earth (humus), from which man (homo) received his name, then the soul, which is wise, which is the ruler of the body, which the limbs obey as a king and commander, which can neither be seen nor grasped, could not have come to man except from a wise nature. But just as mind and soul govern the whole body, so also God governs the world. For it is not likely that lesser and lowly things should have governance, while greater and highest things should not. Finally Marcus Cicero, in the Tusculans and in the Consolation: "No origin of souls (he says) can be found on earth. For there is nothing, he says, in souls mixed and compounded, or that might seem to have been born and fashioned from the earth; nothing even moist, or airy, or fiery. For in these natures there is nothing that has the power of memory, of mind, of thought, that both holds the past and foresees the future and can embrace the present, which alone are divine. For they are never found [to have a source] whence they could come to

Editors' notes and page, col. 108

Page

running head: FIRM. LACTANTII 108 (left edge of running head cut off in image: "IRM. LACTANTII")
marginal letters: A Si vero in hujus mundi; B in terris origo inveniri potest; C beside the note "Unde homo nomen accepit" (in the Variorum notae, not set); D beside "aliis nihilve aut humidum quidem" (in the Variorum notae, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "s⟨a⟩pit": the a is damaged/blurred in the type. The column ends mid-sentence at "unde ad". The full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" is cut off at the left edge of the image and is not set. The Variorum notae below it are not set and are left for a later pass. The text on the left of the images belongs to column 107 and is not set. No editors' matter is in the text block.

PL 7:109

hominem venire possint, nisi a Deo.» Exceptis igitur duobus tribusve calumniatoribus vanis, cum constet, divina providentia mundum regi, sicut et factus est, nec sit quisquam, qui Diagorae Theodorique sententiam, vel Leucippi inane commentum, vel Democriti Epicurique levitatem praeferre audeat auctoritati, vel illorum septem priorum, qui sunt appellati sapientes, vel Pythagorae, vel Socratis, vel Platonis, caeterorumque philosophorum, qui esse Providentiam judicaverunt; falsa igitur est et illa sententia, qua putant terroris ac metus gratia Religionem a sapientibus institutam, quo se homines imperiti a peccatis abstinerent.

man, except from God." Therefore, setting aside two or three empty slanderers, since it is agreed that the world is ruled by divine providence, just as it was also made, and since there is no one who would dare to prefer the opinion of Diagoras and Theodorus, or the empty fiction of Leucippus, or the levity of Democritus and Epicurus, to the authority either of those seven earlier men who were called wise, or of Pythagoras, or of Socrates, or of Plato, and of the other philosophers who judged that there is a Providence; false therefore is that opinion also, by which they think that Religion was instituted by wise men for the sake of terror and fear, so that ignorant men might keep themselves from sins.

Quod si verum sit, ergo derisi ab antiquis sapientibus sumus. Quod si fallendi nostri, atque adeo totius generis humani causa commenti sunt Religionem; sapientes igitur non fuerunt, quia in sapientem non cadit mendacium. Sed fuerint sapientes; quae tanta felicitas mentiendi, ut non tantummodo indoctos, sed Platonem quoque ac Socratem fallerent, et Pythagoram, Zenonem, Aristotelem, maximarum sectarum principes, tam facile deluderent? Est igitur divina providentia, ut senserunt ii homines, quos nominavi; cujus vi ac potestate omnia, quae videmus et facta sunt, et reguntur. Nec enim tanta rerum magnitudo, tanta dispositio, tanta in servandis ordinibus temporibusque constantia, aut olim potuit sine provido artifice oriri, aut constare tot saeculis sine incola potenti, aut in perpetuum gubernari sine perito ac sentiente rectore: quod ratio ipsa

But if this is true, then we have been mocked by the ancient wise men. But if they invented Religion for the sake of deceiving us, and indeed the whole human race, then they were not wise, because falsehood does not befall a wise man. But suppose they were wise; what great success in lying was this, that they deceived not only the unlearned, but Plato also and Socrates, and so easily fooled Pythagoras, Zeno, Aristotle, the founders of the greatest schools? There is therefore a divine providence, as those men whom I have named held; by whose force and power all the things that we see were both made and are ruled. For neither could so great a magnitude of things, so great an arrangement, so great a constancy in keeping orders and seasons, either have arisen at the first without a provident craftsman, or have stood for so many ages without a powerful indweller, or be governed for ever without a skilled and perceiving ruler: which reason itself

Editors' notes and page, col. 109

Footnotes

(printed under page 54)

(1) ‹anchor: Nec enim inveniuntur› · lemma note, col 108

(continued) usquam. Scripsi cum Cicerone, Isaeo, Spark., Heum., Nec enim invenietur, scilicet origo; dixit enim supra, Animorum nulla in terris origo inveniri potest. BUN.

(printed under page 54)

(2) ‹anchor: Caeterorumque philosophorum› · lemma note, col 109

Caeterorumque philosophorum. Ita cum omnibus ferme mss. edit. Rom. 1470. At scripti recentissimi 1 Reg., 2 Colb., Baluz. et impressi interjiciunt, summorum.

And of the other philosophers. So, with almost all the manuscripts, the Roman edition of 1470. But the most recent manuscripts, 1 Reg., 2 Colbert, Baluze, and the printed editions insert "summorum" (the greatest).

(printed under page 54)

(3) ‹anchor: Commenti sunt› · lemma note, col 109

Commenti sunt. Mss. 13 rec. et ed. Rom. 1470, commentati sunt.

They devised. Thirteen recent manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470: "commentati sunt".

(printed under page 54)

(4) ‹anchor: Sed fuerint sapientes› · lemma note, col 109

Sed fuerint sapientes. Vox sapientes deest in Colb. et Pen. In ms. Cauc. et 7 vulgatis legitur, sed ut fuerint.

But suppose they were wise. The word "sapientes" is missing in Colbert and Pen. In the Cauc. manuscript and 7 printed texts one reads "sed ut fuerint".

(printed under page 54)

(5) ‹anchor: Et Pythagoram› · lemma note, col 109

Et Pythagoram. 1 Bon. ant., ut Pythagoram.

And Pythagoras. One old Bologna: "ut Pythagoram".

(printed under page 54)

(6) ‹anchor: In servandis ordinibus› · lemma note, col 109

In servandis ordinibus. Mss. 12 rec., in conservandis.

In keeping the orders. Twelve recent manuscripts: "in conservandis".

(printed under page 54)

(7) ‹anchor: Aut olim potuit› · lemma note, col 109

Aut olim potuit. 2 Bon., Tax., 2. Colb., Baluz., aut demum.

Or could ever. 2 Bologna, Tax., 2 Colbert, Baluze: "aut demum".

(printed under page 54)

(8) ‹anchor: Sine perito ac sentiente rectore› · lemma note, col 109

Sine perito ac sentiente rectore. Sic restitui ex veterrimis et optimis mss. Regio-Put., Cauc., 2 al. Reg., 3 Colbert., Ultr., Clarom., Em., Brun. et edit. Betul. Vide infra, sentientis, etc. quam Deus. 2 Colbert. et Baluz. ac sapiente; 2 Bonon., 5 al. rec. et 6 editi, ac sciente: quae verba desunt in 7 impressis.

Without a skilled and sentient ruler. So I have restored it from the oldest and best manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus, Cauc., 2 other Reg., 3 Colbert, Ultr., Clermont, Em., Brun., and Betuleius's edition. See below, "of a sentient", etc., "than God". Two Colbert and Baluze: "ac sapiente"; 2 Bologna, 5 other recent ones and 6 editions: "ac sciente"; these words are missing in 7 printed editions.

(printed under page 54)

(9) ‹anchor: Naturae est: sapiens vero sentiensque› · lemma note, col 109–110

Naturae est: sapiens vero sentiensque: Haec verba absunt a Lond., Reg., Lips. 2 et Reimmann. mss. item Rost., Ven. 1471, utraque 78, 93, 1497, ut ita cohaereant: Ratio autem sentientis sapientisque naturae nihil aliud potest esse. Parrh. et Paris. Ratio a sentientis sapientisque naturae nihil aliud potest esse. At Goth., Lips. 3, Ald., Crat., Gymn., Fasit., Gryph., Torn., Bet., Thomas., Isaeus, reliqui, ut est editum; nisi quod Torn., Betul., Walch., vocem aliud non habent. BUN.

Is of a nature; but wise and sentient: These words are absent from the Lond., Reg., Lips. 2 and Reimmann manuscripts, and likewise Rost., Venice 1471, both of 1478, 1493, 1497, so that it runs thus: "But the reason of a sentient and wise nature can be nothing else." Parrhasius and Paris: "Ratio a sentientis sapientisque naturae nihil aliud potest esse." But Goth., Lips. 3, Aldus, Cratander, Gymnicus, Fasitelius, Gryphius, Tornaesius, Betuleius, Thomasius, Isaeus and the rest, as edited; except that Tornaesius, Betuleius and Walch do not have the word "aliud". BUN.

(printed under page 54)

(10) ‹anchor: Constitit› · lemma note, col 109–110

Constitit. Apud Buneman. Constat. Londin., Reg., Goth., Lips., Reimm. et editi omnes, Constitit. Emm., Constat, quod praefero: ita quoque Heumannus rescribit. Ita fert mos Lactantii. Confer c. 10: Cum constet; et c. 13 lib. III, c. 11. BUN.

It stood firm. In Bunemann, "Constat". Lond., Reg., Goth., Lips., Reimm. and all the editions: "Constitit". Emm.: "Constat", which I prefer; so too Heumann writes it. Such is Lactantius's custom. Compare chapter 10: "Since it is agreed"; and chapter 13; book III, chapter 11. BUN.

(printed under page 54)

(11) ‹anchor: Multorum esse› · lemma note, col 109–110

Multorum esse. Mss. 3 et edd. 4 interjiciunt deorum; mss. 5 rec., multorum credenda sit.

To be of many. Three manuscripts and 4 editions insert "deorum"; 5 recent manuscripts: "multorum credenda sit".

(printed under page 54)

(12) ‹anchor: Ostendimus in nostris Institutionibus› · lemma note, col 109–110

Ostendimus in nostris Institutionibus. Mss. 10, docuimus. Inde patet, Divinarum Institutionum libros a Lactantio conscriptos ante librum de Ira Dei.

We have shown in our Institutes. Ten manuscripts: "docuimus". Hence it is clear that the books of the Divine Institutes were written by Lactantius before the book On the Anger of God.

(printed under page 54)

(13) ‹anchor: Quod divina vis ac potestas si distribuatur in plures› · lemma note, col 109–110

Quod divina vis ac potestas si distribuatur in plures. Ita omnes editi cum mss. praeter septem, quibus est distrahatur.

That the divine force and power, if it is distributed among many. So all the editions with the manuscripts except seven, which have "distrahatur".

(printed under page 54)

(14) ‹anchor: Diminui eam necesse sit› · lemma note, col 109–110

Diminui eam necesse sit: quod autem minuitur utique et mortale est; si vero. Sic mss 2 Bonon. pluresque alii ac nonnulli editi; et concinnius quam in caeteris; quibus est, diminuitur utique, et mortalis est; si vero.

It must be diminished: but what is diminished is certainly mortal too; but if. So the manuscripts 2 Bologna and many others and some editions; and more neatly than in the rest, which have "it is certainly diminished, and is mortal; but if".

(printed under page 54)

(15) ‹anchor: Non possunt› · lemma note, col 110

Non possunt, etc. Argumento ab analogia ducto, et inductione quadam Socratica statuit monarchiam divinam. Huic rei confirmandae Philo Judaeus Homerico utitur versu, quem non magis de politicis monarchiis, quam de coelesti dictum credit.

They cannot, etc. By an argument drawn from analogy, and by a kind of Socratic induction, he establishes the divine monarchy. To confirm this, Philo the Jew uses a verse of Homer, which he believes was said no more of political monarchies than of the heavenly one.

(printed under page 54)

(16) ‹anchor: Nec in armento, aut grege› · lemma note, col 110

Nec in armento, aut grege. Reimmann. armento et grege. Heumannus rescribit, nec in armentorum greges, quia etiam in l. de Mort. Pers. c. 37: armentorum greges. In Epitome, c. 2: Si plures in armento duces. Minucius tamen distinxit ut in nostro loco, c. 18: Rex unus apibus, dux unus gregibus, in armentis rector unus. BUN.

Nor in a herd or flock. Reimmann: "armento et grege". Heumann writes "nec in armentorum greges", because in the book On the Deaths of the Persecutors, chapter 37, there is also "flocks of herds". In the Epitome, chapter 2: "If there are several leaders in a herd." Minucius, however, distinguished them as in our passage, chapter 18: "One king for the bees, one leader for the flocks, one ruler in the herds." BUN.

(printed under page 54)

(17) ‹anchor: Nec in uno examine› · lemma note, col 110

Nec in uno examine, etc. Ita legendum ex omnibus fere tum mss. tum editis. Quia antea posuerat exempla hominum, postea descendit ad muta animantia: itaque intelligendum est omnino de examine apum, quarum singula examina regem suum habent. Mss. septem et 4 impressi, regimine. — Nec in uno examine. Verissima haec lectio utriusque Bonon. Con- (continues)

Nor in one swarm, etc. So it should be read from almost all the manuscripts and editions alike. Because he had first given examples from men, he then comes down to dumb animals; so it must certainly be understood of a swarm of bees, each swarm of which has its own king. Seven manuscripts and 4 printed editions: "regimine". — Nor in one swarm. This is the truest reading, of both Bologna manuscripts. (continues)

(printed under page 54)

Page

running head: 109 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the image's right edge)
marginal letters: A hominem venire possint; B tius generis humani causa commenti sunt Religio-; C nari sine perito ac sentiente rectore; D (none in the text block; a D stands in the notes area beside "Aut olim potuit")
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "homines" in "quo se homines imperiti" has damaged type (it looks like "honrines") and is set as "homines". The closing quotation mark after "Deo." is set as ». The heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" and the variorum notes below it belong to the editors' apparatus at the page foot and are not set here. The column ends mid-sentence with "quod ratio ipsa".

PL 7:110

declarat. Quidquid est enim, quod habet rationem, ratione sit ortum necesse est. Ratio autem sentientis sapientisque naturae est: sapiens vero sentiensque natura nihil aliud potest esse, quam Deus. Mundus autem, quoniam rationem habet, qua et regitur, et constat; ergo a Deo factus est. Quod si est conditor rectorque mundi Deus, recte igitur ac vere Religio constituta est; auctori enim rerum parentique communi honos veneratioque debetur.

declares. For whatever has reason must necessarily have arisen from reason. Now reason belongs to a sentient and wise nature; but a wise and sentient nature can be nothing other than God. The world, moreover, since it has reason, by which it is both governed and holds together, was therefore made by God. But if God is the founder and ruler of the world, then religion has rightly and truly been established; for honour and veneration are owed to the author of things and common parent.

CAPUT XI.

Chapter XI.

De Deo, eoque uno, cujusque providentia mundus regatur et constat.

Of God, and of Him as one, by Whose providence the world is governed and holds together.

Quoniam constitit de providentia, sequitur ut doceamus, utrumne multorum esse credenda sit, an potius unius. Satis (ut opinor) ostendimus in nostris Institutionibus, deos multos esse non posse; quod divina vis ac potestas si distribuatur in plures, diminui eam necesse sit: quod autem minuitur, utique et mortale est; si vero mortalis non est, nec minui, nec dividi potest. Deus igitur unus est, in quo vis et potestas consummata, nec minui potest, nec augeri. Si autem sunt multi, dum habent singuli potestatis aliquid ac numinis, summa ipsa decrescit: nec poterunt singuli habere totum, quod est commune cum pluribus: unicuique tantum deerit, quantum caeteri possidebunt. Non possunt igitur in hoc mundo multi esse rectores: nec in una domo multi domini, nec in navi una multi gubernatores, nec in armento aut grege duces multi, nec in uno examine multi reges.

Since it is settled concerning providence, it follows that we should show whether it is to be believed to belong to many, or rather to one. We have shown sufficiently (as I think) in our Institutes that there cannot be many gods; because if the divine force and power were distributed among several, it would necessarily be diminished; but what is diminished is certainly also mortal; whereas if it is not mortal, it can be neither diminished nor divided. God therefore is one, in Whom force and power is complete, and can be neither diminished nor increased. But if there are many, while each individually has some portion of power and divinity, the sum itself decreases; nor will each individually be able to have the whole, which is shared in common with several; each will lack as much as the others will possess. There cannot therefore be many rulers in this world: nor many masters in one house, nor many helmsmen in one ship, nor many leaders in a herd or flock, nor many kings in one swarm.

Editors' notes and page, col. 110

Page

running head: [L]IBER DE IRA DEI. (first letter cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹declarat. Quidquid est enim›; B ‹potius unius. Satis (ut opinor)›; C ‹grege duces multi, nec in uno›; D ‹si vero. (in the Variorum notae at the page foot)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence with "declarat."; the cut-off line ends on the left belong to column 109 and are not set; "veneratioque" read through poor type (looks like "veneratloque"); "utrumne" first letter blurred; the VARIORUM NOTAE at the page foot (Constat, quod praefero...) are not set here, left for the later pass; no full-width line in this column

PL 7:111

Sed nec in coelo quidem multi soles esse potuerunt, sicut nec animae plures in uno corpore: adeo in unitate natura universa consentit. Quod si mundum / Spiritus intus alit totamque infusa per artus / Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet, / apparet testimonio poetae, unum esse mundi habitatorem Deum; siquidem corpus omne nisi ab una mente incoli regique non potest. Omnem igitur divinam potestatem necesse est in uno esse, cujus nutu et imperio regantur omnia; et ideo tantus est, ut ab homine non possit, aut verbis enarrari, aut sensibus aestimari.

But not even in the sky could there be many suns, just as there cannot be several souls in one body: so fully does the whole of nature agree in unity. But if a spirit nourishes the world within, and a mind, poured through its limbs, moves the whole mass and mingles itself with the great body, it is evident by the testimony of the poet that the inhabitant of the world is one God; since indeed no body can be inhabited and ruled except by one mind. All divine power, therefore, must be in one, by Whose nod and command all things are governed; and for that reason He is so great that He cannot by man either be told out in words or be measured by the senses.

Unde igitur ad homines opinio multorum deorum persuasione pervenit? Nimirum ii omnes, qui coluntur ut dii, homines fuerunt, et iidem primi, ac maximi reges: sed eos, aut ob virtutem, qua profuerant hominum generi, divinis honoribus affectos esse post mortem; aut ob beneficia et inventa, quibus humanam vitam excoluerant, immortalem memoriam consecutos, quis ignorat? nec tantum mares, sed et foeminas. Quod cum vetustissimi Graeciae scriptores, quos illi θεολόγους nuncupant, tum etiam Romani, Graecos secuti et imitati, docent; quorum praecipue Euhemerus, ac noster Ennius, qui eorum omnium

Whence, then, did the opinion of many gods reach men by persuasion? Doubtless all those who are worshipped as gods were men, and the same were the first and greatest kings: but who does not know that they, either on account of the virtue by which they had benefited the human race, were endowed with divine honours after death, or on account of the benefits and inventions with which they had refined human life, obtained an immortal memory? and not only males, but females as well. This is taught both by the most ancient writers of Greece, whom they call theologoi [theologians], and also by the Romans, who followed and imitated the Greeks; of whom especially Euhemerus, and our own Ennius, who set forth, of them all,

Editors' notes and page, col. 111

Footnotes

(printed under page 55)

(1) ‹anchor: Nec in uno examine› · lemma note, col 110

(continued) firmo ex antiquissimo Taurinensi in Epit. c. 2: Si multi sint in examine apum reges. BUN.

(printed under page 55)

(2) ‹anchor: Potuerunt› · lemma note, col 111

Potuerunt. Ita ms. Editi, poterunt.

They could. So the manuscript. The editions: "poterunt".

(printed under page 55)

(3) ‹anchor: Quod si› · lemma note, col 111

Quod si, etc. Ab auctoritate Maronis. Nam hi versus sunt ex Aeneidos sexto vers. 726. Sed Lactantius noster libro VII, capite tertio, hos versus alio torquet: reprehendit enim Gentiles, quod Deum mentem, Dei corpus mundum fecerint. BETULEIUS.

But if, etc. From the authority of Virgil. For these verses are from the sixth book of the Aeneid, line 726. But our Lactantius, book VII, chapter three, turns these verses another way: for he censures the pagans for making God the mind and the world God's body. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 55)

(4) ‹anchor: Mundi habitatorem› · lemma note, col 111

Mundi habitatorem. Lips. 2 et 3, gubernatorem, aptius, ut videtur, quia c. 10 conditor rectorque mundi Deus. Sed plurimorum habitatorem defenditur per sequentia verba, incoli. Ita l. IV Institut., c. 29. Hic mundus una Dei domus est, et filius ac pater, qui unanimes incolunt mundum, Deus unus. Forte legendum, habitatorem et gubernatorem. BUN.

The inhabitant of the world. Lips. 2 and 3: "gubernatorem", more fittingly, it seems, since in chapter 10 God is "founder and ruler of the world". But the "habitatorem" of most copies is defended by the following words, "is inhabited". So Institutes book IV, chapter 29: "This world is one house of God, and the Son and the Father, who dwell in the world with one mind, are one God." Perhaps one should read "inhabitant and governor". BUN.

(printed under page 55)

(5) ‹anchor: Aut verbis enarrari› · lemma note, col 111

Aut verbis enarrari. Sic ante Lactantium Minucius Felix: Hic nec videri potest, visu clarior est: nec comprehendi potest, nec aestimari; sensibus major est: Infinitus, immensus, et sibi soli, tantus quantus est, notus.

Or be told in words. So before Lactantius, Minucius Felix: "He cannot be seen, he is too bright for sight; he cannot be grasped nor reckoned; he is greater than the senses: infinite, immeasurable, and known in his true greatness to himself alone."

(printed under page 55)

(6) ‹anchor: Persuasione› · lemma note, col 111

Persuasione. Francius suspicabatur legendum esse persuasioque. — Persuasione. Ingeniose Heumannus, persuasiove, id est, sive persuasio, legendum putat. In Reimm. ductus litterarum tales sunt, ut persuasione legi possit. Sane ablativus hic male quadrat, licet sit in omnibus editis. BUN.

By persuasion. Francius suspected one should read "persuasioque". — Persuasione. Heumann ingeniously thinks one should read "persuasiove", that is, "or persuasion". In Reimm. the strokes of the letters are such that "persuasione" can be read. Certainly the ablative fits badly here, though it is in all the editions. BUN.

(printed under page 55)

(7) ‹anchor: Dii, homines fuerunt› · lemma note, col 111

Dii, homines fuerunt. Eadem pene habes lib. I Div. Institut. c. 15. Theophilus ad Autolicum: Καὶ τὰ μὲν ὀνόματα, ὧν φῆς, σέβεσθαι θεῶν, ὀνόματά ἐστι νεκρῶν ἀνθρώπων. Deinde longa inductione sylvam exemplorum adducit. BETULEIUS.

The gods were men. You have almost the same in Divine Institutes book I, chapter 15. Theophilus to Autolycus: "And the names of the gods whom you say you worship are the names of dead men." Then by a long induction he brings forward a forest of examples. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 55)

(8) ‹anchor: Qua profuerant› · lemma note, col 111

Qua profuerant. Ita mss. 2 Bonon. aliique multi. Vide infra quibus. Scripti 12 et editi quia.

In which they had benefited. So the manuscripts 2 Bologna and many others. See below, "quibus". Twelve manuscripts and the editions: "quia".

(printed under page 55)

(9) ‹anchor: Immortalem memoriam› · lemma note, col 111

Immortalem memoriam. Mss. 7. immortalitatis memoriam.

Immortal memory. Seven manuscripts: "immortalitatis memoriam".

(printed under page 55)

(10) ‹anchor: Euhemerus› · lemma note, col 111

Euhemerus. De hoc dictum est lib. I, cap. 11 Div. Institut.

Euhemerus. Of him there was mention in Divine Institutes book I, chapter 11.

(printed under page 55)

(11) ‹anchor: Sepulcra demonstrant› · lemma note, col 111–112

Sepulcra demonstrant. Ita mss. 2 Bonon. aliique plures. Multi mss. et editi legunt simulacra; quod parum, aut nihil probaret.

Their tombs show. So the manuscripts 2 Bologna and many others. Many manuscripts and editions read "simulacra" (images), which would prove little or nothing.

(printed under page 55)

(12) ‹anchor: Quia veritas› · lemma note, col 111–112

Quia veritas. Francius, forte, quia autem veritas; alioqui non cohaeret.

Because the truth. Francius: perhaps "quia autem veritas"; otherwise it does not cohere.

(printed under page 55)

(13) ‹anchor: Erui nunquam potest› · lemma note, col 111–112

Erui nunquam potest. Sic multi mss. inter quos sunt antiquissimi 2 Bon., Reg.-Put. Pro nunquam 11 mss. cum editis habent non.

Can never be dug out. So many manuscripts, among them the most ancient, 2 Bologna and the Regio-Puteanus. For "nunquam" 11 manuscripts with the editions have "non".

(printed under page 55)

(14) ‹anchor: Assequi valuit› · lemma note, col 111–112

Assequi valuit. Voluit est in mss. quamplurimis. Septem rec. ferunt, potuit; 2. rec. et editi, valuit.

Was able to attain. "Voluit" is in very many manuscripts. Seven recent ones have "potuit"; 2 recent ones and the editions "valuit".

(printed under page 55)

(15) ‹anchor: Sicut Plato in Timaeo› · lemma note, col 111–112

Sicut Plato in Timaeo. Cujus verba ita Cicero transtulit in lib. de Universo: Atque illum quidem quasi parentem hujus universitatis invenire difficile, et cum inveneris, indicare in vulgus nefas. ISAEUS.

As Plato in the Timaeus. Whose words Cicero translated thus in the book On the Universe: "And to find him who is as it were the parent of this universe is difficult, and when you have found him, it is unlawful to disclose him to the crowd." ISAEUS.

(printed under page 55)

(16) ‹anchor: Idem testatur Hermes› · lemma note, col 111–112

Idem testatur Hermes. Mercurius scilicet ille Trismegistus, cujus haec ad Tatium sententia legitur apud Stobaeum in Collectaneis Serm. 80, qui est de Diis, et Physiolog. circa coel. ac mund. Deum cogitare animo difficile est, eloqui impossibile. ISAEUS.

Hermes testifies the same. That is, the famous Mercury Trismegistus, whose saying to Tat is read in Stobaeus's Collections, discourse 80, which is on the gods, and in the Physics, on heaven and the world: "To conceive God in the mind is difficult; to speak of him, impossible." ISAEUS.

(printed under page 55)

(17) ‹anchor: Cicero› · lemma note, col 111–112

Cicero. Id est Cic. III Nat. deor., ut lib. I Institut., cap. 6.

Cicero. That is, Cicero, De natura deorum III, as in Institutes book I, chapter 6.

(printed under page 55)

(18) ‹anchor: Trismegistus nominatus› · lemma note, col 111–112

Trismegistus nominatus. Edit. Gymnic., nominatur. Trismegistus, id est ter maximus, ut habetur in tribus mss. rec. interpretationis gratia. Trismegistus apud Stobaeum Serm. 80 de Diis.

Named Trismegistus. Gymnicus's edition: "nominatur". Trismegistus, that is "thrice greatest", as is found in three recent manuscripts by way of explanation. Trismegistus in Stobaeus, discourse 80, On the Gods.

(printed under page 55)

(19) ‹anchor: Et erat non modo› · lemma note, col 111–112

Et erat non modo, etc. Mose dicitur multo recentior, ut Marsilius ex Augustino indicat. Nam quo tempore Moses natus est, floruit Atlas astrologus, Promethei physici frater, ac maternus avus majoris Mercurii, cujus hic Trismegistus filius fuit. BETUL. — Alii tamen hunc Trismegistum Mose multo antiquiorem fuisse non sine causa putant.

And he was not only, etc. He is said to be much later than Moses, as Marsilio [Ficino] shows from Augustine. For at the time when Moses was born, Atlas the astrologer flourished, brother of Prometheus the natural philosopher and maternal grandfather of the elder Mercury, whose son this Trismegistus was. BETULEIUS. — Others, however, not without reason, think this Trismegistus was much older than Moses.

(printed under page 55)

(20) ‹anchor: Apud Xenophontem› · lemma note, col 112

Apud Xenophontem, etc. Apud Xenophontem, Ἀπομνημονευμάτων quarto, Socrates cum Euthydemo disputans, non Deum modo τὸν οἰκονομοῦντα ἀόρατον dicit, sed etiam ministros deorum invisibiles esse affirmat. Atque paulo inferius animas nostras quiddam de divinitate participare docet. Haec Xenophontea verba vide lib. IV memorab. Dictor. et Factor. Socratis circa medium; vide lib. VII Platon. de Leg. et Ciceron. lib. I de Nat. deor.— Apud Xenophontem, etc. Cujus haec verba sunt lib. IV. Memorab. Socrat. Quod igitur Dii sint, hominumque habeant curam, tu quoque, o Euthydeme, cognosces, si non expectes, quousque deorum videris formas; satis namque erit opera eorum considerando, colere ac honorare eos, etc. ISAEUS.

In Xenophon, etc. In Xenophon, the fourth book of the Memorabilia, Socrates, disputing with Euthydemus, not only calls God the invisible one who orders all things, but also affirms that the ministers of the gods are invisible. And a little further down he teaches that our souls share something of divinity. See these words of Xenophon in book IV of the Memorable Sayings and Deeds of Socrates, about the middle; see Plato, Laws book VII, and Cicero, De natura deorum book I. — In Xenophon, etc. Whose words in Memorabilia of Socrates book IV are these: "That there are gods, then, and that they care for men, you too, Euthydemus, will come to know, if you do not wait until you have seen the forms of the gods; for it will be enough, by considering their works, to worship and honour them," etc. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 55)

Page

running head: 111 FIRM. LACTANTII (cut off at the right edge of the image; first figure of the column number damaged, reads like 411)
marginal letters: A ‹Sed nec in coelo quidem›; B ‹mi reges : sed eos›; C ‹sus sunt ex Aeneidos sexto› (in the notes); D ‹persuasiove, id est› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the two verses (Virgil, Aen. 6.726-727) are printed indented on lines of their own within the sentence; set inline, separated by " / ". The full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE (cut off at the right edge) stands below the text block and is not set. The editors' Variorum notae at the page foot (from ‹firmo ex antiquissimo Taurinensi› to ‹alioqui non cohaeret›) are left for the later pass. Initial U of Unde damaged. Column ends mid-sentence at ‹omnium›.

PL 7:112

natales, conjugia, progenies, imperia, res gestas, obitus, sepulcra demonstrant. Et secutus eos Tullius tertio de Natura deorum libro dissolvit publicas religiones: sed tamen veram, quam ignorabat, nec ipse, nec alius quisquam potuit inducere. Adeo et ipse testatus est, falsum quidem apparere, veritatem tamen latere. Utinam (inquit) tam facile vera invenire possem, quam falsa convincere! Quod quidem non dissimulanter, ut Academicus, sed vere atque ex animi sententia proclamavit: quia veritas humanis sensibus erui nunquam potest, quod assequi valuit humana providentia, id assecutus est, ut falsa detegeret. Quidquid enim fictum et commentitium, quia nulla ratione subnixum est, facile dissolvitur. Unus est igitur princeps, et origo rerum Deus, sicut Plato in Timaeo et sensit et docuit; cujus majestatem tantam esse declarat, ut nec mente comprehendi, nec lingua exprimi possit.

the births, marriages, offspring, dominions, deeds, deaths and tombs. And, following them, Tullius in the third book of On the Nature of the Gods dissolved the public religions; but yet the true one, which he did not know, neither he himself nor anyone else was able to bring in. So much so that he himself also testified that the false indeed shows itself, but the truth nevertheless lies hidden. 'Would that,' he says, 'I could find the true as easily as I can refute the false!' And this he proclaimed not dissemblingly, as an Academic, but truly and from the conviction of his mind: because truth can never be dug out by the human senses, what human foresight was able to attain, that he attained, namely to uncover the false. For whatever is feigned and fabricated, since it rests on no reason, is easily dissolved. There is therefore one Prince and Origin of things, God, as Plato both thought and taught in the Timaeus; whose majesty he declares to be so great that it can neither be grasped by the mind nor expressed by the tongue.

Idem testatur Hermes, quem Cicero ait in numero deorum apud Aegyptios haberi, eum scilicet, qui ob virtutem multarumque artium scientiam Trismegistus nominatus, et erat non modo Platone, verum etiam Pythagora septemque illis sapientibus longe antiquior. Apud Xenophontem Socrates disputans

The same is testified by Hermes, who Cicero says is held among the number of the gods by the Egyptians, namely the one who on account of his virtue and his knowledge of many arts was named Trismegistus, and who was far more ancient not only than Plato but even than Pythagoras and those seven wise men. In Xenophon, Socrates, disputing

Editors' notes and page, col. 112

Page

running head: [cut off at left edge]M. LACTANTII 112
marginal letters: A natales, conjugia, progenies; B in Timaeo et sensit et docuit; C Septem rec. ferunt (in the Variorum notae); D pore Moses natus est (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (natales) and ends mid-sentence (disputans), no word split at either break; "Tullius" faint in print but legible; the heading VARIORUM NOTAE is printed across both columns and cut off at the image edge, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (Erui nunquam potest ... Isaeus) left for the later pass; left-column fragments visible at the image edge not set; no editors' prose in the text block.

PL 7:113

ait, « formam Dei non oportere conquiri; » et Plato in Legum libris: « Quid omnino sit Deus, non esse quaerendum; quia nec inveniri possit, nec enarrari. » Pythagoras quoque unum Deum confitetur dicens, incorporalem esse mentem, quae per omnem rerum naturam diffusa et intenta, vitalem sensum cunctis animantibus tribuat. Antisthenes autem in Physico unum esse naturalem Deum dixit, quamvis gentes et urbes suos habeant populares. Eadem fere et Aristoteles cum suis peripateticis, et Zeno cum suis stoicis. Longum est enim singulorum sententias exequi, qui licet diversis nominibus sint abusi, ad unam tamen potestatem, quae mundum regeret, concurrerunt. Sed tamen summum Deum, cum et philosophi, et poetae, et ipsi denique qui deos colunt, saepe fateantur; de cultu tamen et honoribus ejus nemo unquam requisivit⟨…⟩ nemo disseruit; ea scilicet persuasione, qua semper beneficum incorruptumque credentes, nec irasci eum cuiquam, nec ullo cultu indigere arbitrantur. Adeo religio esse non potest, ubi metus nullus est.

says, "that the form of God ought not to be sought out"; and Plato in the books of the Laws: "What God altogether is ought not to be inquired into, because He can neither be found nor described." Pythagoras too confesses one God, saying that He is an incorporeal mind which, diffused and extended through the whole nature of things, bestows the sense of life on all living creatures. Antisthenes, moreover, in the Physicus said that there is one natural God, although nations and cities have their own popular [gods]. Nearly the same [was held by] Aristotle with his Peripatetics, and Zeno with his Stoics. For it would be long to go through the opinions of each of them, who, although they have used different names, nevertheless converged on one power which should rule the world. But although philosophers, and poets, and finally those very people who worship gods, often confess the supreme God, yet concerning His worship and honours no one has ever inquired, no one has discoursed; namely by that persuasion by which, believing Him always beneficent and incorruptible, they think that He is neither angry with anyone nor in need of any worship. So true is it that religion cannot exist where there is no fear.

Editors' notes and page, col. 113

Footnotes

(printed under page 56)

(1) ‹anchor: Et Plato in Legum libris› · lemma note, col 113–114

Et Plato in Legum libris, etc. In septimo de Legibus sic legimus, sub persona hospitis Atheniensis: Τὸν μέγιστον θεὸν, καὶ ὅλον τὸν κόσμον φαμὲν οὔτε ζητεῖν δεῖν, οὔτε πολυπραγμονεῖν τὰς αἰτίας ἐρευνῶντας. Sunt quaedam similia etiam in X, sed huc non referenda.

And Plato in the books of the Laws, etc. In the seventh book of the Laws we read thus, in the person of the Athenian stranger: "We say that one ought not to inquire into the greatest God and the whole world, nor busy oneself searching out their causes." There are some similar things also in book X, but they are not to be brought in here.

(printed under page 56)

(2) ‹anchor: Pythagoras quoque› · lemma note, col 113–114

Pythagoras quoque, etc. Simile quiddam est apud Cic. in primo de Natura deorum; nempe Pythagoram censuisse, Deum esse animum per naturam rerum omnem intentum et commeantem, ex quo nostri animi carperentur. Quae tamen a Velleio etiam Epicureo reprehenduntur; neque immerito. Crassior est illa, quae legitur apud Epiphanium, et plane ab hac nostra discrepans, ubi Epicurus Deum non mentem, sed corpus facit. Sed ex Platone in X. de Legib. Astra non deorum corpora facit idem Epicurus; sed deos ipsos: librum Platonis adeas. Hanc definitionem, quae hic citatur, produximus supra lib. I, cap. 5, sicut etiam Antisthenis jamjam sequentem. BETUL.

Pythagoras too, etc. There is something similar in Cicero, in the first book of De natura deorum: namely that Pythagoras held God to be a soul stretched through and pervading the whole nature of things, from which our souls were plucked. These views are, however, censured by Velleius the Epicurean too, and not undeservedly. Cruder is the one read in Epiphanius, and plainly at odds with ours, where Epicurus makes God not a mind but a body. But from Plato, Laws book X: the same Epicurus makes the stars not the bodies of the gods but the gods themselves; consult Plato's book. This definition, which is quoted here, we brought forward above in book I, chapter 5, as also that of Antisthenes which follows directly. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 56)

(3) ‹anchor: Incorporalem› · lemma note, col 113–114

Incorporalem. Pythag. apud Cic. lib. I de Natura deorum.

Incorporeal. Pythagoras in Cicero, De natura deorum book I.

(printed under page 56)

(4) ‹anchor: Diffusa et intenta› · lemma note, col 113–114

Diffusa et intenta. Lact. de Opif. c. 16: Divina mens Dei per universas mundi partes intenta discurrit...... ubique diffusa. Minucius Fel. cap. 19: Pythagorae Deus est animus per universam rerum naturam commeans et intentus, ex quo etiam animalium omnium vita capiatur. Confer. Lact. lib. I, cap. 5: Quamvis ipse per totum se corpus intenderat. BUN.

Spread abroad and stretched out. Lactantius, De opificio chapter 16: "The divine mind of God runs stretched through all the parts of the world...... everywhere spread abroad." Minucius Felix, chapter 19: "For Pythagoras, God is a soul passing through and stretched through the whole nature of things, from which the life of all animals too is taken." Compare Lactantius book I, chapter 5: "Although he had stretched himself through the whole body." BUN.

(printed under page 56)

(5) ‹anchor: Antisthenes autem in physico› · lemma note, col 113–114

Antisthenes autem in physico. Respice ad lib. I Institut., cap. 6. Ciceronis verba sunt de Natura deor., lib. I, cap. 13: Antisthenes in eo libro, qui Physicus inscribitur, populares deos multos, naturalem unum esse dicens, tollit vim et naturam deorum. CELL.

But Antisthenes in the Physicus. Look back to Institutes book I, chapter 6. Cicero's words are, De natura deorum book I, chapter 13: "Antisthenes, in the book entitled Physicus, saying that the gods of the people are many but the god of nature one, abolishes the power and nature of the gods." CELLARIUS.

(printed under page 56)

(6) ‹anchor: Physico› · lemma note, col 113–114

Physico. Liber fuit Antisthenis.

Physicus. It was a book of Antisthenes.

(printed under page 56)

(7) ‹anchor: Suos habeant populares› · lemma note, col 113–114

Suos habeant populares. Mss. 9 addunt deos.

The peoples have their own. Nine manuscripts add "deos".

(printed under page 56)

(8) ‹anchor: Eadem fere et Aristoteles› · lemma note, col 113–114

Eadem fere et Aristoteles, etc. Libro primo, capite 5. Lactantius est confessus, Aristotelem secum dissidere; in summa tamen, Mentem esse mundi praesidem. De illa ipsa vero dissensione lege Cic. in primo de Natura deorum. BETUL. — De Aristotel. et Zenone, vide Ciceron. lib. I de Nat. deor.

Aristotle too, almost the same, etc. Book one, chapter 5. Lactantius admitted that Aristotle disagrees with himself; yet in sum that a Mind presides over the world. On that very disagreement read Cicero in the first book of De natura deorum. BETULEIUS. — On Aristotle and Zeno, see Cicero, De natura deorum book I.

(printed under page 56)

(9) ‹anchor: Et Zeno› · lemma note, col 113–114

Et Zeno, etc. Vide omnino Lactantium ipsum et Ciceronem locis jam saepius citatis, ubi haec, quae hic in medio suspensa relinquuntur, excutiuntur diligentius.

And Zeno, etc. By all means see Lactantius himself and Cicero in the places already cited many times, where these matters, which are left hanging in mid-air here, are examined more carefully.

(printed under page 56)

(10) ‹anchor: Concurrerunt› · lemma note, col 113–114

Concurrerunt. Sic restitui ex multis editis et omnibus mss. praeter 1 Colb. rec. in quo, ut et in 3 excusis, est concurrunt.

They agreed. So I have restored it from many editions and all the manuscripts except 1 recent Colbert, in which, as also in 3 printed copies, it is "concurrunt".

(printed under page 56)

(11) ‹anchor: Detestabilique prudentiae› · lemma note, col 113–114

Detestabilique prudentiae. Malebat Francius legere impudentiae. At legendum cum mss. Regio-Put. aliisque decem, et 2 vet. edd. Rom. ac Betul. prudentiae, id est sapientiae vel scientiae gentilium philosophorum, ut sumitur hac notione apud Cicer.

And to a detestable prudence. Francius preferred to read "impudentiae". But one should read, with the Regio-Puteanus and ten other manuscripts, and the two old Roman editions and Betuleius, "prudentiae", that is, the wisdom or knowledge of the pagan philosophers, as it is taken in this sense in Cicero.

(printed under page 56)

(12) ‹anchor: Quia sapientia divinitatis intellectus est› · lemma note, col 113–114

Quia sapientia divinitatis intellectus est. Sequor lectionem antiquissimorum et opt. codicum mss. 2 Bonon., 3 Colbert., Baluz. et ed. Plantin. probatam a Thomasio in notis suis, Is. Spark. Caeteri multifariam legunt: alii dum; alteri cum divinitatis intellectus...... reperiatur, justitiam; alii justitia: hanc postremam vocem plures respuunt.— Quia sapientia est divinitatis intellectus, etc. Secutus sum lectionem mss. optimorum, et Plantinianae probatam, et explicatam a Thomasio in suis notis. Antonius Augustinus pro eo quod legitur, In homine solo reperiri justitiam, malebat, In homine solo reperitur justitia. Impressi libri fere omnes habent, Cum divinitatis intellectus, quo differimus a belluis, in homine solo reperiatur, qua nisi cupiditates, etc. quam lectionem mutilam esse, nec bene cum superioribus cohaerere, omnes, ut puto, intelligunt. BUN.

Because wisdom is the understanding of the divine. I follow the reading of the most ancient and best manuscript codices, 2 Bologna, 3 Colbert, Baluze, and the Plantin edition, approved by Thomasius in his notes, Isaeus, Sparke. The others read in many ways: some "dum"; others "cum divinitatis intellectus...... reperiatur, justitiam"; others "justitia": very many reject this last word. — Because wisdom is the understanding of the divine, etc. I have followed the reading of the best manuscripts, approved in the Plantin edition and explained by Thomasius in his notes. Antonio Agustín, for the reading "that justice is found in man alone", preferred "justice is found in man alone". Almost all the printed books have "Since the understanding of the divine, by which we differ from beasts, is found in man alone, by which, unless desires," etc.; a reading which everyone, I think, sees is mutilated and does not cohere well with what precedes. BUN.

(printed under page 56)

(13) ‹anchor: Reperiri justitiam› · lemma note, col 113–114

Reperiri justitiam. Ita mss. 2 Bonon., 3 Colb., Baluz. In aliis est reperiatur.

That justice is found. So the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 3 Colbert, Baluze. In others it is "reperiatur".

(printed under page 56)

(14) ‹anchor: Qua nisi cupiditates› · lemma note, col 113–114

Qua nisi cupiditates. Sic lego cum mss. 2 Reg., 3 Colbert., Christ., Merton., Lips., Ultr., Em., Brun. et ed. Fasitel., Basil. 1532, Egnat. Al., quia.

By which, unless desires. So I read with the manuscripts 2 Reg., 3 Colbert, Christ., Merton, Lips., Ultr., Em., Brun., and the editions of Fasitelius, Basel 1532, Egnatius. Others: "quia".

(printed under page 56)

(15) ‹anchor: Impieque vivemus› · lemma note, col 113–114

Impieque vivemus. Ita omnes mss. et vet. edd. Rom. non ut in editis viveremus. Nam dixerat coercuerit.

And we shall live impiously. So all the manuscripts and the old Roman editions, not "viveremus" as in the editions. For he had said "coercuerit".

(printed under page 56)

(16) ‹anchor: Actus› · lemma note, col 113–114

Actus. Pro actione etiam infra cap. 17, singulorum actus animadvertit.

Acts. For "actio"; also below, chapter 17, "he takes note of the acts of each".

(printed under page 56)

(17) ‹anchor: Religione justitiaque detracta› · lemma note, col 113–114

Religione justitiaque detracta. Haec locutio Lactantii est, illamque in ejus scriptis frequenter reperies. In 2 mss. Bonon. et 5 aliis rec. est detractis.

Religion and justice being taken away. This expression is Lactantius's, and you will find it often in his writings. In 2 Bologna manuscripts and 5 other recent ones it is "detractis".

(printed under page 56)

(18) ‹anchor: Devolvimur› · lemma note, col 113–114

Devolvimur. Ex omnibus mss. et vulgatis editis ita restitui, quod latinius et rotundius est, quam volvimur, ut in pluribus editis.

We are rolled down. I have restored it so from all the manuscripts and the common editions, as more Latin and more rounded than "volvimur", as in most editions.

(printed under page 56)

(19) ‹anchor: Dempto metu de superiore› · lemma note, col 113–114

Dempto metu de superiore. Sic legitur apud Buneman. qui notam sequentem exhibet:— Dempto metu de superiore. Plerique scripti: editi vero omnes, metu superiore. Ita Cyprianus epist. ad Donatum: nullus de legibus metus est; de quaesitore, de judice pavor nullus. Silius Italus, 17, 394: Saevus magno de nomine terror. BUN.

Fear of a superior being removed. So it is read in Bunemann, who gives the following note: — Fear of a superior being removed. Most manuscripts; but all the editions "metu superiore". So Cyprian, letter to Donatus: "there is no fear of the laws; no dread of the inquisitor, of the judge." Silius Italicus 17, 394: "Savage terror from a great name." BUN.

(printed under page 56)

(20) ‹anchor: Per quem› · lemma note, col 113–114

Per quem. Lond., Reg., Lips. 2, et Reimm., per (continues)

Through whom. Lond., Reg., Lips. 2 and Reimm.: "per (continues)

(printed under page 56)

Page

running head: 113 LIBER DE IRA DEI (cut off at the image edge after "LIBER DE IRA D")
marginal letters: A ‹ait, « formam Dei non oportere›; B ‹saepe fateantur; de cultu tamen› ; C ‹rum omnem intentum et commeantem› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹ipse per totum se corpus intenderat› / ‹Antisthenes autem in physico› (in the Variorum notae, between these lines)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence with "ait"; UNSURE: visible gap after "requisivit", probably a lost comma, set as ⟨ ⟩; stray mark after "enarrari." before » not set; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at right edge) stands below "ubi metus nullus est.", not set; the Variorum notae below (Et Plato in Legum libris ... Concurrerunt ... in 3) belong to the page-foot commentary and are left for the later pass
other: 1 gap mark(s) ⟨ ⟩ / ⟨...⟩ (text lost at the edge of the scan, nothing supplied) set as ⟨…⟩ on receipt; leave them

PL 7:114

CAPUT XII.

Chapter XII.

De religione et Dei timore.

On religion and the fear of God.

Nunc quoniam respondimus impiae quorumdam detestabilique prudentiae, vel potius amentiae, redeamus ad propositum. Diximus, religione sublata, nec sapientiam teneri posse, nec justitiam; quia sapientia divinitatis intellectus est, quo differimus a belluis: in homine solo reperiri justitiam, qua nisi cupiditates nostras Deus, qui falli non potest, coercuerit, scelerate impieque vivemus. Spectari ergo actus nostros a Deo, non modo ad utilitatem communis vitae attinet, sed etiam ad veritatem; quia religione justitiaque detracta, vel ad stultitiam pecudum amissa ratione devolvimur, vel ad bestiarum immanitatem: imo vero amplius; siquidem bestiae sui generis animalibus parcunt. Quid erit homine truculentius, quid immitius, si dempto metu superiore, vim legum aut fallere potuerit, aut contemnere? Timor igitur Dei solus est, qui custodit hominum inter se societatem, per quem vita ipsa sustinetur,

Now, since we have answered the impious and detestable wisdom, or rather madness, of certain men, let us return to our purpose. We said that, once religion is taken away, neither wisdom nor justice can be held fast; because wisdom is the understanding of the divinity, by which we differ from the beasts: that justice is found in man alone, and unless God, Who cannot be deceived, restrains our desires by means of it, we shall live wickedly and impiously. That our acts are watched by God, therefore, pertains not only to the advantage of common life but also to the truth; because, when religion and justice are withdrawn, either we sink down, reason being lost, to the folly of cattle, or to the savagery of wild beasts: nay rather further still; since wild beasts spare animals of their own kind. What will be more ferocious than man, what more pitiless, if, the fear of a superior being removed, he has been able either to evade or to despise the force of the laws? The fear of God, therefore, is the only thing that guards the society of men among themselves, through which life itself is sustained,

Editors' notes and page, col. 114

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 114 (first letters cut off at the image's left edge)
marginal letters: A ‹CAPUT XII.›; B ‹immanitatem: imo vero amplius›; C ‹Thomasio in notis suis› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹Impieque vivemus. Ita omnes mss.› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: last word "susti-" is split at the column break (sustinetur or similar continues in col. 115); full-width heading "[V]ARIORUM NOTAE" printed across both columns below the text, cut off at the left edge, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (from "excusis, est concurrunt" to "Per quem. Lond., Reg., Lips. 2, et Reimm., per") not set, for the later pass; UNSURE "communis": type damaged, it looks like "commumis"; UNSURE "inter": damaged type, it looks like "Inter" with a capital; no editors' matter in the text block

PL 7:115

munitur, gubernatur. Is autem timor auferetur, si fuerit homini persuasum, quod irae sit expers Deus; quem moveri et indignari, cum injusta fiunt, non modo communis utilitas, sed etiam ratio ipsa nobis et veritas persuadet. Rursus nobis ad superiora redenndum est, ut quia docuimus a Deo factum esse mundum, doceamus quare sit effectus.

fortified, governed. But that fear will be taken away if man has been persuaded that God is without anger; yet that He is moved and is indignant when unjust things are done, not only the common good but also reason itself and truth persuade us. Once more we must return to what came before, so that, since we have taught that the world was made by God, we may teach why it was made.

CAPUT XIII

Chapter XIII.

De mundi et temporum commodo et usu.

On the advantage and use of the world and of the seasons.

Si consideret aliquis universam mundi administrationem, intelliget profecto, quam vera sit sententia Stoïcorum, qui aiunt nostra causa mundum esse constructum. Omnia enim, quibus constat, quaeque generat ex se mundus, ad utilitatem hominis accommodata sunt. Homo utitur igni ad usum calefaciendi et luminis, et molliendorum ciborum, ferrique fabricandi: utitur fontibus ad potum et ad lavacra; fluminibus ad agros irrigandos terminandasque regiones: utitur terra ad percipiendam frugum varietatem; collibus ad conserenda vineta; montibus ad usum arborum atque lignorum; planis ad segetem; utitur

If anyone should consider the whole government of the world, he will surely understand how true is the opinion of the Stoics, who say that the world was built for our sake. For all the things of which the world consists, and which it produces from itself, have been fitted to the use of man. Man uses fire for the purpose of warming and of light, and of softening foods, and of working iron; he uses springs for drink and for baths; rivers for watering fields and for bounding regions; he uses the earth for gathering a variety of crops; hills for planting vineyards; mountains for the use of trees and timber; plains for corn; he uses

Editors' notes and page, col. 115

Footnotes

(printed under page 57)

(1) ‹anchor: Per quem› · lemma note, col 114

(continued) quam scilicet societatem. Goth., Lips. 3 et editi, per quem, scilicet timorem Dei. BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(2) ‹anchor: Timor auferetur› · lemma note, col 115–116

Timor auferetur. Eadem superius locutio. Editi 4, auferretur. In 21 mss. et 3 edit. Rom., Florent., Is., timor aufertur.

Fear will be taken away. The same expression as above. Four editions: "auferretur". In 21 manuscripts and the 3 Roman editions, the Florentine and Isaeus: "timor aufertur".

(printed under page 57)

(3) ‹anchor: Ratio ipsa nobis et veritas› · lemma note, col 115–116

Ratio ipsa nobis et veritas. Abest nobis a multis mss. et edd. Sed extat in antiquissimis et optimis mss. Regio Put., 2 Bonon. et vulgatis quinque.

Reason itself and truth [teach] us. "Nobis" is absent from many manuscripts and editions. But it stands in the most ancient and best manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus, 2 Bologna, and five printed editions.

(printed under page 57)

(4) ‹anchor: Quam vera sit sententia Stoicorum› · lemma note, col 115–116

Quam vera sit sententia Stoicorum. Chrysippi maxime, ut Cicero in III de Finibus indicat, et in III de Natura deorum. Hanc rem longa oratione prosequitur Q. Lucilius Balbus, qui (Cicerone teste) tantos progressus habet in Stoicis, ut cum excellentibus in eo genere Graecis compararetur. Ex Ecclesiasticis scriptoribus, praeter eos qui in sex dierum opera ex professo scripserunt, hoc negotium elegantissime tractavit Theodoretus, duobus prioribus de Providentia divina sermonibus, atque item quinto: quibus praeterquam quod divinam providentiam ex rerum universitate statuit, edocet manifeste, non solum utilitatem quae mortalibus inde nascitur, sed etiam jucunditatem; et noster Lactant. lib. VII Divin. Instit. c. 3, eamdem quaestionem attingit. BETULEIUS. — Stoicorum. Stoici apud Ciceron. Lucull. ut supra Institut. lib. VII, cap. 4 et 7.

How true is the opinion of the Stoics. Above all of Chrysippus, as Cicero shows in De finibus III, and in De natura deorum III. Quintus Lucilius Balbus pursues this matter in a long speech, a man who (on Cicero's testimony) had made such progress among the Stoics that he could be compared with the outstanding Greeks of that school. Among the church writers, besides those who wrote expressly on the works of the six days, Theodoret treated this matter most elegantly in the first two discourses on divine Providence, and likewise in the fifth: in which, besides establishing divine providence from the universe of things, he plainly teaches not only the usefulness that arises from it for mortals, but also the delight; and our Lactantius, Divine Institutes book VII, chapter 3, touches the same question. BETULEIUS. — Of the Stoics. The Stoics in Cicero's Lucullus, as above, Institutes book VII, chapters 4 and 7.

(printed under page 57)

(5) ‹anchor: Nostra causa› · lemma note, col 115–116

Nostra causa. Legitur Nostri causa apud Buneman. et in hanc variantem notam sequentem exhibet: — Nostri causa. Honor est habendus antiquitati codicis Bonon. ex quo Isaeus recepit nostri causa et Heumannus comprobavit. BUN.

For our sake. "Nostri causa" is the reading in Bunemann, and he gives the following note on this variant: — For our sake. Honour is due to the antiquity of the Bologna codex, from which Isaeus adopted "nostri causa", and Heumann approved it. BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(6) ‹anchor: Ad utilitatem hominis› · lemma note, col 115–116

Ad utilitatem hominis. Mss. 2 Bonon. et 4 al. rec. addunt. solius. Vide infra in usum hominis a Deo facta.

For the use of man. The manuscripts 2 Bologna and 4 other recent ones add "solius" (alone). See below, "made by God for the use of man".

(printed under page 57)

(7) ‹anchor: Molliendorum ciborum› · lemma note, col 115–116

Molliendorum ciborum. Sic lego ex mss. I Reg., 2 Colbert., Baluz. quae vox τῷ igni, quod praecedit, melius convenit, quam molendorum, 2 Bon. et Tax. Et quidem Latinius in sui Lactantii ora scripserat molliendorum vel moliendorum. Lego apud Ciceronem II, de Nat. deor. 134, mollitur cibus. Quod non intelligentes librarii in mss. rec. et in editis mutaverunt in coquendorum; Ultr. et Brun., decoquendorum.

Of softening foods. So I read from the manuscripts 1 Reg., 2 Colbert, Baluze; a word which suits the preceding "fire" better than "molendorum" (of grinding), of 2 Bologna and Tax. And indeed Latinius had written "molliendorum" or "moliendorum" in the margin of his Lactantius. I read in Cicero, De natura deorum II, 134, "food is softened". Not understanding this, the copyists in recent manuscripts and in the editions changed it to "coquendorum" (of cooking); Ultr. and Brun.: "decoquendorum".

(printed under page 57)

(8) ‹anchor: Frugum varietatem› · lemma note, col 115–116

Frugum varietatem. Mss. 6 rec., frugum ubertatem; I Bonon. antiq. et Ultr., fructuum varietatem. — Frugum varietatem. At Bunemannus habet fructuum varietatem, praebetque in hanc lectionem variantem notam sequentem. — Bon., Ultr., Isaeus, approbante quoque Heumanno, fructuum varietatem. Optime, ne ubertas uno numero bis occurrat. Imitatur ita Ciceronem pro lege Manilia, cap. 6: Asia tam..... fertilis, ut et ubertate agrorum et varietate fructuum facile omnibus terris antecellat. BUN.

The variety of crops. Six recent manuscripts: "frugum ubertatem" (abundance of crops); 1 old Bologna and Ultr.: "fructuum varietatem". — The variety of crops. But Bunemann has "fructuum varietatem", and gives the following note on this variant reading. — Bon., Ultr., Isaeus, with Heumann's approval too: "fructuum varietatem". Excellently, so that "ubertas" does not occur twice in one clause. He thus imitates Cicero, For the Manilian Law, chapter 6: "Asia is so..... fertile that in the richness of its fields and the variety of its fruits it easily surpasses all lands." BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(9) ‹anchor: Planis ad segetem› · lemma note, col 115–116

Planis ad segetem. In 15 mss. et editis 3 deest planis ad segetem. — Lignorum; planis ad segetem. Licet haec verba, planis ad segetem, absint a scriptis angl. etc., tamen genuina puto, non modo quia Thomasius et Isaeus non memorarunt ea in suis antiquissimis mss. desiderari, sed etiam quia sunt ultra captum glossatoris, et enumerationi partium aliquid deesset alias; nam verba, terra ad percipiendam fructuum varietatem, pertinent tantum ad fructus: plana vero eleganter dicuntur de campis ut dixi, lib. VII Institut., c. 3: Plana camporum. Cicero de Natura deor., lib. II, cap. 60: Terrenorum commodorum omnis est in homine dominatus. Nos campis, nos montibus fruimur; nostri sunt amnes, nostri lacus; nos fruges serimus, nos arbores, etc. BUN.

The plains for the crop. In 15 manuscripts and 3 editions "planis ad segetem" is missing. — Of timber; the plains for the crop. Although these words, "planis ad segetem", are absent from the English manuscripts, etc., I think them genuine, not only because Thomasius and Isaeus did not mention that they were lacking in their very ancient manuscripts, but also because they are beyond a glossator's reach, and otherwise something would be missing from the enumeration of the parts; for the words "the earth for gathering the variety of fruits" belong to the fruits only, while "plana" is elegantly said of fields, as I said, Institutes book VII, chapter 3: "the plains of the fields". Cicero, De natura deorum book II, chapter 60: "All dominion over the goods of the earth is in man. We enjoy the plains, we the mountains; ours are the rivers, ours the lakes; we sow the crops, we the trees," etc. BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(10) ‹anchor: Copias› · lemma note, col 115–116

Copias. Infra, rerum et copiarum abundantia. Conf. cap. 23. Cicero lib. II de Natura deor., cap. 60: Magnos vero usus affert ad navigia facienda, quorum cursibus suppeditantur omnes undique ad vitam copiae. Plinius liv. VI, ep. 28: Tantum... copiarum, tam urbanarum, quam rusticarum. BUN.

Supplies. Below, "abundance of things and supplies". Compare chapter 23. Cicero, De natura deorum book II, chapter 60: "It brings great uses for building ships, by whose voyages all supplies for life are furnished from every quarter." Pliny, book VI, letter 28: "So much... in supplies, both of town and of country." BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(11) ‹anchor: Ferendas› · lemma note, col 115–116

Ferendas. 1 Reg. rec., 2 Bonon., 2 Colb., Tax., Baluz., perferendas.

To be carried. One recent Reg., 2 Bologna, 2 Colbert, Tax., Baluze: "perferendas".

(printed under page 57)

(12) ‹anchor: Ubertatem omnis generis piscium› · lemma note, col 115–116

Ubertatem omnis generis piscium. Ita omnes fere mss. et editi, melius quam 2 Bonon. et Tax., ad varietatem. Quid enim sibi vult varietas omnis generis piscium? Omne genus piscium nonne varietatem piscium significat?

An abundance of fish of every kind. So almost all the manuscripts and editions, better than 2 Bologna and Tax., "ad varietatem". For what does "a variety of fish of every kind" mean? Does not "every kind of fish" signify a variety of fish?

(printed under page 57)

(13) ‹anchor: Superducit› · lemma note, col 115–116

Superducit. Mss. 1 Reg. rec., et Clarom., superinducit. BUN.

Draws over. The manuscripts 1 recent Reg. and Clermont: "superinducit". BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(14) ‹anchor: Mitescant› · lemma note, col 115–116

Mitescant. Eleganter, ut saepe Columella lib. III, cap. 1, quarum... uvae... ut aliae caloribus mitescunt. Lib. III, 2, 15, citius mitescunt. Lib. IV, cap. 20, 4: priusquam mitescant uvae. BUN.

Should ripen. Elegantly, as often in Columella, book III, chapter 1: "whose... grapes... ripen in the heat like others." Book III, 2, 15: "they ripen more quickly." Book IV, chapter 20, 4: "before the grapes ripen." BUN.

(printed under page 57)

(15) ‹anchor: Caecas tenebris horrentibus noctes› · lemma note, col 115–116

Caecas tenebris horrentibus noctes. Tenebrae eleganter dicuntur horrentes. Plura observavi ad Lact. lib. II Institut., cap. 5: Ne nimium caeca nox terris atque horrentibus tenebris ingravesceret. BUN.

Blind nights with bristling darkness. Darkness is elegantly called "bristling". I have noted more on Lactantius, Institutes book II, chapter 5: "lest night grow too blind and heavy upon the earth with bristling darkness." BUN.

(printed under page 57)

Page

running head: FIRM. LACTANTI (cut off at the image edge; page number 115 at left)
marginal letters: A ‹netur, munitur, gubernatur›; B ‹quaeque generat ex se mundus›; C ‹mss. et edd. Sed extat› (in the notes); D ‹Nostra causa. Legitur› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "netur" of a word broken from the previous column (continetur); full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the right edge) stands below the text block and is not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (from "quam scilicet societatem") are left for the later pass; "redenndum" may be a turned letter rather than damaged type

PL 7:116

mari, non solum ad commercia et copias ex longinquis regionibus ferendas, verum etiam ad ubertatem omnis generis piscium. Quod si his elementis utitur, quibus est proximus, non est dubium, quin et coelo, quoniam et coelestium rerum officia ad fertilitatem terrae, ex qua vivimus, temperata sunt. Sol irrequietis cursibus et spatiis inaequalibus orbes annuos conficit, et aut oriens diem promit ad laborem, aut occidens noctem superducit ad requiem: et tum abscessu longius ad meridiem, tum accessu propius ad septentrionem, hyemis et aestatis vicissitudines facit, ut et hybernis humoribus ac pruinis in ubertatem terra pinguescat, et aestivis caloribus, vel herbidae fruges maturitate durentur, vel quae sunt in humidis, incocta et fervefacta mitescant. Luna quoque nocturni temporis gubernatrix, et amissi ac recepti luminis vicibus menstrua spatia moderatur, et caecas tenebris horrentibus noctes fulgore suae claritatis illustrat; ut aestiva itinera, et expeditiones, et opera sine labore ac molestia confici possint. Siquidem:

the sea, not only for carrying commerce and supplies from distant regions, but also for the abundance of every kind of fish. But if he makes use of these elements, to which he is nearest, there is no doubt that he makes use of the heaven also, since the functions of the heavenly things too have been tempered for the fertility of the earth, from which we live. The sun with unresting courses and unequal spaces completes its yearly circuits, and either rising brings forth the day for labour, or setting draws on the night for rest; and now by its withdrawal farther to the south, now by its approach nearer to the north, it produces the alternations of winter and summer, so that by the wintry moisture and frosts the earth may grow rich unto fruitfulness, and by the summer heats either the grassy crops may be hardened by ripeness, or those things that are in moist places may grow soft, cooked through and heated. The moon also, governess of the night-time, both regulates the monthly spaces by the alternations of its light lost and regained, and lights up with the brightness of its clearness the nights blind with bristling darkness; so that summer journeys and expeditions and works may be accomplished without toil and trouble. For indeed:

Nocte leves stipulae melius, nocte arida prata / Tondentur.

By night the light stubble, by night the dry meadows / are better mown.

Editors' notes and page, col. 116

Page

running head: [cut off at left] RM. LACTANTII 116
marginal letters: A mari, non solum ad commercia; B Luna quoque nocturni temporis; C (in the Variorum notae) Planis ad segetem; D (in the Variorum notae) cursibus suppeditantur omnes
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: running head cut off at the image's left edge, only "RM. LACTANTII" visible; verse quotation (two printed lines) set as one paragraph with " / " at the line break; full-width heading "[VAR]IORUM NOTAE" printed across both columns, cut off at the left edge, below the text, not set; Variorum notae at the page foot (from "notam sequentem" to "ingravesceret. BUN.") not set, left for the later pass

PL 7:117

Astra etiam caetera, vel ortu, vel occasu suo, certis stationibus opportunitates temporum subministrant. Sed et navigiis, quominus errabundo cursu per immensum vagentur, regimen praebent, cum ea rite gubernator observans, ad portum destinati littoris pervehatur. Ventorum spiritu attrahuntur nubes, ut sata imbribus irrigentur, ut vites foetibus, arbusta pomis exuberent. Et haec per orbem vicibus exhibentur, ne desit aliquando, quo vita hominum sustineatur. At enim caeteras animantes eadem terra nutrit, et ejusdem foetu etiam muta pascuntur. Num etiam mutorum causa Deus laboravit? Minim⟨e⟩, quia sunt rationis expertia. Sed intelligimus, et ipsa eodem modo in usum hominis a Deo facta, partim ad cibos, partim ad vestitum, partim ad operis auxilia; ut clarum sit, divinam providentiam rerum

The other stars too, by their rising or by their setting, supply at fixed stations the fit occasions of the seasons. And to ships also they give guidance, so that they may not wander with straying course through the immeasurable [deep], when the helmsman, duly observing them, is carried through to the harbour of the shore he is bound for. By the breath of the winds clouds are drawn together, so that the crops may be watered with rains, so that the vines may abound with their produce and the orchards with fruits. And these things are presented throughout the world in turn, lest there should ever be lacking that by which the life of men is sustained. But, it is said, the same earth nourishes the other living creatures, and even the dumb creatures feed on its produce. Did God then labour for the sake of the dumb creatures too? By no means, since they are devoid of reason. But we understand that they too in the same way were made by God for the use of man, partly for food, partly for clothing, partly as help in work; so that it may be clear that the divine providence, with an abundance of things

Editors' notes and page, col. 117

Footnotes

(printed under page 58)

(1) ‹anchor: Ea rite... observans› · lemma note, col 117–118

[top line cut at the image edge; any notes above it are not visible] Ea rite... observans. Curtius VII, 4: Navigantium modo noctu sidera observant, ad quorum cursum iter dirigunt. Lact. lib. VI, cap. 8: Naves, nisi aliquod coeleste lumen observent, incertis cursibus vagantur. BUN.

Observing them duly... Curtius VII, 4: "Like sailors, they watch the stars by night and steer their course by their motion." Lactantius book VI, chapter 8: "Ships, unless they watch some heavenly light, wander on uncertain courses." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(2) ‹anchor: Pervehatur› · lemma note, col 117–118

Pervehatur. Sic restitui ex omnibus prope mss. et 5 vet. editis. In 2 Reg. rec., Cauc. totidemque excusis est provehatur; in 3 vulgatis, provehamur; in quibusdam editis, provehantur, teste Isaeo, mendose; in Egnat. Paris. 1525, et Graph., provehat.

Should be carried through. So I have restored it from nearly all the manuscripts and 5 old editions. In 2 recent Reg., Cauc. and as many printed copies it is "provehatur"; in 3 printed texts "provehamur"; in some editions, according to Isaeus, "provehantur", faultily; in Egnatius, Paris 1525, and Gryphius (printed "Graph."), "provehat".

(printed under page 58)

(3) ‹anchor: Ventorum spiritu attrahuntur nubes› · lemma note, col 117–118

Ventorum spiritu attrahuntur nubes. L. VII Institut., cap. 6: Cur ventorum spiritus cillent nubes. BUN.

Clouds are drawn on by the breath of the winds. Institutes book VII, chapter 6: "Why the breaths of the winds drive the clouds." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(4) ‹anchor: Vites foetibus› · lemma note, col 117–118

Vites foetibus. Emmann. Vites uvis, sapit glossam. Fructus etiam foetus dicuntur. Cyprianus contra Demetrianum, Arboreis foetibus autumna fecunda, imitatur Virgilii lib. I Georg. 55: Arborei foetus. BUN.

Vines with their offspring. Emmann.: "Vites uvis" (vines with grapes); it smacks of a gloss. Fruits too are called "offspring". Cyprian, Against Demetrianus: "autumns fruitful in the offspring of trees", imitates Virgil, Georgics book I, 55: "the offspring of trees". BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(5) ‹anchor: Arbusta pomis exuberent› · lemma note, col 117–118

Arbusta pomis exuberent. Cyprian. Bon. Patient. Exuberare pomis arbusta. BUN.

The orchards should overflow with fruit. Cyprian, On the Good of Patience: "that the orchards overflow with fruit." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(6) ‹anchor: Per orbem vicibus› · lemma note, col 117–118

Per orbem vicibus. Ut lib. II, cap. 9: Quae orbes temporum perpetuos ac volubiles, quos vocamus annos, alterna per vices successione conficiant. Tacitus lib. 3 Ann., cap. 55: Nisi forte rebus cunctis inest quidam velut orbis, ut quemadmodum temporum vices, ita morum vertantur. BUN.

By turns in a circle. As in book II, chapter 9: "which complete the perpetual, revolving circles of time that we call years, by alternate succession in turn." Tacitus, Annals book 3, chapter 55: "Unless perhaps there is in all things a kind of cycle, so that, as the seasons turn, so do morals." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(7) ‹anchor: Num etiam mutorum causa› · lemma note, col 117–118

Num etiam mutorum causa. Imo illorum causa Deus laboravit, sed tantum secundario, hominis vero primario.

Was it for the sake of dumb animals too? Yes, God laboured for their sake too, but only secondarily, and primarily for man's.

(printed under page 58)

(8) ‹anchor: In usum hominis› · lemma note, col 117–118

In usum hominis. Ita mss. omnes praeter 3 Reg. rec. qui habent, ad usum.

For the use of man. So all the manuscripts except 3 recent Reg., which have "ad usum".

(printed under page 58)

(9) ‹anchor: Ad vestitum› · lemma note, col 117–118

Ad vestitum. Sic a me restitutum ex 6 vet. edit. cunctisque mss. praeter 1 Reg. rec. in quo est vestium, ut in caeteris impressis.

For clothing. So restored by me from 6 old editions and all the manuscripts except 1 recent Reg., in which it is "vestium", as in the other printed editions.

(printed under page 58)

(10) ‹anchor: Ad operis auxilia› · lemma note, col 117–118

Ad operis auxilia. κατ' ἐξοχὴν h. l. significat opus rusticum, agriculturam, quod docet maxime Lact. lib. II, cap. 10. Ut animalia usui hominibus esse possent, alia... ad cibos, alia vero ad vestitum: quae autem magnarum sunt virium, ut in excolenda terra juvarent. BUN.

For help in work. Here "work" means, par excellence, farm work, agriculture, as Lactantius above all teaches, book II, chapter 10: "So that animals might be of use to men, some... for food, others for clothing; and those of great strength to help in tilling the earth." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(11) ‹anchor: Vitam instruere atque ornare› · lemma note, col 117–118

Vitam instruere atque ornare. Hic refer Senecam ad Marciam, cap. 18. Disces, docebisque artes, alias, quae vitam instruant, alias, quae ornent, alias, quae regant. BUN.

To furnish and adorn life. Refer here to Seneca, To Marcia, chapter 18: "You will learn and teach arts, some that furnish life, others that adorn it, others that govern it." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(12) ‹anchor: Sed Academici› · lemma note, col 117–118

Sed Academici, etc. De hoc ex quarto Academicarum Ciceronis supra lib. VII, cap. 4, dictum est. Augustinus contra Manichaeos in Gen. lib. I, cap. 16, respondet illis hominibus eidem errori obnoxiis, [lines not visible above the crop of the right column] in formicarum humilitate laudemus. Et omnino hinc colligit, universitatis integritatem inde compleri. Basilius ad mores transfert. Possunt enim, vel Salomonis testimonio, nos ab inertia ad sedulitatem excitare: quanquam suas naturales virtutes habeat etiam illud animal: et Christus serpentium exemplo sapientiam nobis commendat, etc. BETULEIUS.

But the Academics, etc. Of this, from the fourth book of Cicero's Academics, there was mention above, book VII, chapter 4. Augustine, Against the Manichees, On Genesis book I, chapter 16, answers men liable to the same error, [lines not visible] "...let us praise in the lowliness of ants." And he concludes altogether that the completeness of the universe is fulfilled by this. Basil applies it to morals. For they can, even on Solomon's testimony, rouse us from sloth to diligence; although that creature too has its own natural virtues; and Christ commends wisdom to us by the example of serpents, etc. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 58)

(13) ‹anchor: In gignentibus, et in numero animalium› · lemma note, col 117–118

In gignentibus, et in numero animalium. Omnes libri exhibent in gignentibus. Gignentia sunt genita, quae sunt arbores, frutices. etc. Lact. lib. I, cap. 12: In quo (Sole) est natura et causa gignentium. Eodem sensu dixit de Ira, c. 10. Arbores et quae gignuntur e terra. BUN.

Among growing things, and in the number of animals. All the books have "in gignentibus". "Gignentia" are things begotten, that is, trees, shrubs, etc. Lactantius book I, chapter 12: "In which (the Sun) is the nature and cause of growing things." In the same sense he said in De ira chapter 10: "trees and what is produced from the earth." BUN.

(printed under page 58)

(14) ‹anchor: Quorum adhuc lateat utilitas› · lemma note, col 117–118

Quorum adhuc lateat utilitas. Deest adhuc in 13 mss. et 12 edd. — Quorum adhuc lateat. Testatur Isaeus in variis, haberi voculam adhuc in Bonon. unde illa a Thomasio, Isaeo, Thys., Gall., Sparkio admissa, a Cellario et reliquis non debebat ita fastidiri. BUNEMAN.

Whose usefulness is still hidden. "Adhuc" is missing in 13 manuscripts and 12 editions. — Whose [usefulness] is still hidden. Isaeus testifies in his variants that the little word "adhuc" is in the Bologna manuscript; hence, admitted as it was by Thomasius, Isaeus, Thysius, Gallaeus and Sparke, it ought not to have been so scorned by Cellarius and the rest. BUNEMANN.

(printed under page 58)

(15) ‹anchor: In muribus› · lemma note, col 117–118

In muribus. Neque hoc animalculum tam vile est, quin celebrari etiam ab optimis scriptoribus meruerit. Ducentis nummis in obsidione Massiliana venit, Strabone, Plinio et Valerio auctoribus. Id etiam accidit in Parisiensi anni 1590 et in Rupellensi anni 1628 obsidionibus. Taceo salubritatem; nam murium capitum caudarumque cinerem oculis claritatem inducere tradunt, si ex melle inungatur. Plures ejus virtutes quaere apud Plinium, cum alibi, tum vero praecipue l. XXIX cap. 6. Sextum vero philosophum, qui Adriani temporibus floruit, cap. 21. BETUL.

In mice. Nor is this little creature so worthless that it has not deserved to be celebrated even by the best writers. It sold for two hundred coins in the siege of Massilia, on the authority of Strabo, Pliny and Valerius. The same happened in the sieges of Paris in the year 1590 and of La Rochelle in the year 1628. I say nothing of its healthfulness; for they record that the ash of mice's heads and tails brings clearness to the eyes if it is applied with honey. Look for more of its virtues in Pliny, both elsewhere and especially in book XXIX, chapter 6; and in Sextus the philosopher, who flourished in Hadrian's time, chapter 21. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 58)

(16) ‹anchor: Blattis› · lemma note, col 117–118

Blattis. Inter insecta et Aristoteles et Plin. numerant. Aristoteles suas πρασοκουρίδας nominat, sic enim Gaza transtulit: sed ex scarabeis natas, cum Gaza ex alvearis nasci dicat; unde locus mihi suspectus est. Plinius suas ex humido vapore nasci ait. Virgilius in IV Georg. et Columella lib. X, lucifugas cognominant. Nam et Plinius eas lucem fugere ait, et earum vitam tenebrarum alumnam dicit. Est aliud genus, quod Graeci μύλοχον vocant, vel (ut aliis placet) σίλφην, vermiculum infestum libris et studiosis. Ad prius genus referendam puto medicinam, quae refertur a Plin. sub finem 29, ubi ait quamdam ejus esse, si caput avellatur. Hanc enim tritam una cum rosaceo, auribus mire prodesse, etc. Ergo blattarum etiam in medicinis salubris mortalibus usus aliquis est. BETULEIUS.

In cockroaches. Both Aristotle and Pliny count them among insects. Aristotle names his "leek-beetles", for so Gaza translated it: but as born from beetles, whereas Gaza says they are born from beehives; hence the passage is suspect to me. Pliny says his are born from moist vapour. Virgil in Georgics IV and Columella book X call them "light-shunning". For Pliny too says they shun the light, and calls their life a nursling of darkness. There is another kind, which the Greeks call "mylochos", or (as others prefer) "silphe", a little worm hostile to books and to students. To the former kind I think one should refer the remedy recorded by Pliny near the end of book 29, where he says there is a certain one of it, if its head is torn off. For this, crushed together with oil of roses, is wonderfully good for the ears, etc. So cockroaches too have some healthful use for mortals in medicine. BETULEIUS.

(printed under page 58)

(17) ‹anchor: In serpentibus› · lemma note, col 117–118

In serpentibus. Unicuique notum est, ex illis theriacon, homini valde utile, confici. GALL.

In serpents. Everyone knows that theriac, very useful to man, is made from them. GALLAEUS.

(printed under page 58)

Editors' prose

Certis stationibus. Nihil mutandum. Certae stationes sunt siderum. Vide Senec. Quaest. Nat., lib. vii, cap. 25, et Plinii lib. ii Hist. Nat., cap. 15, sect. 12, extr. BUN.

At fixed stations. Nothing is to be changed. The stations of the stars are fixed. See Seneca, Natural Questions, book VII, chapter 25, and Pliny, Natural History book II, chapter 15, section 12, at the end. BÜNEMANN.

Temporum subministrant. Ms. Cauc. et 7 edit. interserunt, plane. BUN.

Supply [the opportunities] of the seasons. The Cauci manuscript and seven editions insert "plane" ("plainly"). BÜNEMANN.

Sed Academici, etc. De hoc ex quarto Academicarum Ciceronis supra lib. vii, cap. 4, dictum est. Augustinus contra Manichaeos in Gen. lib. i, cap. 16, respondet illis hominibus eidem errori obnoxiis, animantia omnia aut utilia esse, aut perniciosa, aut omnino inutilia et abjecta. De utilibus certa ratio est; perniciosa nos propter peccata exercent. Exemplis nec nostra tempora carent, nec Testamenti Veteris libri; et in iis quae videntur nobis ab omni usu aliena esse, materiam nobis existere, ut Deum etiam in formicarum humilitate laudemus. Et omnino hinc colligit, universitatis integritatem inde compleri. Basilius ad mores transfert. Possunt enim, vel Salomonis testimonio, nos ab inertia ad sedulitatem excitare: quanquam suas naturales virtutes habeat etiam illud animal: et Christus serpentium exemplo sapientiam nobis commendat, etc. BETULEIUS.

But the Academics, etc. Of this it was said above, book VII, chapter 4, from the fourth book of Cicero's Academics. Augustine, Against the Manichaeans, on Genesis, book I, chapter 16, answers men liable to the same error that all living creatures are either useful, or harmful, or wholly useless and abject. Of the useful the reason is certain; the harmful exercise us on account of our sins. Neither our own times nor the books of the Old Testament lack examples; and in those things which seem to us foreign to all use, matter exists for us, so that we may praise God even in the lowliness of ants. And from this he concludes altogether that the completeness of the universe is thereby made full. Basil transfers it to morals. For they can, even by the testimony of Solomon, rouse us from sloth to diligence: although that animal also has its own natural virtues: and Christ commends wisdom to us by the example of serpents, etc. BETULEIUS.

Page

running head: 117 LIBER DE IRA D[EI] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A Astra etiam caetera; B auxilia; ut clarum sit; C mendose; in Egnat. (in the Variorum notae); D primario. (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Minime printed with what looks like a broken e (reads Minimc), set as damaged type; text ends mid-sentence at "rerum"; the page-foot Variorum notae (Certis stationibus ... errori obnoxiis) with their heading VARIORUM NOTAE, printed across the page and cut off at the right edge, are not set (later pass)

PL 7:118

et copiarum abundantia hominum vitam instruere atque ornare voluisse, ob eamque causam, et aerem volucribus, et mare piscibus, et terram quadrupedibus implevit. Sed Academici contra Stoicos disserentes solent quaerere, cur, si Deus omnia hominum causa fecerit, etiam multa contraria, et inimica, et pestifera nobis reperiantur, tam in mari, quam in terra. Quod Stoici veritatem non respicientes ineptissime repulerunt. Aiunt enim, multa esse in gignentibus, et in numero animalium, quorum adhuc lateat utilitas: sed eam processu temporum inveniri; sicut jam plura prioribus saeculis incognita necessitas et usus invenerit. Quae tandem utilitas potest in muribus, in blattis, in serpentibus reperiri, quae homini molesta et perniciosa sunt? An medicina in his aliqua latet? Quae si est, invenietur aliquando,

and of resources, wished to furnish and adorn the life of men, and for that reason filled the air with birds, and the sea with fish, and the earth with four-footed beasts. But the Academics, disputing against the Stoics, are accustomed to ask why, if God made all things for the sake of men, many things are also found that are adverse, and hostile, and pestilent to us, both in the sea and on land. This the Stoics, not regarding the truth, repelled most ineptly. For they say that there are many things among growing things, and in the number of animals, whose usefulness is still hidden, but that it is discovered in the course of time, just as necessity and use have already discovered many things unknown in former ages. What usefulness, pray, can be found in mice, in moths, in serpents, which are troublesome and harmful to man? Or does some medicine lie hidden in them? If there is one, it will be found some day,

Editors' notes and page, col. 118

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 118 (left end cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A et copiarum abundantia; B his aliqua latet; C bri exhibent in gignentibus (in the notes); D cipue l. xxix cap. 6 (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" across both columns not set; the Variorum notae below it (Betuleius, Bunemann, Gallaeus, from "animantia omnia aut utilia esse" to "riacon, homini valde utile, confici. GALL.") left for the later pass; "quae homini" printed with damaged q, read as quae

PL 7:119

nempe adversus mala, cum id illi querantur esse omnino malum. Viperam ferunt exustam in cineremque dilapsam, mederi ejusdem bestiae morsui. Quanto melius fuerat eam prorsus non esse, quam remedium contra se ab ea ipsa desiderari?

namely against evils, since they complain that it is altogether an evil. They say that a viper, burnt and fallen into ashes, heals the bite of that same beast. How much better would it have been for it not to exist at all, than for a remedy against it to be sought from it itself?

Brevius igitur, ac verius respondere potuerunt in hunc modum. Deus cum formasset hominem veluti simulacrum suum, quod erat divini opificii summum, inspiravit ei sapientiam soli, ut omnia imperio ac ditioni suae subjugaret omnibusque mundi commodis uteretur. Proposuit tamen ei et bona et mala; quia sapientiam dedit; cujus omnis ratio in discernendis malis ac bonis sita est. Non potest enim quisquam eligere meliora et scire quid bonum sit, nisi sciat simul rejicere ac vitare quae mala sunt. Invicem sibi alterutra connexa sunt; ut sublato alterutro, utrumque tolli sit necesse. Propositis igitur bonis malisque, tum demum opus suum peragit sapientia; et quidem bonum appetit ad utilitatem, malum rejicit ad salutem. Ergo sicut bona innumerabilia data sunt homini, quibus frui posset; sic etiam mala, quae caveret.

They could therefore have replied more briefly and more truly in this way. God, when He had formed man as His own likeness, which was the highest work of divine craftsmanship, breathed wisdom into him alone, so that he might subject all things to his command and dominion and enjoy all the advantages of the world. Yet He set before him both goods and evils, because He gave him wisdom, the whole method of which lies in distinguishing evils from goods. For no one can choose the better things and know what is good unless he knows at the same time how to reject and avoid the things that are evil. The two are mutually connected with each other, so that if either is removed, both must necessarily be removed. Therefore, when goods and evils have been set before it, then at last wisdom performs its work; and indeed it seeks the good for its usefulness and rejects the evil for its safety. Therefore, just as innumerable goods have been given to man, which he might enjoy, so also evils, which he might beware of.

Editors' notes and page, col. 119

Footnotes

(printed under page 59)

(1) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 119 [begins above the visible area]

… malum. Haec verba omnia Heumannus ejicit. Cellarius et Walch. Nempe adversus mala, cumque illi querentur. Sensus videtur esse: Si vel maxime aliqua medicina in iis (perniciosis) est, et aliquando invenietur, nempe adversus mala erit, et ita medicina ex malis adversus mala; cum Academici velint, nullum omnino malum esse debere, ne medicina ex malis contra mala opus sit. Confer infra, Si malum nullum sit.

… evil. Heumann throws out all these words. Cellarius and Walch. "Namely against evils, and when they complain." The sense seems to be: if there is ever so much some medicine in these (harmful things), and it is sometimes found, it will namely be against evils, and so a medicine from evils against evils; whereas the Academics would have it that there ought to be no evil at all, so that no medicine from evils against evils would be needed. Compare below, "If there were no evil."

(printed under page 59)

(2) ‹Viperam ferunt exustam› · lemma note, printed under col 119

Viperam ferunt exustam, etc. Vide Plinium lib. XXIX Natur. histor. cap. 4. Galenum in Therapeutica ad Pisonem.

"They say that a viper burnt up," etc. See Pliny, Natural History book 29, chapter 4; Galen, in the Therapeutics addressed to Piso.

(printed under page 59)

(3) ‹Quod erat divini opificii summum› · lemma note, printed under col 119

Quod erat divini opificii summum. Abest divini a 16 mss.

"Which was the summit of the divine workmanship." "Divine" is absent from 16 manuscripts.

(printed under page 59)

(4) ‹Et bona et mala› · lemma note, printed under col 119

Et bona et mala, etc. Saepe haec et similia inculcat Lactantius: fallitur autem quam maxime; omnia enim quae Deus creavit, erant valde bona, ut textus sacer innuit. Si igitur nonnullae creaturae homini noxias habent qualitates, non creatoris vitio, sed hominis peccato imputandum; illud enim totum hunc mundum vanitati obnoxium reddidit, ut innuit B. Paulus ad Romanos cap. VIII.

"Both goods and evils," etc. Lactantius often presses this and the like; but he is as wrong as can be, for all things that God created were very good, as the sacred text indicates. If, then, some creatures have qualities harmful to man, this is to be laid not to a fault of the Creator but to man's sin; for that made this whole world subject to vanity, as blessed Paul indicates in Romans, chapter 8.

(printed under page 59)

(5) ‹Ac bonis sita est› · lemma note, printed under col 119

Ac bonis sita est. Sic restitui ex mss. omnibus praeter 3 rec. in quibus est, ut in editis, posita est; mss. quidam, sita sit.

"And is set in goods." So I have restored it from all the manuscripts except three recent ones, in which there is, as in the printed editions, "posita est"; some manuscripts have "sita sit".

(printed under page 59)

(6) ‹Invicem sibi alterutra connexa sunt› · lemma note, printed under col 119

Invicem sibi alterutra connexa sunt. Ita ferunt veterrimi mss. Regio-Put. et Cauc., aliique plures, ac Betuleii edit. In multis aliis, alterutrum connexa sunt.— Hanc ultimam lectionem recipit Buneman, et notam sequentem exhibet. — Invicem sibi alterutrum connexa sunt. Goth. et Betul. alterutra, numero multitudinis, elegantius sane. Ita ante nostrum Tertullianus de Resurr. Carn., cap. 44, Membra alterutrum sumus. Cyprianus lib. III Testim. n. 9. Alterutrum onera sustinete, et alibi. Ipse Lactantius in Epit. c. 29: Vides... bonum et malum ita sibi esse connexa, ut alterum sine altero constare non possit. BUN.

"Are joined each to the other mutually" (alterutra). So the very old manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and Caucianus read, and many others, and Betuleius's edition. In many others, "alterutrum connexa sunt." — Bünemann adopts this last reading and gives the following note. — "Invicem sibi alterutrum connexa sunt." The Gotha manuscript and Betuleius have "alterutra", in the plural, certainly more elegant. So before our author Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, ch. 44: "We are members one of another (alterutrum)." Cyprian, Testimonies book 3, no. 9: "Bear one another's (alterutrum) burdens," and elsewhere. Lactantius himself in the Epitome, ch. 29: "You see … that good and evil are so joined to each other that the one cannot exist without the other." Bünemann.

(printed under page 59)

(7) ‹Sublato alterutro› · lemma note, printed under col 119, runs on to the foot of col 120

Sublato alterutro, etc. 1 Bonon. antiq., altero. Scripti Cauc., Ultr., alterutra. Huic quaestioni non satis apposite respondet Lactantius. Cum enim Deus sui operis inspector, quaecunque totius naturae complexu continebantur, proprio effato bona pronuntiaret, ita ut quae deinceps mala acciderint, sibi homo necesse sit accepta referat, quippe quae non naturae, sed peccati humani sequela essent: tam longe abest, ut quod infra asserit Lactantius, sublato alterutro, […] mine decedat, quod omni contrarietatis metu immunes, felici necessitate in alteram dumtaxat partem ferantur. Haec itaque poenae mala consecuta sunt malum culpae, quod in se Adamus admisit, securus alioqui a prioribus futurus, si innocens perstitisset. SPARKIUS.

"When either one is taken away," etc. One old Bologna manuscript has "altero"; the manuscripts Caucianus and Ultrajectinus, "alterutra". Lactantius does not answer this question aptly enough. For since God, the inspector of his own work, pronounced by his own word good whatever was contained in the compass of all nature, so that whatever evils befell afterwards man must needs lay to his own account, since they were the consequence not of nature but of human sin: so far is it from being true, as Lactantius asserts below, that "when either one is taken away" […] … loses, because, free from all fear of a contrary, they are borne by a happy necessity to the one side only. These evils of punishment, then, followed the evil of guilt which Adam committed in himself, who would otherwise have been safe from the former had he persisted in innocence. Sparke.

(printed under page 59)

(8) ‹Tollitur omnis materia sapientiae› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Tollitur omnis materia sapientiae. Falsum hoc esse patet in Adamo; fuit enim antequam mala essent.— Tollitur omnis materia sapientiae. Et fuit sapientia antequam mala essent, et erit perpetua, sublatis malis omnibus. Caute ergo, quae hoc loco dicuntur, accipienda sunt, cum poenae mala non ante culpam hominis fuerint, neque ad exercitium sapientiae instituta. CELL.

"All the matter of wisdom is taken away." That this is false is plain in Adam, for he existed before there were evils. — "All the matter of wisdom is taken away." Wisdom both existed before there were evils and will be everlasting when all evils are taken away. What is said in this place must therefore be taken with caution, since the evils of punishment did not exist before man's guilt, nor were they established for the exercise of wisdom. Cellarius.

(printed under page 59)

(9) ‹Cum quocumque porrexerit› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Cum quocumque porrexerit. Abest cum a 10 mss. totidemque editis.

"When it has stretched out to anything whatever." "Cum" is absent from 10 manuscripts and as many printed editions.

(printed under page 59)

(10) ‹Naturae... accommodatum› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Naturae... accommodatum. Imitatur Ciceronem, l. V, fin., cap. 9: Coeptat et ea, quae naturae apta sentit, appetere et propulsare contraria. Ergo omni animali illud, quod appetit positum est in eo, quod naturae est accommodatum. BUN.

"Suited … to nature." He imitates Cicero, De finibus book 5, ch. 9: "It begins both to seek the things it perceives to be fitted to its nature and to repel their contraries. Therefore for every animal what it seeks lies in that which is suited to its nature." Bünemann.

(printed under page 59)

(11) ‹Accommodatum sit› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Accommodatum sit. Sic restitui ex antiquiss. mss. 1 Bonon., Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg. rec., 2 Colbert., Baluz. et Clarom. in marg. In aliis et editis commodum.

"Be suited." So I have restored it from the very old manuscripts: one Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, one other recent Royal, two Colbert, Baluze's, and the Claromontanus in the margin. In the others and in the printed editions, "commodum".

(printed under page 59)

(12) ‹Vitale ac salubre› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Vitale ac salubre. Isa reposui ex 2 veterrimis et optimis mss. Bonon., Regio-Put. Et recte; respicitur enim ad coenam supra. Aliis est utile. — Vitale ac salubre. Legitur utile ac salubre apud Buneman. Approbat tamen in nota sequenti nostram lectionem. — Singulariter idque eleganter Bonon. Vitale ac salubre; ut vitalis sit ad vitam utilis. Videntur nonnunquam hae voces confusae. Forte aliquis suspicitur, l. VI, cap. 13, pro vitalis viri, legendum, utilis viri. BUN.

"Life-giving and wholesome." So [printed "Isa"] I have restored it from the two oldest and best manuscripts, the Bologna and the Regio-Puteanus. And rightly, for it looks back to the meal mentioned above. Others have "utile". — "Vitale ac salubre." Bünemann reads "utile ac salubre"; yet in the following note he approves our reading. — Singularly, and elegantly, the Bologna manuscript has "vitale ac salubre", so that "vitalis" means useful for life. These words seem sometimes to have been confused. Perhaps someone suspects that in book 6, ch. 13, for "vitalis viri" we should read "utilis viri". Bünemann.

(printed under page 59)

(13) ‹Opus nobis› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Opus nobis. Sic emendavi ex mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg., 2 Colbert., Baluz., Tax. In caeteris libris legitur bonis, mendose.

"Need for us." So I have corrected it from the manuscripts: two Bologna, one Royal, two Colbert, Baluze's, and Tax. In the other books it reads "bonis", wrongly.

(printed under page 59)

(14) ‹Quae nisi fuissent proposita› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Quae nisi fuissent proposita. Scilicet mala. Vide praeced. et in fine capitis. Ita correxi ex editis vet. Rom., Betul., Is. et omnibus mss., praeter 1 Reg. rec. et 1 Colbert. in quibus legitur fuisset, ut in 15 vulgatis.

"Which, had they not been set before us." Namely, evils. See the preceding, and at the end of the chapter. So I have corrected it from the old Roman edition, Betuleius, Isaeus, and all the manuscripts, except one recent Royal and one Colbert, in which it reads "fuisset", as in 15 common editions.

(printed under page 59)

(15) ‹Rationale animal non essemus› · lemma note, printed under col 120

Rationale animal non essemus. An Adam utique in paradiso non fuit animal rationale? num homines (continues)

"We would not be a rational animal." Was Adam in paradise, then, not a rational animal? Surely men … (continues)

(printed under page 59)

Editors' prose

Nempe adversus mala, cum id illi querantur. . . . . malum. Haec verba omnia Heumannus ejicit. Cellarius et Walch. Nempe adversus mala, cumque illi querentur. Sensus videtur esse: Si vel maxime aliqua medicina in iis (perniciosis) est, et aliquando invenietur, nempe adversus mala erit, et ita medicina ex malis adversus mala; cum Academici velint, nullum omnino malum esse debere, ne medicina ex malis contra mala opus sit. Confer infra, Si malum nullum sit.

Namely against evils, since they complain of this . . . . . evil. Heumann strikes out all these words. Cellarius and Walch: "Namely against evils, and since they would complain." The sense seems to be: if there is any remedy at all in these (harmful things), and it is sometimes found, it will namely be against evils, and so a remedy from evils against evils; since the Academics would have it that there ought to be no evil at all, lest a remedy from evils against evils should be needed. Compare below, "If there is no evil."

Viperam ferunt exustam, etc. Vide Plinium lib. XXIX Natur. histor. cap. 4. Galenum in Therapeutica ad Pisonem.

They say that a viper burnt, etc. See Pliny, Natural History book XXIX, ch. 4; Galen in the Therapeutics addressed to Piso.

Quod erat divini opificii summum. Abest divini a 16 mss.

Which was the summit of the divine workmanship. "Divine" is absent from 16 manuscripts.

Both goods and evils, etc. Lactantius often presses these and similar points; but he is very greatly mistaken, for all things that God created were very good, as the sacred text indicates. If therefore some creatures have qualities harmful to man, this is to be imputed not to a fault of the Creator but to the sin of man; for that sin made this whole world subject to vanity, as blessed Paul indicates in Romans ch. VIII.

Ac bonis sita est. Sic restitui ex mss. omnibus praeter 3 rec. in quibus est, ut in editis, posita est; mss. quidam, sita sit.

And is set in goods. So I have restored it from all the manuscripts except 3 recent ones, in which there is, as in the printed editions, "is placed"; certain manuscripts have "may be set".

Invicem sibi alterutra connexa sunt. Ita ferunt veterrimi mss. Regio-Put. et Cauc., aliique plures, ac Betuleii edit. In multis aliis, alterutrum connexa sunt.—Hanc ultimam lectionem recipit Buneman, et notam sequentem exhibet.—Invicem sibi alterutrum connexa sunt. Goth. et Betul. alterutra, numero multitudinis, elegantius sane. Ita ante nostrum Tertullianus de Resurr. Carn., cap. 44, Membra alterutrum sumus. Cyprianus lib. III Testim. n. 9. Alterutrum onera sustinete, et alibi. Ipse Lactantius in Epit. c. 29: Vides... bonum et malum ita sibi esse connexa, ut alterum sine altero constare non possit. BUN.

The two are joined each to the other. So the very old manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and Caucius read, and many others, and Betuleius's edition. In many others, "are joined one to another" (alterutrum).—Bünemann adopts this last reading and gives the following note.—Are joined one to another. The Gotha manuscript and Betuleius have "alterutra", in the plural, more elegantly indeed. So before our author Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, ch. 44: "We are members one of another." Cyprian, Testimonies book III, no. 9: "Bear one another's burdens," and elsewhere. Lactantius himself in the Epitome, ch. 29: "You see . . . that good and evil are so joined to each other that the one cannot subsist without the other." Bünemann.

Sublato alterutro, etc. 1 Bonon. antiq., altero. Scripti Cauc., Ultr., alterutra. Huic quaestioni non satis apposite respondet Lactantius. Cum enim Deus sui operis inspector, quaecunque totius naturae complexu continebantur, proprio effato bona pronuntiaret, ita ut quae deinceps mala acciderint, sibi homo necesse sit accepta referat, quippe quae non naturae, sed peccati humani sequela essent: tam longe abest, ut quod infra asserit Lactantius, sublato alterutro, utrumque tolli sit necesse, ut coeli incolis nihil eo nomine decedat, quod omni contrarietatis metu immunes, felici necessitate in alteram dumtaxat partem ferantur. Haec itaque poenae mala consecuta sunt malum culpae, quod in se Adamus admisit, securus alioqui a prioribus futurus, si innocens perstitisset. SPARKIUS.

When either is taken away, etc. One old Bologna manuscript has "altero" (the one). The manuscripts of Caucius and Utrecht have "alterutra". Lactantius answers this question not quite aptly. For since God, the beholder of His own work, by His own utterance pronounced good whatever was contained in the compass of all nature, so that whatever evils have befallen since then man must needs put down to his own account, since they were the consequence not of nature but of human sin, it is so far from being the case, as Lactantius asserts below, that "when either is taken away both must be taken away", that the dwellers in heaven lose nothing on that score, because, free from all fear of the contrary, they are borne by a happy necessity towards the one side only. These evils of punishment, therefore, followed upon the evil of guilt which Adam committed against himself, who would otherwise have been secure from the former had he persevered in innocence. Sparke.

Tollitur omnis materia sapientiae. Falsum hoc esse patet in Adamo; fuit enim antequam mala essent.—Tollitur omnis materia sapientiae. Et fuit sapientia antequam mala essent, et erit perpetua, sublatis malis omnibus. Caute ergo, quae hoc loco dicuntur, accipienda sunt, cum poenae mala non ante culpam hominis fuerint, neque ad exercitium sapientiae instituta. CELL.

All the matter of wisdom is taken away. That this is false is plain in Adam; for he existed before there were evils.—All the matter of wisdom is taken away. Wisdom both existed before there were evils, and will be everlasting when all evils are taken away. What is said in this place, therefore, is to be taken with caution, since the evils of punishment did not exist before man's guilt, nor were they instituted for the exercise of wisdom. Cellarius.

Cum quocumque porrexerit. Abest cum a 10 mss. totidemque editis.

Since, wherever he has stretched out. "Cum" (since) is absent from 10 manuscripts and as many printed editions.

To nature . . . suited. He imitates Cicero, De finibus V, ch. 9: "It begins both to seek those things which it perceives to be fitted to its nature and to repel the contrary. Therefore for every animal that which it seeks lies in what is suited to its nature." Bünemann.

Accommodatum sit. Sic restitui ex antiquiss. mss. 1 Bonon., Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg. rec., 2 Colbert., Baluz. et Clarom. in marg. In aliis et editis commodum.

Be suited. So I have restored it from the very old manuscripts, 1 Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, 1 other recent Royal, 2 Colbert, Baluze's, and the Clermont in the margin. In the others and in the printed editions, "commodum" (convenient).

Vitale ac salubre. Isa reposui ex 2 veterrimis et optimis mss. Bonon., Regio-Put. Et recte; respicitur enim ad coenam supra. Aliis est utile.—Vitale ac salubre. Legitur utile ac salubre apud Buneman. Approbat tamen in nota sequenti nostram lectionem.—Singulariter idque eleganter Bonon. Vitale ac salubre; ut vitalis sit ad vitam utilis. Videntur nonnunquam hae voces confusae. Forte aliquis suspicitur, l. VI, cap. 13, pro vitalis viri, legendum, utilis viri. BUN.

Life-giving and wholesome. So (as printed, "Isa") I have restored it from 2 very old and very good manuscripts, the Bologna and the Regio-Puteanus. And rightly, for the reference is to the banquet above. Others have "useful".—Life-giving and wholesome. Bünemann reads "useful and wholesome". In the following note, however, he approves our reading.—The Bologna manuscript, singularly and elegantly, has "Life-giving and wholesome"; so that "vitalis" means "useful for life". These words seem sometimes to have been confused. Perhaps someone may suspect (as printed, "suspicitur") that in book VI, ch. 13, for "vitalis viri" one should read "utilis viri". Bünemann.

Opus nobis. Sic emendavi ex mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg., 2 Colbert., Baluz., Tax. In caeteris libris legitur bonis, mendose.

Needful to us. So I have corrected it from the manuscripts 2 Bologna, 1 Royal, 2 Colbert, Baluze's, Tax. In the other books "bonis" (to the good) is read, wrongly.

Which, had they not been set before us. That is, evils. See the preceding, and at the end of the chapter. So I have corrected it from the old Roman edition, Betuleius, Isaeus, and all the manuscripts, except 1 recent Royal and 1 Colbert, in which "fuisset" (singular) is read, as in 15 common editions.

Rationale animal non essemus. An Adam utique in paradiso non fuit animal rationale? num homines

We should not be a rational animal. Was not Adam, then, a rational animal in paradise? Do men

Page

running head: 119 FIRM. LACTANTII (cut off at the right edge of the image; the rest of the head is not visible)
marginal letters: A ‹nempe adversus mala, cum id illi›; B ‹alterutra connexa sunt; ut sublato›; C ‹contra mala opus sit. Confer infra› (in the notes); D ‹tuleii edit. In multis aliis› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: first letter of "nempe" damaged but legible; column ends at "caveret." with the sentence complete; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the edge) stands between the text and the notes and is not set; the Variorum Notae beginning "Nempe adversus mala, cum id illi querantur" are page-foot commentary left for the later pass and not set

PL 7:120

Nam si malum nullum sit, nullum periculum, nihil denique, quod loedere hominem possit, tollitur omnis materia sapientiae, nec erit homini necessaria. Positis enim tantummodo in conspectu bonis, quid opus est cogitatione, intellectu, scientia, ratione? cum quocunque porrexerit manum, id naturae aptum et accommodatum sit: ut si quis velit apparatissimam coenam iufantibus, qui nondum sapiant, apponere, utique id appetent singuli, quo unumquemque aut impetus, aut fames, aut etiam casus attraxerit, et quidquid sumpserint, id illis erit vitale ac salubre. Quid igitur nocebit, eos sicuti sunt, permanere et semper infantes ac nescios esse rerum? Si autem admisceas vel amara, vel inutilia, vel etiam venenata, decipiuntur utique per ignorantiam boni ac mali, nisi accedat his sapientia, per quam habeant malorum rejectionem bonorumque delectum.

For if there were no evil, no danger, nothing at all, in short, that could harm man, all the material of wisdom is taken away, nor will it be necessary for man. For if only goods were set before our eyes, what need is there of reflection, understanding, knowledge, reason? since wherever he stretched out his hand, that would be suited and accommodated to his nature: as if someone should wish to set a most sumptuous dinner before infants, who are not yet wise, each of them will certainly go for that to which impulse, or hunger, or even chance has drawn each one, and whatever they take, that will be life-giving and wholesome for them. What harm, then, will it do for them to remain as they are and to be always infants and ignorant of things? But if you mix in things either bitter, or useless, or even poisonous, they are certainly deceived through ignorance of good and evil, unless wisdom comes to their aid, by which they may have the rejection of evils and the choice of goods.

Vides ergo, magis propter mala opus nobis esse sapientia: quae nisi fuissent proposita, rationale animal non essemus. Quod si haec ratio vera est, quam

You see therefore that we have need of wisdom rather on account of evils: and if these had not been set before us, we would not be a rational animal. But if this reasoning is true, which

Editors' notes and page, col. 120

Page

running head: ‹...›RM. LACTANTII 120 (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A Nam si malum nullum sit; B nisi accedat his sapientia; C patet in Adamo (in the Variorum notae below the text); D optimis mss. Bonon. (in the Variorum notae below the text)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "loedere" may be an intended old spelling rather than a misprint; "unumquemque" is blurred in the scan (looks like uuumquemque) and is set as the intended word; "sapientia" is printed before the colon (ablative with opus est) and is set as printed; the full-width heading "‹V›ARIORUM NOTAE." below the text block, cut off at the left edge, is not set; the Variorum notae beneath it (from "utrumque tolli sit necesse" to "num homines") are left for the later apparatus pass

PL 7:121

stoici nullo modo videre potuerunt, dissolvitur etiam argumentum illud Epicuri. Deus, inquit, aut vult tollere mala et non potest; aut potest et non vult; aut neque vult, neque potest; aut et vult et potest. Si vult et non potest, imbecillis est; quod in Deum non cadit. Si potest et non vult, invidus; quod aeque alienum a Deo. Si neque vult, neque potest, et invidus et imbecillis est; ideoque neque Deus. Si vult et potest, quod solum Deo convenit, unde ergo sunt mala? aut cur illa non tollit? Scio plerosque philosophorum, qui providentiam defendunt, hoc argumento perturbari solere et invitos pene adigi, ut Deum nihil curare fateantur, quod maxime quaerit Epicurus. Sed nos ratione perspecta, formidolosum hoc argumentum facile dissolvimus. Deus enim potest quidquid velit, et imbecillitas, vel invidia in Deo nulla est; potest igitur mala tollere: sed non vult; nec ideo tamen invidus est. Idcirco enim non tollit, quia sapientiam (sicut edocui) simul tribuit, et plus est boni ac jucunditatis in sapientia, quam in malis molestiae. Sapientia enim facit, ut etiam Deum cognoscamus et per eam cognitionem immortalitatem assequamur; quod est summum bonum. Itaque nisi prius malum agnoverimus, nec bonum poterimus agnoscere. Sed hoc non vidit Epicurus, nec alius quisquam; si tollantur mala, tolli pariter sapientiam, nec ulla in homine virtutis remanere vestigia, cujus ratio in sustinenda et superanda malorum acerbitate consistit. Itaque propter exiguum compendium sublatorum malorum maximo et vero et proprio nobis bono careremus. Constat igitur omnia propter hominem proposita, tam mala, quam etiam bona.

the Stoics were in no way able to see, that argument of Epicurus too is dissolved. God, he says, either wishes to take away evils and cannot; or can and does not wish to; or neither wishes nor can; or both wishes and can. If He wishes and cannot, He is weak; which does not apply to God. If He can and does not wish to, He is envious; which is equally foreign to God. If He neither wishes nor can, He is both envious and weak, and therefore not God either. If He both wishes and can, which alone befits God, whence then are evils? or why does He not take them away? I know that most of the philosophers who defend providence are accustomed to be disturbed by this argument and to be driven, almost against their will, to confess that God cares for nothing, which is exactly what Epicurus is after. But we, having examined the reasoning, easily dissolve this formidable argument. For God can do whatever He wishes, and there is no weakness or envy in God; He can therefore take away evils; but He does not wish to; and yet He is not on that account envious. For He does not take them away for this reason, that He at the same time bestowed wisdom (as I have shown), and there is more good and pleasantness in wisdom than there is trouble in evils. For wisdom brings it about that we also know God, and through that knowledge attain immortality; which is the highest good. Therefore unless we have first recognized evil, neither shall we be able to recognize good. But Epicurus did not see this, nor did anyone else: that if evils are taken away, wisdom is likewise taken away, and no traces of virtue remain in man, whose essence consists in enduring and overcoming the bitterness of evils. Therefore for the sake of the slight gain of having evils removed we should be deprived of the greatest, true and proper good that is ours. It is established, therefore, that all things have been set before us for the sake of man, evils as well as goods.

Editors' notes and page, col. 121

Footnotes

(printed under page 60)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 121

(continued) hanc proprietatem in coelis amittent, eo quod ibi nulla sint mala? GALLAEUS.

(printed under page 60)

(1) ‹Quam stoïci nullo modo videre potuerunt› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Quam stoïci nullo modo videre potuerunt, dissolvitur. Mss. 15 et edit. 2 vet. Rom., Parrhas., Tridin., Florent., quam stoïci posuerunt, dissolvitur; non recte, quia supra dixerat stoïcos repulisse quaestionem academicorum, etc. ISAEUS. — Quam stoïci nullo modo videre potuerunt. Stoïci illam rationem de sapientia nullibi posuerunt, et ipse Lactantius infra affirmat neque Epicurum, nec alium quemquam hoc vidisse; ergo nec stoïci illam rationem posuerunt. BUN.

"Which the Stoics could in no way see, is resolved." Fifteen manuscripts and two editions, the old Roman, Parrhasius's, the Tridinum and the Florentine, have "which the Stoics put forward, is resolved"; wrongly, because above he had said that the Stoics repelled the Academics' question, etc. Isaeus. — "Which the Stoics could in no way see." The Stoics nowhere put forward that argument about wisdom, and Lactantius himself affirms below that neither Epicurus nor anyone else saw this; therefore the Stoics did not put forward that argument either. Bünemann.

(printed under page 60)

(2) ‹Si vult et potest, quod› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Si vult et potest, quod. Ita antiquissimi mss. 1 Bon., 1 Regio-Put., 1 Colbert. et editi fere omnes. In 14 mss. rec. et impressis Rom. et Gymnic. legitur, si et vult et potest, quod.

"If he both wills and is able, which." So the oldest manuscripts, one Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, one Colbert, and almost all the printed editions. In 14 recent manuscripts and in the Roman and Gymnich printings it reads "si et vult et potest, quod".

(printed under page 60)

(3) ‹Sicut edocui› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Sicut edocui. Ita restitutum ex 4 Reg. inter quos est Regio-Put., aliisque multis, accedentibus 2 al. Reg., 3 Colb., Clarom. et ed. Rom. 1470, quibus est et docui.

"As I have shown." So restored from four Royal manuscripts, among them the Regio-Puteanus, and many others, with the support of two other Royal, three Colbert, the Claromontanus and the Roman edition of 1470, which have "et docui".

(printed under page 60)

(4) ‹Et plus est boni› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Et plus est boni. Ex Regio-Put., 3 Colbert. aliisque addidi est, pro quo legitur et in 6 scriptis; deest autem in caeteris.

"And there is more of good." From the Regio-Puteanus, three Colbert and others I have added "est", in place of which six manuscripts read "et"; it is lacking in the rest.

(printed under page 60)

(5) ‹Sapientia enim facit› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Sapientia enim facit. Ita lego ex vetustissimis mss. 2 Bonon., Regio-Put., aliisque 2 Reg., 6 Colb. sexque aliis et ed. Betul. ac Is. non ut in mss. 3 Reg. rec. et in quamplurimis editis, Sapientia etiam. Nam causam affert, cur in sapientia plus sit boni ac jucunditatis, neque placet hic et iterum mox etiam.

"For wisdom makes." So I read from the oldest manuscripts, two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, two other Royal, six Colbert and six others, and the editions of Betuleius and Isaeus; not, as in three recent Royal manuscripts and very many printed editions, "Sapientia etiam". For he gives the reason why there is more good and pleasure in wisdom, and "etiam" here and again shortly after does not please.

(printed under page 60)

(6) ‹Cujus ratio in sustinenda› · lemma note, printed under col 121

Cujus ratio in sustinenda, etc. Praepositionem in addidi ex omnibus fere mss. et 6 editis. Abest a 2 Reg. et excusis 8.

"Whose principle lies in enduring," etc. I have added the preposition "in" from nearly all the manuscripts and six editions. It is absent from two Royal manuscripts and eight printed copies.

(printed under page 60)

(7) ‹Recto corpore› · lemma note, printed under col 121, runs on to the foot of col 122

Recto corpore Ita quamplurimi mss. inter quos sunt veterrimi Bonon. et Reg. At 14 rec. et totidem impressi, rectus corpore.

"With upright body." So very many manuscripts, among them the oldest Bologna and Royal. But 14 recent ones and as many printed editions have "rectus corpore".

(printed under page 60)

(8) ‹Ideoque illi› · lemma note, printed under col 122

Ideoque illi, etc. In mss. 1 Lips. Ideoque illi titulum tantum honoris. In nullo alio, quod sciam, ita legitur, ideoque nihil mutare volui.

"And therefore to him," etc. In one Leipzig manuscript: "Ideoque illi titulum tantum honoris." In no other, so far as I know, is it so read, and therefore I have chosen to change nothing.

(printed under page 60)

(9) ‹Rerum omnium dominaretur› · lemma note, printed under col 122

Rerum omnium dominaretur. Per Graecismum; insolens enim constructio dominari cum gignendi casu. Apud Ciceronem jungitur quarto vel sexto casui cum praepositione in.

"Should be lord of all things." By a Grecism; for "dominari" with the genitive is an unusual construction. In Cicero it is joined to the accusative or ablative with the preposition "in".

(printed under page 60)

(10) ‹Utique justissimum est et eum qui tanta praestiterit› · lemma note, printed under col 122

Utique justissimum est et eum qui tanta praestiterit, amare et hominem, qui sit. Sic lego et emendo ex mss. Regio-Put., 2 Bonon., Tax., Em., 1 Colb., quod rectius et purius est, quam, Utique justissimum est et Deum colere, videlicet eum qui tanta praestiterit et amare hominem, etc., quod glossam sapit, ut in ms. Cauc. in 3 editis, praestitit; in 5 vulgatis, demptis conjunctionibus. 1 Reg., 2 Colb. et Baluz. ut in textu, nisi quod pro et eum, habent eum videlicet; 1 Lips. et 5 impressi, et Deum colere qui tanta praestiterit et amare hominem qui, etc. Vide infra, Deum et hominem caros habere.—Eum qui tanta praestiterit, amare et hominem. Valde antiquus codex Cauci, Fasit., Gryph., Torn., Betul., Walch., Heumann.: Justissimum est et Deum colere, videlicet eum, qui tanta praestiterit, et amare hominem. Hanc lectionem puto verissimam, verbumque colere est necessarium; nam hoc ipso numero dixit: Deus hominem suum voluit esse cultorem; et infra, Deum honorare... hominem diligere. Conf., cap. 6. BUN.

"It is surely most just both to love him who has bestowed such things, and man, who is." So I read and correct from the manuscripts Regio-Puteanus, two Bologna, Tax, Em., and one Colbert, which is more correct and purer than "It is surely most just both to worship God, namely him who has bestowed such things, and to love man," etc., which smacks of a gloss, as in the Caucianus manuscript; in three editions "praestitit"; in five common editions, with the conjunctions removed. One Royal, two Colbert and Baluze's read as in the text, except that for "et eum" they have "eum videlicet"; one Leipzig and five printed editions, "and to worship God who has bestowed such things and to love man who," etc. See below, "to hold God and man dear." — "Him who has bestowed such things, to love, and man." The very old codex of Cauchius, Fasitelius, Gryphius, Tornaesius, Betuleius, Walch, Heumann: "It is most just both to worship God, namely him who has bestowed such things, and to love man." I think this reading the truest, and the verb "colere" is necessary; for in this very section he said, "God willed man to be his worshipper"; and below, "to honour God … to love man." Compare ch. 6. Bünemann.

(printed under page 60)

(11) ‹Unde intelligitur› · lemma note, printed under col 122

Unde intelligitur. Mss. 2 Bonon., 1 Reg. rec., 2 Colbert., Tax., Baluz., intelligimus.

"Whence it is understood." The manuscripts two Bologna, one recent Royal, two Colbert, Tax and Baluze's have "intelligimus" ("we understand").

(printed under page 60)

(12) ‹Omnes homines esse justos› · lemma note, printed under col 122

Omnes homines esse justos. Ex omnibus mss. et (continues)

"That all men be just." From all the manuscripts and … (continues)

(printed under page 60)

Page

running head: 121 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the image's right edge)
marginal letters: A ‹stoici nullo modo videre potuerunt›; B ‹quid velit, et imbecillitas›; C ‹mus. Constat igitur omnia›; D ‹1 Regio-Put., 1 Colbert. et editi› (in the notes area)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (stoici, lowercase); full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE (cut off at right edge) stands between the text and the notes, not set; Variorum notes at page foot (Gallaeus, Isaeus, Bun., variants) left for the later pass; editors' matter set: (none)

PL 7:122

CAPUT XIV.

Chapter XIV.

Cur Deus fecerit hominem.

Why God made man.

Sequitur ut ostendam cur fecerit hominem ipsum Deus. Sicut mundum propter hominem machinatus est, ita ipsum propter se, tamquam divini templi antistitem, spectatorem operum rerumque coelestium. Solus est enim, qui sentiens, capaxque rationis, intelligere possit Deum, qui opera ejus admirari, virtutem potestatemque perspicere; idcirco enim consilio, mente, prudentia instructus est. Ideo solus praeter caeteras animantes recto corpore ac statu factus est, ut ad contemplationem parentis sui excitatus esse videatur. Ideo sermonem solus accepit, ac linguam cogitationis interpretem, ut enarrare majestatem domini sui possit. Postremo idcirco ei cuncta subjecta sunt, ut factori atque artifici Deo esset ipse subjectus. Si ergo Deus hominem suum voluit esse cultorem, ideoque illi tantum honoris attribuit, ut rerum omnium dominaretur; utique justissimum est et eum qui tanta praestiterit, amare et hominem, qui sit nobiscum divini juris societate conjunctus. Nec enim fas est cultorem Dei a Dei cultore violari. Unde intelligitur religionis ac justitiae causa esse hominem figuratum. Cujus rei testis est Marcus Tullius in libris de Legibus, ita dicens: « Sed omnium, quae in doctorum hominum disputatione versantur, nihil est profecto praestabilius, quam plane intelligi, nos ad justitiam esse natos. » Quod si est verissimum, Deus ergo vult omnes homines esse justos, id est, Deum et hominem caros habere: Deum scilicet honorare tamquam patrem,

It follows that I should show why God made man himself. Just as He contrived the world for the sake of man, so [He made] man himself for His own sake, as the priest of a divine temple, the spectator of His works and of heavenly things. For he alone is the one who, being sentient and capable of reason, can understand God, who can admire His works and perceive His power and might; for it is for this reason that he has been furnished with counsel, mind and prudence. Therefore he alone, beyond the other living creatures, was made with an upright body and stance, so that he might seem to have been roused to the contemplation of his parent. Therefore he alone received speech, and a tongue, the interpreter of thought, so that he might be able to declare the majesty of his Lord. Lastly, for this reason all things have been made subject to him, that he himself might be subject to God, his maker and craftsman. If, therefore, God willed man to be His worshipper, and for that reason bestowed on him so much honour that he should have dominion over all things, it is surely most just both to love Him who has bestowed such great things, and to love man, who is joined with us in the fellowship of divine law. For it is not right that a worshipper of God should be violated by a worshipper of God. Whence it is understood that man was fashioned for the sake of religion and justice. Of this Marcus Tullius is a witness in the books On the Laws, saying thus: "But of all the things that are treated in the disputation of learned men, nothing is assuredly more excellent than to understand plainly that we are born for justice." But if this is most true, God therefore wills all men to be just, that is, to hold God and man dear: namely, to honour God as a father,

Editors' notes and page, col. 122

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 122 (left edge cut off in the image)
marginal letters: A ‹CAPUT XIV.›; B ‹interpretem, ut enarrare›; C ‹mines esse justos›; D ‹tius et purius est› (in the Variorum notes, not the text block)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "sunt" (cuncta subjecta sunt) prints with a damaged or doubtful first letter, possibly "snnt", so it is UNSURE; "omnes" (vult omnes) has a damaged initial letter; the full-width heading "[V]ARIORUM NOTAE." stands across the page above the notes, is cut off at the left edge and is not set; the Variorum notes at the page foot are left for the later pass

PL 7:123

hominem diligere velut fratrem; in his enim duobus tota justitia consistit. Qui ergo aut Deum non agnoscit, aut homini nocet, injuste et contra naturam suam vivit, et hoc modo rumpit institutum legemque divinam.

to love man as a brother; for in these two the whole of justice consists. He therefore who either does not acknowledge God, or harms a man, lives unjustly and against his own nature, and in this way breaks the divine ordinance and law.

CAPUT XV.

Chapter XV.

Unde ad hominem peccata pervenerint.

Whence sins came to man.

Hic fortasse quaerat aliquis, unde ad hominem peccata pervenerint, aut quae pravitas divini instituti regulam ad pejora detorserit, ut cum sit ad justitiam genitus, opera tamen efficiat injusta. Jam superius explanavi, simul Deum proposuisse bonum ac malum; et bonum quidem diligere, malum autem, quod huic repugnat, odisse: sed ideo malum permisisse, ut et bonum emicaret, quod alterum sine altero (sicut saepe docui) intelligimus constare non posse: denique ipsum mundum ex duobus elementis repugnantibus et invicem copulatis esse concretum, igneo et humido, nec potuisse lucem fieri, nisi et tenebrae fuissent; quia nec superum potest esse sine infero, nec oriens sine occidente, nec calidum sine frigido, nec molle sine duro. Sic et nos ex duobus aeque repugnantibus compacti sumus, anima et corpore: quorum alterum coelo ascribitur, quia tenue est et intractabile; alterum terrae, quia comprehensibile est: alterum solidum et aeternum est, alterum fragile atque mortale. Ergo alteri bonum adhaeret, alteri malum: alteri lux, vita, justitia; alteri tenebrae, mors, injustitia. Hinc extitit in hominibus naturae suae depravatio; ut esset necesse constitui legem, qua possent et vitia prohiberi, et virtutis officia imperari. Cum igitur sint in rebus humanis bona et mala, quorum rationem declaravi, necesse est in utramque partem moveri Deum, et ad gratiam, cum justa fieri videt; et ad iram, cum cernit injusta.

Here perhaps someone may ask whence sins came to man, or what depravity twisted the rule of the divine ordinance towards worse things, so that, although he was born for justice, he nevertheless performs unjust works. I have already explained above that God set forth good and evil together; and that He loves the good, but hates the evil, which is opposed to it: but that He permitted evil for this reason, that the good also might shine forth, since we understand (as I have often taught) that the one cannot exist without the other: in short, that the world itself is compounded of two elements opposed to each other and joined together, the fiery and the moist, and that light could not have come into being unless there had also been darkness; since there cannot be an above without a below, nor an east without a west, nor hot without cold, nor soft without hard. So we too are put together from two things equally opposed to each other, soul and body: of which the one is assigned to heaven, because it is subtle and intangible; the other to the earth, because it can be grasped: the one is solid and eternal, the other fragile and mortal. Therefore to the one good adheres, to the other evil: to the one light, life, justice; to the other darkness, death, injustice. From this arose in men the depravation of their nature; so that it was necessary for a law to be established, by which both vices might be forbidden and the duties of virtue commanded. Since, therefore, there are good things and evil things in human affairs, the reason for which I have set out, it is necessary that God be moved in both directions, both to favour, when He sees just things being done; and to anger, when He perceives unjust things.

Sed occurrit nobis Epicurus, ac dicit: « Si est in

But Epicurus confronts us and says: “If there is in

Editors' notes and page, col. 123

Footnotes

(printed under page 61)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 123

(continued) multis edd. addidi τὸ homines, quod a nonnullis impressis abest.

(printed under page 61)

(1) ‹In his duobus› · lemma note, printed under col 123

In his duobus. Matth. XXII, Rom. XIII, Gal. V.

"In these two." Matthew 22; Romans 13; Galatians 5.

(printed under page 61)

(2) ‹Quae pravitas... regulam... detorserit› · lemma note, printed under col 123

Quae pravitas... regulam... detorserit. Verae lectioni detorserit in Reimm. inscriptum, detruserit male; prius elegans et rectum. Lib. VI, cap. 21: Hic sensus non est ad vitium detorquendus. BUN.

"Which depravity … has twisted … the rule." Over the true reading "detorserit", "detruserit" has been written in Reimmann's copy, wrongly; the former is elegant and correct. Book 6, ch. 21: "This sense is not to be twisted to vice." Bünemann.

(printed under page 61)

(3) ‹Simul Deum proposuisse bonum ac malum› · lemma note, printed under col 123

Simul Deum proposuisse bonum ac malum. Id est, permisisse. Hic loquitur de malo culpae. ISAEUS.

"That God at once set forth good and evil." That is, permitted it. Here he speaks of the evil of guilt. Isaeus.

(printed under page 61)

(4) ‹Et bonum quidem diligere› · lemma note, printed under col 123

Et bonum quidem diligere; malum autem, quod huic repugnat, odisse. Sic lego cum mss. 1 Reg. et antiquissimis Cauc. et 1 Bonon., 3 Colbert., Clarom. et 14 vulgatis, nisi quod pro malum autem, 7 editi habent ac malum; 4 scripti rec., et malum. In 1 Bon. antiq. et ed. Is. pro huic, est bono. Regio-Put., et bonum quidem diligere, pugnat odisse, omissis, malum autem quod huic re. Mss. 4 Reg. rec., 2 Colb., Ultr., Brun. et vet. edit. Rom., et bonum quidem diligere, pugnas odisse; Pen. et 1 Colb., habent eligere, pugnas odisse.

"And to love the good, but to hate the evil that opposes it." So I read with one Royal manuscript and the very old Caucianus and one Bologna, three Colbert, the Claromontanus and 14 common editions, except that for "malum autem" seven editions have "ac malum", and four recent manuscripts "et malum". In one old Bologna manuscript and Isaeus's edition, for "huic" there is "bono". The Regio-Puteanus has "et bonum quidem diligere, pugnat odisse", omitting "malum autem quod huic re[pugnat]". Four recent Royal manuscripts, two Colbert, the Ultrajectinus, the Brunswick and the old Roman edition have "et bonum quidem diligere, pugnas odisse"; Pen. and one Colbert have "eligere, pugnas odisse".

(printed under page 61)

(5) ‹Intelligimus constare non posse› · lemma note, printed under col 123

Intelligimus constare non posse. Caute lege, quae de mali origine et necessitate proponit Lactantius: in his enim non ubique sanus est.

"We understand that it cannot exist." Read with caution what Lactantius sets out on the origin and necessity of evil, for in these matters he is not everywhere sound.

(printed under page 61)

(6) ‹In utramque partem› · lemma note, printed under col 123

In utramque partem. Ita omnes mss. praeter 2 Reg. rec. qui habent ad utramque partem.

"In either direction." So all the manuscripts except two recent Royal ones, which have "ad utramque partem".

(printed under page 61)

(7) ‹Consideremus divinam necessitatem› · lemma note, printed under col 123, runs on to the foot of col 124

Consideremus divinam necessitatem. Ita omnes fere mss. et editi. In scriptis 5 est, Quod si consideremus divinam bonitatem; minus apte.

"Let us consider the divine necessity." So nearly all the manuscripts and printed editions. Five manuscripts have "But if we consider the divine goodness"; less aptly.

(printed under page 61)

(8) ‹Noster› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Noster. Deest in veterib. edition.

"Our." It is lacking in the old editions.

(printed under page 61)

(9) ‹Et causa› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Et causa. Deest in 6 rec. mss. et 9 editis.

"And the cause." It is lacking in six recent manuscripts and nine printed editions.

(printed under page 61)

(10) ‹Nam quia fragilis› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Nam quia fragilis. Ita corrigendum fuit illud librariorum erratum, 3 mss. rec. et 8 edit. in quibus legitur, Nam qui.

"For because frail." So the copyists' error had to be corrected in three recent manuscripts and eight editions, in which it reads "Nam qui".

(printed under page 61)

(11) ‹Ad continuandam generis perpetuitatem› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Ad continuandam generis perpetuitatem. Sic restitui ex mss. vetustissimis 1 Bonon., Regio-Put., Cauc., Goth., 1 Colbert., 1 Lips., Em., Brun., edit. Betul., Cellar. Walch. et Spark. in marg. melius quam ad continendam, ut in 13 scriptis et 10 vulgatis.

"To continue the perpetuity of the race." So I have restored it from the very old manuscripts: one Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, the Caucianus, the Gotha, one Colbert, one Leipzig, Em., the Brunswick, and the editions of Betuleius, Cellarius, Walch, and Sparke in the margin; better than "ad continendam", as in 13 manuscripts and 10 common editions.

(printed under page 61)

(12) ‹Quaeret quispiam› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Quaeret quispiam. Sic mss. Marm. et 1 Clarom. a secunda manu. Et sic Cicero, et mox inquiet, cap. 20. Multi scripti, quaerit; 1. al., Quaerat.

"Someone will ask." So the Marmoutier manuscript and one Claromontanus by a second hand. And so Cicero; and shortly, "inquiet", ch. 20. Many manuscripts have "quaerit"; one other, "Quaerat".

(printed under page 61)

(13) ‹Accidentibus malis› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Accidentibus malis. Mss. 1 Bon. antiq. Pen. et ed. Rom. 1468. Torn. Soubron. Walch. accedentibus.

"By evils befalling." The manuscripts one old Bologna and Pen., and the editions Roman 1468, Tornaesius, Soubron and Walch, have "accedentibus".

(printed under page 61)

(14) ‹Mitigant› · lemma note, printed under col 124

Mitigant. Quod verbum mutat Heumannus in eumque obsecrant. — Mitigant, obsecrant. Lib. VI, cap. 10 Offensus ab his Deus eos... Subjugabat, donec rursus poenitentia populi mitigatus liberaret; lib. V, cap. 13: Si... cum Deos sibi arbitrantur iratos, tamen donis, et sacrificiis, et odoribus placari eos credunt... cur Deum nostrum tam immitem, tam implacabilem putent? BUN.

"They appease." Heumann changes this word to "eumque obsecrant". — "They appease, they beseech." Book 6, ch. 10: "God, offended by them, … subjugated them, until, appeased again by the people's repentance, he set them free"; book 5, ch. 13: "If … when they think the gods angry with them, they nevertheless believe they are appeased by gifts and sacrifices and incense … why should they think our God so harsh, so implacable?" Bünemann.

(printed under page 61)

Page

running head: 123 FIRM. LACTANTI[I] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹hominem diligere velut fratrem› (gutter); B ‹bonum emicaret, quod alterum›; C ‹necesse constitui legem›; D ‹non est ad vitium detorquendus› (in the notes at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width line "VARIORUM NOTAE" stands below "Sed occurrit nobis Epicurus", not set; the Variorum notes below it (from "multis edd. addidi" onward) are page-foot commentary, left for the later pass; "lucem" is blurred and could be read as "lucom", set as lucem; the column number in the head is faint (reads 123/125); the column ends mid-sentence at "Si est in"

PL 7:124

Deo laetitiae affectus ad gratiam, et odii ad iram, necesse est habeat, et timorem, et libidinem, et cupiditatem, caeterosque affectus, qui sunt imbecillitatis humanae. » Non est necesse ut timeat, qui irascitur; aut moereat, qui gaudet: denique iracundi, minus timidi sunt; et natura laeti, minus moerent. Quid opus est de humanis affectibus dicere, quibus fragilitas nostra succumbit? Consideremus divinam necessitatem; nolo enim naturam dicere, quia Deus noster nunquam creditur natus. Timoris affectus habet in homine materiam, in Deo non habet. Homo, quia multis casibus periculisque subjectus est, metuit, ne qua vis major existat, quae illum verberet, spoliet, laceret, affligat, interimat. Deus autem, in quem nec egestas, nec injuria, nec dolor, nec mors cadit, timere nullo pacto potest; quia nihil est, quod ei vim possit inferre. Item libidinis ratio et causa in homine manifesta est. Nam quia fragilis et mortalis effectus est, necesse fuit alterum sexum diversumque constitui, cujus permistione soboles effici posset ad continuandam generis perpetuitatem. Haec autem libido in Deo locum non habet; quia et fragilitas et interitus ab eo alienus est, nec ulla est apud eum foemina, cujus possit copulatione gaudere, nec successione indiget, qui semper futurus est. Eadem de invidia et cupiditate dici possunt; quae certis manifestisque de causis in hominem cadunt, in Deum nullo modo. At vero, et gratia, et ira, et miseratio habent in Deo materiam; recteque illis utitur summa illa et singularis potestas ad rerum conservationem.

God an affection of joy towards favour, and of hatred towards anger, He must have fear also, and lust, and desire, and the other affections which belong to human weakness.” It is not necessary that he who is angry should fear, or that he who rejoices should grieve: indeed, the irascible are less fearful, and those joyful by nature grieve less. What need is there to speak of human affections, to which our frailty succumbs? Let us consider the divine necessity; for I am unwilling to say “nature”, since our God is never believed to have been born. The affection of fear has its material in man; in God it has none. Man, because he is subject to many mishaps and dangers, is afraid lest some greater force should arise to strike him, despoil him, tear him, afflict him, kill him. But God, upon Whom neither want, nor injury, nor pain, nor death falls, can in no way fear, since there is nothing that can do Him violence. Likewise the reason and cause of lust is manifest in man. For because he was made frail and mortal, it was necessary that another and different sex be established, by whose intermingling offspring might be produced for continuing the perpetuity of the race. But this lust has no place in God, since both frailty and death are foreign to Him, nor is there any woman with Him in whose union He could delight, nor does He need succession, Who will always exist. The same can be said of envy and desire, which for certain and manifest causes fall upon man, but in no way upon God. But favour, and anger, and pity have their material in God; and that supreme and singular power rightly uses them for the preservation of things.

CAPUT XVI.

Chapter XVI.

De Deo ejusque ira et affectibus.

On God, and His anger and affections.

Quaeret quispiam, quae sit ista materia? Primum accidentibus malis afflicti homines ad Deum plerumque confugiunt, mitigant, obsecrant, credentes eum

Someone will ask what this material is. First, men afflicted by misfortunes that befall them very often flee to God, appease Him, entreat Him, believing Him

Editors' notes and page, col. 124

Page

running head: [cut off at left edge]IRM. LACTANTII 124
marginal letters: A Deo laetitiae affectus ad gratiam; B cadit, timere nullo pacto potest; C blank line above CAPUT XVI; D in the Variorum notae, beside "tur, Nam qui."
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: the column begins mid-sentence ("Deo") and ends mid-sentence ("eum"); the closing » after humanae is printed, its opening mark stands in the previous column. UNSURE: "nunquam" and "confugiunt" are worn in the scan and could be printed with a turned n (nuuquam, confugiuut); I have set them as the normal words. The page-foot heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" is printed across both columns and is cut off at the left edge, so it is not set. The Variorum notae below it are left for the later pass.

PL 7:125

posse ab his injurias propulsare. Habet igitur causam miserandi; nec enim tam immitis est hominumque contemptor, ut auxilium laborantibus deneget. Item plurimi, quibus persuasum est Deo placere justitiam, eumque qui sit dominus ac parens omnium, venerantur, et precibus assiduis ac frequentibus votis, dona et sacrificia offerunt, nomen ejus laudibus prosequuntur, justis ac bonis operibus demereri eum laborantes. Ergo est, propter quod Deus et possit, et debeat gratificari. Nam si nihil est tam conveniens Deo, quam beneficentia, nihil autem tam alienum, quam ut sit ingratus: necesse est ut officiis optimorum sancteque viventium praestet aliquid, ac vicem reddat, ne subeat ingrati culpam, quae est etiam homini criminosa. Contra autem sunt alii facinorosi et nefarii, qui libidinibus omnia polluant, caedibus vexent, fraudent, rapiant, perjurent; nec consanguineis, nec parentibus parcant; leges et ipsum etiam Deum negligant.

to be able to ward off injuries from them. He therefore has cause for pity; for He is not so harsh and so contemptuous of men as to deny help to those who are in distress. Likewise very many, who are persuaded that justice is pleasing to God, venerate Him who is Lord and Parent of all, and with constant prayers and frequent vows offer gifts and sacrifices, honour His name with praises, labouring to win His favour by just and good works. There is therefore a reason why God both can and ought to show favour. For if nothing is so fitting for God as beneficence, and nothing so foreign to Him as to be ungrateful, it is necessary that He should bestow something in return for the services of the best men and of those who live holily, and should make requital, lest He incur the fault of ingratitude, which is criminal even in a man. But on the other hand there are others, wicked and impious, who defile everything with their lusts, harass with slaughter, defraud, plunder, perjure themselves; who spare neither kinsmen nor parents; who disregard the laws and even God Himself.

Habet igitur ira in Deo materiam. Non est enim fas eum, cum talia fieri videat, non moveri, et insurgere ad ultionem sceleratorum, et pestiferos nocentesque delere, ut bonis omnibus consulat: adeo et in ipsa ira inest et gratificatio. Inania ergo et falsa reperiuntur argumenta, vel eorum, qui, cum irasci Deum nolunt, gratificari volunt, quia ne hoc quidem fieri sine ira potest; vel eorum, qui nullum animi motum esse in Deo putant. Et quia sunt aliqui affectus,

Anger therefore has matter in God. For it is not right that He, when He sees such things done, should not be moved, and should not rise up to punish the wicked, and destroy the pestilent and the guilty, so as to provide for all the good: so much so that in anger itself there is also kindness. Empty and false, therefore, are found to be the arguments either of those who, while they will not have God be angry, will have Him show favour, since not even this can come about without anger; or of those who think that there is no movement of the mind in God. And because there are some affections

Editors' notes and page, col. 125

Footnotes

(printed under page 62)

(1) ‹Ab his injurias propulsare› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Ab his injurias propulsare. Ita emendavi ex mss. 2 Bonon. 1 Reg. ac sex aliis et edit. Is. Alii, ab his injuriis propulsare.

"To ward off injuries from these." So I have corrected it from two Bologna manuscripts, one Royal and six others, and Isaeus's edition. Others have "ab his injuriis propulsare".

(printed under page 62)

(2) ‹Habet igitur causam› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Habet igitur causam. Ms. 1 Bon. antiq. et 6 edit. interjiciunt Deus, quod a caeteris abest. In Lips. et ed. Cellar. caussas.

"He has, then, a cause." One old Bologna manuscript and six editions insert "Deus", which is absent from the rest. The Leipzig manuscript and Cellarius's edition have "caussas".

(printed under page 62)

(3) ‹Nec enim tam immitis est hominumque contemptor› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Nec enim tam immitis est hominumque contemptor. Sic vet. edit. Rom. et Gymnic. cum omnibus mss. praeter 3 Colbert. a quibus abest conjunctio que ut a caeteris impressis.

"For he is not so harsh and so contemptuous of men." So the old Roman edition and Gymnich's, with all the manuscripts except three Colbert, from which the conjunction "que" is absent, as from the other printed editions.

(printed under page 62)

(4) ‹Et precibus assiduis› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Et precibus assiduis. Ita cum ed. Betul. et Is. cuncti mss., demptis 3 rec. quibus est cum precibus, ut in vulgatis caeteris.

"And with constant prayers." So all the manuscripts, with the editions of Betuleius and Isaeus, except three recent ones, which have "cum precibus", as in the other common editions.

(printed under page 62)

(5) ‹Perjurent› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Perjurent. Ita omnes fere mss. In 2 Bonon. 2 Reg. rec. et 1 Lips. est pejerent.— Sic quoque Buneman. Rapiant, pejerent. Verbo frequentiori usus. Sed tamen et Horatius, lib. II Sat. 3, vers. 127. Si quidvis satis est, perjuras, surripis, aufers. CELL. — Perjurent. Haec est antiqua scriptura, quam ex Plauto et Cic. lib. III de Officiis, cap. 29, commendat Curtius ad Sallust. Jugurth., cap 11, 4, confer Lambinum ad Horatium II, Sat. 3, v. 127; reliquorum pejerent usitatius. BUN.

"Forswear themselves" (perjurent). So nearly all the manuscripts. In two Bologna, two recent Royal and one Leipzig it is "pejerent". — So too Bünemann. "Let them plunder, let them forswear (pejerent)." He has used the more frequent word. But yet Horace too, Satires book 2, 3, line 127: "If anything at all is enough, you forswear (perjuras), you filch, you carry off." Cellarius. — "Perjurent." This is the ancient spelling, which Cortius commends, from Plautus and from Cicero, De officiis book 3, ch. 29, on Sallust's Jugurtha ch. 11, 4; compare Lambinus on Horace, Satires 2, 3, line 127; the others' "pejerent" is more usual. Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(6) ‹Adeo et in ipsa› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Adeo et in ipsa. Sic reposui ex antiq. Regio-Put., 2 al. Reg., 2 Colb., Clarom. et ed. Cellar. In 21 scriptis rec., inest gratificatio; in 2 rec. est gratificatio. In Lipsiensibus, non inest; in 2 al. rec., non est; utrumque male.

"So that even in it." So I have restored it from the old Regio-Puteanus, two other Royal, two Colbert, the Claromontanus and Cellarius's edition. In 21 recent manuscripts, "inest gratificatio"; in two recent ones, "est gratificatio". In the Leipzig manuscripts, "non inest"; in two other recent ones, "non est"; both wrongly.

(printed under page 62)

(7) ‹Nolunt› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Nolunt. Heumannus legit nolint.

"They are unwilling." Heumann reads "nolint".

(printed under page 62)

(8) ‹Quin... potest› · lemma note, printed under col 125

Quin... potest. Haec octo verba eradenda putat Heumannus velut glossema.

"Indeed … can." Heumann thinks these eight words should be erased as a gloss.

(printed under page 62)

(9) ‹Eos autem, qui sunt virtutis› · lemma note, printed under col 125, runs on to the foot of col 126

Eos autem, qui sunt virtutis, id est, ira... charitas... miseratio. Ita omnes scripti editique. Mihi ne tot voces corrigantur, duabus litteris mutatis, legendum videtur: Eos autem, qui sunt virtutis, ut est ira... charitas... miseratio. Ut et id ductibus parum differunt, et saepe confunduntur; praeterea in priori membro dixerat: Ut libido... invidia. BUN.

"But those which belong to virtue, that is, anger … love … pity." So all the manuscripts and printed editions. To me, so that so many words need not be corrected, it seems we should read, with two letters changed: "But those which belong to virtue, as is anger … love … pity." "Ut" and "id" differ little in their strokes and are often confused; besides, in the earlier member he had said, "as lust … envy." Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(10) ‹Digna› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Digna. Lege digni, ait Heumannus, subaudiendo, affectus. — Digna. Heumannus, lege, inquit, digni, subauditur enim affectus. Nihil corrigo; neutrum digna respicit voces ira... charitas... miseratio. Frequentissime ita neutrum sequitur. Lib. III Institut., c. 11: Num voluptatem?... divitias?... potestates? At ea fragilia... caduca... Num gloriam?... honorem?... memoriam nominis? At haec omnia... posita. Lib. VI, c. 3: Desidiae, inertiae, luxuriae se tradere, quae suavia... videntur. BUN.

"Worthy" (digna). Read "digni", says Heumann, understanding "affectus". — "Digna." Heumann says, read "digni", for "affectus" is understood. I correct nothing; the neuter "digna" looks to the words "anger … love … pity". The neuter very often follows in this way. Institutes book 3, ch. 11: "Is it pleasure? … riches? … powers? But those things are frail … perishable … Is it glory? … honour? … the remembrance of a name? But all these things … are placed …" Book 6, ch. 3: "To give oneself up to sloth, idleness, luxury, which seem … sweet." Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(11) ‹Quae profecto› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Quae profecto. Idem legit quos profecto, subaudiendo affectus. — Quae profecto. Et hic Heumannus corrigit, Quos profecto, scilicet affectus. Sed qui priora salva cognoscet, nec haec corriget. BUN.

"Which surely." The same reads "quos profecto", understanding "affectus". — "Quae profecto." Here too Heumann corrects to "quos profecto", that is, the affections. But whoever recognizes the earlier words as sound will not correct these either. Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(12) ‹Depopulabitur› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Depopulabitur. Passive. Confer Heusingerum ad Wechner. Hellenol. BUN.

"Will be laid waste." Passive. Compare Heusinger on Wechner's Hellenolexia. Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(13) ‹Sperant› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Sperant. Cum verbum hoc etiam ad priora, mali poenam, pertineat, et significet saepe timere, credere, vide Quintil. lib. VIII Instit., c. 2. Vide et Davis. ad Epit. c. 65: Spera et tibi accidere posse, quod alteri videas accidisse. BUN.

"They hope." Since this verb also bears on the preceding words, "the punishment of evil", and often means "to fear, to believe", see Quintilian, Institutio book 8, ch. 2. See also Davies on the Epitome, ch. 65: "Expect that what you see has befallen another can befall you too." Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(14) ‹Impune vexantur› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Impune vexantur. Scilicet ad tempus. Offendit vox impune alios; hinc in Lips. 2 et 3, est omissa. BUN.

"Are harassed with impunity." Namely, for a time. The word "impune" has offended others; hence in Leipzig manuscripts 2 and 3 it is omitted. Bünemann.

(printed under page 62)

(15) ‹Cur ista fiant› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Cur ista fiant. 1 Colb., Cur ita fiant; Em. et Brun., cur ita fiat.

"Why these things happen." One Colbert has "Cur ita fiant"; Em. and the Brunswick, "cur ita fiat".

(printed under page 62)

(16) ‹Utrum› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Utrum. Heuman. legit, an vero.

"Whether." Heumann reads "an vero".

(printed under page 62)

(17) ‹Quae tanta causa est› · lemma note, printed under col 126

Quae tanta causa est. Ex mss. Reg.-Put. et 3 al. Reg. Lipsiensibus, 4 Colbert. aliisque pluribus expunxi, ut inutile, τὸ negligendi, quod est in 4 mss. rec. et 13 editis; in 5 scriptis, negligentiae; in tribus, tantae. — Bunem. vero addit verbum negligendi, et notam sequentem exhibet: — Quae tanta est negligendi causa. Thom. in marg. ex Bon. citat.: Quae tanta est negligentiae causa; eamque lectionem Heumannus vocat rectissimam. Lubens sequerer, nisi obstaret recentior collator Bononiensis codicis Isaeus, qui legit (continues)

"What cause is so great." On the authority of the manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and three other Royal, the Leipzig ones, four Colbert and several others, I have struck out as useless the word "negligendi", which is in four recent manuscripts and 13 printed editions; in five manuscripts, "negligentiae"; in three, "tantae". — Bünemann, however, adds the word "negligendi" and gives the following note: — "What cause of neglecting is so great." Thomasius in the margin cites from the Bologna manuscript: "What cause of negligence is so great"; and Heumann calls that reading most correct. I would gladly follow it, were it not opposed by Isaeus, the more recent collator of the Bologna codex, who reads … (continues)

(printed under page 62)

Page

running head: 125 LIBER DE IRA D (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A posse ab his injurias propulsare; B farii, qui libidinibus omnia polluant; C Ab his injurias propulsare. Ita emendavi (editors' notes); D Si quidvis satis est, perjuras (editors' notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: last word "affec-" split at the column break (affectus); "irasci" printed with a stray mark over the c, read as irasci; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTA[E]" across both columns, cut off at the image edge, not set; the Variorum notes below it (Ab his injurias propulsare... to ...et saepe) are page-foot editors' notes, left for the later pass

PL 7:126

qui non cadunt in Deum, ut libido, timor, avaritia, moeror, invidia, omni prorsus affectu eum vacare dixerunt. His enim vacat, quia vitiorum affectus sunt: eos autem, qui sunt virtutis, id est, ira in malos, caritas in bonos, miseratio in afflictos, quoniam divina potestate sunt digna, proprios, et justos, et veros habet. Quae profecto nisi habeat, humana vita turbabitur; atque ad tantam confusionem deveniet status rerum, ut contemptis superatisque legibus, sola regnet audacia, ut nemo denique tutus esse possit, nisi qui viribus praevaleat. Ita quasi communi latrocinio terra omnis depopulabitur. Nunc vero quoniam et mali poenam, et boni gratiam, et afflicti opem sperant; et virtutibus locus est, et scelera rariora sunt. Atenim plerumque et scelerati feliciores sunt, et boni miseriores, et justi ab injustis impune vexantur. Considerabimus postea, cur ista fiant. Interim de ira explicemus, an sit aliqua in Deo; utrum nihil curet omnino, nec moveatur ad ea quae impie geruntur.

which do not befall God, such as lust, fear, avarice, grief, envy, they said that He is entirely free of every affection. For He is free of these because they are affections of the vices; but those which belong to virtue, that is, anger against the wicked, love towards the good, compassion towards the afflicted, since they are worthy of the divine power, He has as His own, and just, and true. And indeed, unless He has them, human life will be thrown into disorder; and the state of things will come to such confusion that, the laws being despised and overcome, boldness alone will reign, so that in the end no one can be safe except him who prevails by strength. Thus the whole earth will be laid waste as if by a common brigandage. But now, since the wicked expect punishment, and the good favour, and the afflicted help, there is both room for the virtues, and crimes are rarer. And yet for the most part both the criminals are more prosperous and the good more wretched, and the just are harassed by the unjust with impunity. We shall consider later why these things happen. Meanwhile let us set out concerning anger, whether there is any in God; whether He cares for nothing at all, and is not moved at the things which are done impiously.

CAPUT XVII.

Chapter XVII.

De Deo, cura et ira.

Of God, care, and anger.

Deus, inquit Epicurus, nihil curat; nullam igitur habet potestatem. Curare enim necesse est eum, qui habet potestatem; vel si habet, et non utitur, quae tanta causa est, ut ei, non dicam nostrum genus,

God, says Epicurus, cares for nothing; therefore He has no power. For he who has power must necessarily care; or if He has it and does not use it, what cause so great is there that to Him, I will not say our race,

Editors' notes and page, col. 126

Page

running head: [LI]BER DE IRA DEI. 126 (left edge cut off; numeral blurred)
marginal letters: A ‹tus, qui non cadunt in Deum›; B ‹ciores sunt, et boni miseriores›; C ‹confunduntur; praeterea in priori› (in the notes); D ‹Sperant. Cum verbum hoc› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "tus" of a word (affectus) broken from the preceding column; column ends mid-sentence after "genus,"; "moeror", "poenam" set from printed oe-ligature, "praevaleat" from printed ae-ligature; "Atenim" printed as one word, kept; full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" stands below the text block above the notes, not set; the Variorum notes at the page foot not set (later pass)

PL 7:127

sed etiam mundus ipse sit vilis? Ideo, inquit, incorruptus est ac beatus, quia semper quietus. Cui ergo administratio tantarum rerum cessit, si haec a Deo negligantur, quae videmus ratione summa gubernari? aut quietus esse quomodo potest, qui vivit et sentit? Nam quies aut somni res est, aut mortis. Sed nec somnus habet quietem. Nam cum soporati sumus, corpus quidem quiescit, animus tamen irrequietus agitatur: imagines sibi, quas cernat effingit, ut naturalem suum motum exerceat varietate visorum; avocatque se a falsis, dum membra saturentur, ac vigorem capiant de quiete. Quies igitur sempiterna solius mortis est. Si autem mors Deum non attingit, Deus igitur nunquam quietus est. Dei vero actio quae potest esse, nisi mundi administratio? Si vero mundi curam gerit, curat igitur hominum vitam Deus, ac singulorum actus animadvertit, eosque sapientes ac bonos esse desiderat. Haec est voluntas Dei, haec divina lex; quam qui sequitur, qui observat, Deo carus est. Necesse est igitur, ut ira moveatur adversus eum, qui hanc aeternam divinamque legem, aut violaverit, aut spreverit. Si nocet, inquit, alicui Deus, jam bonus non est. Non exiguo falluntur errore, qui censuram

but even the world itself should be worthless? For this reason, he says, He is incorruptible and blessed, because He is always at rest. To whom, then, has the administration of such great affairs fallen, if these things, which we see governed by the highest reason, are neglected by God? Or how can He who lives and perceives be at rest? For rest belongs either to sleep or to death. But not even sleep has rest. For when we are asleep, the body indeed rests, but the mind is driven about restlessly: it fashions for itself images to behold, so as to exercise its natural motion in a variety of visions; and it diverts itself with false things, while the limbs are refreshed and take vigour from rest. Everlasting rest, therefore, belongs to death alone. But if death does not touch God, then God is never at rest. And what can the activity of God be, except the administration of the world? But if He takes care of the world, then God cares for the life of men, and observes the acts of each one, and desires them to be wise and good. This is the will of God, this the divine law; whoever follows it, whoever keeps it, is dear to God. It is necessary, therefore, that He be moved to anger against him who has either violated or spurned this eternal and divine law. If God harms anyone, he says, He is then not good. They are deceived by no small error who defame punishment,

Editors' notes and page, col. 127

Footnotes

(printed under page 63)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 127

(continued) in Bonon. et Tax. Quae tantae negligente causa est.

(printed under page 63)

(1) ‹Vilis› · lemma note, printed under col 127

Vilis. Lib. VII Institution., c. 22: Cum... justi tam viles habeantur. Tacit. lib. I Annal. 40: Si vilis ipsi laus. BUN.

"Cheap." Institutes book 7, ch. 22: "Since … the just are held so cheap." Tacitus, Annals book 1, 40: "If praise is cheap to him." Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(2) ‹Cui ergo administratio tantarum rerum› · lemma note, printed under col 127

Cui ergo administratio tantarum rerum. Sic in mss. omnibus lego, et in editis vet. Rom. et Crat. Vide infra mundi administratio. In caeteris impressis est, Cui ergo ministratio.

"To whom, then, the administration of such great things." So I read in all the manuscripts and in the old Roman and Cratander printed editions. See below, "the administration of the world." In the other printed editions it is "Cui ergo ministratio".

(printed under page 63)

(3) ‹Tamen› · lemma note, printed under col 127

Tamen. Sic mss. Thomasii: alii plures legunt autem, minus bene.

"Yet." So Thomasius's manuscripts; several others read "autem", less well.

(printed under page 63)

(4) ‹Avocatque se a falsis› · lemma note, printed under col 127

Avocatque se a falsis. Sic vetustissimae editiones et mss. 2 rec. et multi editi, falsis; 2 al. rec., de falsis. — Legitur avocatque se falsis apud Bunemann., in hancque variantem notam sequentem exhibet. — Avocatque se falsis. Reim. prave, Advocatque se a falsis; idque Heumannus defendit et exponit, Avocat se a falsis imaginibus, id est, somniare cessat. At Goth., Merton., C.C.C. Rost., Ven. 1471, 1493, 97, Paris. 1513 et Cellarius, Avocatque se falsis. Quae lectio est unice recta. Noster iterum de Opif. c. 18: Ut mens per diem veris visionibus avocatur, ne obdormiat; ita falsis nocte (scilicet avocatur) ne excitetur; et ibidem ante: Avocatur ergo (mens) simulacris, donec membra sopore irrigata vegetentur. Est igitur sensus verborum, ut iterum ibid. Mens visionum imaginibus occupata tenetur; et postea, Mens ad contemplandas imagines ab intentione traducitur. BUN.

"And it withdraws itself from false things." So the oldest editions; two recent manuscripts and many editions have "falsis"; two other recent ones, "de falsis". — Bünemann reads "avocatque se falsis", and on this variant gives the following note. — "Avocatque se falsis." Reimmann's copy wrongly has "Advocatque se a falsis"; and Heumann defends this and explains it: "it withdraws itself from false images, that is, it stops dreaming." But the Gotha, the Merton, Corpus Christi College, the Rostock, the Venice editions of 1471, 1493 and [14]97, Paris 1513 and Cellarius have "Avocatque se falsis", the one correct reading. Our author again, De opificio ch. 18: "As by day the mind is diverted by true sights so that it does not fall asleep, so at night by false ones (that is, it is diverted) so that it is not roused"; and earlier in the same place: "So the mind is diverted by images until the limbs, steeped in sleep, are refreshed." The sense of the words therefore is, as again in the same place, "The mind is held occupied by the images of visions"; and afterwards, "The mind is drawn off from its effort to the contemplation of images." Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(5) ‹Vigorem capiant de quiete. Quies igitur› · lemma note, printed under col 127, runs on to the foot of col 128

Vigorem capiant de quiete. Quies igitur. Thomasius, capere vigorem de quiete, inquit, latine non dicitur. Ex his autem denique re facile potuit fieri de quiete, cui postmodum addita est dictio igitur, ut aliquis sensus eliceretur. Sequor nihilominus lectionem Goth., Lips., Reimm., Ultr., Cauc., Anglic., Rost., Ven. 1471, 72, utriusque 78, 90, 93, 97, Pier., Parrh., Paris., Junt., Aldi, Crat., Gymn., Fas., Gryph., Torn., Betuleii, Vigorem capiant de quiete. Quies igitur (Emm. ergo). Quis enim simpliciter dixerit, membra saturari, ac vigorem capere, non addito, unde saturentur ac vigorem capiant? Verba, Dum membra saturentur ac vigorem capiant de quiete, idem dicunt, quod illa de Opif. c. 18: Donec membra sopore irrigata vegetentur; et infra, Postquam mens ad contemplandas imagines traducta est, tunc demum corpus omne resolvitur in quietem. Plinius lib. XXIII H. N. c. 4: Oleo mollitur corpus, vigorem et robur accipit. De quiete valet, ex quiete, ex sopore, more Lactantio frequenti, ubi de, pro ex ponit. Uti vero capere fructum, utilitatem, voluptatem ex re dicitur; sic latine dici capere vigorem de, vel ex re, nihil impedit. BUN. — Capiant de quiete. Quies igitur sempiterna. Sic reposui ex antiquis mss. Reg.-Put., Cauc., al. 4 Reg., 6 Colbert., Ultr., Em., Brun., multis editis et 1 Clarom., nisi quod habet capiat. 1 Bon. Antiq., Cant. et 4 impressi capiant. Denique requies sempiterna. Hanc tamen veram esse scripturam existimat Heumannus.

"Take vigour from rest. Rest, therefore." "To take vigour from rest," says Thomasius, "is not said in Latin. But from 'ex his autem denique re' 'de quiete' could easily have been made, to which the word 'igitur' was afterwards added so that some sense might be drawn out." I nevertheless follow the reading of the Gotha, Leipzig, Reimmann, Ultrajectinus, Caucianus, English, Rostock manuscripts, Venice 1471 and [14]72, both of [14]78, [14]90, [14]93, [14]97, Pierius, Parrhasius, Paris, Junta, Aldus, Cratander, Gymnich, Fasitelius, Gryphius, Tornaesius and Betuleius: "Vigorem capiant de quiete. Quies igitur" (Emm. "ergo"). For who would say simply that the limbs are sated and take vigour, without adding from what they are sated and take vigour? The words "while the limbs are sated and take vigour from rest" say the same as those in De opificio ch. 18: "until the limbs, steeped in sleep, are refreshed"; and below, "After the mind has been drawn off to the contemplation of images, then at last the whole body is relaxed into rest." Pliny, Natural History book 23, ch. 4: "By oil the body is softened, and receives vigour and strength." "De quiete" means "from rest, from sleep", after Lactantius's frequent habit of putting "de" for "ex". And just as one says "to take fruit, profit, pleasure from a thing", so nothing prevents "to take vigour from (de or ex) a thing" from being said in Latin. Bünemann. — "Capiant de quiete. Quies igitur sempiterna." So I have restored it from the old manuscripts Regio-Puteanus, Caucianus, four other Royal, six Colbert, the Ultrajectinus, Em., the Brunswick, many printed editions and one Claromontanus, except that it has "capiat". One old Bologna, the Cantabrigian edition and four printed editions have "capiant. Denique requies sempiterna." Heumann, however, judges this to be the true reading.

(printed under page 63)

(6) ‹Si nocet, inquit, alicui Deus› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Si nocet, inquit, alicui Deus. Abest inquit a quamplurimis scriptis et impressis: at extat in antiquissimis mss. Regio-Put., 1 Bonon. et editis Gymnic., Is., Gall., Thys., Spark.

"If God, he says, harms anyone." "Inquit" is absent from very many manuscripts and printed editions; but it stands in the oldest manuscripts, the Regio-Puteanus and one Bologna, and in the editions of Gymnich, Isaeus, Gallaeus, Thysius and Sparke.

(printed under page 63)

(7) ‹Acerbitatis et malitiae› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Acerbitatis et malitiae. Haud secus veterrimi Regio-Put. et 1 Bonon., edd. Thomas., Is., Thys., Gall., Spark. In aliis deest et malitiae.

"Of harshness and malice." No differently the very old Regio-Puteanus and one Bologna, and the editions of Thomasius, Isaeus, Thysius, Gallaeus and Sparke. In others "et malitiae" is lacking.

(printed under page 63)

(8) ‹Qui scelere convictos› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Qui scelere convictos. Ita restitui ex quamplurimis editis et omnibus mss. praeter 1 Reg. cui est corrupte conjunctos, pro convictos. In pluribus editis est convicto, mendose.—Scelere convinctos. Paris. Scelere convictos. Cant. editio, Scelere convicto, vitiose. Suetonii est, ut Lexica indicant, in Nerone, c. 31. Scelere convictus. BUN.

"Who [punishes] those convicted of crime." So I have restored it from very many printed editions and all the manuscripts except one Royal, which corruptly has "conjunctos" for "convictos". In several editions it is "convicto", wrongly. — "Scelere convinctos." The Paris edition: "Scelere convictos." The Cantabrigian edition: "Scelere convicto", faultily. It is Suetonius's phrase, as the lexicons show, in the Nero, ch. 31: "Scelere convictus." Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(9) ‹Ipse autem est› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Ipse autem est. At Buneman. Is autem est. editi omnes, Ipse autem est. Bonon. Is est autem. Reimm. Is autem est. Etiam Heumanno Is rectum est. BUN.

"But he himself is." But Bünemann has "Is autem est". All the printed editions: "Ipse autem est." The Bologna manuscript: "Is est autem." Reimmann's: "Is autem est." Heumann too thinks "Is" correct. Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(10) ‹Libet quaerere› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Libet quaerere. Manuscriptorum est et 9 vet. edit. In 7 vulgatis est Licet.

"It pleases me to ask." This is the reading of the manuscripts and nine old editions. In seven common editions it is "Licet".

(printed under page 63)

(11) ‹Immobilem› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Immobilem. Cap. 22: Deum faciunt immobilem. Conf. not. l. VI, c. 17: Ad immobilem stuporem mentis perducere. BUN.

"Immovable." Ch. 22: "They make God immovable." Compare the note on book 6, ch. 17: "To bring to an immovable stupor of mind." Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(12) ‹Omnia invaserint› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Omnia invaserint. At Bun. addit ejus, et sic rationem reddit: — Omnia ejus invaserint. Ex Lips. 2, 3 Reimm., Rost., Ven. 1472, utraque 78, 93, 97, Pier., Parrh., Paris., Junt., Isaeo, Heumanno scribo, Omnia ejus invaserint. Caeteri ejus neglexerunt. Studio illud ejus ter repetiit. BUN.

"Have seized everything." But Bünemann adds "ejus" and gives his reason thus: — "Have seized everything of his." From Leipzig 2 and 3, Reimmann's, the Rostock, Venice 1472, both of [14]78, [14]93, [14]97, Pierius, Parrhasius, Paris, Junta, Isaeus and Heumann I write "Omnia ejus invaserint." The rest have neglected "ejus". He repeated that "ejus" three times on purpose. Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

(13) ‹Perfrui› · lemma note, printed under col 128

Perfrui. Major vis in composito subinnuit securam impunitatem. BUN.

"To enjoy to the full." The greater force of the compound hints at a carefree impunity. Bünemann.

(printed under page 63)

Page

running head: 127 FIRM. LACTANTI[I] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹sed etiam mundus ipse sit vilis›; B ‹curam gerit, curat igitur hominum›; C ‹omnibus lego, et in editis vet. Rom.› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹sensus verborum, ut iterum ibid.› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: a stray dot-like mark is printed after "naturalem"; it is not set. "negligantur" is set as read (subjunctive "a"). The column ends mid-sentence at "censuram". The full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" and the foot notes beneath it (Vilis..., Cui ergo administratio..., Tamen..., Avocatque se a falsis..., Vigorem capiant de quiete...) are page-foot apparatus and are not set here; they are left for the later pass.

PL 7:128

sive humanam, sive divinam, acerbitatis et malitiae nomine infamant, putantes nocentem dici oportere, qui nocentes afficit poena. Quod si est, nocentes igitur leges habemus, quae peccantibus supplicia sanxerunt; nocentes judices, qui scelere convictos poena capitis afficiunt. Quod si et lex justa est, quae et nocenti tribuit quod meretur, et judex integer ac bonus dicitur, cum male facta vindicat (bonorum enim salutem custodit, qui malos punit), ergo et Deus, cum malis obest, nocens non est; ipse autem est nocens, qui aut innocenti nocet, aut nocenti parcit, ut pluribus noceat.

whether human or divine, under the name of harshness and malice, thinking that he who inflicts punishment on the guilty ought to be called harmful. If that is so, then we have harmful laws, which have ordained penalties for wrongdoers, and harmful judges, who inflict capital punishment on those convicted of crime. But if the law is just which also gives the guilty man what he deserves, and the judge is called upright and good when he punishes evil deeds (for he who punishes the wicked safeguards the welfare of the good), then God too, when He harms the wicked, is not harmful; rather, he is harmful who either harms the innocent or spares the guilty, so that he may harm more people.

Libet quaerere ab iis, qui Deum faciunt immobilem, si quis habeat rem, domum, familiam, servique ejus contemnentes patientiam domini, omnia invaserint, ipsi bonis ejus fruantur, ipsos familia ejus honoret, dominus autem contemnatur ab omnibus, derideatur, relinquatur: utrumne sapiens esse possit, qui contumelias non vindicet, suisque rebus eos perfrui patiatur, in quos habeat potestatem? Quae tanta in quoquam potest patientia reperiri? si tamen patientia nominanda est, et non stupor quidam insensibilis. Sed facile est ferre contemptum. Quid si fiant illa,

I should like to ask those who make God immovable: if someone has property, a house, a household, and his slaves, despising their master's patience, have seized everything, enjoy his goods themselves, and his household honours them, while the master is despised by all, mocked and abandoned, could he be wise who does not avenge the insults and allows those over whom he has power to enjoy his possessions to the full? What patience so great can be found in anyone? if indeed it should be called patience, and not a kind of insensible stupor. But it is easy to bear contempt. What if those things were done,

Editors' notes and page, col. 128

Page

running head: …RM. LACTANTII (left part cut off at the image edge; column number 128)
marginal letters: A sive humanam, sive divinam; B ipsi bonis ejus fruantur; C vel ex re, nihil impedit (in the Variorum notae); D conviclos. Çant. editio / tonii est (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "nocens non est" prints as "noceus" (broken or blurred n), set as nocens; column ends mid-sentence at "illa,"; the VARIORUM NOTAE at the page foot (from "tem. Plinius lib. xxiii") not set, left for the apparatus pass; heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" runs across both columns and is cut off at the left edge, not set

PL 7:129

quae a Cicerone dicuntur? « Etenim quaero, si quis paterfamilias liberis suis a servo interfectis, uxore occisa, incensa domo, supplicium de servo non quam acerrimum sumpserit; utrum is clemens ac misericors, an inhumanus et crudelissimus esse videatur? » Quod si ejusmodi facinoribus ignoscere crudelitatis est potius quam pietatis; non est ergo virtutis in Deo, ad ea, quae injuste fiunt, non commoveri. Nam mundus tanquam Dei domus est, et homines tanquam servi: quibus si ludibrio sit nomen ejus, qualis aut quanta patientia est, ut honoribus suis cedat, prava et iniqua fieri videat, et non indignetur, quod proprium et naturale est ei, cui peccata non placeant? Irasci ergo rationis est; auferuntur enim delicta, et refraenatur licentia, quod utique juste sapienterque fit.

which are said by Cicero? "For I ask: if some father of a household, his children having been killed by a slave, his wife slain, his house set on fire, should not exact the most severe punishment possible from the slave, would he seem merciful and compassionate, or inhuman and most cruel?" But if to pardon crimes of this kind belongs to cruelty rather than to dutiful love, then it is no mark of virtue in God not to be moved at the things that are done unjustly. For the world is as it were God's house, and men as it were His servants: if His name is a mockery to them, what sort of patience, or how great, is it, that He should give up His honours, should see wicked and unjust things being done, and not be indignant, which is proper and natural to one to whom sins are displeasing? To be angry, therefore, belongs to reason; for offences are removed, and licence is curbed, which is certainly done justly and wisely.

Sed Stoici non viderunt esse discrimen recti et pravi; esse iram justam et injustam: et quia medelam rei non inveniebant, voluerunt eam penitus excidere. Peripatetici vero non excidendam, sed temperandam esse dixerunt: quibus in sexto libro Institutionum satis respondimus. Nescisse autem philosophos, quae ratio esset irae, apparet ex definitionibus eorum, quas Seneca enumeravit in libris, quos de

But the Stoics did not see that there is a distinction between right and wrong; that there is a just anger and an unjust one: and because they could find no remedy for the thing, they wished to cut it out entirely. The Peripatetics, on the other hand, said that it was not to be cut out but moderated: to these we have given sufficient answer in the sixth book of the Institutes. But that the philosophers did not know what the nature of anger was is plain from their definitions, which Seneca enumerated in the books which on

Editors' notes and page, col. 129

Footnotes

(printed under page 64)

(1) ‹Supplicium de servo non quam acerrimum sumpserit› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Supplicium de servo non quam acerrimum sumpserit. In omnibus Lactantii mss. et edd. est cum negatione hic locus; apud Ciceronem Orat. 4 in Catilinam c. 6, quam acerbissimum, sine negatione in quibusdam editis: Lambinus vero, Isaeus, aliique legunt non quam acerrimum. Et ita apud Lactantium.

"Had not exacted the sharpest possible punishment from the slave." In all the manuscripts and editions of Lactantius this passage has the negative; in Cicero, Fourth Oration against Catiline ch. 6, "quam acerbissimum", without the negative in some editions; but Lambinus, Isaeus and others read "non quam acerrimum". And so in Lactantius.

(printed under page 64)

(2) ‹Sed stoici non viderunt› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Sed stoici non viderunt. Perturbatio. πάθος, ut Cicero in 4 Tusc. ex Zenonis sententia definit, est aversa a recta ratione contra naturam animi commotio. Quidam appetitum vehementiorem, ὁρμὴν πλεονάζουσαν: iram autem ut formam libidini, τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ, libidinem vero perturbationi subjiciunt, sic definientes: Ira est libido ejus, qui videtur laesisse injuria. Ergo stoici posuerunt iram inter morbos et vitia. BETULEIUS.

"But the Stoics did not see." Perturbation, pathos, as Cicero defines it in Tusculans 4 after Zeno's view, is a commotion of the mind turned away from right reason, contrary to nature. Some call it a more vehement appetite, "an excessive impulse"; and they place anger as a species under lust, "desire", and lust under perturbation, defining thus: Anger is the lust [to punish] him who seems to have injured one unjustly. So the Stoics placed anger among the diseases and vices. Betuleius.

(printed under page 64)

(3) ‹Penitus excidere› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Penitus excidere. Lips. Tert., occidere, Torn., Penitus exscindere. Sic saepe variare dixi ad lib. V, cap. 3: Horatius lib. II, Sat. 3: Denique quatenus excidi penitus vitium irae / Caetera item nequeant stultis haerentia. BUN.

"To cut out utterly." The third Leipzig manuscript has "occidere"; Tornaesius, "Penitus exscindere". I have said that these often vary, on book 5, ch. 3. Horace, Satires book 2, 3: "In short, since the vice of anger cannot be utterly cut out, nor likewise the other vices that cling to fools." Bünemann.

(printed under page 64)

(4) ‹Ira est, inquit, cupiditas, ulciscendae injuriae› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Ira est, inquit, cupiditas, ulciscendae injuriae. Seneca lib. I de Ira, cap. 3: Primum diximus cupiditatem esse poenae exigendae. Ad verbum diximus, commentatur ita Lipsius: nempe in iis, quae e Lactantio reponimus. Et lib. II de Ira, cap. 3, ait: Ira est concitatio animi ad ultionem voluntate et judicio pergentis. CELL.

"Anger, he says, is the desire to avenge an injury." Seneca, On Anger book 1, ch. 3: "First we said that it is the desire to exact punishment." On the word "we said" Lipsius comments thus: namely in what we restore from Lactantius. And in On Anger book 2, ch. 3, he says: "Anger is an arousing of the mind proceeding to revenge by will and judgement." Cellarius.

(printed under page 64)

(5) ‹Alii (ut ait) Posidonius› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Alii (ut ait) Posidonius. Sic lego cum Lambino, Gothofredo, Francio, aliisque doctis viris; non Possidonius, ut in mss. et editis nostris. Posidonius, forte a Ποσειδῶν, Neptunus, ait Francius.— Buneman. vero habet: Aut, ut ait, et notam sequentem exhibet:—Goth., Lips., Reimm., et editi: Alii, ut ait, Pen., Vel, ut ait. Bonon., Aut, ut ait. Hunc sequor. Posset tamen vox alii quoque hic locum habere; non tantum enim Posidonius, sed etiam Zeno dixit, teste Laertio: Ὀργὴν ἐπιθυμίαν τιμωρίας. BUN.

"Others (as Posidonius says)." So I read with Lambinus, Gothofredus, Francius and other learned men; not "Possidonius", as in our manuscripts and editions. "Posidonius, perhaps from Poseidon, Neptune," says Francius. — Bünemann, however, has "Aut, ut ait", and gives the following note: — The Gotha, Leipzig and Reimmann manuscripts and the printed editions have "Alii, ut ait"; Pen., "Vel, ut ait"; the Bologna, "Aut, ut ait". This I follow. Yet the word "alii" too could have a place here, for not only Posidonius but also Zeno said, as Laertius witnesses, "Anger is a desire for retribution." Bünemann.

(printed under page 64)

(6) ‹Iram› · lemma note, printed under col 129

Iram. Aristot. II Rhetor., cap. 2, et apud Senec. ubi supra.

"Anger." Aristotle, Rhetoric book 2, ch. 2, and in Seneca at the place cited above.

(printed under page 64)

(7) ‹Injusta› · lemma note, printed under col 129, runs on to the foot of col 130

Injusta. Haec vox deest in 8 vulgatis et 12 mss. At extat in vetustissimis 1 Bonon., Regio-Put., 4 al. Reg., 2 Colb., Baluz. et Clarom. in marg. necnon in editis Thom., Is., Thys., Gall., Spark., Walch., estque necessaria, quia de ira justa post loquitur.

"Unjust." This word is lacking in 8 common editions and 12 manuscripts. But it stands in the oldest, one Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, four other Royal, two Colbert, Baluze's and the Claromontanus in the margin, as well as in the editions of Thomasius, Isaeus, Thysius, Gallaeus, Sparke and Walch; and it is necessary, because he speaks afterwards of just anger.

(printed under page 64)

(8) ‹Ne ad aliquod maximum malum› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Ne ad aliquod maximum malum. Ita ms. Regio-Put. cum multis editis. In plerisque deest malum. — Ad aliquod maximum malum prosiliat. Necessario hic substantivum addendum. Sic c. 18: Hinc quotidie ad immania facinora prosilitur; et infra: Evadent ad majus malum. Epit. c. 61: Inde ad immania facinora prosilitur; ubique vero ad, non in, ut in Parrh. dicitur; hinc bis lib. VI, cap. 5, et lib. VI, cap. 18: prosilire ad nocendum. BUN.

"Lest to some very great evil." So the Regio-Puteanus manuscript with many printed editions. In most, "malum" is lacking. — "Should leap forth to some very great evil." The noun must necessarily be added here. So ch. 18: "Hence every day men leap forth to monstrous crimes"; and below: "They will issue in a greater evil." Epitome ch. 61: "Thence men leap forth to monstrous crimes"; and everywhere "ad", not "in" as in Parrhasius; hence twice, book 6, ch. 5, and book 6, ch. 18: "to leap forth to do harm." Bünemann.

(printed under page 64)

(9) ‹Illaesibilis› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Illaesibilis. Rara vox, quam nullibi reperire potui. — Legitur apud Buneman. Ille stabilis, et in hanc variantem notam sequentem exhibet: — Ille stabilis. Omnes editiones, illaesibilis: etiam duo Guelferb., illaesibilis, et sequitur laesio. Suspecta mihi dudum visa vox illaesibilis, qua alibi semper abstinuit; unde c. 17: Nihil est, quod ei (Deo) vim possit inferre; et c. 5: qui laedi non potest. Optime haec ratio alteri sequenti, quia fragilis est, opponitur. Ita cap. 15: In homine... quia fragilis et mortalis est... in Deo locum non habet, quia et fragilitas et interitus ab eo alienus est... qui semper futurus est, id est, stabilis est. Eadem oppositio lib. V Institut., cap. 21: Corpus... imbecillum, fragile, mortale... animus stabilis et constans et perpetuus. Iterum de Deo lib. VI Institut. cap. 15: Ut idem (Deus) sit semper et stabilis, et immutabilis, et inconcussus. Ne tamen lexica aliquid detrimenti capiant proscripta hac voce, quam Walchius maxime raram, nec alibi eam se potuisse reperire dicit, in Lactantii locum, sufficiam Tertullianum, qui dixit adv. Valentin. cap. 27: Pater impassibilis, illaesibilis. BUN.

"Incapable of injury." A rare word, which I have been able to find nowhere else. — Bünemann reads "Ille stabilis", and on this variant gives the following note: — "Ille stabilis." All the editions have "illaesibilis"; the two Wolfenbüttel manuscripts too have "illaesibilis", and "laesio" follows. The word "illaesibilis" has long seemed suspect to me, a word he everywhere else avoided; hence ch. 17: "There is nothing that can do violence to him (God)"; and ch. 5: "who cannot be injured." This reason is very well set against the other that follows, "because he is frail." So ch. 15: "In man … because he is frail and mortal … has no place in God, because both frailty and death are foreign to him … who will always be, that is, is steadfast." The same opposition in Institutes book 5, ch. 21: "The body … weak, frail, mortal … the mind steadfast and constant and perpetual." Again of God, Institutes book 6, ch. 15: "So that the same (God) may be always both steadfast and unchangeable and unshaken." Yet lest the lexicons suffer any loss by the banishing of this word, which Walch calls very rare and says he could find nowhere else, I put Tertullian in Lactantius's place, who said, Against the Valentinians ch. 27: "The Father impassible, incapable of injury." Bünemann.

(printed under page 64)

(10) ‹Inurit enim laesio dolorem› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Inurit enim laesio dolorem. Sic restitui ex mss. 4 Reg. aliisque mss. plurimis, vet. edit. Rom. et Cellar. In 6 scriptis et 14 excusis est Irritat. Sed et infra dixit, dolorem inureret, cap. 18 circa med.

"For injury burns in pain." So I have restored it from four Royal manuscripts and very many other manuscripts, the old Roman edition and Cellarius's. In six manuscripts and 14 printed copies it is "Irritat". But below too he said "dolorem inureret", ch. 18, about the middle.

(printed under page 64)

(11) ‹Illa ira justa› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Illa ira justa. Mss. tres. rec. addunt qua movetur; 3 al. rec. quae movetur; quas voces utpote inutiles expunxi, et absunt a caeteris mss. et vet. edit. Rom.

"That just anger." Three recent manuscripts add "qua movetur"; three other recent ones, "quae movetur"; these words I have struck out as useless, and they are absent from the other manuscripts and the old Roman edition.

(printed under page 64)

(12) ‹Quibus etsi judex› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Quibus etsi judex. Ita cuncti fere mss. ac 2 vet. edd. In 3 scriptis rec. et aliis editis est et.

"To whom although a judge." So nearly all the manuscripts and two old editions. In three recent manuscripts and other printed editions it is "et".

(printed under page 64)

(13) ‹Ut servi liberi, ut conjuges, et discipuli› · lemma note, printed under col 130

Ut servi liberi, ut conjuges, et discipuli. Distributio (continues)

"As slaves, children, as wives, and pupils." The distribution … (continues)

(printed under page 64)

Page

running head: 129 LIBER DE IRA DE (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹quae a Cicerone dicuntur›; B ‹pienterque fit.›; C ‹c. 6, quam acerbissimum› (beside the notes); D ‹ponimus. Et lib. II de Ira› (beside the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 7:130

Ira composuit. « Ira est, inquit, cupiditas ulciscendae injuriae. Alii, ut ait Posidonius, cupiditas puniendi ejus, a quo te inique putes laesum. » Quidam ita definierunt : « Ira est incitatio animi ad nocendum ei qui, aut nocuit, aut nocere voluit. » Aristotelis definitio non multum a nostra abest. Ait enim iram esse cupiditatem doloris rependendi. Haec est ira, de qua superius diximus, injusta ; quae etiam mutis inest : in homine vero cohibenda est, ne ad aliquod maximum malum prosiliat per furorem. Haec in Deo esse non potest, quia illaesibilis est ; in homine autem, quia fragilis est, invenitur. Inurit enim laesio dolorem ; et dolor facit ultionis cupiditatem. Ubi est ergo illa ira justa adversus delinquentes ? quae utique non est cupiditas ultionis, quia non praecedit injuria. Non dico de iis qui adversus leges peccant, quibus etsi judex sine crimine irasci postest, fingamus tamen, eum sedato animo esse debere, cum subjicit poenae nocentem, quia legum sit minister, non animi, aut potestatis suae ; sic enim volunt, qui iram conantur evellere. Sed de iis potissimum dico, qui sunt nostrae potestatis, ut servi, liberi, conjuges et discipuli : quos cum delinquere videmus, incitamur ad coercendum.

Anger he composed. "Anger," he says, "is the desire of avenging an injury. Others, as Posidonius says, [call it] the desire of punishing him by whom you think you have been unjustly hurt." Some have defined it thus: "Anger is an incitement of the mind to harming him who has either harmed or wished to harm." Aristotle's definition is not far removed from ours. For he says that anger is the desire of repaying pain. This is the anger of which we spoke above, the unjust kind; it is present even in dumb animals, but in man it must be restrained, lest through fury it leap forth into some very great evil. This cannot exist in God, because He cannot be hurt; but in man, because he is frail, it is found. For hurt burns pain into him, and pain produces the desire of revenge. Where then is that just anger against wrongdoers? It is certainly not a desire of revenge, because no injury precedes it. I do not speak of those who sin against the laws, with whom, although a judge can be angry without blame, let us nevertheless suppose that he ought to be of a calm mind when he subjects the guilty to punishment, because he is the minister of the laws, not of his own mind or power; for so those would have it who try to tear anger out. But I speak above all of those who are in our power, such as slaves, children, wives and pupils: when we see them doing wrong, we are roused to restrain them.

Necesse est enim bono ac justo displicere, quae

For it must needs be that those things displease the good and just man which

Editors' notes and page, col. 130

Page

running head: [LIB]ER DE IRA DEI. 130 (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹Ira composuit. « Ira est›; B ‹de iis qui adversus leges peccant›; C ‹aliquod maximum malum prosiliat (in the Variorum notae, not set)›; D ‹imbecillum, fragile, mortale (in the Variorum notae, not set)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence with "Ira composuit." (the column before ends "...os de", evidently the title of Seneca's De Ira), so the English begins mid-sentence too; the full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE." across both columns, cut off at the left edge, stands between the text and the notes and is not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (Ne ad aliquod maximum malum ... Distributio) are left for the later pass; the second paragraph runs on into column 131

PL 7:131

prava sunt; et cui malum displicet, moveri, cum id fieri videt. Ergo surgimus ad vindictam; non quia laesi sumus, sed ut disciplina servetur, mores corrigantur, licentia comprimatur. Haec est ira justa, quae sicut in homine necessaria est ad pravitatis correctionem, sic utique in Deo, a quo ad hominem pervenit exemplum. Nam sicuti nos potestati nostrae subjectos coercere debemus, ita etiam peccata universorum Deus coercere debet. Quod ut faciat, irascatur necesse est; quia naturale est bono ad alterius peccatum moveri et incitari. Ergo definire debuerunt: Ira est motus animi ad coercenda peccata insurgentis. Nam definitio Ciceronis « Ira est libido ulciscendi, » non multum a superioribus distat. Ira autem, quam possumus vel furorem, vel iracundiam nominare, haec ne in homine quidem debet esse, quia tota vitiosa est. Ira vero, quae ad correctionem vitiorum pertinet, nec homini adimi debet, nec Deo potest, quia et utilis est rebus humanis, et necessaria.

are depraved; and for one to whom evil is displeasing, to be moved when he sees it being done. Therefore we rise up to punishment, not because we have been injured, but so that discipline may be preserved, morals corrected, and licence suppressed. This is just anger, which, as it is necessary in man for the correction of depravity, so certainly is it in God, from Whom the example has come down to man. For just as we ought to restrain those subject to our power, so also God ought to restrain the sins of all. And in order that He may do this, it is necessary that He be angry; because it is natural for a good man to be moved and roused at another's sin. Therefore they ought to have defined it thus: Anger is a motion of the mind rising up to restrain sins. For the definition of Cicero, "Anger is a desire of taking vengeance," does not differ much from the ones above. But that anger which we can call either fury or irascibility ought not to exist even in man, because it is wholly vicious. But the anger which pertains to the correction of vices ought neither to be taken away from man, nor can it be from God, because it is both useful to human affairs and necessary.

CAPUT XVIII.

Chapter XVIII.

De peccatis vindicandis, sine ira fieri non posse.

That the punishing of sins cannot be done without anger.

Quid opus est, inquiunt, ira, cum sine hoc affectu peccata corrigi possint? Atqui nullus est, qui peccantem possit videre tranquille: possit fortasse, qui legibus praesidet, quia facinus non sub oculis ejus admittitur, sed defertur aliunde tanquam dubium, nec

What need is there, they say, of anger, since sins can be corrected without this emotion? And yet there is no one who can look upon a man sinning with tranquillity: perhaps he can who presides over the laws, because the crime is not committed under his eyes, but is reported from elsewhere as something doubtful, nor

Editors' notes and page, col. 131

Footnotes

(printed under page 65)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 131

(continued) et copulatio est mss. CELL. — Huc pertinet lib. VI, cap. 19: Irae affectus ad coercenda peccata eorum, qui sunt in nostra potestate, id est, ut arctiore disciplina minor aetas ad probitatem justitiamque formetur. Nostis reliqua. BUN.

(printed under page 65)

(1) ‹Moveri› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Moveri. Sic lego ex praecedenti periodi membro, et ex mss. Cauc., Baluz., aliisque ac multis editis. In quamplurimis mss. et 4 edd. est movetur.

"To be moved." So I read from the preceding member of the period, and from the manuscripts Caucianus, Baluze's and others, and many printed editions. In very many manuscripts and four editions it is "movetur".

(printed under page 65)

(2) ‹Cum id fieri videt› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Cum id fieri videt. Cauc. et 18 impressi, videat.

"When he sees it done." The Caucianus and 18 printed editions have "videat".

(printed under page 65)

(3) ‹Sic utique in Deo› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Sic utique in Deo. Scil. est necessaria. Reimm.: Sit utique in Deo. Sicut... sic saepe et eleganter se excipiunt in Cicerone et nostro. BUN.

"So surely in God." That is, it is necessary. Reimmann's copy: "Sit utique in Deo." "Sicut … sic" often and elegantly answer each other in Cicero and our author. Bünemann.

(printed under page 65)

(4) ‹Nam definitio Ciceronis› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Nam definitio Ciceronis. Stoica, seu ex sententia stoicorum lib. IV Tusc. cap. 9 producta: Sic definiunt, inquit, ut ira sit libido puniendi ejus, qui videatur laesisse injuria. CELL. — Non ad illum quem Cellarius indicat, locum respexit Lactantius, sed ad lib. IV Tusc. cap. 19: Est enim ira ulciscendi libido. Ubi confer Davisium. Idem Cicero lib. III Tusc. cap. 5: Sic enim definitur iracundia: Ulciscendi libido. BUN.

"For Cicero's definition." The Stoic one, brought forward according to the Stoics' view in Tusculans book 4, ch. 9: "They define it thus," he says, "that anger is the lust to punish him who seems to have injured one unjustly." Cellarius. — Lactantius did not have in view the passage Cellarius points to, but Tusculans book 4, ch. 19: "For anger is the lust for revenge." Compare Davies there. The same Cicero, Tusculans book 3, ch. 5: "For irascibility is defined thus: the lust for revenge." Bünemann.

(printed under page 65)

(5) ‹Ira autem› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Ira autem. Haec verba quae scriptis Bonon., Tax., Lips. et 5 vulgatis desunt, addimus ex mss. 5 Reg., 6 Colb., 4 Oxon., 5 aliis et 4 excusis. In Cauc., Ultr. et 5 vet. editis est Iram autem, mendose.

"But anger." These words, which are lacking in the Bologna, Tax and Leipzig manuscripts and five common editions, we add from five Royal manuscripts, six Colbert, four Oxford, five others and four printed copies. In the Caucianus, the Ultrajectinus and five old editions it is "Iram autem", wrongly.

(printed under page 65)

(6) ‹Quia tota vitiosa est› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Quia tota vitiosa est. Mss. rec. 1 Reg. et 1 Colb. ac 13 edit., quae.

"Because it is wholly vicious." The recent manuscripts one Royal and one Colbert, and 13 editions, have "quae".

(printed under page 65)

(7) ‹Qui peccantem› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Qui peccantem. Sic reposui ex 3, vet. edd. Rom. et omnibus mss. praeter Pen. in quo est qui peccata; in caeteris editis, qui peccatorum.

"Who [sees] one sinning." So I have restored it from three old Roman editions and all the manuscripts except Pen., in which it is "qui peccata"; in the other printed editions, "qui peccatorum".

(printed under page 65)

(8) ‹Sed defertur aliunde.... et ideo potest judex non moveri› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Sed defertur aliunde.... et ideo potest judex non moveri. Haec retinenda fuerunt, ut in mss. et in edd. Aldin. et Plant. quae in 10 mss. et edit. 5 desiderantur.

"But it is reported from elsewhere … and therefore the judge can be unmoved." These words had to be kept, as in the manuscripts and in the Aldine and Plantin editions; they are missing in ten manuscripts and five editions.

(printed under page 65)

(9) ‹Potest concedi› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Potest concedi. 1 Reg. rec. et 3 Colo. ac 7 editi praeponunt sed.

"It can be granted." One recent Royal manuscript and three Colbert [printed "Colo."], and seven editions, put "sed" before it.

(printed under page 65)

(10) ‹Ut sine ira faciat, quod facit› · lemma note, printed under col 131

Ut sine ira faciat, quod facit. Deest quod facit in 7 mss. et 3 editis.

"That he does without anger what he does." "Quod facit" is lacking in seven manuscripts and three printed editions.

(printed under page 65)

(11) ‹Aut probat delicta› · lemma note, printed under col 131, runs on to the foot of col 132

Aut probat delicta, etc. Dilemma infirmum. Nam Sopater, ut est apud Stobaeum, mediam quamdam rationem invenit, ut nec judex irascatur, nec impunitas subditis fenestram ad nequitiam aperiat. BETUL.

"Either he approves the offences," etc. A weak dilemma. For Sopater, as found in Stobaeus, discovered a middle course, so that the judge neither is angry nor does impunity open a window to wickedness for his subjects. Betuleius.

(printed under page 65)

(12) ‹Nisi stimulaverit ira et incitaverit› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Nisi stimulaverit ira et incitaverit. Ita mss. 2 Bonon. et plures edit. In 7 scriptis et in ed. Roman. deest ira et incitaverit. In multis est ira, sed deest, et incitaverit.

"Unless anger has goaded and roused him." So two Bologna manuscripts and several editions. In seven manuscripts and the Roman edition "ira et incitaverit" is lacking. In many "ira" is present, but "et incitaverit" is lacking.

(printed under page 65)

(13) ‹Qui autem cum moveatur tamen› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Qui autem cum moveatur tamen, etc. Sic lego ex veterrimis mss. 2 Bonon., Regio-Put., 4 aliis Reg., et aliis quinque, in quibus scriptum est commoveatur uno vocabulo, cum sint duo, cum moveatur. Et sic legunt docti viri.

"But he who, though he is moved, yet," etc. So I read from the very old manuscripts, two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, four other Royal and five others, in which "commoveatur" is written as one word, whereas there are two, "cum moveatur". And so learned men read.

(printed under page 65)

(14) ‹Lenitate› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Lenitate. Ita edit. Rom. 1470 et 5 al. cum mss. omnibus, praeter Baluz. et Brun., quibus est levitate, ut 14 vulgatis.

"By gentleness." So the Roman edition of 1470 and five others, with all the manuscripts except Baluze's and the Brunswick, which have "levitate", as do 14 common editions.

(printed under page 65)

(15) ‹Aeternam molestiarum materiam subministrat› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Aeternam molestiarum materiam subministrat. Aeternam, id est perpetuam. Mss. 2 Bon., Tax., aeternam molestiam subministrat.

"Supplies everlasting matter for vexations." "Everlasting", that is, perpetual. The manuscripts two Bologna and Tax have "aeternam molestiam subministrat".

(printed under page 65)

(16) ‹Laudatur Archytas Tarentinus› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Laudatur Archytas Tarentinus. Reperitur haec chria vel apophthegma etiam apud Ciceronem, in IV Tuscul. quaest., apud Valer. Max., lib. IV. cap. 1, de Animi moderatione; apud Plutarch., de Pueris educandis; atque rursus apud eumdem, de Sera numinis animadversione.

"Archytas of Tarentum is praised." This chreia or apophthegm is found also in Cicero, Tusculan Disputations book 4; in Valerius Maximus, book 4, ch. 1, On moderation of mind; in Plutarch, On the education of children; and again in the same author, On the delay of divine punishment.

(printed under page 65)

(17) ‹Miserum te› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Miserum te. Ambrosius, lib. I Off., c. 21, ita: O te infelicem! quam te afflictarem, nisi iratus essem! Seneca similia, lib. I de Ira, c. 15, de Socrate; et l. III de Ira, c. 12, de Platone. BUN.

"Wretch that you are." Ambrose, De officiis book 1, ch. 21, thus: "O unhappy man! How I would punish you, if I were not angry!" Seneca has similar things, On Anger book 1, ch. 15, of Socrates; and On Anger book 3, ch. 12, of Plato. Bünemann.

(printed under page 65)

(18) ‹Unicum hoc exemplum› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Unicum hoc exemplum. Observat Heumannus, unicum hic esse plane singulare. Aliquoties ita ipse Lactantius, ex. grat., de Opif., c. 20. M. Tullius eloquentiae ipsius unicum exemplar. BUN.

"This unique example." Heumann observes that "unicum" here means quite singular. Lactantius himself uses it so several times, for example De opificio ch. 20: "Marcus Tullius, the unique exemplar of eloquence itself." Bünemann.

(printed under page 65)

(19) ‹Si (ut ait Plato) nemo prudens punit› · lemma note, printed under col 132

Si (ut ait Plato) nemo prudens punit, etc. Recte: vide seqq. At mss. Cauc., 2 Reg. et 5 alii, necnon 19 edit., Sicut. Vide Plat. de Leg. II. Similis locus est apud eumdem Platonem in Protagora, ad quem Lactantius verius respexisse videtur. Est rursus alius locus Platonicus in quinto de Legibus, hisce pulchre subserviens, et ad sequentem figuram explicandam mire conveniens. Vide apud eumdem Platonem locum citatum ab A. Gellio, lib. VI Noct. Attic., c. 14, (continues)

"If (as Plato says) no wise man punishes," etc. Rightly: see what follows. But the manuscripts Caucianus, two Royal and five others, as well as 19 editions, have "Sicut". See Plato, Laws book 2. A similar passage is in the same Plato's Protagoras, which Lactantius seems more truly to have had in view. There is again another Platonic passage, in the fifth book of the Laws, which serves these words beautifully and fits wonderfully for explaining the following figure. See in the same Plato the passage cited by Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights book 6, ch. 14, … (continues)

(printed under page 65)

Page

running head: 131 FIRM. LACTANT (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹prava sunt; et cui malum displicet›; B ‹haec ne in homine quidem debet esse›; C ‹et copulatio est mss. CELL.› (in the notes); D ‹Bun.› (in the notes, before "Ira autem")
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE." above the page-foot notes, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (et copulatio est mss. ...) not set (later pass); right-hand column belongs to col. 132, not set; "XVIII" in the chapter heading has damaged type but is legible; "motus animi ad" is printed with tight spacing; the column ends mid-sentence at "nec"

PL 7:132

unquam potest esse scelus tam clarum, ut defensioni locus non sit; et ideo potest judex non moveri adversus eum, qui potest innocens inveniri. Cumque detectum facinus in lucem venerit, jam non sua, sed legum sententia utitur. Potest concedi, ut sine ira faciat, quod facit; habet enim quod sequatur. Nos certe, cum domi peccatur a nostris, sive id cernimus, sive sentimus, indignari necesse est; ipse enim peccati aspectus indignus est. Nam qui non movetur omnino, aut probat delicta, quod est turpius et injustius, aut molestiam castigandi fugit, quam sedatus animus et quieta mens aspernatur ac renuit, nisi stimulaverit ira et incitaverit. Qui autem cum moveatur, tamen intempestiva lenitate, vel saepius quam necesse est, vel etiam semper ignoscit, is plane et illorum vitam perdit, quorum audaciam nutrit ad facinora majora, et sibi ipsi aeternam molestiarum materiam subministrat. Vitiosa est ergo in peccatis irae suae cohibitio.

ever can a crime be so manifest that there is no room for a defence; and therefore the judge can remain unmoved against one who may be found innocent. And when the crime, once detected, has come to light, he no longer uses his own judgement but that of the laws. It can be granted that he does without anger what he does; for he has something to follow. We, certainly, when wrong is done at home by our own people, whether we see it or perceive it, must be indignant; for the very sight of wrongdoing is unworthy. For he who is not moved at all either approves the offences, which is more shameful and more unjust, or shuns the trouble of chastising, which a calm spirit and a quiet mind scorns and refuses unless anger has goaded and roused it. But he who, although he is moved, nevertheless with untimely leniency pardons either more often than is necessary or even always, plainly ruins the life of those whose audacity he nourishes towards greater crimes, and supplies himself with an everlasting source of troubles. Blameworthy, therefore, is the restraint of one's anger in the face of wrongdoing.

Laudatur Archytas Tarentinus, qui cum in agro corrupta esse omnia comperisset, villici sui culpam redarguens, Miserum te, inquit, quem jam verberibus necassem, nisi iratus essem. Unicum hoc exemplum temperantiae putant: sed auctoritate ducti non vident quam inepta et locutus fuerit, et fecerit. Nam si (ut ait Plato) nemo prudens punit, quia peccatum est, sed ne peccetur, apparet quam malum vir sapiens

Archytas of Tarentum is praised, who, when he had found that everything on his farm had been ruined, rebuking the fault of his steward, said: Wretch that you are, whom I would already have flogged to death, had I not been angry. They regard this as a unique example of self-restraint; but, led by authority, they do not see how foolishly he both spoke and acted. For if (as Plato says) no prudent man punishes because wrong has been done, but so that wrong may not be done, it is evident how bad a one the wise man

Editors' notes and page, col. 132

Page

running head: ...IRM. LACTANTII 132 (cut off at left; column number printed blurred)
marginal letters: A ‹unquam potest esse scelus›; B ‹rum vitam perdit, quorum›; C ‹rationem invenit, ut nec judex› (in the notes, not set); D ‹candis; atque rursus apud eumdem› (in the notes, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (unquam) and ends mid-sentence (sapiens); full-width heading ‹...RIORUM NOTAE.› (Variorum notae) printed across both columns below the text block, cut off at left edge, not set; the editors' notes below it (Nisi stimulaverit..., Lenitate..., Laudatur Archytas..., Si ut ait Plato...) are page-foot commentary, left for the later pass; digitization stamp at foot not set; malum at column end presumably agrees with a noun in the next column, hence the bracketed supplement

PL 7:133

proposuerit exemplum. Si enim sen⟨s⟩erint servi dominum suum saevire cum non irascitur, tum parcere cum irascitur, non peccabunt utique leviter, ne verberentur; sed quantum poterunt gravissime, ut stomachum ejus incitent atque impune discedant. Ego vero laudarem, si cum fuisset iratus, dedisset irae suae spatium, ut residente per intervallum temporis animi tumore, haberet modum castigatio. Non ergo propter irae magnitudinem donanda erat poena, sed differenda, ne aut peccanti majorem justo dolorem inureret, aut castiganti furorem. Nunc vero quae tandem aequitas, aut quae sapientia est, ut aliquis ob exiguum delictum puniatur, ob maximum non puniatur? quod si naturam rerum causasque didicisset, nunquam tam importunam continentiam profiteretur, ut nequam servus iratum sibi fuisse dominum gratularetur. Nam sicut corpns humanum Deus multis et variis sensibus ad usum vitae necessariis instruxit, sic et animo varios attribuit affectus, quibus vitae ratio constaret,

set forth as an example. For if slaves perceive that their master is harsh when he is not angry, but spares them when he is angry, they will certainly not commit light offences, lest they be beaten, but the gravest they can, so as to provoke his anger and get away unpunished. I for my part would have praised him if, when he had been angry, he had given his anger room, so that, once the swelling of his mind had subsided over an interval of time, the chastisement might have had measure. Therefore the penalty ought not to have been remitted on account of the greatness of his anger, but deferred, lest he should brand either upon the offender a pain greater than is just, or upon the chastiser fury. But as it is, what fairness, pray, or what wisdom is it that someone should be punished for a slight offence and not be punished for a very great one? But if he had learned the nature and causes of things, he would never have professed so ill-timed a self-restraint that a worthless slave should rejoice that his master had been angry with him. For as God has furnished the human body with many and various senses necessary for the use of life, so also to the mind He has assigned various affections, by which the conduct of life might be maintained,

Editors' notes and page, col. 133

Footnotes

(printed under page 66)

(0) ‹—› · continuation of a lemma note from page 65, printed at the head of the foot under col 133

[…] ex Gorgia; et apud Senec., in fine I de Ira, et ad fin. II cap. 31.

[…] from Gorgias; and in Seneca, at the end of On Anger book 1, and at the end of book 2, ch. 31.

(printed under page 66)

(1) ‹Ut stomachum ejus incitent› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Ut stomachum ejus incitent. Mss. 9, pro ejus, legunt in his. Mss. 2 Bonon. et 6 alii, ut stomachum perversi hominis incitent. Quae lectio arridet Isaeo. Ms. Ball., perversi homines.

"So as to rouse his bile." Nine manuscripts read "in his" for "ejus". Two Bologna manuscripts and six others have "ut stomachum perversi hominis incitent" ("so as to rouse the bile of a perverse man"). This reading pleases Isaeus. Baluze's manuscript has "perversi homines".

(printed under page 66)

(2) ‹Residente..... animi tumore› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Residente..... animi tumore. Eleganter dicta haec omnia: residente, id est composito, sedato. Cic., lib. III Tusc., c. 12: Cum tumor animi resedisset. BUN.

"When the swelling of the mind … has subsided." All this is elegantly said: "residente", that is, settled, calmed. Cicero, Tusculans book 3, ch. 12: "When the swelling of the mind had subsided." Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(3) ‹Differenda› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Differenda. Ea vero mens fuit Socratis, de quo Seneca, lib. I, de Ira, cap. 15 extr. BUN.

"To be put off." This indeed was the mind of Socrates, of whom Seneca speaks, On Anger book 1, end of ch. 15. Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(4) ‹Dolorem inureret› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Dolorem inureret. Sic supra, inurit laesio dolorem, cap. 17, 1 Colb., vinceret, pro inureret, 3 Colb., Brun., immitteret. Caeteri ut in textu. — Dolorem inureret. Videtur noster respexisse ad Cicer. lib. III Tusculan., cap. 9: Proprium est irati cupere a quo laesus videatur, ei quam maximum dolorem inurere. BUN.

"Should burn in pain." So above, "injury burns in pain", ch. 17. One Colbert has "vinceret" for "inureret"; three Colbert and the Brunswick, "immitteret". The others as in the text. — "Dolorem inureret." Our author seems to have had in view Cicero, Tusculans book 3, ch. 9: "It is the mark of an angry man to desire to burn the greatest possible pain into him by whom he seems to have been injured." Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(5) ‹Quae tandem aequitas, aut quae sapientia est› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Quae tandem aequitas, aut quae sapientia est. Ita quamplurimi mss. et edit. Rom. 1470, et al. 5. In ms. Ultr. legitur, quaenam sapientia est; in Cauc. 1, Colb., Brun. et 8 vulgatis, aut sapientia est; in 2 Reg. rec., 2 Colb. et Baluz., quae tandem aut aequitas, aut quae sapientia est.

"What equity, pray, or what wisdom is this?" So very many manuscripts, the Roman edition of 1470 and five others. In the Ultrajectinus manuscript one reads "quaenam sapientia est"; in the Caucianus, one Colbert, the Brunswick and eight common editions, "aut sapientia est"; in two recent Royal, two Colbert and Baluze's, "quae tandem aut aequitas, aut quae sapientia est".

(printed under page 66)

(6) ‹Ob exiguum delictum› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Ob exiguum delictum. Sic mss. antiquiss., 2 Bon., Regio Put. et 1 al. Reg. rec., 2 Colb., Clarom. ac 12 editi. Et recte. Lege et expende quae praecesserunt, et ea quae sequuntur. In 12 scriptis rec. et 2 vet. ed. Rom., pro delictum legitur dolorem. — Ob exiguum delictum, Ep., c. 38. Qui........ nullam facit differentiam delictorum, aut levia magnis suppliciis afficienda censet, quod est crudelis judicis, aut gravia parvis, quod est dissoluti, utrumque reipublicae incommodum. Si enim summa scelera leviter puniantur, audacia malis crescet ad facinora majora; et si levibus delictis poena gravior irrogetur, multi...in periculum venient. BUN.

"For a slight offence." So the oldest manuscripts, two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus and one other recent Royal, two Colbert, the Claromontanus, and 12 editions. And rightly. Read and weigh what went before and what follows. In 12 recent manuscripts and two old Roman editions "dolorem" is read for "delictum". — "For a slight offence": Epitome ch. 38: "He who … makes no distinction between offences, either judges that light ones are to be visited with great punishments, which is the part of a cruel judge, or grave ones with small, which is the part of a lax one; both are harmful to the commonwealth. For if the greatest crimes are punished lightly, boldness will grow in the wicked towards greater crimes; and if a heavier penalty is laid on light offences, many … will come into danger." Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(7) ‹Affectus› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Affectus. Quae his sectionibus disputat, similiter exsecutus est lib. VI, cap. 19. BUN.

"Affections." What he argues in these sections he has treated in the same way in book 6, ch. 19. Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(8) ‹Prodendae sobolis gratia› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Prodendae sobolis gratia. Ita reposui ex omnibus mss. demptis 2 Reg. rec., in quibus, ut et in editis, est, producendae. Ed. Rom. 1468, corrupte, perdendae pro prodendae.

"For the sake of propagating offspring." So I have restored it from all the manuscripts except two recent Royal ones, in which, as also in the printed editions, it is "producendae". The Roman edition of 1468 corruptly has "perdendae" for "prodendae".

(printed under page 66)

(9) ‹Ira et affectu› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Ira et affectu. Id est, irae affectu, ἓν διὰ δυοῖν. Nisi et hic malis legere irae affectu, uti l. VI, c. 19, bis irae affectus dicitur. BUN.

"By anger and affection." That is, by the affection of anger, a hendiadys ("one through two"). Unless here too you prefer to read "irae affectu", as in book 6, ch. 19, "irae affectus" is said twice. Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(10) ‹Ergo etiam non peccantibus irascuntur, etiam paribus› · lemma note, printed under col 133

Ergo etiam non peccantibus irascuntur, etiam paribus. In mss. Lipsiensibus, 4 Reg. rec., 4 Colb., Clar., 2 vet. ed. Rom., deest ergo etiam non peccantibus; item in 8 al. ed., ubi irascuntur aut paribus; alia desunt.

"So they are angry even with those who do not sin, even with their equals." In the Leipzig manuscripts, four recent Royal, four Colbert, the Claromontanus and two old Roman editions, "ergo etiam non peccantibus" is lacking; likewise in eight other editions, where there is "irascuntur aut paribus" and the rest is lacking.

(printed under page 66)

(11) ‹Aut etiam superioribus› · lemma note, printed under col 133, runs on to the foot of col 134

Aut etiam superioribus. Eleganter, aut etiam, ut c. 20 Cic., lib. II de Nat. deor., c. 3, caeteris rebus etiam potioribus. BUN.

"Or even with their superiors." Elegantly, "aut etiam", as in ch. 20; Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods book 2, ch. 3, "than other things, even better ones." Bünemann.

(printed under page 66)

(12) ‹Ad immania facinora› · lemma note, printed under col 134

Ad immania facinora. Sic restitui ex mss. 2 Bon., Regio-Put., Cauc., 5 Colbert. et 10 aliis, et edit. Betul., Is., Spark. In 1 Reg. rec., 1 Colb. et 13 ed. est ad maxima facinora.

"To monstrous crimes." So I have restored it from the manuscripts two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, the Caucianus, five Colbert and ten others, and the editions of Betuleius, Isaeus and Sparke. In one recent Royal, one Colbert and 13 editions it is "ad maxima facinora".

(printed under page 66)

(13) ‹Omitto de figura Dei dicere› · lemma note, printed under col 134

Omitto de figura Dei dicere. Τὸ Dei non extat in 7 mss. Contrarium videre est lib. II, cap. 9, et lib. VI, cap. 25, ubi recte de Deo sensit. — Quod autem de homine dicimus, id etiam de Deo, qui hominem similem sui fecit. Omitto de figura Dei dicere, etc. Corporea Deum praeditum esse figura multis locis asserere videtur Lactantius, cum tamen II Instit., cap. 9, et lib. VI, cap. ult., et lib. VII, c. 3, 9 et 21, vere et recte fateatur, ipsum corporis expertem: adeo facile scriptores interdum sibi contraria et dicunt, et sentiunt. Id asseruerunt non modo philosophi quidam, ut Aristoteles scribit III Metaph. text. 7, scilicet Epicurei, de quibus Cic. I de Nat. deor., et Galen., de philosophic. Hist., cap. 29, sed etiam Judaeorum nonnulli, et ex nostris quidam haeretici, ut Tertullian., quem tamen pie interpretatur S. Augustin., in libro de Haeresib. ad Quodvultdeum, cap. 86. Vadiani item, et Manichaei, ut habetur ex S. Augustino, in III Confess., cap. 7, qui omnes ab errore illo cognomen Anthropomorphitarum adepti sunt. De quibus videnda sunt quae scribit Nicephor., lib. II, cap. 14, et lib. XIII, cap. 10, eo quoque infectum olim pene omne genus monachorum qui in Aegypto morabantur, scribit Cassianus, Collat. 10, cap. 1. Quod enim Scriptura dicat hominem ad Dei imaginem et similitudinem creatum, illi humilem litterae sonum attendentes, eum errorem concipiebant. Ibi vero similitudo et imago non corporaliter, sed spiritaliter accipitur, sive Latinorum sententiam amplectamur, ut illa imago dicatur respectu mentis humanae, et trium ejus potentiarum, quibus sanctissima Trinitas aliquo modo repraesentetur, ut docet sanctus Augustinus in lib. de Trinitat. sive graecorum patrum, ut illa imago et similitudo sit respectu dominii quod obtinet, non modo terrenarum omnium rerum, ut Chrysost. sensit Homil. 8, in I Genes., sed etiam suorum affectuum et motuum per libertatem arbitrii, quatenus rationi adversantur, ut Clemens Alexandr., VI Strom., Basil., Homil. 10, in Hexaemer.; Chrysost., Homil. 25 super Genes.; Plato in Phaedon., referente Euseb., lib. II Praepar., cap. 14, et Porphyrius, eodem Eus. attestante. Vide contra eam haeresim concilium Late- (continues)

"I pass over speaking of the form of God." The word "Dei" does not stand in seven manuscripts. The contrary is to be seen in book 2, ch. 9, and book 6, ch. 25, where he thought rightly about God. — "What we say of man, we say also of God, who made man like himself. I pass over speaking of the form of God," etc. In many places Lactantius seems to assert that God is endowed with a bodily form, though in Institutes 2, ch. 9, book 6, last chapter, and book 7, chs. 3, 9 and 21, he truly and rightly confesses that he is without a body: so easily do writers sometimes both say and think things contrary to themselves. This was asserted not only by certain philosophers, as Aristotle writes in Metaphysics 3, text 7, namely the Epicureans, of whom Cicero speaks in On the Nature of the Gods 1, and Galen in the History of Philosophy, ch. 29, but also by some of the Jews, and among our own by certain heretics, such as Tertullian, whom nevertheless St Augustine interprets charitably in the book On Heresies to Quodvultdeus, ch. 86. Likewise the Vadiani and the Manichees, as we have from St Augustine, Confessions 3, ch. 7, all of whom got the name of Anthropomorphites from that error. On them see what Nicephorus writes, book 2, ch. 14, and book 13, ch. 10; Cassian writes, Conference 10, ch. 1, that almost the whole body of monks then living in Egypt was once infected with it. For because Scripture says that man was created to the image and likeness of God, they, attending to the lowly sound of the letter, conceived that error. But there the likeness and image is taken not bodily but spiritually: whether we embrace the view of the Latins, that the image is spoken of with respect to the human mind and its three powers, by which the most holy Trinity is in some way represented, as St Augustine teaches in the books On the Trinity; or that of the Greek Fathers, that the image and likeness is with respect to the dominion it holds, not only over all earthly things, as Chrysostom thought, Homily 8 on Genesis 1, but also over its own affections and motions, through freedom of choice, so far as they oppose reason, as Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6; Basil, Homily 10 on the Hexaemeron; Chrysostom, Homily 25 on Genesis; Plato in the Phaedo, as Eusebius reports, Preparation book 2, ch. 14; and Porphyry, the same Eusebius witnessing. Against that heresy see the Council of Late[ran] … (continues)

(printed under page 66)

Page

running head: 133 LIBER DE IRA DE (cut off at the image edge; presumably LIBER DE IRA DEI)
marginal letters: A proposuerit exemplum. Si enim sen⟨s⟩erint servi do-; B sicut corpns humanum Deus multis et variis sensibus; C beside the page-foot note line "Dolorem inureret. Sic supra"; D beside the page-foot note line "est dissoluti, utrumque reipublicae"
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "sen⟨s⟩erint" has a visible gap in the type, read as senserint. "corpns" seems to be printed with a turned u, which is unsure. A stray mark after "sic" is not set. The full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE", which is cut off at the right edge, is not set. The page-foot Variorum notae (beginning "ex Gorgia; et apud Senec.") are left for the later pass. No editors' matter in the text block.

PL 7:134

ut libidinem prodendae sobolis gratia dedit, sic iram cohibendorum causa delictorum.

as He gave lust for the sake of bringing forth offspring, so [He gave] anger for the sake of restraining offences.

Verum ii qui nesciunt fines bonorum ac malorum, sicut libidine utuntur ad corruptelas et ad voluptates, sic ira et affectu ad nocendum, dum iis quos odio habent irascuntur. Ergo etiam non peccantibus irascuntur, etiam paribus aut etiam superioribus. Hinc quotidie ad immania facinora prosilitur: hinc tragoediae saepe nascuntur. Esset igitur laudandus Archytas, si, cum alicui civi et pari facienti sibi injuriam fuisset iratus, repressisset se tamen et patientia furoris impetum mitigasset. Haec sui cohibitio gloriosa est, qua compescitur aliquod imminens magnum malum. Servorum autem filiorumque peccata non coercere, peccatum est; evadent enim ad majus malum per impunitatem. Hic non cohibenda ira, sed etiam, si jacet, excitanda est. Quod autem de homine dicimus, id etiam de Deo, qui hominem similem sui fecit. Omitto de figura Dei dicere, quia stoici negant habere ullam

But those who do not know the bounds of good and evil, just as they use lust for debaucheries and for pleasures, so they use anger and passion for doing harm, while they grow angry with those whom they hold in hatred. Therefore they grow angry even with those who do not sin, even with equals or even with superiors. Hence every day men leap into monstrous crimes; hence tragedies often arise. Archytas, therefore, would be worthy of praise if, when he had been angry with some citizen, his equal, who was doing him an injury, he had nevertheless checked himself and by patience softened the onset of his fury. This self-restraint is glorious, by which some great impending evil is held in check. But not to restrain the sins of servants and sons is a sin; for through impunity they will go on to greater evil. Here anger is not to be restrained, but even, if it lies dormant, to be roused. Now what we say of man, that we say also of God, Who made man like Himself. I pass over speaking of the shape of God, because the Stoics deny that [He] has any

Editors' notes and page, col. 134

Page

running head: …ER DE IRA DEI. (cut off at left edge; presumably LIBER DE IRA DEI.)
marginal letters: A ‹ut libidinem prodendae sobolis›; B ‹excitanda est. Quod autem›; C ‹homine dicimus, id etiam de Deo› (in the notes); D ‹Cassianus, Collat. 10› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: "prodendae" set as printed (unsure; other editions read procreandae); "libidine" looks like "libidlne" in the image, taken as damaged type, unsure; column ends mid-sentence at "ullam"; full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE." below the text block, cut off at the left edge, not set; the editors' notes below it (Commentarius) are left for the later pass

PL 7:135

formam Deum; et ingens alia materia nascetur, si eos coarguere velimus: de animo tantum loquor. Si Deo subjacet cogitare, sapere, intelligere, providere, praestare, ex omnibus autem animalibus homo solus haec habet; ergo ad Dei similitudinem factus est: sed ideo procedit in vitium, quia de terrena fragilitate permistus, non potest id quod a Deo sumpsit, incorruptum purumque servare, nisi ab eodem Deo justitiae praeceptis imbuatur.

form, [namely] God; and a great deal of other matter will arise, if we wish to refute them: I speak only of the mind. If thinking, being wise, understanding, foreseeing and excelling pertain to God, and of all living creatures man alone has these things, then he was made to the likeness of God: but he proceeds into vice for this reason, that, being mixed with earthly frailty, he cannot keep incorrupt and pure that which he took from God, unless he is imbued by the same God with the precepts of justice.

CAPUT XIX.

Chapter XIX.

De anima et corpore, deque Providentia.

On the soul and the body, and on Providence.

Sed quoniam compactus est, ut diximus, e duobus, animo et corpore, in altero virtutes, in altero vitia continentur, et impugnant se invicem. Animi enim bona, quae sunt in continendis libidinibus, contraria sunt corpori; et corporis bona, quae sunt in omni genere voluptatum, inimica sunt animo. Sed si virtus animi repugnaverit cupiditatibus, easque compresserit, erit vere Deo similis. Unde apparet animam hominis, quae virtutem divinam capit, non esse mortalem. Sed discrimen illud est, quod cum virtus habeat

But since [man] is compacted, as we have said, of two things, mind and body, in the one virtues are contained, in the other vices, and they fight against each other. For the goods of the mind, which consist in restraining lusts, are contrary to the body; and the goods of the body, which consist in every kind of pleasure, are hostile to the mind. But if the virtue of the mind resists desires and represses them, he will be truly like God. Whence it is evident that the soul of man, which receives divine virtue, is not mortal. But the difference is this, that when virtue has

Editors' notes and page, col. 135

Footnotes

(printed under page 67)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 135

(continued) ranens. sub Innoc. III, in cap. Firmiter, de Summ. Trinit.; S. Augustin. ubi supra, et lib. II Confess., cap. 10, super Genes. ad litt. lib. X, cap. 25; de Doctrina Christi, cap. 6 et 8; S. Thom. I, cont. Gentes, cap. 21, et I part. quaest. 3, art. 1. ISAEUS.

(printed under page 67)

(1) ‹Materia nascetur› · lemma note, printed under col 135

Materia nascetur. Ms. Reg. et editi, nascitur.

"Matter will arise." The Royal manuscript and the printed editions have "nascitur".

(printed under page 67)

(2) ‹Haec habet› · lemma note, printed under col 135

Haec habet. Sic reposui ex ed. Gymnic. et cunctis mss., praeter 1 Reg. rec., 1 Colbert., Cant., in quibus est, ut in editis, hoc habet.

"Has these things." So I have restored it from Gymnich's edition and all the manuscripts except one recent Royal, one Colbert and the Cantabrigian, in which it is, as in the printed editions, "hoc habet".

(printed under page 67)

(3) ‹Compactus est› · lemma note, printed under col 135

Compactus est. Supple homo. — Compactus est, ut diximus, e duobus. Cap. 15: Sic et nos ex duobus aeque repugnantibus compacti sumus, anima et corpore, etc. BUN.

"Is compounded." Supply "man". — "He is compounded, as we have said, of two." Ch. 15: "So we too are compounded of two things equally at odds, soul and body," etc. Bünemann.

(printed under page 67)

(4) ‹Impugnant se invicem› · lemma note, printed under col 135

Impugnant se invicem. Abest se a 9 mss. et ed. Rom. 1470. In Goth. et Lips. est repugnant invicem. — Repugnant invicem. Lib. VI Instit., cap. 3: Sive... virtutes inferas, vitia sua sponte decedent; sive vitia eximas, virtutes ultro subibunt. Sic bonorum ac malorum constituta natura est, ut se invicem semper oppugnent, semper expellant. Lib. VII. cap. 10: Vitia virtutem semper impugnant. Pro media lectione sine pronomine sunt libri in loco gemino. Lib. VII Inst., c. 5: Ergo quia virtutem proposuit homini Deus, licet anima et corpus consociata sint, tamen contraria sunt, et impugnant invicem. BUN.

"They fight against each other." "Se" is absent from nine manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470. In the Gotha and Leipzig it is "repugnant invicem". — "Repugnant invicem." Institutes book 6, ch. 3: "Whether … you bring in virtues, the vices will depart of their own accord; or you take away the vices, the virtues will come in of themselves. So is the nature of good and evil constituted, that they always attack each other, always drive each other out." Book 7, ch. 10: "Vices always fight against virtue." For the middle reading, without the pronoun, the books stand in a twin passage, Institutes book 7, ch. 5: "Therefore, because God set virtue before man, although soul and body are joined together, yet they are contraries and fight against each other." Bünemann.

(printed under page 67)

(5) ‹Repugnaverit cupiditatibus› · lemma note, printed under col 135

Repugnaverit cupiditatibus. Haec lectio est antiquissimorum et opt. mss. 2 Bonon., Regio-Put., Cauc. et 1 al. Reg., 2 Colb., Lips., Baluz. et 14 impressorum. In 13 rec. scriptis ac 2 vet. edd. Rom. et Is. est voluptatibus. Sic quoque Buneman. et notam sequentem exhibet. — Repugnaverit voluptatibus. Alii, Repugnaverit cupiditatibus; prius Heumannus praefert: Ea vox mihi hic rectior videtur, quia eo vocabulo perpetuo hic utitur lib. IV, cap. 17: Utuntur libidine ad capiendas voluptates. Epit., cap. 61 pr.: Libido... appetit voluptates. Conf. infra. Instar commentarii esse possunt, quae disputat de voluptatibus lib. VI, cap. 20, 21, 22 et 23. BUN.

"Has resisted his desires." This is the reading of the oldest and best manuscripts, two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, the Caucianus and one other Royal, two Colbert, the Leipzig and Baluze's, and of 14 printed editions. In 13 recent manuscripts and two old editions, the Roman and Isaeus's, it is "voluptatibus". So too Bünemann, who gives the following note. — "Has resisted pleasures." Others have "Repugnaverit cupiditatibus"; Heumann prefers the former. That word seems more correct to me here, because he uses that term constantly here; book 4, ch. 17: "They use lust to seize pleasures." Epitome ch. 61, beginning: "Lust … seeks pleasures." Compare below. What he argues on pleasures in book 6, chs. 20, 21, 22 and 23 can serve as a commentary. Bünemann.

(printed under page 67)

(6) ‹Easque compresserit› · lemma note, printed under col 135, runs on to the foot of col 136

Easque compresserit. 1 Colb., oppresserit; 2 Bon. et Tax., represserit. Vide infra, cap. 21 initio, temperari debuit furor ejus et comprimi.— Easque compresserit. Reprimere parum est, cum sint comprimendae. Distinctionem observo ex Cic. Orat. 1 in Catil., c. 12: Hoc uno interfecto, intelligo hanc reipublicae pestem paulisper reprimi, non in perpetuum comprimi posse. BUN.

"And has crushed them." One Colbert has "oppresserit"; two Bologna and Tax, "represserit". See below, beginning of ch. 21: "his fury ought to have been tempered and crushed." — "Easque compresserit." To check them is too little, since they must be crushed. I note the distinction from Cicero, First Oration against Catiline, ch. 12: "With this one man killed, I understand that this plague of the commonwealth can be checked for a little while, not crushed for ever." Bünemann.

(printed under page 67)

(7) ‹Erit vere Deo similis› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Erit vere Deo similis. Ita antiq. mss. Regio-Put. et Cauc., 2 al. Regii, Colb. aliique multi, necnon 15 editi. In 2 Colb. est, erit vero Deo similis; in 2 Bonon., Tax., Baluz., vere Deo similis invenietur; in 1 Reg. rec., 1 Colb. et 4 vulgatis, invenitur. Hanc vocem addit etiam Buneman. ut in nota sequenti.—Vere Deo similis invenitur. Alii, Erit vere Deo similis. Satis bene. Thomas. Thys. Gall. Spark., vere similis Deo invenitur. Bonon. Tax. Isaeus, vere Deo similis invenietur. Praetuli ob codd. antiquitatem, et quia ingratum aliquid habere videtur altera lectio, compresserit, erit. Alias res eodem redit. De Opif., cap. 19. Hic beatus, hic... similis Deo sit necesse est: Lib. II Inst., cap 18: Hic coelo dignus judicabitur. Lib. VI, cap. 18: Quia virtute... nihil homine dignius inveniri potest. BUN.

"He will be truly like God." So the old manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and Caucianus, two other Royal, the Colbert and many others, as well as 15 printed editions. In two Colbert it is "erit vero Deo similis"; in two Bologna, Tax and Baluze's, "vere Deo similis invenietur"; in one recent Royal, one Colbert and four common editions, "invenitur". Bünemann too adds this word, as in the following note. — "Is found truly like God." Others have "Erit vere Deo similis", well enough. Thomasius, Thysius, Gallaeus and Sparke: "vere similis Deo invenitur." The Bologna, Tax and Isaeus: "vere Deo similis invenietur." I have preferred it for the antiquity of the codices, and because the other reading, "compresserit, erit", seems to have something unpleasing about it. Otherwise it comes to the same thing. De opificio ch. 19: "He is blessed, he … must needs be like God." Institutes book 2, ch. 18: "He will be judged worthy of heaven." Book 6, ch. 18: "Because … nothing can be found worthier than man in virtue." Bünemann.

(printed under page 67)

(8) ‹Qui se corpori› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Qui se corpori. In 6 mss. et edd. vet. Rom. est quia, quod mox sequitur.

"Who [gave] himself to the body." In six manuscripts and the old Roman editions it is "quia", which follows shortly after.

(printed under page 67)

(9) ‹Divini muneris› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Divini muneris. Sic reposui ex quamplurimis mss. inter quos sunt veterrimi et optimi 2 Bonon., Regio-Put., Cauc. et edd. Betul. ac Cellar. In 3 Reg. rec. et 4 Colb. ac 13 vulgatis est divini numinis; in Clarom., nominis; male.

"Of the divine gift." So I have restored it from very many manuscripts, among which are the oldest and best, two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus and the Caucianus, and the editions of Betuleius and Cellarius. In three recent Royal, four Colbert and 13 common editions it is "divini numinis"; in the Claromontanus, "nominis"; wrongly.

(printed under page 67)

(10) ‹Inquinaverunt› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Inquinaverunt. Ita lego cum omnibus fere mss. et edit. Rom. 1470, Florent., Is. At caeteri vulgati codices cum mss. 1 Reg. rec., 2 Colb., Clarom. habent, inquinarunt.

"Have defiled." So I read with nearly all the manuscripts and the editions Roman 1470, Florentine and Isaeus's. But the other common copies, with the manuscripts one recent Royal, two Colbert and the Claromontanus, have "inquinarunt".

(printed under page 67)

(11) ‹Quod si est mundi administrator› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Quod si est mundi administrator. 1 Bonon. recentior, Qui.

"But if he is the governor of the world." One more recent Bologna manuscript has "Qui".

(printed under page 67)

(12) ‹Si est providus› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Si est providus. Ita cum veteribus editis omnes mss. praeter 1 Reg. rec. et Cauc. quibus est providens, ut 15 impressis.

"If he is provident." So, with the old printed editions, all the manuscripts except one recent Royal and the Caucianus, which have "providens", as do 15 printed editions.

(printed under page 67)

(13) ‹Inquit› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Inquit. Ms. Em. et edd. Cellar., Walch., (inquit aliquis.)

"He says." The Em. manuscript and the editions of Cellarius and Walch have "(inquit aliquis)" ("someone says").

(printed under page 67)

(14) ‹Aristides› · lemma note, printed under col 136

Aristides. Nullus mihi restat ambigendi locus, quin hic legendum sit Aristides, tum ex Cicerone, qui eum de iracundia citat, et Timonem de odio; tum ex antiquissimis et optimis mss. 1 Bonon., Regio-Put., 1 Vatic., 1 Colbert., Bodl. et Clarom. in marg. quod recentiores mss. et editi corruperunt in Aristoteles. Aristides autem Graecus Atheniensis erat, cujus virtutes, verba et exempla commemorat Cicero Tuscul. Quaest. lib. V, n. 106, de Officiis lib. III, n. 44 et (continues)

"Aristides." No room for doubt is left me that "Aristides" is to be read here, both from Cicero, who cites him on irascibility, and Timon on hatred, and from the oldest and best manuscripts, one Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, one Vatican, one Colbert, the Bodleian and the Claromontanus in the margin; the more recent manuscripts and the printed editions have corrupted it into "Aristoteles". Aristides was a Greek, an Athenian, whose virtues, sayings and examples Cicero records in the Tusculan Disputations book 5, no. 106, De officiis book 3, no. 44, and … (continues)

(printed under page 67)

Page

running head: 135 FIRM. LACTANTI (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A formam Deum; et ingens alia materia nascetur, si; B continentur, et impugnant se invicem. Animi enim; C beside the notes (Materia nascetur. Ms. Reg. et editi); D beside the notes (pugnant invicem. Bun.)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: last word "ha-" split at the column break (continues in the next column); full-width heading "VARIORUM NOT[AE]" across both columns, cut off at the right edge, stands between the text and the notes and is not set; the Variorum notes at the page foot (ranens. sub Innoc. III ... Distinctionem observo ex Cic.) are left for the later pass; "permistus" set as printed (variant spelling, not a misprint)

PL 7:136

amaritudinem, et sit dulcis illecebra voluptatis, vincuntur plurimi, et abstrahuntur ad suavitatem. Ii vero, qui se corpori rebusque terrenis addixerunt, premuntur in terram, nec assequi possunt divini muneris gratiam, quia se vitiorum labibus inquinaverunt. Qui autem Deum secuti, eique parentes, corporis desideria contempserint, et virtutem praeferentes voluptatibus, innocentiam justitiamque servaverint: hos Deus ut sui similes recognoscit.

bitterness, and the allurement of pleasure is sweet, very many are overcome and are drawn away to sweetness. But those who have given themselves over to the body and to earthly things are pressed down to the earth, and cannot attain the grace of the divine gift, because they have defiled themselves with the stains of the vices. But those who, following God and obeying Him, have despised the desires of the body and, preferring virtue to pleasures, have kept innocence and justice: these God recognizes as like Himself.

Cum igitur sanctissimam legem posuerit, velitque universos, innocentes ac beneficos esse; potestne non irasci, cum videt contemni legem suam, abjici virtutem, appeti voluptatem? Quod si est mundi administrator, sicut esse debet, non utique contemnit id quod est in omni mundo vel maximum. Si est providus, ut oportet Deum, consulit utique generi humano, quo sit vita nostra et copiosior, et melior, et tutior. Si est pater ac Deus universorum, certe virtutibus hominum delectatur, et vitiis commovetur; ergo et justos diligit, et impios odit. Odio (inquit) opus non est; semel enim statuit bonis praemium, et malis poenam. Quod si aliquis juste innocenterque vivat, et idem Deum nec colat, nec curet omnino, ut Aristides,

Since, therefore, He has laid down a most holy law, and wills all men to be innocent and beneficent, can He fail to be angry when He sees His law despised, virtue cast away, pleasure sought? But if He is the governor of the world, as He ought to be, He certainly does not despise that which is the very greatest thing in the whole world. If He is provident, as befits God, He certainly takes thought for the human race, so that our life may be both more abundant, and better, and safer. If He is the Father and God of all things, surely He is delighted by the virtues of men and is moved by their vices; therefore He both loves the just and hates the impious. "There is no need," he says, "of hatred; for He has once for all appointed a reward for the good and a punishment for the wicked." But if someone lives justly and innocently, and the same man neither worships God nor cares for Him at all, like Aristides,

Editors' notes and page, col. 136

Page

running head: RM. LACTANTII | 136 (cut off at the left edge of the image)
marginal letters: A beat amaritudinem; B vidus, ut oportet Deum; C editi. In 2 Colb. est (in the Variorum notae); D edit. Rom. 1470, Florent. (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with the fragment "beat", the rest of a word (habeat) broken from column 135; ends mid-sentence at "ut Aristides,"; the full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" across both columns, cut off at the left edge, stands between the text and the notes and is not set; the Variorum notae in the lower part of the column (Hoc uno interfecto ... through Aristides ... de Officiis lib. III, n. 44 et) are left for the later pass

PL 7:137

ut Aristides et Timon, caeterique philosophorum, cedetne huic impune, quod cum legi Dei obtemperarit, ipsum tamen spreverit? Est igitur aliquid, propter quod Deus possit irasci, tanquam fiducia integritatis adversus eum rebellanti. Si huic potest irasci propter superbiam, cur non magis peccatori, qui legem cum ipso pariter latore contempserit? Judex peccatis veniam dare non potest, quia voluntati servit alienae. Deus autem potest, quia est legis suae ipse disceptator et judex: quam cum poneret, non utique ademit sibi omnem potestatem, sed habet ignoscendi licentiam.

like Aristides and Timon, and the rest of the philosophers, will it go unpunished for such a man that, although he obeyed the law of God, he nevertheless spurned God Himself? There is therefore something on account of which God can be angry, namely with one who, in the confidence of his integrity, rebels against Him. If He can be angry with this man on account of his pride, why not rather with the sinner, who has despised the law together with the Lawgiver Himself? A judge cannot grant pardon for sins, because he serves the will of another. But God can, because He is Himself the arbiter and judge of His own law: when He laid it down, He certainly did not take from Himself all power, but He has the liberty of pardoning.

CAPUT XX.

Chapter XX.

De peccatis et Dei misericordia.

On sins and the mercy of God.

Si potest ignoscere, potest igitur et irasci. Cur ergo, inquiet aliquis, et qui peccant, saepe felices sunt, et qui pie vivunt, saepe miseri? Quia fugitivi et abdicati libere vivunt, et qui sub disciplina patris, aut domini sunt, strictius et frugalius. Virtus enim per mala et probatur, et constat; vitia per voluptatem. Nec tamen ille qui peccat, sperare debet perpetuam impunitatem, quia nulla est perpetua felicitas:

If He can pardon, then He can also be angry. Why then, someone will say, are those who sin often happy, and those who live piously often wretched? Because fugitives and the disinherited live freely, while those who are under the discipline of a father or a master live more strictly and frugally. For virtue is both proved and established through evils, vices through pleasure. Nor yet ought he who sins to hope for perpetual impunity, since there is no perpetual happiness:

Sed scilicet ultima semper / Expectanda dies homini; dicique beatus / Ante obitum nemo supremaque funera debet. (Ovid., Metam., lib. III, vers. 135.)

But surely the last day must always be awaited by man; and no one ought to be called happy before his death and his final funeral rites. (Ovid, Metamorphoses, book 3, line 135.)

ut ait poeta non insuavis. Exitus est, qui arguit felicitatem; et nemo judicium Dei potest, nec vivus effugere, nec mortuus. Habet enim potestatem, et vivos praecipitare de summo, et mortuos aeternis afficere cruciatibus. Imo, inquit, si irascitur Deus, statim

as a not unpleasing poet says. It is the end that proves happiness; and no one can escape the judgement of God, neither living nor dead. For He has the power both to cast the living down from the summit and to afflict the dead with eternal torments. Nay, someone says, if God is angry, immediately

Editors' notes and page, col. 137

Footnotes

(printed under page 68)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 137

(continued) Orat. 32, pro P. Sextio n. 141: Si apud Athenienses homines Graecos Themistoclem illum conservatorem patriae non deterruit... Aristidis fuga, qui unus omnium invictissimus fuisse traditur... propositis tot exemplis iracundiae, etc.

(printed under page 68)

(1) ‹Et Timon› · lemma note, printed under col 137

Et Timon. Fuit Cicerone teste etiam Atheniensis, Laertio vir frugi, solitudinis et hortorum amans, hominum osor. Ejus dicta refert Cicero Tuscul. Quaest. lib. IV, n. 25 et 27, ac de Amicitia n. 87. Abest Timon ab 11 mss. et 3 edd. Alii volunt hunc fuisse Philigismum Pyrrhonis discipulum.

"And Timon." He too was an Athenian, on Cicero's witness; according to Laertius a frugal man, a lover of solitude and of gardens, a hater of men. Cicero reports his sayings in the Tusculan Disputations book 4, nos. 25 and 27, and in On Friendship, no. 87. "Timon" is absent from 11 manuscripts and three editions. Others would have him to be the Phliasian [printed "Philigismum"], the disciple of Pyrrho.

(printed under page 68)

(2) ‹Ut Aristides et Cimon› · lemma note, printed under col 137

Ut Aristides et Cimon. Unus Vat., Ald., Crat., Gymn., Fas., Gryph., Torn., Bet., Paris. 1561, Thomas., Thys., Gall., Spark., Timon: Siquidem in antiquissimis mss. Bonon. et Taurin. forma majuscula litterarum c et t propemodum una et eadem est. De Aristide clare Nepos in Aristide, cap. 2: Memoria ejus justitiae et aequitatis et innocentiae multa. Ejusdem justitiam Lactantius lib. III, c. 19, commendat. Add. lib. VI Institut., cap. 6. Ut vero emendarem, Cimon, fecit plane genuinus locus Lactantii lib. VI Instit., cap. 9: Deum qui ignorat, et ipsam justitiam ignoret necesse est. Sed putemus fieri posse, ut aliquis naturali et ingenito bono veras virtutes capiat, qualem fuisse Cimonem Athenis accepimus, qui et egentibus stipem dedit, et pauperes invitavit et nudos induit: tamen cum illud unum, quod est maximum, deest agnitio Dei, jam bona illa omnia supervacua sunt et inania, ut frustra in his assequendis laboraverit. Omnis enim justitia ejus similis est humano corpori caput non habenti. Vides nostrum hoc etiam loco de Cimone et philosophis agere. BUNEMAN.

"Like Aristides and Cimon." One Vatican manuscript, Aldus, Cratander, Gymnich, Fasitelius, Gryphius, Tornaesius, Betuleius, Paris 1561, Thomasius, Thysius, Gallaeus and Sparke have "Timon": for in the very old Bologna and Turin manuscripts the capital forms of the letters C and T are almost one and the same. Of Aristides, Nepos speaks clearly in the Aristides, ch. 2: "There are many records of his justice, equity and innocence." Lactantius commends his justice in book 3, ch. 19; add Institutes book 6, ch. 6. But what made me emend to "Cimon" is plainly the genuine passage of Lactantius, Institutes book 6, ch. 9: "Whoever does not know God must needs not know justice itself either. But let us suppose it can happen that someone, by natural and inborn goodness, takes on true virtues, such as we have heard Cimon was at Athens, who both gave alms to the needy, and invited the poor, and clothed the naked: yet when that one thing which is greatest is lacking, the knowledge of God, then all those goods are superfluous and empty, so that he has laboured in vain to attain them. For all his justice is like a human body that has no head." You see that our author is dealing in this place too with Cimon and the philosophers. Bünemann.

(printed under page 68)

(3) ‹Rebellanti› · lemma note, printed under col 137, runs on to the foot of col 138

Rebellanti. Ita ferunt 13 mss. inter quos est Regio-Put. In 2 Reg. rec. et ed. Rom. 1470 est rebellati; in 2 Bonon. et aliis 5, rebellante; in omnibus fere editis est rebellandi.

"To one who rebels." So 13 manuscripts, among them the Regio-Puteanus. In two recent Royal manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470 it is "rebellati"; in two Bologna and five others, "rebellante"; in nearly all printed editions, "rebellandi".

(printed under page 68)

(4) ‹Potest igitur et irasci› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Potest igitur et irasci. Sic lego cum mss. Regio-Put., 4 al. Reg., 2 Colb., Baluz., Clarom. In 2 Bonon., Tax., 1 Colb., et ed. Is. deest igitur; in vulgatis desideratur et. Mss. 1 Reg., 3 Colb., 2 Lips., Brun. et edd. Rom. 1470, 1474, Tridin., Florent. legunt: Si potest igitur irasci, cur ergo?

"He can therefore also be angry." So I read with the manuscripts Regio-Puteanus, four other Royal, two Colbert, Baluze's and the Claromontanus. In two Bologna, Tax, one Colbert and Isaeus's edition "igitur" is lacking; in the common editions "et" is missing. The manuscripts one Royal, three Colbert, two Leipzig, the Brunswick, and the editions Roman 1470 and 1474, Tridinum and Florentine read: "If, then, he can be angry, why therefore?"

(printed under page 68)

(5) ‹Abdicati› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Abdicati. Id est repudiati.

"Disowned." That is, repudiated.

(printed under page 68)

(6) ‹Qui arguit felicitatem› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Qui arguit felicitatem. Id est demonstrat, probat. Minucius Felix., cap. 36. In fin.: itaque ut aurum ignibus, sic nos discriminibus arguimur. Hieronymus epist. ad Paulam: humilitas vestium non tumentes animos arguebat. BUN.

"Which proves happiness." That is, shows, demonstrates. Minucius Felix, ch. 36, at the end: "so, as gold by fire, we are proved by trials." Jerome, letter to Paula: "the lowliness of their clothing showed minds not swollen with pride." Bünemann.

(printed under page 68)

(7) ‹Vinolentia› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Vinolentia. Ita emendavi ex omnibus fere mss. inter quos sunt 2 Bon., Regio-Put., 2 al. Reg., 3 Colbert., 4 Oxon., Tax., Em., Cant., Brun., edit. Rom. 1470 ac Cellar. Et ita Joan. Cauci et Francius legendum esse suspicabantur; quam lectionem probat Heumannus. At in 3 Reg. rec., 3 Colb., Marm., Clarom. editisque 13 est violentia.

"Drunkenness." So I have corrected it from nearly all the manuscripts, among them two Bologna, the Regio-Puteanus, two other Royal, three Colbert, four Oxford, Tax, Em., the Cantabrigian and the Brunswick, and the editions Roman 1470 and Cellarius's. And so John Cauchius and Francius suspected it should be read; Heumann approves this reading. But in three recent Royal, three Colbert, the Marmoutier, the Claromontanus and 13 printed editions it is "violentia".

(printed under page 68)

(8) ‹Quorum peccata occuluntur› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Quorum peccata occuluntur. Sic restitui ex ed. Gymnic. et manuscriptis, praeter 2 Reg. rec., 3 Colb. in quibus est occultantur, ut in pluribus editis.

"Whose sins are hidden." So I have restored it from Gymnich's edition and the manuscripts, except two recent Royal and three Colbert, in which it is "occultantur", as in several printed editions.

(printed under page 68)

(9) ‹Aut etiam nullus› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Aut etiam nullus. Ex omnibus prope mss. et ed. Gymnic. additum etiam, quod caeteris impressis et 4 rec. scriptis deest.

"Or even none." From almost all the manuscripts and Gymnich's edition "etiam" has been added, which is lacking in the other printed editions and four recent manuscripts.

(printed under page 68)

(10) ‹Laborata› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Laborata. Francius, forte elaborata. Est tamen laboratus eodem sensu apud Ciceronem XIII Attic. 3 et pro Coel. 54.

"Wrought." Francius: perhaps "elaborata". Yet "laboratus" occurs in the same sense in Cicero, Letters to Atticus 13, 3, and For Caelius 54.

(printed under page 68)

(11) ‹Maluerunt pecudum modo› · lemma note, printed under col 138

Maluerunt pecudum modo. Ita reposui ex veteribus edit. Rom. et 12 aliis impressis, Manuscriptis Regio-Put. et 14 al. nisi quod mss. Cauc., Clarom. ac 12 impressi legunt more, pro modo. Regius unus, Bo- (continues)

"They preferred, after the manner of cattle." So I have restored it from the old Roman editions and 12 other printed editions, and the manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and 14 others, except that the manuscripts Caucianus and Claromontanus and 12 printed editions read "more" for "modo". One Royal, Bo[logna] … (continues)

(printed under page 68)

Page

running head: 137 LIBER DE IRA DEI. (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹ut Aristides et Timon›; B ‹ergo, inquiet aliquis›; C ‹cere cruciatibus. Imo›; D ‹litterarum c et t propemodum› (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 7:138

debuit vindicare, et pro merito quemque punire. Atenim si id faceret, nemo superesset. Nullus est enim, qui nihil peccet; et multa sunt, quae ad peccandum irritent; aetas, vinolentia, egestas, occasio, praemium. Adeo subjecta est peccato fragilitas carnis, qua induti sumus, ut nisi huic necessitati Deus parceret, nimium fortasse pauci viverent: propter hanc causam patientissimus est, et iram suam continet. Nam quia perfecta est in eo virtus, necesse est patientiam quoque ejus esse perfectam, quae et ipsa virtus est. Quam multi ex peccatoribus justi posterius effecti sunt, ex malis boni, ex improbis continentes! quam multi in prima aetate turpes, et omnium judicio damnati, postmodum tamen laudabiles extiterunt! Quod utique non fieret, si omne peccatum poena sequeretur.

He ought to have avenged, and to have punished each according to his desert. But indeed, if He did so, no one would survive. For there is no one who does not sin; and there are many things which incite to sinning: age, drunkenness, want, opportunity, reward. So subject to sin is the frailty of the flesh with which we are clothed, that unless God spared this necessity, perhaps all too few would live: for this reason He is most patient, and restrains His anger. For since virtue is perfect in Him, His patience too must be perfect, which itself also is a virtue. How many sinners have afterwards been made just, how many bad men good, how many wicked men continent! How many, base in their early years and condemned by the judgement of all, have nevertheless afterwards turned out praiseworthy! This would certainly not happen if punishment followed every sin.

Leges publicae manifestos reos damnant: sed plurimi sunt, quorum peccata occuluntur; plurimi, qui delatorem comprimunt, aut precibus, aut praemio; plurimi, qui judicia eludunt per gratiam, vel potentiam. Quod si eos omnes, qui humanam poenam effugiunt, censura divina damnaret, esset homo aut rarus, aut etiam nullus in terra. Denique vel una illa causa delendi generis humani justa esse potuisset, quod homines, contempto Deo vivo, terrenis fragilibusque figmentis honorem divinum tanquam coelestibus deferunt, adorantes opera humanis digitis laborata. Cumque illos Deus artifex, ore sublimi, statu recto figuratos, ad contemplationem coeli et notitiam Dei excitaverit, curvare se ad terram maluerunt pecudum modo. Humilis enim, et curvus, et pronus est,

Public laws condemn manifest culprits: but there are very many whose sins are hidden; very many who silence the informer, either by entreaties or by reward; very many who elude judgements through favour or power. But if the divine sentence were to condemn all those who escape human punishment, man would be either rare or even non-existent on earth. Finally, even that one cause alone could have been a just cause for destroying the human race, that men, having despised the living God, pay divine honour to earthly and frail images as though to heavenly beings, adoring works fashioned by human fingers. And although God the Craftsman, having shaped them with lofty face and upright stance, roused them to the contemplation of heaven and the knowledge of God, they have preferred to bend themselves to the earth in the manner of cattle. For lowly, and bent, and prone is he

Editors' notes and page, col. 138

Page

running head: …R DE IRA DEI. 138 (left part of the running head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹tim debuit vindicare›; B ‹quereretur.›; C ‹cudum modo. Humilis enim›; D ‹Vinolentia. Ita emendavi› (in the Variorum Notae at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with "tim", the end of "statim" broken from col. 137; maluerunt read where the worn type could be taken for "malnerunt" (the note lemma prints Maluerunt), UNSURE whether u or n is actually printed; full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" at the page foot, cut off at the left edge, not set (apparatus, later pass); Variorum Notae (Bonon. et aliis 5 … Regius unus, Bo-) not set; printer's signature 5 and Google / "Распознавание текста АБК/FR" stamps omitted; editors' matter set: (none)

PL 7:139

qui ab aspectu coeli Deique patris aversus, terrena, quae calcare debuerat, id est, de terra ficta et formata, veneratur. In tanta igitur impietate hominum tantisque peccatis id assequitur patientia Dei, ut se ipsi homines damnatis vitae prioris erroribus corrigant. Denique, et boni sunt justique multi, et abjectis terrenis cultibus, majestatem Dei singularis agnoscunt. Sed cum maxima et utilissima sit Dei patientia, tamen, quamvis sero, noxios punit, nec patitur longius procedere, cum eos inemendabiles esse perviderit.

who, turned away from the sight of heaven and of God the Father, worships earthly things, which he ought to have trodden underfoot, that is, things fashioned and formed from earth. Amid such great impiety of men and such great sins, therefore, the patience of God achieves this: that men themselves condemn the errors of their former life and correct themselves. Indeed, many are both good and just, and, having cast off earthly worship, acknowledge the majesty of the one God. But although the patience of God is very great and most beneficial, nevertheless, though late, He punishes the guilty and does not allow them to go further, once He has perceived that they are incorrigible.

CAPUT XXI.

Chapter XXI.

De ira Dei et hominis.

On the anger of God and of man.

Superest una et extrema quaestio. Nam dixerit fortasse quispiam, adeo non irasci Deum, ut etiam in praeceptis hominem irasci vetet. Possem dicere, quod ira hominis refraenanda fuerit, quia injuste saepe irascitur; et praesentem habet motum, quia temporalis est. Itaque ne fierent ea, quae faciunt per iram et humiles, et mediocres, et magni reges, temperari debuit furor ejus, et comprimi, ne mentis impos aliquod inexpiabile facinus admitteret. Deus autem non ad praesens irascitur, quia aeternus est perfectaeque virtutis; et nunquam nisi merito irascitur. Sed tamen non ita res se habet. Nam si omnino prohiberet irasci, ipse quodammodo reprehensor opificii sui fuisset,

There remains one last question. For someone may perhaps say that God is so far from being angry that He even forbids man in His precepts to be angry. I could say that the anger of man had to be restrained because he is often angry unjustly; and it has an impulse of the moment, because it is temporal. Therefore, lest those things should be done which the humble, the middling, and great kings do through anger, his fury had to be moderated and checked, lest, out of his mind, he should commit some inexpiable crime. But God is not angry for the moment, because He is eternal and of perfect virtue; and He is never angry except deservedly. But nevertheless the matter does not stand thus. For if He had altogether forbidden anger, He would in a certain way have been the censurer of His own workmanship,

Editors' notes and page, col. 139

Footnotes

(printed under page 69)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 139

(continued) non., Tax., Lips. addunt humi repere; scripti 5, irrepere.

(printed under page 69)

(1) ‹Aversus, terrena, quae calcare debuerat› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Aversus, terrena, quae calcare debuerat. Bene. Vide seqq. mss. Regio-Put. et 1 al. Reg., edit. Rom. 1470, Ald., Fasit., Betul. habent, aversus, terram quam calcare debuerat. Mss. 13 et ed. Rom. 1468, adversus terram quam calcare debuerat.

"Turned away, [to] earthly things, which he ought to have trodden underfoot." Well said. See what follows. The manuscripts Regio-Puteanus and one other Royal, and the editions Roman 1470, Aldus, Fasitelius and Betuleius, have "aversus, terram quam calcare debuerat". Thirteen manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1468 have "adversus terram quam calcare debuerat".

(printed under page 69)

(2) ‹Majestatem Dei singularis agnoscunt› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Majestatem Dei singularis agnoscunt. Sic et alibi passim Lactantius. Vide Not. ad lib. de Mortib. Persecut. cap. 1. Ms. Em. habet Dei coelestis; 2 Reg. rec., 3 Colb., Clarom. et 2 vet. edd. Rom., cognoscunt.

"They acknowledge the majesty of the one God." So Lactantius elsewhere too, here and there. See the note on the book On the Deaths of the Persecutors, ch. 1. The Em. manuscript has "Dei coelestis"; two recent Royal, three Colbert, the Claromontanus and two old Roman editions, "cognoscunt".

(printed under page 69)

(3) ‹Superest una et extrema quaestio› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Superest una et extrema quaestio. Ita libri antiquiores, tum mss. tum editi. Multi impressi post una addunt maxima; 1 Colbert. permaxima; scripti 4 rec. una et maxima.

"One last question remains." So the older books, both manuscript and printed. Many printed editions add "maxima" after "una"; one Colbert, "permaxima"; four recent manuscripts, "una et maxima".

(printed under page 69)

(4) ‹Ut etiam in praeceptis› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Ut etiam in praeceptis. Reposui etiam ex editis Cratand. et Cellar. cunctisque scriptis, praeter 4 mss. rec. in quibus, ut in caeteris impressis, legitur et; in Em., ipse.

"So that even in the precepts." I have restored "etiam" from the Cratander and Cellarius editions and all the manuscripts, except four recent ones, in which, as in the other printed editions, "et" is read; in Em., "ipse".

(printed under page 69)

(5) ‹Debuit› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Debuit. Ita ex vet. edd. Rom. et Is. ac quamplurimis mss. reposui. In Cauc. et in 8 impressis est debuerat; in 5 scriptis et 4 vulgatis est debuerit.

"He ought." So I have restored it from the old Roman editions and Isaeus's and very many manuscripts. In the Caucianus and eight printed editions it is "debuerat"; in five manuscripts and four common editions, "debuerit".

(printed under page 69)

(6) ‹Ne mentis impos aliquod inexpiabile facinus admitteret› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Ne mentis impos aliquod inexpiabile facinus admitteret. mss. 14 inter quos est Regio-Put. et unus Jano Gullielmi visus, editioque Romana 1468 habent, ne mentis impossibile aliquod, nullo sensu; unde Gullielmus et Gallaeus legendum esse putant, ne mentis impos a bile, aut in bile. Mss. 2 Bon., 1 Reg. rec., Tax., 2 Colb., 1 Sorbon., Baluz., Clarom. in marg. ne post aliquod, etc. 1 Colb., ne post iram aliquod.

"Lest, out of his mind, he commit some inexpiable crime." Fourteen manuscripts, among them the Regio-Puteanus and one seen by Janus Gulielmius, and the Roman edition of 1468, have "ne mentis impossibile aliquod", which makes no sense; hence Gulielmius and Gallaeus think we should read "ne mentis impos a bile" or "in bile" ("out of his mind from bile"). The manuscripts two Bologna, one recent Royal, Tax, two Colbert, one Sorbonne, Baluze's and the Claromontanus in the margin have "ne post aliquod", etc.; one Colbert, "ne post iram aliquod".

(printed under page 69)

(7) ‹Qui a principio› · lemma note, printed under col 139

Qui a principio. Mss. 14 et totidem editi, quia in principio.

"Who from the beginning." Fourteen manuscripts and as many printed editions have "quia in principio".

(printed under page 69)

(8) ‹Iram jecori hominis› · lemma note, printed under col 139, runs on to the foot of col 140

Iram jecori hominis. Mss. 2 Reg., 4 Colbert., iram jecoris hominis; Em., felli hominis. — Iram jecori hominis indidisset. Legitur apud Buneman. iram felli hominis. In hancque variantem notam sequentem exhibet: — Iram felli hominis indidisset. Editi omnes, iram jecori. Scripsi ex Emmann., iram felli. Suadent sequentia, in humore fellis; et lib. VI Institut. cap. 15: Affectus irae in felle, libidinis in jecore; et de Opif. cap. 14: Affectum iracundiae... in felle constitutum... libidines rerum venerearum in jecore. BUN.

"Anger in man's liver." Two Royal manuscripts and four Colbert have "iram jecoris hominis"; Em., "felli hominis". — "Had placed anger in man's liver." Bünemann reads "iram felli hominis", and on this variant gives the following note: — "Had placed anger in man's gall." All the printed editions have "iram jecori". I have written "iram felli" from Emmanuel's manuscript. What follows recommends it, "in the humour of the gall"; and Institutes book 6, ch. 15: "the affection of anger in the gall, of lust in the liver"; and De opificio ch. 14: "the affection of irascibility … set in the gall … the lusts for venereal things in the liver." Bünemann.

(printed under page 69)

(9) ‹Deinde› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Deinde. Ita restitutum ex edit. Bonon. 1470, Betul., Cellar. In 1 Reg. rec. et 12 excusis est Denique.

"Then." So restored from the editions Bologna 1470, Betuleius and Cellarius. In one recent Royal manuscript and 12 printed copies it is "Denique".

(printed under page 69)

(10) ‹Cum irasci quidem, sed tamen non peccare praecepit› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Cum irasci quidem, sed tamen non peccare praecepit, non utique. Mss. 3 rec. et 14 edd., cum irasci... scripti 3 rec., praecipit.

"Since he commanded us to be angry indeed, but yet not to sin, not surely." Three recent manuscripts and 14 editions have "cum irasci …"; three recent manuscripts, "praecipit".

(printed under page 69)

(11) ‹Sed tamen non peccare› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Sed tamen non peccare, etc. Psal. IV apud Septuaginta quidem est ὀργίζεσθε, καὶ μὴ ἁμαρτάνετε. Sed Hebraei transferunt contremiscite; qui sensus est, ut abhorreamus a peccatis. BETUL.

"But yet not to sin," etc. Psalm 4 in the Septuagint indeed reads "Be angry, and do not sin." But the Hebrews translate "tremble"; the sense of which is that we should shrink from sins. Betuleius.

(printed under page 69)

(12) ‹Qui placari› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Qui placari. Ita correxi ex omnibus mss. multisque editis: in nonnullis impressis est placare.

"Who [can] be appeased." So I have corrected it from all the manuscripts and many printed editions; in some printed editions it is "placare".

(printed under page 69)

(13) ‹Celerius praecipit› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Celerius praecipit. Sic lego ex mss. quamplurimis antiquissimis et optimis, approbante Francio: quod superioribus respondet, ubi est jubet.

"He commands [it] the more quickly." So I read from very many of the oldest and best manuscripts, with Francius's approval; this answers to the preceding words, where there is "jubet".

(printed under page 69)

(14) ‹Ea enim praecepit› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Ea enim praecepit. Sic restitui ex cunctis mss. et vet. ed. Rom. In 12 impressis est, siquidem praecipit.

"For he commanded these things." So I have restored it from all the manuscripts and the old Roman edition. In 12 printed editions it is "siquidem praecipit".

(printed under page 69)

(15) ‹Nec facile regere se potest propter fragilitatem› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Nec facile regere se potest propter fragilitatem: intelligere debemus, etc. Ita ferunt omnes manuscripti et 5 editi. Atque vera et genuina est lectio Tridin. et Florent., Ven. 1490. Vitiose in impress. aliis, non ideo intelligere, etc. quae lectio scopo Lact. contraria est, ut bene observarunt Thomasius et Isaeus.

"Nor can he easily govern himself because of frailty: we ought to understand," etc. So all the manuscripts and five editions read. And it is the true and genuine reading of the Tridinum, the Florentine and Venice 1490. Faultily, in other printed editions, "non ideo intelligere", etc., a reading contrary to Lactantius's aim, as Thomasius and Isaeus have well observed.

(printed under page 69)

(16) ‹Iram ejus in aeternum manere› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Iram ejus in aeternum manere. Id est, ab omnipotentia aliisque Dei attributis illud necessario fluit, ut eos odio habeat quotquot adversus ipsius majestatem obstinato animo deliquerint. Uti rursus ab infinita Dei misericordia proficiscitur, quod eos sinat secum in gratiam redire, qui (ut noster infra loquitur) concessa, resipiscendi et sui corrigendi facultate bene utuntur. SPARKIUS.

"That his anger remains for ever." That is, it flows necessarily from God's omnipotence and other attributes that he holds in hatred all who have offended against his majesty with obstinate mind; just as, again, it proceeds from God's infinite mercy that he allows those to return into his favour who (as our author says below) make good use of the opportunity granted them to come to their senses and correct themselves. Sparke.

(printed under page 69)

(17) ‹Aut gratiae post delictum locus› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Aut gratiae post delictum locus. 1 Bonon. antiq., aut gratiae positus locus.

"Or room for favour after the offence." One old Bologna manuscript has "aut gratiae positus locus".

(printed under page 69)

(18) ‹Ante solis occasum› · lemma note, printed under col 140

Ante solis occasum, etc. Non Christi, sed Pauli vox (continues)

"Before the setting of the sun," etc. The saying is not Christ's but Paul's … (continues)

(printed under page 69)

Page

running head: 139 FIRM. LACTANT (cut off at the right edge of the image)
marginal letters: A ‹qui ab aspectu coeli Deique›; B ‹tasse quispiam, adeo non irasci›; C ‹non., Tax., Lips. addunt› (in the Variorum notae); D ‹Debuit. Ita ex vet. edd.› (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "VARIORUM NOTAE" (cut off at the right edge) stands between the text and the notes, not set; the Variorum notae at the page foot (non., Tax., Lips. addunt ... Suadent se-) are left for the later pass; "procedere" is blurred in the image (could look like "proeedere"), read as procedere; "Digitized by Google" watermark ignored

PL 7:140

qui a principio iram jecori hominis indidisset: siquidem creditur, causam hujus commotionis in humore fellis contineri. Non igitur in totum prohibet irasci, quia is affectus necessario datus est: sed prohibet in ira permanere. Ira enim mortalium debet esse mortalis; nam si maneat, confirmantur inimicitiae ad perniciem sempiternam. Deinde rursus cum irasci quidem, sed tamen non peccare praecepit, non utique evellit iram radicitus, sed temperavit: ut in omni castigatione modum ac justitiam teneremus. Qui ergo irasci nos jubet, ipse utique irascitur: qui placari celerius praecipit, est utique ipse placabilis; ea enim praecepit, quae sunt justa, et rebus utilia communibus.

Who from the beginning had placed anger in the liver of man; for indeed it is believed that the cause of this agitation is contained in the humour of the gall. He does not therefore altogether forbid being angry, because that affection has been given of necessity; but He forbids remaining in anger. For the anger of mortals ought to be mortal; for if it should remain, enmities are strengthened to everlasting destruction. Then again, when He commanded us to be angry indeed, but yet not to sin, He certainly did not tear anger out by the roots, but tempered it, so that in every chastisement we might keep measure and justice. He therefore Who commands us to be angry is Himself certainly angry; He Who commands us to be appeased more quickly is certainly Himself placable; for He commanded those things which are just and useful for the common good.

Sed quia dixeram non esse iram Dei temporalem, sicut hominis, qui praesentanea commotione fervescit, nec facile regere se potest propter fragilitatem; intelligere debemus, quia sit aeternus Deus, iram quoque ejus in aeternum manere: sed rursum, quia virtute sit maxima praeditus, in potestate habere iram suam; nec ab ea regi, sed ipsum illam, quemadmodum velit, moderari: quod utique non repugnat superiori. Nam si prorsus immortalis fuisset ira ejus, non esset satisfactioni aut gratiae post delictum locus; cum ipse homines ante solis occasum reconciliari jubeat. Sed ira divina in aeternum manet adversus eos, qui peccant in aeternum. Itaque Deus

But since I had said that the anger of God is not temporary, like that of man, who grows hot with a momentary agitation and cannot easily govern himself on account of his frailty, we ought to understand that, because God is eternal, His anger also remains for ever; but again, that because He is endowed with the greatest power, He holds His anger in His power, and is not ruled by it, but Himself moderates it as He wishes: which certainly does not conflict with what was said before. For if His anger had been altogether immortal, there would be no place for satisfaction or for favour after wrongdoing, since He Himself commands men to be reconciled before the setting of the sun. But the divine anger remains for ever against those who sin for ever. Therefore God

Editors' notes and page, col. 140

Page

running head: [cut off at left] FIRM. LACTANTII 140
marginal letters: A qui a principio iram jecori; B ralem, sicut hominis; C quentia, in humore fellis (in the notes); D vet. ed. Rom. (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 7:141

non thure, non hostia, non pretiosis muneribus, quae omnia sunt corruptibilia, sed morum emendatione placatur; et qui peccare desinit, iram Dei mortalem facit. Idcirco enim non ad praesens noxium quemque punit, ut habeat homo resipiscendi et corrigendi sui facultatem.

is appeased not by incense, not by a victim, not by costly gifts, all of which are corruptible, but by the amendment of conduct; and whoever ceases to sin makes the anger of God mortal. For this reason He does not punish every guilty person at once, so that man may have the opportunity of coming to his senses and correcting himself.

CAPUT XXII.

Chapter XXII.

De peccatis, deque iis recitati versus Sibyllae.

On sins, and verses of the Sibyl recited concerning them.

Haec habui, quae de ira Dei dicerem, Donate charissime; ut scires quemadmodum refelleres eos qui Deum faciunt immobilem. Restat, ut more Ciceronis utamur epilogo ad perorandum. Sicut ille in Tusculanis de morte disserens fecit: ita nos in hoc opere testimonia divina, quibus credi possit, adhibere debemus, ut illorum persuasionem revincamus, qui sine ira Deum esse credentes, dissolvunt omnem religionem: sine qua, ut ostendimus, aut immanitate belluis, aut stultitia pecudibus adaequamur; in sola enim religione, id est, in Dei summi notione sapientia est. Prophetae universi divino Spiritu repleti nihil

These are the things I had to say about the anger of God, dearest Donatus, so that you might know how to refute those who make God immovable. It remains for us, after the manner of Cicero, to use an epilogue in concluding. Just as he did in the Tusculans when discussing death, so we in this work ought to bring forward divine testimonies, in which belief may be placed, so that we may refute the conviction of those who, believing that God is without anger, dissolve all religion; without which, as we have shown, we are made equal either to beasts in savagery or to cattle in stupidity; for in religion alone, that is, in the knowledge of the supreme God, is wisdom. All the prophets, filled with the divine Spirit, nothing

Editors' notes and page, col. 141

Footnotes

(printed under page 70)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 141

(continued) haec est, Eph. IV. Ergo tantum auctoritatis tribuit scriptis Pauli, ut oraculi loco habeat, quod a numine divino dictata sint.

(printed under page 70)

(1) ‹Resipiscendi et corrigendi sui facultatem› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Resipiscendi et corrigendi sui facultatem. Deest et corrigendi sui in 20 mss. sed in 12 est resipiscendi sui, quamvis tamen sui cum casu resipiscendi componi nequeat. Edit. Betul. habet, homo recipiendi sui facultatem. Verum haec Lactantiana verba ex Cicerone sunt desumpta, ubi legas resipiscendi et corrigendi sui.

"The opportunity to come to his senses and correct himself." "Et corrigendi sui" is lacking in 20 manuscripts, but in 12 there is "resipiscendi sui", although "sui" cannot be construed with the case of "resipiscendi". Betuleius's edition has "homo recipiendi sui facultatem". But these words of Lactantius are taken from Cicero, where you may read "resipiscendi et corrigendi sui".

(printed under page 70)

(2) ‹Refelleres› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Refelleres. 1 Bon. antiq., refellas.

"You would refute." One old Bologna manuscript has "refellas".

(printed under page 70)

(3) ‹Illorum persuasionem revincamus› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Illorum persuasionem revincamus. Ita reposui ex omnibus prope mss. edit. Venet., Tridin., Florent., Is., Cellar. In ms. Brun. legitur persuasione; in 1 Colbert., Marm., Clarom., persuasiones; in 1 Reg. rec., persuasionem pervincamus; in Cauc., 1 Colb. et 14 impressis, persuasionem vincamus. — Revincamus. Optime. L. I Institut., c. 16: Quod genus probationis adversus eos magis adhibere debemus, quam ut eos deorum suorum testimoniis revincamus. De Opif., c. 10: Quos... armis... ex ipsorum inter se concertatione sumptis revincemus, et alibi saepius. BUNEMANN.

"Let us refute their conviction." So I have restored it from almost all the manuscripts and the editions Venice, Tridinum, Florentine, Isaeus and Cellarius. In the Brunswick manuscript one reads "persuasione"; in one Colbert, the Marmoutier and the Claromontanus, "persuasiones"; in one recent Royal, "persuasionem pervincamus"; in the Caucianus, one Colbert and 14 printed editions, "persuasionem vincamus". — "Revincamus." Excellent. Institutes book 1, ch. 16: "What kind of proof ought we rather to use against them than to refute them by the testimonies of their own gods?" De opificio ch. 10: "Whom … we shall refute with weapons … taken from their own disputing among themselves," and elsewhere quite often. Bünemann.

(printed under page 70)

(4) ‹Iis... non credunt isti› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Iis... non credunt isti. L. I, c. 5: Sed omittamus testimonia prophetarum, ne minus idonea probatio videatur de his, quibus omnino non creditur. BUN.

"These men do not believe them." Book 1, ch. 5: "But let us leave aside the testimonies of the prophets, lest the proof drawn from those who are not believed at all seem less fit." Bünemann.

(printed under page 70)

(5) ‹Qui sapientiam capillis et habitu jactant› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Qui sapientiam capillis et habitu jactant. Nam promissum capillum gerebant, et palliis induebantur, qui sapientiam profitebantur, ut l. III Institutionum, cap. 25, diximus. Is.— Vide etiam libro V, c. 2.

"Who parade their wisdom by their hair and dress." For those who professed wisdom wore their hair long and were clothed in cloaks, as we said on Institutes book 3, ch. 25. Isaeus. — See also book 5, ch. 2.

(printed under page 70)

(6) ‹Fuerant... refellendi› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Fuerant... refellendi... Heumann. legit, fuerunt. Libri, fuerant. Similis locus, l. V, c. 4, ubi, qua materia (Cyprianus) non est usus, ut debuit. Non enim scripturae testimoniis quam ille (Demetrianus) ...commentitiam... putabat, sed argumentis et ratione fuerat refellendus.

"They should have been … refuted." Heumann reads "fuerunt"; the books have "fuerant". A similar passage, book 5, ch. 4, where: "which material (Cyprian) did not use as he ought. For he (Demetrianus) was to be refuted not by testimonies of Scripture, which he thought … invented …, but by arguments and reason."

(printed under page 70)

(7) ‹Ut humana divinis tribuant auctoritatem› · lemma note, printed under col 141

Ut humana divinis tribuant auctoritatem, cum potius humanis divina debuerint. Ita omnes fere mss. ex quibus sunt antiquissimi, et 7 vet. ed. In scriptis 5 et multis impressis mendose legitur: Ut humanam divinis tr. aut. cum potius humanis divinam debuerint; 1 Colb., tribuerint.

"That they give human things authority over divine, when they ought rather [to have given] divine things [authority] over human." So nearly all the manuscripts, among them the oldest, and seven old editions. In five manuscripts and many printed editions one reads wrongly: "Ut humanam divinis tr[ibuant] aut[oritatem] cum potius humanis divinam debuerint"; one Colbert has "tribuerint".

(printed under page 70)

(8) ‹Sibyllas› · lemma note, printed under col 141, runs on to the foot of col 142

Sibyllas. Mss. 4 rec. et edd. 16 addunt, multas fuisse: quae duo verba a caeteris absunt. De Sibyllis lege quae diximus, tom. I, lib. I, c. 6. Confirmant Lactantii sententiam, quae plurima memorat Suidas, haud dubie ex vetustissimorum auctorum monumentis collecta. Affirmat is decem fuisse, diversis temporibus et locis. Verum Sebastianus Castalio, quidquid Sibyllarum nomine fertur, ab una profectum affirmat; ac in suam me propemodum traxit sententiam, argumentis non in speciem modo probabilibus, sed justis quibusdam rationibus roboratis. Sed interim vetustatis auctoritas faciebat, ut rationes diligentius expenderem. Obstitit primum incredibilis Sibyllae, quam ex multis unam facit, longaevitas, a diluvio nimirum usque ad Tarquiniorum tempora: quod spatium complectitur annos circiter 1770. Et quamquam Sibyllae vivacitas olim in proverbium abiit, fidem tamen excedit aetas ita prodigiosa, ut a nullo scriptore tanta commemoretur. Inde obstat nominum varietas, non ex gentibus variis variantium, sed propriorum maxime. Postremo adduci vix potero ut credam Noae tempore graece eas scripsisse, et quidem numeris heroicis, tam facile ad Homeri, vel Hesiodi (vel si mavis antiquioris Orphei) suavitatem fluentibus. Et ut facile credo decem non extitisse Sibyllas, ita malim subscribere illis qui duas solummodo posuerunt, aut quatuor. BETUL. — Sed quidquid hic dicat Betuleius, vide quae de Sibyllis diximus libro I, cap. 6.

"The Sibyls." Four recent manuscripts and 16 editions add "multas fuisse" ("that there were many"): these two words are absent from the rest. On the Sibyls read what we said in vol. 1, book 1, ch. 6. Lactantius's view is confirmed by the many things Suidas records, collected no doubt from the records of the most ancient authors. He affirms that there were ten, at different times and places. But Sebastian Castellio affirms that whatever goes under the name of the Sibyls came from one; and he almost drew me to his view, by arguments not merely plausible in appearance but strengthened by certain sound reasons. Meanwhile, however, the authority of antiquity made me weigh the reasons more carefully. First there stood in the way the incredible longevity of the Sibyl whom he makes one out of many, from the Flood, that is, down to the times of the Tarquins: a span of about 1,770 years. And although the Sibyl's long life once passed into a proverb, an age so prodigious passes belief, since no writer records one so great. Next, the variety of names stands in the way: names varying not with different peoples but, above all, proper names. Lastly, I can hardly be brought to believe that they wrote in Greek in Noah's time, and in heroic verse at that, flowing so easily, with the sweetness of Homer or Hesiod (or, if you prefer, of the more ancient Orpheus). And as I readily believe that there were not ten Sibyls, so I would rather side with those who have posited only two, or four. Betuleius. — But whatever Betuleius says here, see what we said on the Sibyls in book 1, ch. 6.

(printed under page 70)

(9) ‹Aristo Chius› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Aristo Chius. Sic plures mss. et omnes ferme editi; nec aliter dicitur Ciceroni, l. I de Legib., n. 78, ubi refert ejus dogmata, et Minucio Felici in Octavio. Itaque vitiose scribitur in 2 Colb. et ed. Rom. 1470, Aristochius; pejus in Reg.-Put., Cauc. et 7 aliis, Aristonicus; in Marm., Aristo meus, pro Aristonicus; in 1 Bon. antiq., Aristo Stoicus; in 1 Reg. rec., 2 Colbert., ed. Rom. 1468, Aristoricus; in nonnullis editis, Aristarchus. Hic Aristo patria fuit Chius, Stoicus Philosophus; de quo vide Diogenem Laertium, l. VI, ad finem, et l. VII ad finem Zenonis.

"Aristo of Chios." So most manuscripts and almost all printed editions; nor is he called otherwise by Cicero, On the Laws book 1, no. 78, where he reports his doctrines, and by Minucius Felix in the Octavius. So it is wrongly written "Aristochius" in two Colbert manuscripts and the Roman edition of 1470; worse, "Aristonicus" in the Regio-Puteanus, the Caucianus and seven others; in the Marmoutier, "Aristo meus" for "Aristonicus"; in one old Bologna, "Aristo Stoicus"; in one recent Royal, two Colbert and the Roman edition of 1468, "Aristoricus"; in some printed editions, "Aristarchus". This Aristo was a Chian by birth, a Stoic philosopher; on him see Diogenes Laertius, book 6 at the end, and book 7 at the end of the Zeno.

(printed under page 70)

(10) ‹Apollodorus Erythraeus› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Apollodorus Erythraeus. Laudatus etiam, l. I, c. 6. CELL.

"Apollodorus of Erythrae." Cited also in book 1, ch. 6. Cellarius.

(printed under page 70)

(11) ‹Erythras› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Erythras. Ita plurimi mss. et omnes editi. Varie alii. Ms. Baluz. legit Erythreas; Reg.-Put., Erythreh [?] a Senatu; 2 rec. et ed. Rom. 1468, Erithreos; 1 Colbert., Erithros; Bon., 1 Reg., Brun., Erythro; 1 Colb., Erithreo; 1 alter Colb., Erltheo [?].

"To Erythrae." So very many manuscripts and all the printed editions. Others vary. Baluze's manuscript reads "Erythreas"; the Regio-Puteanus, "Erythreh [?] a Senatu"; two recent ones and the Roman edition of 1468, "Erithreos"; one Colbert, "Erithros"; the Bologna, one Royal and the Brunswick, "Erythro"; one Colbert, "Erithreo"; another Colbert, "Erltheo" [?].

(printed under page 70)

(12) ‹Deportarentur› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Deportarentur. Vel deportarent.

"Should be brought back." Or "deportarent".

(printed under page 70)

(13) ‹Consules Curio et Octavius› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Consules Curio et Octavius. Lips. tert., Reimm., Rost., Octavianus. Prave. Curio et Octavius fuere consules anno U.C. 678. BUN.

"The consuls Curio and Octavius." The third Leipzig manuscript, Reimmann's and the Rostock have "Octavianus". Wrongly. Curio and Octavius were consuls in the year of the City 678. Bünemann.

(printed under page 70)

(14) ‹Q. Catulo› · lemma note, printed under col 142

Q. Catulo. Ita mss. et plures editi; nec aliter Cicero lib. II et III de Oratore. Alii, Catullo.

"Quintus Catulus." So the manuscripts and most printed editions; nor does Cicero write otherwise, De oratore books 2 and 3. Others have "Catullo".

(printed under page 70)

Page

running head: 141 LIBER DE IRA DE[I] (cut off at the right edge of the image)
marginal letters: A non thure, non hostia; B mus, ut illorum persuasionem; C tatem. Verum haec Lactantiana (in the Variorum notae); D missum capillum gerebant (in the Variorum notae)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width heading "VARIORUM NOT[AE]" at the head of the page-foot notes, cut off at the edge, not set; the Variorum notae below it (Resipiscendi et corrigendi sui facultatem ... Sibyllas ...) belong to the page-foot commentary, left for the later pass; "deque iis" in the sub-caption is blurred in the scan, so the reading is slightly unsure; the column ends mid-sentence at "nihil"

PL 7:142

aliud, quam de gratia Dei erga justos, et de ira ejus adversus impios loquuntur. Quorum testimonia nobis quidem satis sunt: verum iis quoniam non credunt isti, qui sapientiam capillis et habitu jactant, ratione quoque et argumentis fuerant a nobis refellendi. Sic enim praepostere agitur, ut humana divinis tribuant auctoritatem, cum potius humanis divina debuerint. Quae nunc sane omittamus ne nihil apud istos agamus, et in infinitum materia procedat. Ea igitur quaeramus testimonia, quibus illi possint aut credere aut certe non repugnare.

other than of the grace of God towards the just, and of His anger against the impious, do they speak. Their testimonies are indeed enough for us; but since these men, who make a show of wisdom by their hair and dress, do not believe them, they had to be refuted by us with reason and arguments as well. For the matter is handled so preposterously that they lend authority to divine things from human ones, when they ought rather to have lent it to human things from divine. Let us now indeed leave these things aside, so that we do not accomplish nothing with these men and the subject run on without end. Let us therefore seek those testimonies which they can either believe or at least not resist.

Sibyllas plurimi et maximi auctores tradiderunt; Graecorum, Aristo Chius et Apollodorus Erythraeus; nostrorum, Varro et Fenestella. Hi omnes praecipuam, et nobilem praeter caeteras Erythraeam fuisse commemorant. Apollodorus quidem ut de civi ac populari sua gloriatur. Fenestella vero etiam legatos Erythras a senatu esse missos refert, ut hujus Sibyllae carmina Romam deportarentur, et ea consules Curio et Octavius in Capitolio, quod tunc erat curante Quinto Catulo

Very many and very great authors have handed down an account of the Sibyls: of the Greeks, Aristo of Chios and Apollodorus of Erythrae; of our own, Varro and Fenestella. All these record that the Erythraean was pre-eminent and renowned beyond the others. Apollodorus indeed boasts of her as of his own fellow citizen and countrywoman. Fenestella, moreover, relates that envoys were also sent by the senate to Erythrae, so that the verses of this Sibyl might be brought to Rome, and that these the consuls Curio and Octavius, in the Capitol, which at that time had, under the care of Quintus Catulus,

Editors' notes and page, col. 142

Page

running head: [LIB]ER DE IRA DEI. 142 (left part of the head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A aliud, quam de gratia; B morant. Apollodorus; C rem. Obstitit primum (in the Variorum Notae, not set); D Itaque vitiose scribitur (in the Variorum Notae, not set)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column ends mid-word "Ca-" (Catulo); a stray brace-like mark after "Apollodorus" in the B line taken as type noise or a note call and not set; the lower part of the column (VARIORUM NOTAE, from "locis. Verum Sebastianus Castalio" to "Alii, Catullo.") is editors' commentary at the page foot, left for the later pass; the heading "VARIORUM NOTAE." runs across both columns and is not set

PL 7:143

restitutum, ponenda curarent. Apud hanc de summo et conditore rerum Deo hujusmodi versus reperiuntur :

been restored, took care to have deposited. In her [writings] verses of this kind are found concerning the supreme God and Maker of things:

Ἄφθαρτος κτίστης αἰώνιος αἰθέρα ναίων, / Τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἀγαθὸν προφέρων, πολὺ μείζονα μισθὸν; / Τοῖς δὲ κακοῖς ἀδίκοις τε χόλον καὶ θυμὸν ἐγείρων.

The incorruptible, eternal Creator, dwelling in the aether, / bringing forth good for the good, a much greater reward; / but for the wicked and unjust rousing up wrath and fury.

Rursùs alio loco enumerans, quibus maxime facinoribus incitetur D⟨e⟩us, haec intulit :

Again, in another place, enumerating the crimes by which God is most provoked, she added these words:

Φεῦγε δὲ λατρείας ἀνόμους, Θεῷ ζῶντι λάτρευε. / Μοιχείας τε φύλασσε, καὶ ἄρσενος ἄκριτον εὐνήν, / Ἰδίαν γενεὰν παίδων τρέφε, μηδὲ φόνευε· / Καὶ γὰρ ὁ ἀθάνατος κεχολώσεται, ὅσκεν ἁμάρτῃ.

But flee lawless worship; serve the living God. / Guard against adulteries and the indiscriminate bed with a male; / rear your own offspring of children, and do not kill; / for the Immortal will be angry with whoever sins.

Indignatur ergo adversus peccatores.

He is therefore indignant against sinners.

CAPUT XXIII.

Chapter XXIII.

De ira Dei, et peccatorum punitione, deque ea Sibyllarum carmina recitata: castigatio praeterea et adhortatio.

On the wrath of God and the punishment of sinners, and the verses of the Sibyls recited concerning it; a reproof besides, and an exhortation.

Verum quia plures, ut ostendi, Sibyllae a doctissimis auctoribus fuisse traduntur, unius testimonium satis non sit ad confirmandam, sicut intendimus, veritatem. Cumeae quidem volumina, quibus Romanorum fata conscripta sunt, in arcanis habentur : caeterarum tamen fere omnium libelli, quominus in usu sint omnibus, non vetantur; ex quibus alia denuntians universis gentibus iram Dei ob impietatem hominum, hoc modo exorsa est :

But since, as I have shown, there are reported by the most learned authors to have been several Sibyls, the testimony of one would not be enough to confirm the truth, as we intend. The volumes of the Cumaean indeed, in which the fates of the Romans have been written down, are kept in secret; but the books of almost all the others are not forbidden from being in use by all; of whom one, announcing to all nations the wrath of God on account of the impiety of men, began in this manner:

Ἐρχομένης ὀργῆς μεγάλης ἐπὶ κόσμον ἀπειθῆ, / Ἔσχατον εἰς αἰῶνα θεοῦ μηνύματα φαίνω, / Πᾶσι προφητεύσασα κατὰ πόλιν ἀνθρώποισι.

As great wrath is coming upon a disobedient world, / I make known the messages of God to the last age, / having prophesied to all men, city by city.

Alia quoque per indignationem Dei adversus injustos

Another also, through the indignation of God against the unjust,

Editors' notes and page, col. 143

Footnotes

(printed under page 71)

(1) ‹Ἄφθαρτος› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Ἄφθαρτος, etc. Interpret. lat. Incorruptibilis conditor aeternus in aethere habitans, / Bonis bonum proferens, multo majorem mercedem; / Malis autem et injustis iram et furorem excitans.

"Incorruptible," etc. Latin rendering: "The incorruptible eternal Creator, dwelling in the heavens, / bringing forth good for the good, a much greater reward; / but for the evil and unjust stirring up anger and fury."

(printed under page 71)

(2) ‹Τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἀγαθόν› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἀγαθόν. 1 Reg. rec., 1 Colbert. et 7 editi. Τοῖς ἀκακοῖς ἀκακόν. Caeteri cum Autolyco ut in textu.

"Good for the good." So one recent Royal manuscript, one Colbert and seven editions. [Others:] "Guileless for the guileless." The rest, with the Ad Autolycum, as in the text.

(printed under page 71)

(3) ‹Haec intulit› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Haec intulit. Ex cunctis mss. et edd. Rom. 1470, Betul., sic reposui. Caeteris vulgatis est retulit.

"She added these words." So I have restored it from all the manuscripts and the editions Roman 1470 and Betuleius. In the other common editions it is "retulit".

(printed under page 71)

(4) ‹Φεῦγε δέ› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Φεῦγε δέ. Latine: Fuge vero religiones impias, et Deo vivo famulare. / Ab adulterio te abstine, et a masculi commixtione impura. / Propriam generationem filiorum nutri, et ne occidas, / Etenim Immortalis irascitur ei qui peccaverit.

"But flee." In Latin: "But flee impious cults, and serve the living God. / Keep yourself from adultery and from impure intercourse with a male. / Rear your own offspring of children, and do not kill them, / for the Immortal is angry with whoever has sinned."

(printed under page 71)

(5) ‹Ἰδίαν γενεάν› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Ἰδίαν γενεάν. Ms. Lactantii Regio-Put. his majusculis litteris exprimit, ΘΗΝΑΙΔΙΑΝ ΘΗΝΑΗ.

"Your own offspring." The Regio-Puteanus manuscript of Lactantius gives it in these capital letters: ΘΗΝΑΙΔΙΑΝ ΘΗΝΑΗ.

(printed under page 71)

(6) ‹Indignatur ergo adversus peccatores› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Indignatur ergo adversus peccatores. Haec addidi ex omnibus mss. et vet. 3 edit. Rom., Florent., Betul. et Cellar. quae in caeteris excusis non habentur.

"He is therefore indignant against sinners." I have added these words from all the manuscripts and three old editions, the Roman, the Florentine and Betuleius's, and Cellarius's; they are not found in the other printed copies.

(printed under page 71)

(7) ‹Ut ostendi› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Ut ostendi. Cap. 22 et l. I Inst., c. 6 et seqq. BUN.

"As I have shown." Ch. 22, and Institutes book 1, ch. 6 and following. Bünemann.

(printed under page 71)

(8) ‹Fata› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Fata. Reliqui fata, unde, quod commode Heumannus hic observat, libri Sibyllini dicti libri fatales Livio l. V, c. 14 et 15, et l. XLII, c. 2. Addo etiam Fulv. Sabinum in Vopisci Aureliano c. 19, dixisse ex Aureliani litteris, ut inspiciantur fatales libri. Etiam Suetonius in Caesare cap. 79, haec carmina dixit libros fatales; in Augusto c. 31, libros fatidicos. BUN.

"Fates." I have left "fata"; whence, as Heumann aptly observes here, the Sibylline books are called "the books of fate" by Livy, book 5, chs. 14 and 15, and book 42, ch. 2. I add also that Fulvius Sabinus, in Vopiscus's Aurelian ch. 19, said from Aurelian's letter "that the books of fate be consulted". Suetonius too, in the Caesar ch. 79, called these songs "the books of fate"; in the Augustus ch. 31, "the prophetic books". Bünemann.

(printed under page 71)

(9) ‹Denuntians› · lemma note, printed under col 143

Denuntians. De rebus gravissimis et minis. Conf. infra Inst. l. II, cap. 16; lib. VII, cap. 16 et 13. Cicero l. II Att., ep. 23 extr., terrores jacit atque denuntiat.

"Announcing." Of the gravest matters and of threats. Compare below, Institutes book 2, ch. 16; book 7, chs. 16 and 13. Cicero, Letters to Atticus book 2, letter 23 at the end: "he hurls terrors and announces them."

(printed under page 71)

(10) ‹Ἐρχομένης› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Ἐρχομένης, etc. Serm. VIII init. Latine: Veniente ira magna ad mundum pertinacem, / Postremum ad saeculum Dei edicta pando, / Omnibus vaticinans oppidatim hominibus.

"Coming," etc. Beginning of Discourse 8. In Latin: "As great wrath comes upon the stubborn world, / to the last age I lay open the decrees of God, / prophesying to all men, city by city."

(printed under page 71)

(11) ‹Ἐξ οὗ› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Ἐξ οὗ, etc. Serm. IV init. Latine: Ex quo irato supercoelesti Deo / Ipsis urbibus et hominibus cunctis, / Terram cooperuit mare diluvio erupto.

"From when," etc. Beginning of Discourse 4. In Latin: "Since, when God above the heavens was angry / with the very cities and with all men, / the sea covered the earth, the flood having burst forth."

(printed under page 71)

(12) ‹Πολίεσσι› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Πολίεσσι. Regii duo, πολίεσιν; 1 alter Reg. et edit. rom. 1470, πολέεσι.

"Cities" (πολίεσσι). Two Royal manuscripts have πολίεσιν; one other Royal and the Roman edition of 1470, πολέεσι.

(printed under page 71)

(13) ‹Καί ποτε› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Καί ποτε. Serm. IV ad fin. Latine: Et aliquando Deum iram non amplius placantem, / Sed aggravantem, et perdentem genus / Hominum, ac totum id incendio depopulantem.

"And once," etc. Near the end of Discourse 4. In Latin: "And that God at some time, no longer appeasing his anger, / but making it heavier, and destroying the race / of men, and laying it all waste by fire."

(printed under page 71)

(14) ‹Πραΰνοντα› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Πραΰνοντα. Ms. Regio-Put. πραϋνθέντα, passive; male.

"Appeasing." The Regio-Puteanus manuscript has πραϋνθέντα, passive; wrongly.

(printed under page 71)

(15) ‹Nasonem› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Nasonem. Metam. I vers. 256.

"Naso" [Ovid]. Metamorphoses 1, line 256.

(printed under page 71)

(16) ‹Ἀλλ' ἐλέει› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Ἀλλ' ἐλέει, etc. Serm. IV. Latine: Sed misericordia convertimini homines nunc, neque ad iram / Omnigenam adducite Deum magnum.

"But with mercy," etc. Discourse 4. In Latin: "But turn now, men, with mercy, and do not drive / the great God to anger of every kind."

(printed under page 71)

(17) ‹Οὐκ ὀλέσει› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Οὐκ ὀλέσει. Serm. IV. Latine: Non perdet, sedabit autem iterum iram, cum omnes / Pietatem pretiosam in praecordiis exercueritis.

"He will not destroy." Discourse 4. In Latin: "He will not destroy, but will calm his anger again, when you all / have practised precious piety in your hearts."

(printed under page 71)

(18) ‹Εὖτ' ἂν ἅπαντες› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Pro Εὖτ' ἂν ἅπαντες. Ms. Regio-Put. ἦν ἄρα πάντες; 1 Colb. et edit. Rom. 1470, ἐπὰν ἅπαντες; alter Colb., ἐπειδὴ πάντες. Quidam mss. et edd., περὶ θυμῷ. Libri Sibyllae impressi, περίψιμον, 1 Colb., περίθυμον. Sed omnium rectissime Regio-Put., ἐρίτιμον, approbante Opsopoeio.

For "when all": the Regio-Puteanus manuscript has ἦν ἄρα πάντες; one Colbert and the Roman edition of 1470, ἐπὰν ἅπαντες; another Colbert, ἐπειδὴ πάντες. Some manuscripts and editions have περὶ θυμῷ. The printed Sibylline books have περίψιμον; one Colbert, περίθυμον. But most correctly of all, the Regio-Puteanus has ἐρίτιμον ("precious"), with Opsopoeus's approval.

(printed under page 71)

(19) ‹Μή ποτε› · lemma note, printed under col 144

Μή ποτε, etc. Latine: Ne forte iratus Deus incorruptibilis perdat (continues)

"Lest ever," etc. In Latin: "Lest perhaps the incorruptible God in anger destroy …" (continues)

(printed under page 71)

Page

running head: 143 FIRM. LACTANT[II] (cut off at the right edge)
marginal letters: A ‹tulo restitutum, ponenda curarent›; B ‹larum carmina recitata: castigatio›; C ‹Alia quoque per indignationem Dei›; D ‹Etenim Immortalis irascitur (in the Variorum notae)›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins with "tulo", the end of "Ca-tulo" broken from col. 142; Greek verse blocks each set as one paragraph with " / " between verse lines; "Dcus" appears with a worn e, set D⟨e⟩us; italic "praeterea" in the caput summary is unclear (æ vs œ), set praeterea; "τε χόλον" unsure (worn type); "VARIORUM NOTAE" heading and the notes below it are page-foot commentary, not set (heading apparently spans the page, cut off at right edge)

PL 7:144

cataclysmum priore saeculo factum esse dixit, ut malitia generis humani extingueretur.

said that a deluge was brought about in the former age, so that the wickedness of the human race might be extinguished.

Ἐξ οὗ μηνίσαντος ἐπουρανίοιο θεοῖο / Αὐταῖσι πολίεσσι καὶ ἀνθρώποισιν ἅπασιν / Γῆν ἐκάλυψε θάλασσα κατακλυσμοῖο ῥαγέντος.

From the time when the heavenly God was angered, the sea covered the earth, together with the very cities and all men, when the deluge burst forth.

Simili modo deflagrationem postea futuram vaticinata est, qua rursus impietas hominum deleatur.

In like manner she foretold a burning that would come afterwards, by which the impiety of men will be destroyed in its turn.

Καί ποτε τὴν ὀργὴν θεὸν οὐκ ἔτι πραΰνοντα, / Ἀλλ' ἐξεμβρίθοντα, καὶ †ἐξολύοντά τε γένναν / Ἀνθρώπων, ἅπασαν ὑπ' ἐμπρησμοῦ πέρθοντα.

And that at some time God, no longer soothing His wrath, but making it heavy, and destroying the race of men, will lay it all waste by burning.

Unde apud Nasonem de Jove ita dicitur:

Hence in Naso it is said thus concerning Jupiter:

Esse quoque in fatis reminiscitur, affore tempus, / Quo mare, quo tellus, correptaque regia coeli / Ardeat, et mundi moles operosa laboret.

He recalls also that it is in the fates that a time will come when the sea, when the earth, and the palace of heaven, seized [by fire], will burn, and the laboriously wrought mass of the world will be in distress.

Quod tunc fiat necesse est, cum honor, et cultus Dei summi apud homines interierit.

This must necessarily happen at the time when the honour and worship of the supreme God have perished among men.

Eadem tamen, placari eum poenitentia factorum et sui emendatione contestans, haec addidit:

Yet the same [Sibyl], bearing witness that He is appeased by repentance for deeds and by amendment of oneself, added these words:

Ἀλλ' ἐλέει μετάθεσθε βροτοὶ νῦν, μὴ δὲ πρὸς ὀργὴν / Παντοίην ἀγάγητε θεὸν μέγαν.

But change now, mortals, through mercy, and do not lead the great God to wrath of every kind.

Item paulo post:

Likewise a little after:

Οὐκ ὀλέσει, παύσει δὲ πάλιν χόλον, εὖτ' ἂν ἅπαντες / Εὐσεβίειν ἐρίτιμον ἐνὶ φρεσὶν ἀσκήσητε.

He will not destroy, but will stop His anger again, when all of you practise precious piety in your hearts.

Deinde alia Sibylla coelestium terrenorumque genitorem diligi oportere denuntiat, ne ad perdendos homines indignatio ejus insurgat:

Next, another Sibyl declares that the begetter of things heavenly and earthly must be loved, lest His indignation rise up to destroy men:

Μήποτε θυμωθεὶς θεὸς ἄφθιτος ἐξαπολέσσῃ / Πᾶν γένος ἀνθρώπων, βίοτον καὶ φῦλον ἀναιδὲς, / Δεῖ στέργειν γενετῆρα θεὸν σοφὸν αἰὲν ἐόντα.

Lest God the incorruptible, being angered, utterly destroy the whole race of men, their life and shameless tribe, it is necessary to love God the Begetter, wise, ever existing.

Ex his apparet vanas esse rationes philosophorum,

From these things it appears that the reasonings of the philosophers are vain,

Editors' notes and page, col. 144

Page

running head: [cut off at left] FIRM. LACTANTII 144
marginal letters: A ‹cataclysmum priore saeculo›; B ‹Eadem tamen, placari›; C ‹Ex his apparet vanas›; D ‹in the Variorum notae at the page foot, beside "Hominum, ac totum id incendio" / "Πραΰνοντα"›
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Greek verses are set as single lines with " / " marking the printed verse ends. The small Greek type is blurred and its accents are uncertain throughout. In "ἐξολύοντά" (marked †) the print is unclear; the expected reading is perhaps ἐξολέκοντα. "γένναν" is also blurred. "postea" is printed blurred (it looks like "postca"). The full-width heading "[VA]RIORUM NOTAE" stands below "Ex his apparet…" and is not set. The Variorum notes at the page foot (from Ἐρχομένης, etc. to "Ne forte iratus Deus incorruptibilis perdat") are left for the later pass. The fragments of column 143 at the left edge are not set.

PL 7:145

qui Deum putant sine ira; et inter caeteras laudes ejus id ponunt, quod est inutilissimum, detrahentes ei, quod est rebus humanis maxime sa⟨lu⟩tare, per quod constat ipsa majestas. Regnum hoc imperiumque terrenum nisi metus custodiat, solvitur. Aufer iram regi, non modo nemo parebit, sed etiam de fastigio praecipitabitur. Imo vero cuilibet humili eripe hunc affectum, quis eum non spoliabit? quis non deridebit? quis non afficiet injuria? Ita nec indumenta, nec sedem, nec victum poterit habere, aliis quidquid habuerit diripientibus; nedum putemus coelestis imperii majestatem sine ira et metu posse consistere. Apollo Milesius, de Judaeorum religione consultus, responso hoc indidit:

who think God to be without anger; and among His other praises they set down that which is most useless, taking away from Him that which is most salutary to human affairs, through which majesty itself subsists. This earthly kingdom and dominion, unless fear guards it, is dissolved. Take away anger from a king: not only will no one obey him, but he will even be hurled down from his eminence. Indeed, snatch this affection from any lowly man you please: who will not rob him? who will not mock him? who will not inflict injury on him? So he will be able to have neither clothing, nor dwelling, nor food, since others will plunder whatever he has; much less should we think that the majesty of the heavenly dominion can stand without anger and fear. Apollo of Miletus, consulted about the religion of the Jews, put this into his response:

Ἠδὲ Θεὸν βασιλῆα καὶ γεννητῆρα πρὸ πάντων,

And God, the King and Begetter before all things,

Ὃν τρέμεται καὶ γαῖα, καὶ οὐρανὸς, ἠδὲ θάλασσα,

before Whom both earth trembles, and heaven, and the sea,

Ταρτάρειοί τε μυχοὶ, καὶ δαίμονες ἐκφρίττουσιν.

and the recesses of Tartarus, and the demons shudder.

Si tam lenis est, quam philosophi volunt, quomodo ad nutum ejus non modo daemones, et ministri tantae potestatis, sed etiam coelum, et terra, et rerum natura omnis contremiscit? Si enim nullus alteri servit nisi coactus, omne igitur imperium metu constat: metus autem per iram: nam si non moveatur quis adversus parere nolentem, nec cogi poterit ad obsequium. Consulat unusquisque affectus suos: jam intelliget neminem posse sine ira et castigatione imperio subjugari. Ubi ergo ira non fuerit, imperium quoque non erit. Deus autem habet imperium; ergo et iram,

If He is as mild as the philosophers would have it, how is it that at His nod not only the demons, the ministers of so great a power, but also heaven, and earth, and the whole nature of things tremble? For if no one serves another unless compelled, then all dominion subsists through fear; and fear through anger: for if a man is not stirred against one who is unwilling to obey, neither can that one be compelled to obedience. Let each consult his own affections: he will at once understand that no one can be brought under dominion without anger and chastisement. Where, therefore, there is no anger, there will be no dominion either. But God has dominion; therefore also anger,

Editors' notes and page, col. 145

Footnotes

(printed under page 72)

(0) ‹—› · lemma note, printed under col 145

(continued) Omne genus hominum, vitam et gentem impudentem, / Oportet amare genitorem Deum sapientem qui semper est.

(printed under page 72)

(1) ‹Sine ira› · lemma note, printed under col 145

Sine ira. Heuman. legit sine ira esse.

"Without anger." Heumann reads "sine ira esse".

(printed under page 72)

(2) ‹Id ponunt... per quod constat ipsa majestas› · lemma note, printed under col 145

Id ponunt... per quod constat ipsa majestas. Sic habent uterque Bonon., Tax., Pen. In Lips., 2 Brun., Ultr. aliisque, mutilus est locus, et sic legitur: id ponunt quod est contra ipsam majestatem. Regnum hoc. ISAEUS. — In veterrimo Regio-Put. est, id ponunt quod est constat ipsa majestas. Desunt verba intermedia a primo quod usque ad tertium quod. In quo patet fuisse amanuensis erratum, ex praetermissa linea. Videtur Lactantius respexisse ad ea quae habet sub finem cap. 17 supra, ubi ait de ira, quia utilis est rebus humanis et necessaria.—Id ponunt, quod est inutilissimum, detrahentes ei, quod est rebus humanis maxime salutare, per quod constat ipsa majestas. Non ausus fui repudiare hanc codicum ex omnibus antiquissimorum, duorum scilicet Bononiensium, et Taxaquetii et Peniae, ex quibus Thomasius, Isaeus, Thys. Gall. Sparkius et ed. Cantabr. in textum receperunt.

"They posit that … by which majesty itself subsists." So both Bologna manuscripts, Tax and Pen. In the Leipzig, two Brunswick, the Ultrajectinus and others the passage is mutilated and reads thus: "they posit that which is against majesty itself. This kingdom." Isaeus. — In the very old Regio-Puteanus it is "id ponunt quod est constat ipsa majestas". The intervening words from the first "quod" to the third "quod" are missing; in which it is plain that there was a copyist's error from a line skipped. Lactantius seems to have had in view what he says near the end of ch. 17 above, where he says of anger, "because it is useful and necessary to human affairs." — "They posit what is most useless, taking away from him what is most salutary to human affairs, by which majesty itself subsists." I have not dared to reject this reading of the oldest codices of all, namely the two Bologna manuscripts, Taxaquetius's and Penia's, from which Thomasius, Isaeus, Thysius, Gallaeus, Sparke and the Cambridge edition took it into the text.

(printed under page 72)

(3) ‹Ἠδὲ Θεόν› · lemma note, printed under col 145

Ἠδὲ Θεόν. Latine: Et Deum Regem et genitorem (1) omnium, / Quem contremiscit terra, et coelum ac mare, / Tartareaeque latebrae et daemones horrescunt

"And God." In Latin: "And God, the King and Father (1) of all, / at whom earth trembles, and heaven and sea, / and the hiding places of Tartarus and the demons shudder."

(printed under page 72)

(4) ‹Tantae potestatis› · lemma note, printed under col 145

Tantae potestatis. Non inconcinne legit Heumannus Tartareae potestatis; quod exprimitur vocula graeca ταρτάρεοι.—Ministri tantae potestatis. Ego servo, tantae, sc. divinae majestatis. Nam dicit infra; de hac tanta potestate: Qui rerum dominator habeat in omnes veram et aeternam potestatem. Conf. supra. Daemones hujus tantae potestatis dicuntur regni ministri. BUN.

"Of so great a power." Heumann, not unaptly, reads "Tartareae potestatis", which is expressed by the little Greek word ταρτάρεοι. — "Ministers of so great a power." I keep "tantae", that is, of the divine majesty. For he says below of this great power: "who, as lord of things, has true and eternal power over all." Compare above. The demons are called ministers of the kingdom of this so great power. Bünemann.

(printed under page 72)

(5) ‹Metu constat› · lemma note, printed under col 145, runs on to the foot of col 146

Metu constat. Id dicas de terreno imperio, quod legibus et metu constat: attamen dicit Livius lib. II: Imperia legum potentiora sunt quam hominum. Non idem est de coelesti imperio, quod amor et spe potius quam metu continetur. Lex poenalis et metus in religione non sunt nisi pro injustis, quia gratia et amore seu timore filiali justus ducitur.

"Subsists by fear." You may say that of earthly rule, which subsists by laws and fear; and yet Livy says, book 2: "The commands of the laws are more powerful than those of men." It is not the same with heavenly rule, which is held together by love and hope rather than by fear. Penal law and fear have place in religion only for the unjust, because the just man is led by grace and love, or by filial fear.

(printed under page 72)

(6) ‹Quapropter› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Quapropter, etc. Hic in mss. 4 Colbert., Clarom. et edd. Rom. 1470, 1474, Parrhas. et Is. incipit Caput XXIV. quod caeteri superiori connectunt.

"Wherefore," etc. Here, in four Colbert manuscripts, the Claromontanus, and the editions Roman 1470 and 1474, Parrhasius's and Isaeus's, Chapter 24 begins, which the others join to the preceding one.

(printed under page 72)

(7) ‹Vaniloquentia› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Vaniloquentia. In Reimm. vana eloquentia est correctum vana loquentia. Recepta est Plauti, Livii, Taciti vox. BUN.

"Idle talk." In Reimmann's copy "vana eloquentia" has been corrected to "vana loquentia". The word is the accepted one of Plautus, Livy and Tacitus. Bünemann.

(printed under page 72)

(8) ‹Utraque persona in eo venerabilis› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Utraque persona in eo venerabilis. Hoc est, venerari eum debemus, non solum velut patrem beneficum, sed etiam tanquam severum dominum. Id jam dixerat Lactantius Divin. Institut. lib. IV cap. 4 initio, ubi ait: Quoniam utramque personam sustinet (Deus) et patris et Domini, et amare eum debemus, quia filii sumus, et timere, quia servi. HEUMANNUS.

"Each character in him is to be revered." That is, we ought to revere him not only as a kindly father but also as a stern master. Lactantius had already said this in the Divine Institutes book 4, beginning of ch. 4, where he says: "Since (God) bears both characters, of Father and of Lord, we ought both to love him, because we are sons, and to fear him, because we are servants." Heumann.

(printed under page 72)

(9) ‹Habeat› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Habeat. Heuman. legit habet.

"Should have." Heumann reads "habet".

(printed under page 72)

(10) ‹Si Deum cogites› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Si Deum cogites. Ita quidem libri omnes: mallem cum Davisio ad Epit. c. 70. si dominum cogites; mox enim domini et parentis. Conf. l. I, c. 7. BUN.

"If you think of God." So indeed all the books; I would prefer, with Davies on the Epitome ch. 70, "si dominum cogites", for shortly after there is "of the master and parent". Compare book 1, ch. 7. Bünemann.

(printed under page 72)

(11) ‹Officiosa› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Officiosa. Subaudi familia. HEUMANNUS.

"Dutiful." Understand "household". Heumann.

(printed under page 72)

(12) ‹Notionem› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Notionem. Γνῶσιν. Vid. not. l. II Inst., c. 15, et l. V, c. 14. BUN.

"Knowledge." Gnosis. See the notes on Institutes book 2, ch. 15, and book 5, ch. 14. Bünemann.

(printed under page 72)

(13) ‹Coelestia et divina sempiterna meditemur› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Coelestia et divina sempiterna meditemur. Ita mss. et editi. Francius legebat, et sempiterna, sicut et Heumannus, qui omittendum putat divina.—Coelestia et divina sempiterna. Sic omnes libri, mallem et ejecto: coelestia, divina, sempiterna; nisi forte sempiterna explicas, quae sempiterna sunt. BUN.

"Let us meditate on heavenly and divine everlasting things." So the manuscripts and printed editions. Francius read "et sempiterna", as does Heumann, who thinks "divina" should be omitted. — "Coelestia et divina sempiterna." So all the books; I would prefer, with "et" thrown out, "heavenly, divine, everlasting things"; unless perhaps you explain "sempiterna" as "the things that are everlasting". Bünemann.

(printed under page 72)

(14) ‹Et diligendus est› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Et diligendus est. Abest a 14 mss. inter quos est Regio-Put. et a 10 vulgatis. Sed ex caeteris reponendum et retinendum, ut fiat ad tria sequentia relatio; et duo veterrimi mss. Bonon. habent in textu ut scripsimus. Quam lectionem recte propugnat Thomasius ex hoc ipso Lactantii loco. Deus sequendus est, quia in eo est materia rerum; adorandus, ob rationem virtutum; diligendus, quia est fons bonorum.

"And he is to be loved." It is absent from 14 manuscripts, among them the Regio-Puteanus, and from 10 common editions. But it must be restored from the rest and kept, so that it answers to the three things that follow; and the two very old Bologna manuscripts have it in the text as we have written it. Thomasius rightly defends this reading from this very passage of Lactantius: God is to be followed, because in him is the matter of things; to be worshipped, by reason of the virtues; to be loved, because he is the fount of good things.

(printed under page 72)

(15) ‹Materia rerum› · lemma note, printed under col 146

Materia rerum. Id est, causa rerum. SPARK.

"The matter of things." That is, the cause of things. Sparke.

(printed under page 72)

(1) ‹genitorem (1) omnium› · call in col 145 (inside lemma note 3)

Mss. Baluz., Brun. et ed. Rom. 1470, pro omnium, legunt ante omnia, juxta graecum πρὸ πάντων.

The manuscripts Baluze's and the Brunswick and the Roman edition of 1470 read "ante omnia" ("before all things") for "omnium", following the Greek "before all".

(printed under page 72)

Page

running head: 145 LIBER DE IRA D[EI] (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A qui Deum putant sine ira; B Ὃν τρέμεται καὶ γαῖα; C Omne genus hominum (in the notes); D kius et ed. Cantabr. (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 7:146

qua constat imperium, habeat necesse est. Quapropter nemo vaniloquentia philosophorum inductus ad contemptum se Dei erudiat; quod est maximum nefas. Debemus hunc omnes et amare, quod pater est; et vereri, quod dominus; et honorificare, quod beneficus; et metuere, quod severus: utraque persona in eo venerabilis. Quis salva pietate non diligat animae suae parentem? aut quis impune contemnat eum, qui rerum dominator, habeat in omnes veram et aeternam potestatem? Si patrem consideres, ortum nobis ad lucem, qua fruimur, subministrat: per illum vivimus, per illum in hospitium hujus mundi intravimus. Si Deum cogites, ille nos innumerabilibus copiis alit, ille sustentat, in hujus domo habitamus, hujus familia sumus; et si minus obsequens, quam decebat, minusque officiosa, quam domini et parentis immortalia merita poscebant: tamen plurimum proficit ad veniam consequendam, si cultum ejus notionemque teneamus; si abjectis humilibus terrenisque tam rebus, quam bonis, coelestia et divina sempiterna meditemur. Quod ut facere possimus, Deus nobis sequendus est, Deus adorandus et diligendus est; quoniam in eo est materia rerum, et ratio virtutum, et fons bonorum.

by which dominion stands, He must necessarily have. Wherefore let no one, led on by the empty talk of the philosophers, train himself into contempt of God; which is the greatest impiety. We all ought both to love Him, because He is Father; and to revere Him, because He is Lord; and to honour Him, because He is beneficent; and to fear Him, because He is severe: each person in Him is worthy of veneration. Who, with piety unimpaired, would not love the parent of his soul? or who may with impunity despise Him Who, as ruler of things, has true and eternal power over all? If you consider the Father, He furnishes us with our rising to the light which we enjoy: through Him we live, through Him we have entered into the lodging of this world. If you think of God, He nourishes us with countless resources, He sustains [us], in His house we dwell, we are His household; and even if [that household is] less obedient than was fitting, and less dutiful than the immortal merits of its lord and parent demanded: nevertheless it avails very much towards obtaining pardon, if we hold fast to His worship and the knowledge of Him; if, casting aside lowly and earthly things as well as goods, we meditate on heavenly and divine eternal things. And that we may be able to do this, God must be followed by us, God must be adored and loved; since in Him is the material of things, and the principle of virtues, and the source of goods.

Quid enim Deo aut potentia majus est, aut ratione perfectius, aut claritate luculentius? Qui quoniam nos ad sapientiam genuit, ad justitiam procreavit; non est fas hominem, relicto Deo sensus, ac vitae datore,

For what is greater than God in power, or more perfect in reason, or more resplendent in brightness? And since He begot us for wisdom, brought us forth for justice, it is not right for man, having abandoned God, the giver of sense and of life,

Editors' notes and page, col. 146

Page

running head: ‹LI›BER DE IRA DEI. 146 (left edge cut off in image)
marginal letters: A qua constat imperium; B minusque officiosa; C idem est de coelesti imperio (in the notes); D cum Davisio ad Epit. (in the notes)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: column begins mid-sentence (qua constat imperium) and ends mid-sentence (vitae datore,); full-width heading ‹VA›RIORUM NOTAE stands between the text and the notes, cut off at left, not set; Variorum notae (Quapropter, Vaniloquentia, Utraque persona, Si Deum cogites, etc.) not set, left for the later pass; line fragments at left edge belong to col. 145, not set

PL 7:147

terrenis fragilibusque famulari, aut quaerendis temporalibus bonis inhaerentem, ab innocentia et pietate desciscere. Non faciunt beatum vitiosae ac mortiferae voluptates, non opulentia libidinum incitatrix, non inanis ambitio, non caduci honores, quibus illaqueatus animus humanus, et corpori mancipatus, aeterna morte damnatur: sed innocentia sola, sola justitia, cujus legitima et digna merces est immortalitas, quam statuit a principio Deus sanctis et incorruptis mentibus, quae se a vitiis et ab omni labe terrena integras inviolatasque conservant. Hujus praemii coelestis ac sempiterni participes esse non possunt, qui facinoribus, fraudibus, rapinis, circumscriptionibus conscientiam polluerunt, quique injuriis hominum, nefariis commissis, ineluibiles sibi maculas inusserunt. Proinde universos oportet, qui sapientes, qui homines merito dici volunt, fragilia contemnere, terrena calcare, humilia despicere, ut possint cum Deo beatissima necessitudine copulari.

to serve earthly and fragile things, or, clinging to the pursuit of temporal goods, to fall away from innocence and piety. Vicious and deadly pleasures do not make a man happy, nor wealth, the inciter of lusts, nor empty ambition, nor fleeting honours, by which the human soul, ensnared and made a slave to the body, is condemned to eternal death; but innocence alone, justice alone, whose lawful and worthy reward is immortality, which God appointed from the beginning for holy and incorrupt minds, which keep themselves whole and inviolate from vices and from every earthly stain. Of this heavenly and everlasting reward they cannot be partakers who have polluted their conscience with crimes, frauds, robberies and deceptions, and who, by injuries done to men and by wicked deeds committed, have branded upon themselves stains that cannot be washed out. Therefore it behoves all who wish deservedly to be called wise, to be called men, to despise fragile things, to trample upon earthly things, to look down upon lowly things, so that they may be joined with God in a most blessed bond of kinship.

Auferatur impietas, discordiae; dissensionesque turbulentae ac pestiferae sopiantur, quibus humanae societates, et publici foederis divina conjunctio rumpitur, dirimitur, dissipatur: quantum possumus, boni ac benefici esse meditemur; si quid nobis opum, si quid suppetit copiarum, id non voluptati unius, sed multorum saluti impartiatur. Voluptas enim tam mortalis est, quam corpus, cui exhibet ministerium. Justitia vero et beneficentia tam immortales, quam mens et anima, quae bonis operibus similitudinem Dei assequitur. Sit nobis Deus non in templis, sed in corde nostro consecratus. Destructilia sunt omnia, quae manu fiunt. Mundemus hoc templum, quod non fumo, non pulvere, sed malis cogitationibus sordidatur; quod non cereis ardentibus, sed claritate ac luce sapientiae illuminatur. In quo si Deum semper crediderimus esse praesentem, cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent, ita vivemus, ut et propitium semper habeamus, et nunquam vereamur iratum.

Let impiety and discords be taken away; and let the turbulent and pestilent dissensions be laid to rest by which human societies and the divine union of the public covenant are broken, severed and scattered: let us take thought, as far as we can, to be good and beneficent; if we have any wealth, if any store of resources is at hand, let it be imparted not to the pleasure of one, but to the welfare of many. For pleasure is as mortal as the body, to which it renders service. But justice and beneficence are as immortal as the mind and soul, which by good works attains the likeness of God. Let God be consecrated by us not in temples, but in our heart. All things that are made by hand are destructible. Let us cleanse this temple, which is soiled not by smoke, not by dust, but by evil thoughts; which is lit not by burning tapers, but by the brightness and light of wisdom. If we believe that God is always present in it, to Whose divinity the secrets of the mind lie open, we shall so live that we may both always have Him propitious and never fear Him angry.

Editors' notes and page, col. 147

Footnotes

(printed under page 73)

(1) ‹Desciscere› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Desciscere. Mss. 13 et edd., discedere.—Desciscere. L. I Inst., cap. 21: ab humanitate desciscunt. Seneca de Otio Sap. c. 29: desciscere a praeceptis; l. IV, Benef. 17, a lege descivit. BUN.

"To fall away." Thirteen manuscripts and the editions have "discedere". — "Desciscere": Institutes book 1, ch. 21: "they fall away from humanity." Seneca, On the Leisure of the Wise ch. 29: "to fall away from the precepts"; On Benefits book 4, 17: "he fell away from the law." Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(2) ‹Incitatrix› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Incitatrix. Mss. Bonon., irritatrix.

"She who incites." The Bologna manuscripts have "irritatrix".

(printed under page 73)

(3) ‹Qui facinoribus, fraudibus› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Qui facinoribus, fraudibus. Sic facinoribus restitui ex mss. Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg., 2 Colbert., Baluz., Clarom. in margine. Deest in caeteris tum scriptis, tum impressis.

"Who by crimes, by frauds." So I have restored "facinoribus" from the manuscripts Regio-Puteanus, one other Royal, two Colbert, Baluze's, and the Claromontanus in the margin. It is lacking in the rest, both manuscript and printed.

(printed under page 73)

(4) ‹Ineluibiles› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Ineluibiles. Ita mss. quod vix in scriptoribus latinis reperias, nisi apud Lactantium libro VII Divin. Institut. cap. 20, circa medium. Quaedam editiones habent indelebiles, Cellarii scilicet et aliorum; sed maluimus sequi mss. et editos. — Ineluibiles maculas Ciceronis est, l. V, in Ver., c. 46, et pro sectio, cap. 27, maculas eluere. BUN.

"Not to be washed out." So the manuscripts, a word you will hardly find in Latin writers except in Lactantius, Divine Institutes book 7, ch. 20, about the middle. Some editions have "indelebiles", namely Cellarius's and others'; but we preferred to follow the manuscripts and printed editions. — "Stains not to be washed out": it is Cicero's, Against Verres book 5, ch. 46, and For Sestius ch. 27, "to wash out stains." Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(5) ‹Impartiatur› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Impartiatur. 1 Colb., impartiamur. Regio-Put., 4 Colb., Clarom., edit. Cantabrig., impetiatur.

"Be imparted." One Colbert has "impartiamur". The Regio-Puteanus, four Colbert, the Claromontanus and the Cambridge edition have "impetiatur".

(printed under page 73)

(6) ‹Tam immortales› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Tam immortales. Reimmann., tam immortalis, in singulari, non indocte; ut statim, mens et anima... assequitur. BUN.

"So immortal." Reimmann's copy has "tam immortalis", in the singular, not unlearnedly; as just after, "mind and soul … attains." Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(7) ‹Deus... in corde... consecratus› · lemma note, printed under col 147

Deus... in corde... consecratus, l. VI Inst., cap. 25. Secum... habeat Deum semper in corde suo consecratum, quoniam ipse est Dei templum. Minuc. Fel., c. 32: Nonne melius in nostra dedicandus est mente, in nostro imo consecrandus est pectore? BUN.

"God … consecrated … in the heart." Institutes book 6, ch. 25: "Let him … have God always consecrated in his heart, since he himself is God's temple." Minucius Felix, ch. 32: "Is he not better dedicated in our mind, consecrated in our inmost breast?" Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(8) ‹Destructilia› · lemma note, printed under col 147, runs on to the foot of col 148

Destructilia. Sic lego cum vetustissimis et optimis […] Quinque syllabis, quod adjectivum tuetur versus Prudentii Peristeph. II., X, 346, sqq.: Aedem sibi ipse mente in hominis condidit / Vivam, serenam, sensualem, stabilem, / Solvi incapacem posse, nec destructilem. Idem aliquoties cum Vitruvio et Celso dixit, structilis; ut Tertullianus, instructilis. BUN.

"Destructible." So I read with the oldest and best […] in five syllables, an adjective defended by Prudentius's verse, Peristephanon 2 [printed so], 10, 346 ff.: "He built himself a temple in the mind of man, / living, serene, endowed with sense, steadfast, / incapable of being dissolved, nor destructible." He likewise says "structilis" several times, with Vitruvius and Celsus; as Tertullian says "instructilis". Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(9) ‹Malis cogitationibus sordidatur› · lemma note, printed under col 148

Malis cogitationibus sordidatur. L. V Inst., c. 20. Quanto satius est mentem potius eluere, quae malis cupiditatibus sordidatur. BUN.

"Is soiled by evil thoughts." Institutes book 5, ch. 20: "How much better it is rather to wash the mind, which is soiled by evil desires." Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

(10) ‹Quod non cereis ardentibus› · lemma note, printed under col 148

Quod non cereis ardentibus. Vide Not. supra ad lib. VI Inst., cap. 6.

"Which, not with burning tapers." See the note above on Institutes book 6, ch. 6.

(printed under page 73)

(11) ‹Sed claritate ac luce sapientiae› · lemma note, printed under col 148

Sed claritate ac luce sapientiae. Ms. Bodl. habet, sed Dei claritate; editi nonnulli ac duce sapientia.

"But by the brightness and light of wisdom." The Bodleian manuscript has "sed Dei claritate"; some printed editions, "ac duce sapientia" ("with wisdom as guide").

(printed under page 73)

(12) ‹Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent› · lemma note, printed under col 148

Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent. Haec desunt in 19 rec. mss. et edd. Rom. quorum vice legitur ejus divinitatis potentia ita vivemus; ita etiam habent vetustae saeculi XV editiones. At in Bonon. multisque aliis est ut in textu; in Regio-Put. vero, cujus divinitatis ita patentia vivemus. — Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent, ita vivemus. Ita l. VI Inst., c. 24. Deo... nihil potest esse secretum... patemus Deo.... Dei divinitas nec visceribus submoveri potest. BUN.

"To whose divinity the secrets of the mind lie open." These words are lacking in 19 recent manuscripts and the Roman editions, in place of which one reads "ejus divinitatis potentia ita vivemus"; so too the old fifteenth-century editions. But in the Bologna and many others it is as in the text; in the Regio-Puteanus, however, "cujus divinitatis ita patentia vivemus". — "To whose divinity the secrets of the mind lie open, so shall we live." So Institutes book 6, ch. 24: "From God … nothing can be secret … we lie open to God … God's divinity cannot be kept out even of our inmost parts." Bünemann.

(printed under page 73)

Editors' prose

VARIORUM NOTAE.

NOTES OF VARIOUS EDITORS.

Desciscere. Mss. 13 et edd., discedere.—Desciscere. L. I Inst., cap. 21: ab humanitate desciscunt. Seneca de Otio Sap. c. 29: desciscere a praeceptis; l. IV, Benef. 17, a lege descivit. BUN.

Desciscere ('to fall away'). Thirteen manuscripts and the editions have discedere ('to depart'). — Desciscere: Book I of the Institutes, chapter 21: 'they fall away from humanity'. Seneca, De otio sapientis, c. 29: 'to fall away from precepts'; De beneficiis IV, 17: 'he fell away from the law'. BÜN[EMANN].

Incitatrix. Mss. Bonon., irritatrix.

Incitatrix ('inciter'). The Bologna manuscripts have irritatrix ('provoker').

Qui facinoribus, fraudibus. Sic facinoribus restitui ex mss. Regio-Put., 1 al. Reg., 2 Colbert., Baluz., Clarom. in margine. Deest in caeteris tum scriptis, tum impressis.

Qui facinoribus, fraudibus ('who by crimes, by frauds'). I have restored facinoribus thus from the manuscripts: the Regio-Puteanus, one other Regius, two Colbertine, Baluze's, and the Claromontanus in the margin. It is wanting in the rest, both written and printed.

Ineluibiles ('not to be washed out'). So the manuscripts; a word you would scarcely find in Latin writers, except in Lactantius, Book VII of the Divine Institutes, chapter 20, about the middle. Some editions, namely Cellarius's and others', have indelebiles ('indelible'); but we have preferred to follow the manuscripts and the printed editions. — Ineluibiles maculas is Cicero's, In Verrem V, c. 46, and in Pro sectio [sic], chapter 27, maculas eluere ('to wash out stains'). BÜN[EMANN].

Impartiatur. 1 Colb., impartiamur. Regio-Put., 4 Colb., Clarom., edit. Cantabrig., impetiatur.

Impartiatur ('let it be imparted'). One Colbertine has impartiamur; the Regio-Puteanus, four Colbertine, the Claromontanus and the Cambridge edition have impetiatur.

Tam immortales. Reimmann., tam immortalis, in singulari, non indocte; ut statim, mens et anima... assequitur. BUN.

Tam immortales ('as immortal'). Reimmann has tam immortalis, in the singular, not unlearnedly; as just after, mens et anima ... assequitur ('the mind and soul ... attains'). BÜN[EMANN].

Deus ... in corde ... consecratus ('God ... consecrated in the heart'): Book VI of the Institutes, chapter 25: 'Let him have God ever consecrated with him in his heart, since he himself is the temple of God.' Minucius Felix, c. 32: 'Is He not better dedicated in our mind, consecrated in our inmost breast?' BÜN[EMANN].

Destructilia. Sic lego cum vetustissimis et optimis mss. Bonon., 2 Reg., 2 Colb., Tax. Scripti recentiores et editi ferunt destructibilia. — Destructilia. Quinque syllabis, quod adjectivum tuetur versus Prudentii Peristeph. II., x, 346, sqq. :

Destructilia ('destructible'). So I read with the oldest and best manuscripts: the Bologna, two Regii, two Colbertine, and Tax[aquet's]. The more recent manuscripts and the printed editions give destructibilia. — Destructilia: in five syllables, an adjective which a verse of Prudentius supports, Peristephanon II., x, 346 ff.:

Aedem sibi ipse mente in hominis condidit Vivam, serenam, sensualem, stabilem, Solvi incapacem posse, nec destructilem.

He built Himself a temple in the mind of man,

Idem aliquoties cum Vitruvio et Celso dixit, structilis; ut Tertullianus, instructilis. BUN.

The same writer several times said, with Vitruvius and Celsus, structilis ('built'); as Tertullian said instructilis. BÜN[EMANN].

Malis cogitationibus sordidatur. L. V Inst., c. 20. Quanto satius est mentem potius eluere, quae malis cupiditatibus sordidatur. BUN.

Malis cogitationibus sordidatur ('is soiled by evil thoughts'). Book V of the Institutes, c. 20: 'How much better it is rather to wash clean the mind, which is soiled by evil desires.' BÜN[EMANN].

Quod non cereis ardentibus. Vide Not. supra ad lib. VI Inst., cap. 6.

Quod non cereis ardentibus ('which not with burning tapers'). See the note above on Book VI of the Institutes, chapter 6.

Sed claritate ac luce sapientiae. Ms. Bodl. habet, sed Dei claritate; editi nonnulli ac duce sapientia.

Sed claritate ac luce sapientiae ('but by the brightness and light of wisdom'). The Bodleian manuscript has sed Dei claritate ('but by the brightness of God'); some printed editions ac duce sapientia ('and with wisdom as guide').

Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent. Haec desunt in 19 rec. mss. et edd. Rom. quorum vice legitur ejus divinitatis potentia ita vivemus; ita etiam habent vetustae saeculi XV editiones. At in Bonon. multisque aliis est ut in textu; in Regio-Put. vero, cujus divinitatis ita patentia vivemus. — Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent, ita vivemus. Ita l. VI Inst., c. 24. Deo... nihil potest esse secretum... patemus Deo... Dei divinitas nec visceribus submoveri potest. BUN.

Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent ('to whose divinity the secrets of the mind lie open'). These words are wanting in nineteen recent manuscripts and in the Roman editions, in place of which is read ejus divinitatis potentia ita vivemus ('by the power of His divinity we shall so live'); so too have the old editions of the fifteenth century. But in the Bologna manuscript and many others it stands as in the text; in the Regio-Puteanus, however, cujus divinitatis ita patentia vivemus. — Cujus divinitati secreta mentis patent, ita vivemus: so Book VI of the Institutes, c. 24: 'To God ... nothing can be secret ... we lie open to God ... the divinity of God cannot be kept out even from our inmost parts.' BÜN[EMANN].

Page

running head: 147 DISSERT. D. LE NOURRY IN L (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹terrenis fragilibusque famulari›; B ‹merito dici volunt, fragilia contemnere›; C ‹habent indelebiles, Cellarii scilicet› (in the Variorum notae at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: full-width line "VARIORUM NOTA[E]" and the notes beneath it (Desciscere ... Destructilia) are page-foot commentary, not set; full-width title lines "DISSERTA[TIO] / DE LACTANTII LIBRO ..." and "AUCTORE DOM. LE NOUR[RY]" cut off at the image edge, not set; editors' matter set: Le Nourry's dissertation, Caput primum, "Analysis hujus libri. Libri hujus initio"; last word split at the column break: quorum- (presumably quorumdam)
other: a full-width band stands across cols 147/148 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 148 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 147 (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 7:148

Editors' notes and page, col. 148

Page

running head: [cut off at left edge] NOURRY IN LIB. DE IRA DEI. 148
marginal letters: A Auferatur impietas; B crediderimus esse praesentem; C piditatibus sordidatur (in the Variorum Notae at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: Destructilia printed thus and defended in the notes, so not a misprint; full-width heading VARIORUM NOTAE not set, stands after "vereamur iratum"; Variorum Notae at the page foot (mss. Bonon., 2 Reg. ...) not set, left for the later pass; full-width title DISSERTATIO IN LIBRO DE IRA DEI ... DOM. LE NOURRY O. S. B. with ornamental rules not set, stands between the notes and the dissertation text, its left part cut off; editors' matter set: Le Nourry's dissertation, "dam etiam philosophorum"; first word "dam" is the end of a word broken from the preceding column, probably quorum-dam (left column ends "orum-"); last word "in-" broken at the column end, perhaps ingenio, unsure; running head cut off at its left edge
other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 147 (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)