Nicolaus de Lestocq, Disquisitio de auctore libri cui titulus De Mortibus persecutorum, qui Lactantio tribui solet

Firmianus, the first book of the Divine Institutes ends happily.

At the end of the fourth book one may read: "Of Caelius Firmianus, the fourth book of the Divine Institutes ends."

At the foot of the fifth book is written: "Of L. Caelius Firmianus, the fifth book of the Divine Institutes, on Justice, ends."

The Royal manuscript, number 1673, reads thus: "Of Lucius Caelius Lactantius Firmianus, the first book of the Divine Institutes against the Gentiles, to the Emperor Constantine."

At the foot of the manuscript codex, moreover, there stands: "Of L. Caelius Lactantius Firmianus, the seventh and last book of the Divine Institutes against the Gentiles, to the Emperor Constantine, ends happily."

So in codex 1671 of the same Library one reads: "Of L. Celius Lactantius Firmianus, of the Divine Institutes against the Gentiles, the Preface of the first book, on False Religion, to the Emperor Constantine."

The Colbert codex, now in the Royal Library as number 1667, to which is prefixed an inscription in these words: "Of Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius, the book against the Gentiles begins."

In the Lactantius codex which is in the Library of Marmoutier near Tours, at the beginning of the first book there stands thus: "Of Lactantius Firmianus Caecilius, on the False Religion of the Gods: here begin the rubrics of the first book."

At the foot of the second book one may read: "Of Firmianus Lactantius Cecilius."

Finally, at the end of the sixth book is written: "Of Cecilius Firmianus Lactantius," etc.

In these places the praenomen Lucius has been omitted through carelessness.

Indeed, in the ancient Bologna codex too, which nevertheless lacks its first two leaves, one reads all the same at the foot of the first book: "Of L. Firmianus Lactantius, on False Religion

the first book ends, the name of Caelius, or Cecilius, being in that case, that is, omitted, which nevertheless is read in the other books.

At the end of books 2, 3 and 7 there is: "Of L. Caelius Firmianus Lactantius", etc.

But at the close of book 4 you have: "Of L. Caelius Lactantius Firmianus", etc., in inverted order, as you see.

At the end of the book On the Anger of God, moreover, one may read: "Of L. Caelius Lactantius", the name Firmianus being passed over.

But why did Dom Nicolas le Nourry not examine the manuscript codex of Lactantius which exists in the Saint-Germain Library, where he was then living? In it he would without doubt have read these words at the end of the book On the Workmanship of God: "Of L. Caelius Firmianus Lactantius, On the Reason, to Demetrius, ends." And yet in the books of the Institutes he is called only Firmianus Lactantius, three or four times.

From where, I ask, did so many editors of this author copy out the forenames and surnames, namely Lucius Caelius Firmianus Lactantius? Was it not from the manuscript codices which they used? For they neither invented them nor published them by chance and accident. It follows, therefore, that Nicolas le Nourry wrote more carelessly and more confidently than is proper that Lactantius was nowhere in the manuscript codices distinguished by the forenames Lucius Caelius or Lucius Caecilius. On the contrary, it is established that he is called by the former names in such a way that he is recognized equally under the names of Lucius Caelius or Caecilius as under those of Firmianus Lactantius.

With the chief argument of Dom le Nourry thus removed, his whole opinion collapses; nor does anything prevent the little book On the Deaths of the Persecutors from being assigned to Lactantius, although it displays only the names Lucius Cecilius: especially since we have shown rightly enough, and that by many reasons, that this elegant and most useful little work can be ascribed to Lactantius alone.