| << | Contents | >> |
Archelaus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1588
Introductory Notice to Archelaus.
[1578] Ingenitæ.
[1579] Fructus.
[1580] The reference is to the ancient custom of using wax and certain earths and clays for the purpose of affixing, by means of the ring, a seal with an impression on any object which it was desired to secure. Thus Herodotus, ii. 38, tell us how the Egyptians marked the pure victim by wrapping it round the horns with papyrus, and then smearing some sealing earth (γῆν σημαντρίδα) on it, and stamping it with a ring. See also Cicero, Pro Flacco, where he speaks of the laudatio obsignata cretâ illa Asiatica; and Plautus, Pseudolus, Scene i., where he mentions the expressam in cera ex annulo suam imaginem, etc. [Compare vol. v. p. 466, note 3, this series.]
[1581] The text is “quid dixerit adversarii;” some propose “quod” or “quia dixerit,” etc.
[1582] The manuscript reading is, “tam si quidem ex hoc arbitratus est se affirmaturum.” For this it is proposed to read, as in the translation, “tametsi quidem ex hoc arbitratus es me affirmaturum.”
[1583] The text gives ingentem. Routh suggests inscientem, stupid.
[1584] [Vol. iii. 301–302. See Coleridge (on Donne), English Divines, vol. i. p. 87.]
[1585] Adopting the proposed reading, “et ideo duæ, ingenitæ naturæ esse non possunt.” The text omits the duæ, however; and in that case the sense would be simply, And consequently there cannot be unbegotten natures; or perhaps, And so they (the creatures) cannot be of an unbegotten nature.
[1587] Propria.
[1588] Didicisti. But perhaps we ought to read dixisti, which you have been uttering.
[1589] Aliena, of what is alien.
[1590] The text runs thus: “ut si dicamus, Judæus, si velit fieri Christianus, aut si Christianus velit esse gentilis, hæc species est convertibilitatis et causa.”
[1591] The text gives convertibiles. Routh suggests inconvertibiles, inconvertible.
[1592] The text is unum dicamus ingenitum. Routh suggests unum bonum, etc. = Why should we not speak of only one unbegotten good?
[1593] The text is, “quod si suis eum dicas extitisse malum, sine dubio ergo ostenditur illum bonæ esse naturæ.” Routh suggests, “quia istis suis adversatur qui mali sunt,” etc. = The fact that he is adverse to those who are of his own kin, and who are evil, would be a proof that he comes of a good nature.
[1595] Or, kin to it, vicinum habet interitum.
[1597] The text is, “creati hominis causa invenitur exstitisse malitiæ,” for which we read “creatio hominis,” etc.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0166 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page