| << | Contents | >> |
Arnobius
Introductory Notice to Arnobius.
[3192] Lardner’s Testimony of Ancient Heathenism, Works, vol. vii. p. 17.
[3193] Credib., iii. 463.
[3194] Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxix. f. 121, Bened. ed. tom. iv.
[3195] Ep. lxxxiii. f. 656.
[3196] i.e., a.d. 326.
[3197] Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxx. f. 121, ep. lxxxiii.
[3198] Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxx.
[3199] Anno 2333.
[3200] As “vain.” [But see p. 405, supra.]
[3201] Book i. sec. 39, p. 423, infra.
[3202] i. 13, p. 417.
[3203] ii. 71, p. 461.
[3204] iv. 36.
[3205] Noticed in iii. 7, infra.
[3206] Cf. note on book vii. sec. 36, infra. [It is not at all improbable that some sketch of his convictions, written to assure the bishop of his conversion, was the foundation of what afterwards grew into a work.]
[3207] [Conf. Constantine’s “vision.”]
[3208] Ep. lxii. ad Tranquill.
[3209] Ep. xlix. ad Paulinum.
[3210] Cf. book vii. cap. 36, note, and Ib. cap. 51, note, with the Appendix.
[3211] Book iii. cap. 12, note.
[3212] Cf. book vii., on sacrifices generally. [Proves nothing.]
[3213] Book i. cap. 46, note.
[3214] Book i. cap. 53, note.
[3215] Book i. cap. 6.
[3216] Book ii. cap. 65, note.
[3217] Book i. cap. 46; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 6.
[3218] i. 55, 56, 58, 59.
[3219] iv. 36.
[3220] ii. 6, note.
[3221] Cf.1 Cor. iii. 19.
[3222] [Compare the Exhortation of Clement, vol. ii. p. 171, passim; and Tertullian, vol. iii. and passim.]
[3223] Book iii. cap. 7, and book iv. cap. 13, note.
[3224] Arnobii Disputationum adversus Gentes, libri octo, nunc primum in lucem editi Romæ, apud Franc. Priscianum Florentinum, 1542.
[3225] Basileæ, 1546.
[3226] Antverpiæ, 1582.
[3227] Romæ, 1583. This is the second Roman edition, and restores the Octavius to Minucius Felix.
[3228] Hanoviæ, 1603; dedicated to Joseph Scaliger.
[3229] Antverpiæ, 1604.
[3230] Paris, 1605. This edition, which is of great value, and shows great learning and ability, was completed in two months, as Heraldus himself tells us.
[3231] Lugduni Batavorum 1651, containing the notes of Canterus, Elmenhorst, Stewechius, and Heraldus.
[3232] Salmasius purposed writing commentaries for this edition, but died without doing more than beginning them.
[3233] Wirceburgi, 1783, 8vo, preceded by a rambling introductory epistle.
[3234] Lipsiæ, 1816–17, 8vo.
[3235] Halis Saxonum, 1844, 8vo.
[3236] Lipsiæ, 1846, 8vo.
[3237] Cf. § 1, notes 2 and 3.
[3238] [This section (8) appears as a “Preface” to the Edinburgh edition.]
[3239] The words insanire, bacchari, refer to the appearance of the ancient seers when under the influence of the deity. So Virgil says, Insanam vatem aspicies (Æn., iii. 443), and, Bacchatur vates(Æn., vi. 78). The meaning is, that they make their asseverations with all the confidence of a seer when filled, as he pretended, with the influence of the god.
[3240] Et velut quiddam promptum ex oraculo dicere, i.e., to declare a matter with boldness and majesty, as if most certain and undoubted.
[3241] Popularia verba, i.e., rumours arising from the ignorance of the common people.
[3242] The Christians were regarded as “public enemies,” and were so called.
[3243] Or, “all party zeal.”
[3244] So Meursius,—the ms. reading is inusitatum, “extraordinary.”
[3245] So Gelenius; ms., coartatur, “pressed together.”
[3246] Or, “race,” gens, i.e., the Christian people.
[3247] The verb mereri, used in this passage, has in Roman writers the idea of merit or excellence of some kind in a person, in virtue of which he is deemed worthy of some favour or advantage; but in ecclesiastical Latin it means, as here, to gain something by the mere favour of God, without any merit of one’s own.
[3248] See Livy, i. 31, etc.; and Pliny, Nat. Hist., ii. 38.
[3249] The ms. reads, flumina cognoverimus ingentia lim-in-is ingentia siccatis, “that mighty rivers shrunk up, leaving the mud,” etc.
[3250] So Tertullian, Apologet., 40, says,—“We have read that the islands Hiera, Anaphe, Delos, Rhodes, and Cos were destroyed, together with many human beings.”
[3251] Arnobius, no doubt, speaks of the story of Phæthon, as told by Ovid; on which, cf. Plato, Tim., st. p. 22.
[3252] Nourry thinks that reference is here made to the contests of gladiators and athletes with lions and other beasts in the circus. But it is more likely that the author is thinking of African tribes who were harassed by lions. Thus Ælian (de Nat Anim., xvii. 24) tells of a Libyan people, the Nomæi, who were entirely destroyed by lions.
[3253] The city of Amyclæ in Italy is referred to, which was destroyed by serpents.
[3254] In the Timæus of Plato, c. vi. st. p. 24, an old priest of Saïs, in Egypt, is represented as telling Solon that in times long gone by the Athenians were a very peaceful and very brave people, and that 9,000 years before that time they had overcome a mighty host which came rushing from the Atlantic Sea, and which threatened to subjugate all Europe and Asia. The sea was then navigable, and in front of the pillars of Hercules (Strait of Gibraltar) lay an island larger than Africa and Asia together: from it travellers could pass to other islands, and from these again to the opposite continent. In this island great kings arose, who made themselves masters of the whole island, as well as of other islands, and parts of the continent. Having already possessions in Libya and Europe, which they wished to increase, they gathered an immense host; but it was repelled by the Athenians. Great earthquakes and storms ensued, in which the island of Atlantis was submerged, and the sea ever after rendered impassable by shoals of mud produced by the sunken island. For other forms of this legend, and explanations of it, see Smith’s Dictionary of Geography, under Atlantis; [also Ancient America, p. 175, Harpers, 1872. This volume, little known, seems to me “stranger than fiction,” and far more interesting].
[3255] Cf.Matt. v. 39.
[3256] The ms. here inserts a mark of interrogation.
[3257] So the ms. si facto et, corrected, however, by a later copyist, si facio ut, “if I cause that,” etc.
[3258] Plato, Tim., st. p. 22.
[3259] “To analyze”—dissolvere—is in the ms. marked as spurious.
[3260] In the ms. we find “to chill and numb”—congelare, constringere; but the last word, too, is marked as spurious.
[3261] ms. sustinere (marked as a gloss), “to sustain;” perferre, “to endure.”
[3262] See Introduction.
[3263] [Our author thus identifies himself with Christians, and was, doubtless, baptized when he wrote these words.]
[3264] Sine ullis feriis, a proverbial expression, “without any holidays;” i.e. without any intermixture of good.
[3265] For qui durare Ursinus would read quiret durare; but this seems to have no ms. authority, though giving better sense and an easier construction.
[3266] That is, unsuccessfully.
[3267] Alemanni, i.e., the Germans; hence the French Allemagne. The ms. has Alamanni.
[3268] [“Innumerable Christians:” let this be noted.]
[3269] The Gætuli and Tinguitani were African tribes. For Tinguitanos, another reading is tunc Aquitanos; but Tinguitanos is much to be preferred on every ground.
[3270] The ms. reads at, “but.”
[3271] Defendere is added in the ms., but marked as a gloss.
[3272] Consumere is in like manner marked as a gloss.
[3273] So Orelli, for the ms. judicationis, “judgment.”
[3274] The carelessness of some copyist makes the ms. read ve-st-ri, “your,” corrected as above by Ursinus.
[3275] So Ursinus, followed by Heraldus, LB., and Orelli, for the ms. errores, which Stewechius would change into errones—“vagrants”—referring to the spirits wandering over the earth: most other edd., following Gelenius, read, “called demigods, that these indeed”—dæmonas appellat, et hos, etc.
[3276] So the ms., which is corrected in the first ed. “us to be willing”—nos velle: Stewechius reads, “us to be making good progress, are envious, enraged, and cry aloud,” etc.—nos belle provenire compererunt, invident, indignantur, declamitantque, etc.; to both of which it is sufficient objection that they do not improve the passage by their departure from the ms.
[3277] A beautiful appeal, and one sufficient to show that our author was no longer among catechumens.]
[3278] So LB. and Orelli; but the ms. reads, “himself to be like a god by his prophets,” etc.—se esse similem profiteatur in vatibus.
[3279] So corrected by Pithœus for the ms. profanus.
[3280] [Evidences of our author’s Christian status abound in this fine passage.]
[3281] So Gelenius, followed by Orelli and others, for the ms., reading divini interpretes viri (instead of juris)—“O men, interpreters of the sacred and divine,” which is retained by the 1st ed., Hildebrand, and Oehler.
[3282] Aii Locutii. Shortly before the Gallic invasion, b.c. 390, a voice was heard at the dead of night announcing the approach of the Gauls, but the warning was unheeded. After the departure of the Gauls, the Romans dedicated an altar and sacred enclosure to Aius Locutius, or Loquens, i.e., “The Announcing Speaker,” at a spot on the Via Nova, where the voice was heard. The ms. reads aiaceos boetios, which Gelenius emended Aios Locutios.
[3283] So emended by Ursinus for the ms. libentinos, which is retained in the 1st ed., and by Gelenius, Canterus, and others. Cf. iv. 9, where Libentina is spoken of as presiding over lusts.
[3284] As a soul was assigned to each individual at his birth, so a genius was attributed to a state. The genius of the Roman people was often represented on ancient coins.
[3285] Thus the Athenians paid honours to Leæna, the Romans to Acca Laurentia and Flora.
[3286] The superstitions of the Egyptians are here specially referred to.
[3287] That is, by whose pleasure and at whose command they are preserved from annihilation.
[3288] So Orelli, adopting a conjecture of Meursius, for the ms. nobis.
[3289] That is, not self-existent, but sprung from something previously in being.
[3290] Columen is here regarded by some as equal to culmen; but the term “pillar” makes a good sense likewise.
[3291] This is according to the doctrine of Pythagoras, Plato, Origen, and others, who taught that the souls of men first existed in heavenly beings, and that on account of sins of long standing they were transferred to earthly bodies to suffer punishment. Cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. p. 433.
[3292] The Peripatetics called God the locus rerum, τόπος πάντων, the “locality and the area of all things;” that is, the being in whom all else was contained.
[3293] [This prayer of Arnobius is surely worthy of admiration.]
[3294] Diagoras of Melos and Theodorus of Cyrene, called the Atheists. The former flourished about b.c. 430, the latter about b.c. 310. See Cic., Nat. Deor., i. 2. [Note the universal faith, cap. 34, infra.]
[3295] Protagoras of Abdera, b. b.c. 480, d. 411.
[3296] Democritus of Abdera, b. b.c. 460, and Epicurus, b. b.c. 342, d. 270.
[3297] Obstinatione, literally “stubbornness;” Walker conjectures opinatione, “imaginings,” which Orelli approves.
[3298] So the ms.; for which Meursius would read, nobis vobisque, communis esset (for cessat)—“is to us and to you, the anger of the gods would be shared in common.”
[3299] So Ursinus, followed by most edd., for the reading of the ms. Fenta Fatua, cf. v. 18. A later writer has corrected the ms. Fanda, which, Rigaltius says, an old gloss renders “mother.”
[3300] So restored by Salmasius for Dioscuri, and understood by him as meaning Dea Syria, i.e., Venus, because it is said that a large egg having been found by the fish in the Euphrates, was pushed up by them to the dry land, when a dove came down, and sat upon it until the goddess came forth. Such was the form of the legend according to Nigidius; but Eratosthenes spoke of both Venus and Cupid as being produced in this manner. The Syrian deities were therefore Venus, Cupid, and perhaps Adonis. It should be remembered, however, that the Syrians paid reverence to pigeons and fish as gods (Xen., Anab., i. 4, 9), and that these may therefore be meant.
[3301] So all edd., except those of Hildebrand and Oehler, for the ms. censum—“list.”
[3302] That is, that God is a Spirit. [Note our author’s spirit of faith in Christ.]
[3303] Orelli would refer these words to God; he thinks that with those immediately following they may be understood of God’s spiritual nature,—an idea which he therefore supposes Arnobius to assert had never been grasped by the heathen.
[3304] So Gelenius, followed by Orelli and others, for the corrupt reading of the ms., idem ne quis; but possibly both this and the preceding clause have crept into the text from the margin, as in construction they differ from the rest of the sentence, both that which precedes, and that which follows.
[3305] The phrase animalibus causis is regarded by commentators as equal to animatis causis, and refers to the doctrine of the Stoics, that in the sun, moon, stars, etc., there was an intelligent nature, or a certain impulse of mind, which directed their movements.
[3306] Lit. “shall see”—visuri, the reading of the ms.; changed in the first ed. and others to victuri—“shall live.”
[3307] Some have suggested a different construction of these words—memoriam nullam nostri sensus et recordationis habituri, thus—“have no memory of ourselves and senses of recollection;” but that adopted above is simpler, and does not force the words as this seems to do.
[3308] The ms. and 1st and 2d Roman edd. read, qui constringit—“who restrains.”
[3309] It was a common practice with the Romans to hang the spoils of an enemy on a tree, which was thus consecrated to some deity. Hence such trees were sacred, and remained unhurt even to old age. Some have supposed that the epithet “old” is applied from the fact that the heathen used to offer to their gods objects no longer of use to themselves; thus it was only old trees, past bearing fruit, which were generally selected to hang the spoila upon.
[3310] [This interesting personal confession deserves especial note.]
[3311] Vel personæ vel capiti.
[3312] So all the later edd.; but in the ms., 1st and 2d Roman edd., and in those of Gelenius and Canterus, this clause reads, cruciatoris perpetitur sævitatem—“but suffers the cruelty of his persecutor.”
[3313] The words post pœnas in the text are regarded as spurious by Orelli, who supposes them to have crept in from the preceding sentence: but they may be defended as sufficiently expressing the agonies which Hercules suffered through the fatal shirt of Nessus.
[3314] The words deum propitium are indeed found in the ms., but according to Rigaltius are not in the same handwriting as the rest of the work.
[3315] Cybele whose worship was conjoined with that of Atys.
[3316] So Orelli, but the ms. Attis.
[3317] This refers to the practice of placing the images of the gods on pillows at feasts. In the temples there were pulvinaria, or couches, specially for the purpose.
[3318] The phrase potentiarum interiorum is not easily understood. Orelli is of opinion that it means those powers which in the Bible are called the “powers of heaven,” the “army of heaven,” i.e., the angels. The Jews and the early Fathers of the Church divided the heaven into circles or zones, each inhabited by its peculiar powers or intelligent natures, differing in dignity and in might. The central place was assigned to God Himself, and to Christ, who sat on His right hand, and who is called by the Fathers of the Church the “Angel of the Church,” and the “Angel of the New Covenant.” Next in order came “Thrones,” “Archangels,” “Cherubim and Seraphim,” and most remote from God’s throne the “Chorus of Angels,” the tutelar genii of men. The system of zones and powers seems to have been derived from the Chaldeans, who made a similar division of the heavens. According to this idea, Arnobius speaks of Christ as nearest to the Father, and God of the “inner powers,” who enjoyed God’s immediate presence. Reference is perhaps made to some recondite doctrine of the Gnostics. It may mean, however, the more subtile powers of nature, as affecting both the souls of men and the physical universe.
[3319] So Orelli with most edd., following Ursinus, for the ms. suo ge-ne-ri-s sub limine, which might, however, be retained, as if the sense were that these ordinances were coeval with man’s origin, and translated, “tribes saw at the beginning of their race.”
[3320] Magus, almost equivalent to sorcerer.
[3321] Arnobius uses nomina, “names,” with special significance, because the Magi in their incantations used barbarous and fearful names of angels and of powers, by whose influence they thought strange and unusual things were brought to pass.
[3322] All these different effects the magicians of old attempted to produce: to break family ties by bringing plagues into houses, or by poisons; open doors and unbind chains by charms (Orig., contra Cels., ii.); affect horses in the race—of which Hieronymus in his Life of Hilarion gives an example; and use philters and love potions to kindle excessive and unlawful desires.
[3323] So Orelli and most edd., following a marginal reading of Ursinus, auxiliaribus plenum bonis (for the ms. nobis).
[3324] In the height of his indignation and contempt, the writer stops short and does not apply to his opponents any new epithet.
[3325] This is contrasted with the mutterings and strange words used by the magicians.
[3326] So the ms. according to Oehler, and seemingly Heraldus; but according to Orelli, the ms. reads immoderati (instead of—os) cohibebant fluores, which Meursius received as equivalent to “the excessive flow stayed itself.”
[3327] Penetrabilis, “searching,” i.e., finding its way to all parts of the body.
[3328] So Orelli, LB., Elmenhorst, and Stewechius, adopting a marginal reading of Ursinus, which prefixes im—to the ms. mobilitates—“looseness”—retained by the other edd.
[3329] Cf. John ii. 25. [He often replies to thoughts not uttered.]
[3330] No such miracle is recorded of Christ, and Oehler suggests with some probability that Arnobius may have here fallen into confusion as to what is recorded of the apostles on the day of Pentecost.
[3331] The Latin is, per puræ speciem simplicitatis, which is not easily understood, and is less easily expressed.
[3332] [I have already directed attention to Dominic Diodati’s essay, De Christo Græce loquente. ed. London, 1843.]
[3333] So almost all edd.; but the ms. and 1st and 2d Roman edd. read scire—“to know,” etc.
[3334] See book ii. chap. 36, infra.
[3335] The gods in whose temples the sick lay ordered remedies through the priests.
[3336] So all edd. except LB., which reads with the ms. superponere—“that (one) place the juices,” etc.
[3337] That is, the physician.
[3338] So the edd. reading tri-v-erunt, for the ms. tri-bu-erunt—“given up,” which is retained in the first ed.
[3339] Pietatis, “of mercy,” in which sense the word is often used in late writers. Thus it was from his clemency that Antoninus, the Roman emperor, received the title of Pius.
[3340] So most edd., following a marginal reading of Ursinus, which prefixes in—to the ms. firmitate.
[3341] “They, too,…those labouring under the inflictions of these:” so LB., with the warm approval of Orelli (who, however, with previous edd., retains the ms. reading in his text) and others, reading sub eorum t-ortantes (for ms. p—) et illi se casibus; Heraldus having suggested rotantes. This simple and elegant emendation makes it unnecessary to notice the harsh and forced readings of earlier edd.
[3342] So understood by Orelli, who reads quo Dius est, adopting the explanation of Dialis given by Festus. The ms., however, according to Crusius, reads, Dialem, quod ejus est, flaminem isto jure donavit; in which case, from the position of the quod, the meaning might be, “which term is his,” or possibly, “because he (i.e., the priest) is his,” only that in the latter case a pronoun would be expected: the commentators generally refer it to the succeeding jure, with this “right” which is his. Canterus reads, quod majus est, i.e., than the Pontifex Maximus. [Compare vol. iv. p. 74, note 7.]
[3343] So the ms. reading æqualitas, which is retained by Hild. and Oehler; all other editions drop æ—“that the quality of deed and doer might be one.”
[3344] This passage has furnished occasion for much discussion as to text and interpretation. In the text Orelli’s punctuation has been followed, who regards Arnobius as mentioning four Zoroasters—the Assyrian or Chaldean, the Bactrian (cf. c. 5 of this book), the Armenian, and finally the Pamphylian, or Pamphilos, who, according to Clem. Alex. (Strom. [vol. ii. p. 469]), is referred to in Plato’s Republic, book x., under the name Er; Meursius and Salmasius, however, regarding the whole as one sentence, consider that only three persons are so referred to, the first being either Libyan or Bactrian, and the others as with Orelli. To seek to determine which view is most plausible even, would be a fruitless task, as will be evident on considering what is said in the index under Zoroaster. [Jowett’s Plato, ii. 121.]
[3345] So Orelli, reading veniat qu-is su-per igneam zonam. LB. reads for the second and third words, quæ-so per—“let there come, I pray you, through,” etc., from the ms. quæ super; while Heraldus would change the last three words into Azonaces, the name of the supposed teacher of Zoroaster. By the “fiery zone” Salmasius would understand Libya; but the legends should be borne in mind which spoke of Zoroaster as having shown himself to a wondering multitude from a hill blazing with fire, that he might teach them new ceremonies of worship, or as being otherwise distinguished in connection with fire. [Plato, Rep., p. 446, Jowett’s trans.]
[3346] So Stewechius, Orelli, and others, for the ms. Zostriani—“grandson of Zostrianus,” retained in the 1st ed. and LB.
[3347] So the edd., reading in rebus eximiis for the ms. exi-gu-is, which would, of course, give an opposite and wholly unsuitable meaning.
[3348] So generally, Heraldus having restored delitu-it in Christo from the ms., which had omitted -it, for the reading of Gelenius, Canterus, and Ursinus, delicti—“no deceit, no sin was,” etc.
[3349] So emended by Salmasius, followed by most later edd. In the earlier edd. the reading is et merito exutus a corpore (Salm. reading at instead of a, and inserting a period after mer.)—“and when rightly freed from the body,” etc.
[3350] It may be instructive to notice how the simpler narrative of the Gospels is amplified. Matthew (Matt. 27.51) says that the earth trembled, and Luke (Luke 23.45) that the sun was darkened; but they go no further. [See p. 301, note 4, supra.]
[3351] Or, “which if…itself, would never,” etc. [Note the confidence of this appeal to general assent.]
[3352] That is, by the climate and the inclination of the earth’s surface.
[3353] So the 1st ed., Ursinus, Elmenhorst, Orelli, and Hildebrand, reading munerandis, which is found in the ms. in a later handwriting, for the original reading of the ms. munera dis.
[3354] According to Rigaltius the ms. reads ista promiserunt in immensum—“have put forth (i.e., exaggerated) these things to an immense degree falsely, small matters and trivial affairs have magnified,” etc.; while by a later hand has been superscribed over in immensum, in ink of a different colour, extulere—“have extolled.”
[3355] So the ms., 1st ed., and Hildebrand, while all others read atqu-i—“but.”
[3356] So LB., reading quo for the ms. quod.
[3357] So most edd., reading intercip-erefor the ms. intercipi—“it is that the progress be obstructed,” etc.
[3358] So Orelli and Hildebrand, reading glabre from a conjecture of Grotius, for the ms. grave.
[3359] i.e., that the one should be masculine, the other feminine.
[3360] i.e., does not one of you make the plural of uter masc., another neut.? [Note the opponent’s witness to the text of the Gospels.]
[3361] So the ms., followed by Hildebrand and Oehler, reads and punctuates quis mortuus? homo, for which all edd. read mortuus est? “Who died?”
[3362] Here, as in the whole discussion in the second book on the origin and nature of the soul, the opinions expressed are Gnostic, Cerinthus saying more precisely that Christ having descended from heaven in the form of a dove, dwelt in the body of Jesus during His life, but removed from it before the crucifixion.
[3363] So the ms. by changing a single letter, with LB. and others, similitudine proxim-a (ms. o) constitutum; while the first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Ursinus, Orelli, and others, read -dini proxime—“settled very closely to analogy.”
[3364] In the original latronibus; here, as in the next chapter, used loosely to denote lawless men.
[3365] So emended by Mercerus for the ms. vatis.
[3366] So read in the ms.—not -tius, as in LB. and Orelli.
[3367] Lit., “the ways of things”—vias rerum.
[3368] The ms. reads unintelligibly assumpti-o which was, however, retained in both Roman edd., although Ursinus suggested the dropping of the o, which has been done by all later edd.
[3369] The ms. reads, quam nec ipsam perpeti succubuisset vis—“would his might,” i.e., “would He with His great power have stooped.” Orelli simply omits vis as Canterus, and seemingly the other later edd. do.
[3370] The ms. and 1st ed. read sati-s, which has clearly arisen from f being confounded with the old form of s.
[3371] The construction is a little involved, quæ nulli nec homines scire nec ipsi qui appellantur dii mundi queunt—“which none, neither men can know, nor those…of the world can reach, except those whom,” etc.
[3372] In the Latin, vel potestate inversa, which according to Oehler is the ms. reading, while Orelli speaks of it as an emendation of LB. (where it is certainty found, but without any indication of its source), and with most edd. reads universa—“by His universal power.”
[3373] So the ms. according to Hildebrand, reading præcipi=bat. Most edd., however, following Gelenius, read faciebat—“made them lame.”
[3374] Lit., “to bind fast the motions of the members,” adopting the reading of most edd., motus alligare membrorum (ms. c-al-igare).
[3375] The ms. reads nervorum duritia-m, for which Ursinus, with most edd., reads as above, merely dropping m; Hildebrand and Oehler insert in, and read, from a conjecture of Ursinus adopted by Elmenhorst, c-ol-ligare—“to bind into stiffness.”
[3376] Ursinus suggested di-, “most terrible,” for the ms. durissimis.
[3377] So the ms. reading, multa mala de illarum contra insinuator (mala is perhaps in the abl., agreeing with a lost word), which has been regarded by Heraldus and Stewechius, followed by Orelli, as mutilated, and is so read in the first ed., and by Ursinus and LB. The passage is in all cases left obscure and doubtful, and we may therefore be excused discussing its meaning here.
[3378] Lit., “to the ends of fitting duties.”
[3379] In the original, seminaria abscidit,—the former word used of nurseries for plants, while the latter may be either as above (from abscindo), or may mean “cut off ” (from abscido); but in both cases the general meaning is the same, and the metaphor is in either slightly confused.
[3380] Lit., “familiar to be accosted,”—the supine, as in the preceding clause.
[3381] So the edd., reading corporalibus affectos malis, but the ms. inserts after malis the word morbis (“with evil bodily diseases”); but according to Hildebrand this word is marked as spurious.
[3382] So the edd., reading nemo h-om-i-n-um, except Hildebrand and Oehler, who retain the ms. om-n-i-um—“no one of all.”
[3383] John viii. 46: “Which of you convinceth me of sin?”
[3384] So Heraldus and LB., followed by later edd., reading exiliis for the ms. ex-uis, for which Gelenius, Canterus, and Ursinus read et suis—“and by their slaughters.”
[3385] Here, as frequently in Arnobius, the comparative is used instead of the superlative.
[3386] “To posterity evil reports of their own time”—sui temporis posteris notas—so emended by Ursinus, followed by Orelli and Hildebrand, for the ms. in temporis posteri-s, retained by LB., and with the omission of s in the 1st ed.; but this requires our looking on the passage as defective.
[3387] The reference is clearly to the well-known passage in Plato’s Republic. [See the sickening details, book v. p. 282, Jowett’s trans.]
[3388] So Gelenius, LB., and Orelli, reading con-v-ell-e-refor the ms. con-p-ell-a-re, “to accost” or “abuse,” which is out of place here. Canterus suggested com-p-il-are, “to plunder,” which also occurs in the sense “to cudgel.”
[3389] Supply, “do you pursue Him so fiercely?”
[3390] These words are followed in the edition of Gelenius by ch. 2–5 of the second book, seemingly without any mark to denote transposition; while Ursinus inserted the same chapters—beginning, however, with the last sentence of the first chapter (read as mentioned in the note on it)—but prefixed an asterisk, to mark a departure from the order of the ms. The later editors have not adopted either change.
[3391] So Ursinus suggested in the margin, followed by LB. and Orelli, reading in privatam perniciem p-a-r-atum for the ms. p-r-iv-atum, which is clearly derived from the preceding privatam, but is, though unintelligible also, retained in the two Roman edd. The conclusion of the sentence is, literally, “obstinacy of spirit.”
[3392] In the original, spe salutis proposita atque amore incolumitatis.
[3393] Lit., “is”—est.
[3394] So all the edd., reading fastidi-os-um supercilium, which Crusius says the ms. reads with os omitted, i.e., “pride, scorn.”
[3395] So the edd., reading fatuita-tem, for the ms. fatuita-n-tem, which may, however, point to a verb not found elsewhere.
[3396] i.e., to friends and foes alike. The ms. reads æqualiter benignus hostibus dicere, which is retained by Orelli, supporting an ellipsis of fuerit, i.e., “He was kind to say,” which might be received; but it is more natural to suppose that -t has dropped off, and read diceret as above, with the two Roman editions and LB. Gelenius, followed by Ursinus, emended omnibus docuerit—“with uniform kindness taught to all.” It may be well to give here an instance of the very insufficient grounds on which supposed references to Scripture are sometimes based. Orelli considers that Arnobius here refers (videtur respexisse, he says) to Col. i. 21, 22, “You, that were sometimes alienated and enemies in mind by wicked works, yet now hath He reconciled in the body of His flesh through death,” to which, though the words which follow might indeed be thought to have a very distant resemblance, they can in no way be shown to refer.
[3397] i.e., from His resurrection, which showed that death’s power was broken by Him.
[3398] There has been much confusion in dealing with the first seven chapters of this book, owing to the leaves of the ms. having been arranged in wrong order, as was pointed out at an early period by some one who noted on the margin that there was some transposition. To this circumstance, however, Oehler alone seems to have called attention; but the corruption was so manifest, that the various editors gave themselves full liberty to re-arrange and dispose the text more correctly. The first leaf of the ms. concludes with the words sine ullius personæ discriminibus inrogavit, “without any distinction of person,” and is followed by one which begins with the words (A, end of c. 5) et non omnium virtutum, “and (not) by an eager longing,” and ends tanta experiatur examina, “undergoes such countless ills” (middle of c. 7). The third and fourth leaves begin with the words (B. end of c. 1) utrum in cunctos…amoverit? qui si dignos, “Now if He was not worthy” (see notes), and run on to end of c. 5, quadam dulcedine, “by some charm;” while the fifth (C, middle of c. 7) begins atque ne (or utrumne) illum, “whether the earth,” and there is no further difficulty. This order is retained in the first ed., and also by Hildebrand, who supposes three lacunæ at A, B, and C, to account for the abruptness and want of connection; but it is at once seen that, on changing the order of the leaves, so that they shall run B A C, the argument and sense are perfectly restored. This arrangement seems to have been first adopted in LB., and is followed by the later editors, with the exception of Hildebrand.
[3399] Lit., “boil up with the ardours of furious spirits.”
[3400] Lit., “by the heats of.”
[3401] So Meursius, reading a- for the ms. o-ptaret, which is retained by LB., Orelli, and others. The ms. reading is explained, along with the next words vota immortalitatis, by Orelli as meaning “sought by His prayers,” with reference to John xvii. 24, in which he is clearly mistaken. Heraldus conjectures p-o-r-ta-s a-p-er-taret, “opened paths…and the gates of immortality.”
[3402] The words which follow, ut non in cunctos, etc., have been thus transposed by Heraldus, followed by later editors; but formerly they preceded the rest of the sentence, and, according to Oehler, the ms. gives utrum, thus: “(You ask) whether He has both extended to all…ignorance? who, if He was not,” etc. Cf. book i. (this page) note 3, supra.
[3403] So the ms., reading periculum i-g-n-ora-tionis, for which Meursius suggests i-n-teri-tionis—“danger of destruction.”
[3404] Pl.
[3405] This seems the true rationale of the sentence, viewed in relation to the context. Immediately before, Arnobius suggests that the hatred of Christ by the heathen is unjustifiable, because they had suffered nothing at His hands; now an opponent is supposed to rejoin, “But He has deserved our hatred by assailing our religion.” The introductory particles at enim fully bear this out, from their being regularly used to introduce a rejoinder. Still, by Orelli and other editors the sentence is regarded as interrogative, and in that case would be, “Has He indeed merited our hatred by driving out,” etc., which, however, not merely breaks away from what precedes, but also makes the next sentence somewhat lame. The older editors, too, read it without any mark of interrogation.
[3406] i.e., according to Orelli, to the wants of men; but possibly it may here have the subjunctive meaning of “more full of service,” i.e., to God.
[3407] So the ms., reading perpetuarum pater, fundator conditor rerum, but all the editions pa-ri-ter, “alike,” which has helped to lead Orelli astray. He suggests et fons est perpetu-us pariter, etc., “perpetual fountain,…of all things alike the founder and framer.” It has been also proposed by Oehler (to get rid of the difficulty felt here) to transfer per metathesin, the idea of “enduring,” to God; but the reference is surely quite clear, viewed as a distinction between the results of God’s working and that of all other beings.
[3408] So the ms. and almost all edd, reading da verum judicium, for which Heraldus suggested da naturæ, or verum animæ judicium, “give the judgment of nature,” or “the true judgment of the soul,” as if appeal were made to the inner sense; but in his later observations he proposed da puerum judicem, “give a boy as judge,” which is adopted by Orelli. Meursius, merely transposing d-a, reads much more naturally ad—“at a true judgment.”
[3409] The ms. reading is illum testem d-e-um constituimus improbarum, retained in the edd. with the change of -arum into -orum. Perhaps for deum should be read r-e-r-um, “make him witness of wicked things.” With this passage compare iii. 31–33.
[3410] It seems necessary for the sake of the argument to read this interrogatively, but in all the edd. the sentence ends without any mark of interrogation.
[3411] Typhus—τῦφος.
[3412] Lit., “He chose…to stand.”
[3413] Lit. “the ignorance of wretched men from the worst robbers,” i.e., the false prophets and teachers, who made a prey of the ignorant and credulous. John viii. 46.
[3414] Lit., “Are the things clear with you which,” etc.
[3415] So the ms., followed by both Roman edd., Hildebrand and Oehler, reading passa, which Cujacius (referring it to patior, as the editors seem to have done generally) would explain as meaning “past,” while in all other editions cassa, “vain,” is read.
[3416] Lit., “the touching of no anticipation.”
[3417] Lit., “purer reasoning.”
[3418] Lit., “that is.” This clause Meursius rejects as a gloss.
[3419] i.e., If you believe Christ’s promises, your belief makes you lose nothing should it prove groundless; but if you disbelieve them, then the consequences to you will be terrible if they are sure. This would seem too clear to need remark, were it not for the confusion of Orelli in particular as to the meaning of the passage.
[3420] Lit., “most worthy even of weeping and pity.”
[3421] Redarguat. This sense is not recognised by Riddle and White, and would therefore seem to be, if not unique, at least extremely rare. The derivative redargutio, however, is in late Latin used for “demonstration,” and this is evidently the meaning here.
[3422] Fidem vobis faciunt argumenta credendi. Heraldus, joining the two last words, naturally regards them as a gloss from the margin; but read as above, joining the first and last, there is nothing out of place.
[3423] Lit., “tranquillity being assumed, passed to placid feelings.”
[3424] Res, “the thing.”
[3425] Lit., “on chance encounters.”
[3426] Rationes cognitas. There is some difficulty as to the meaning of these words, but it seems best to refer them to the argumenta credendi (beginning of chapter, “do not even these proofs”), and render as above. Hildebrand, however, reads tortiones, “they accept the tortures which they know will befall them.”
[3427] The ms. reads et non omnium, “and by a love not of all the virtues,” changed in most edd. as above into atque omnium, while Oehler proposes et novo omnium, “and by fresh love of all,” etc. It will be remembered that the transposition of leaves in the ms. (note on ii. 1) occurs here, and this seems to account for the arbitrary reading of Gelenius, which has no ms. authority whatever, but was added by himself when transposing these chapters to the first book (cf. p. 432, n. 14), atque nectare ebrii cuncta contemnant—“As if intoxicated with a certain sweetness and nectar, they despise all things.” The same circumstance has made the restoration of the passage by Canterus a connecting of fragments of widely separated sentences and arguments.
[3428] Lit., “all the things of the world.” Here the argument breaks off, and passes into a new phase, but Orelli includes the next sentence also in the fifth chapter.
[3429] Lit., “to the assent of that credulity.”
[3430] So the ms., reading conditi vi mera, for which Orelli would read with Oudendorp, conditæ—“by the pure force of recondite wisdom.” The ms., however, is supported by the similar phrase in the beginning of chap. 8, where tincti is used.
[3431] So the ms., reading aliud, for which Stewechius, adopting a suggestion of Canterus, conjectures, altius et profundius—“something deeper and more profound.” Others propose readings further removed from the text; while Obbarius, retaining the ms. reading, explains it as “not common.”
[3432] Lit., “because you are,” etc.
[3433] Lit., “either yourselves to utter,” etc.
[3434] Incomptus, for which Heraldus would read inconditus, as in opposition to “harmonious.” This is, however, unnecessary, as the clause is evidently opposed to the whole of the preceding one.
[3435] No trace of either of these works has come down to us, and therefore, though there has been abundance of conjecture, we can reach no satisfactory conclusion about them. It seems most natural to suppose the former to be probably part of the lost satires of Lucilius, which had dealt with obscene matters, and the author of the latter to be the Atellane poet of Bononia. As to this there has been some discussion; but, in our utter ignorance of the work itself, it is as well to allow that we must remain ignorant of its author also. The scope of both works is suggested clearly enough by their titles—the statue of Marsyas in the forum overlooking nightly licentious orgies; and their mention seems intended to suggest a covert argument against the heathen, in the implied indecency of the knowledge on which they prided themselves. For Fornicem Lucilianum (ms. Lucialinum) Meursius reads Cæcilianum.
[3436] Lit., “Has that thing published never struck,” etc. There is clearly a reference to 1 Cor. iii. 19, “the wisdom of this world.” The argument breaks off here, and is taken up from a different point in the next sentence, which is included, however, in this chapter by Orelli.
[3437] So Gelenius, followed by Canterus and Orelli, reading primum et ipsi, by rejecting one word of the ms. (et quæ). Canterus plausibly combines both words into itaque—“therefore.” LB. reads ecquid—“do you at all,” etc., with which Orelli so far agrees, that he makes the whole sentence interrogative.
[3438] So restored by Stewechius; in the first ed. perspiciam (instead of am-us) “if I perceive the truth,” etc.
[3439] So the ms. very intelligibly and forcibly, res…invida, but the common reading is invid-i-a—“whom something…with envy.” The train of thought which is merely started here is pursued at some length a little later.
[3440] The ms. gives fedro, but all editions, except the first, Hildebrand, and Oehler, read Phædone, referring, however, to a passage in the first Alcibiades (st. p. 129), which is manifestly absurd, as in it, while Alcibiades “cannot tell what man is,” Socrates at once proceeds to lead him to the required knowledge by the usual dialectic. Nourry thinks that there is a general reference to Phædr., st. p. 230,—a passage in which Socrates says that he disregards mythological questions that he may study himself. [P. 447, note 2, infra.]
[3441] Lit., “changed with the rottenness of some moisture.” The reference is probably to the statement by Socrates (Phædo, st. p. 96) of the questions with regard to the origin of life, its progress and development, which interested him as a young man.
[3442] So the ms., LB., and Oehler, but the other edd. make the verb plural, and thus break the connection.
[3443] Lit., “established in the common senses.”
[3444] Arnobius overstates the fact here. In the passage referred to (Th., st. p. 158), Socrates is represented as developing the Protagorean theory from its author’s standpoint, not as stating his own opinions.
[3445] Lit., “by the stretching out of rays and of light.” This, the doctrine of the Stoics, is naturally contrasted in the next clause with that of Epicurus.
[3446] Lit., “oil refuses to suffer immersion into itself,” i.e., of other fluids.
[3447] So LB., followed by Orelli, reading impenetrabil-em, for the ms. impenetrabil-is, which is corrected in both Roman edd. by Gelenius, Canterus, and Elmenhorst -e, to agree with the subject oleum—“being impenetrable is ever,” etc.
[3448] Lit., “a god.”
[3449] So the edd., generally reading fatua for the ms. futura, which is clearly corrupt. Hildebrand turns the three adjectives into corresponding verbs, and Heinsius emends deliret (ms. -ra) et fatue et insane—“dotes both sillily and crazily.” Arnobius here follows Lucr., iii. 445 sqq.
[3450] Lit., “something of truth.”
[3451] The ms. has a-t-tor-o-s, corrected by a later writer a-c-tor-e-s, which is received in LB. and by Meursius and Orelli.
[3452] Lit., “unite marriage partnerships.”
[3453] Lit., “be safe and come.”
[3454] Or, “in successive battles”—præliorum successionibus.
[3455] Lit., “with ocular inspection, and held touched.”
[3456] “Fire” is wanting in the ms.
[3457] Arnobius here allows himself to be misled by Cicero (Tusc., i. 10), who explains ἐντελέχεια as a kind of perpetual motion, evidently confusing it with ἐνδελέχεια (cf. Donaldson, New Crat., § 339 sqq.), and represents Aristotle as making it a fifth primary cause. The word has no such meaning, and Aristotle invariably enumerates only four primary causes: the material from which, the form in which, the power by which, and the end for which anything exists (Physics, ii. 3; Metaph., iv. 2, etc.).
[3458] Lit., “with indivisible bodies.”
[3459] Pl.
[3460] So the ms., LB., and Hildebrand, reading Archesilæ, while the others read Archesilao, forgetting that Arcesilas is the regular Latin form, although Archesilaus is found.
[3461] Sententiarum is read in the first ed. by Gelenius, Canterus, and Ursinus, and seems from Crusius to be the ms. reading. The other edd., however, have received from the margin of Ursinus the reading of the text, sectarum.
[3462] In the first ed., and that of Ursinus, the reading is, nonne apud ea, “in those things which they say, do they not say,” etc., which Gelenius emended as in the text, nonne ipsa ea.
[3463] Cf. Diog. Lært. ix. 9, where Heraclitus is said to have taught that fire—the first principle—condensing becomes water, water earth, and conversely; and on Thales, Arist., Met., A, 3, where, however, as in other places, Thales is merely said to have referred the generation and maintenance of all things to moisture, although by others he is represented as teaching the doctrine ascribed to him above. Cf. Cic., de Nat. Deor., i. 10, and Heraclides, Alleg. Hom., c. 22, where water evaporating is said to become air, and settling, to become mud.
[3464] There is some difficulty as to the reading: the ms., first ed., and Ursinus give numero s-c-ire, explained by Canterus as meaning “that numbers have understanding,” i.e., so as to be the cause of all. Gelenius, followed by Canterus, reads -os scit—“does Pyth. know numbers,” which is absurdly out of place. Heraldus approved of a reading in the margin of Ursinus (merely inserting o after c), “that numbers unite,” which seems very plausible. The text follows an emendation of Gronovius adopted by Orelli, -o ex-ire.
[3465] So the ms., reading ut; but Orelli, and all edd. before him, aut—“or do they.”
[3466] i.e., that truth knowable by man exists.
[3467] So the ms. reading nostra in-credulitate, for which Ursinus, followed by Stewechius, reads nostra cum. Heraldus conjectured vestra, i.e., “in your readiness of belief,” you are just as much exposed to such ridicule.
[3468] Heraldus has well suggested that plurimum is a gloss arising out of its being met with in the next clause.
[3469] So the ms. and edd., reading Platoni; but Ursinus suggested Plotino, which Heraldus thinks most probably correct. There is, indeed, an evident suitableness in introducing here the later rather than the earlier philosopher, which has great weight in dealing with the next name, and should therefore, perhaps, have some in this case also.
[3470] The ms. and both Roman edd. give Crotonio, rejected by the others because no Crotonius is known (it has been referred, however, to Pythagoras, on the ground of his having taught in Croton). In the margin of Ursinus Cronius was suggested, received by LB. and Orelli, who is mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., vi. 19, 3) with Numenius and others as an eminent Pythagorean, and by Porphyry (de Ant. Nymph., xxi.), as a friend of Numenius, and one of those who treated the Homeric poems as allegories. Gelenius substitutes Plotinus, followed by most edd.
[3471] [Thus everywhere he writes as a Christian.]
[3472] Stemus, the admirable correction of Gelenius for the ms. tem-p-us.
[3473] Orelli, following Stewechius, would omit ita.
[3474] Hildebrand thinks compescere here a gloss, but it must be remembered that redundancy is a characteristic of Arnobius.
[3475] The superlative is here, as elsewhere, used by Arnobius instead of the comparative.
[3476] i.e., so as to show the relations existing between them.
[3477] Perhaps “axioms and postulates.”
[3478] According to Crusius, non is not found in the ms.
[3479] White and Riddle translate candidule, “sincerely,” but give no other instance of its use, and here the reference is plainly to the previous statement of the literary excellence of the philosophers. Heraldus suggests callidule, “cunningly,” of which Orelli approves; but by referring the adv. to this well-known meaning of its primitive, all necessity for emendation is obviated.
[3480] Lit., “subtleties of suspicions.” This passage is certainly doubtful. The reading translated, et suspicionum argutias profertis, is that of LB., Orelli, and the later edd. generally; while the ms. reads -atis—“Bring forward arguments to us, and” (for which Heraldus conjectures very plausibly, nec, “and not”) “subtleties,” etc., which, by changing a single letter, reads in the earlier edd. pro-fer-etis—“Will you,” or, “You will bring forward,” etc.
[3481] Meursius conjectures in- (for ms. ju-) dicare—“pointed out,” of which Orelli approves.
[3482] So the ms. and both Roman edd., supported by Heraldus, reading solidæ facilitatis, changed by the edd. into stolidæ—“stupid.”
[3483] So all the edd. except Oehler; but as the first verb is plural in the ms., while the second is singular, it is at least as probable that the second was plural originally also, and that therefore the relative should be made to refer both to “virtues” and “power.”
[3484] Orelli notes that by India is here meant Ethiopia. If so, it may be well to remember that Lucan (x. 29 sq.) makes the Seres neighbours of the Ethiopians, and dwellers at the sources of the Nile.
[3485] Instead of sint, Stewechius would read essent—“were.”
[3486] Instead of the ms. reading, Numæ regis artibus et antiquis superstitionibus, Stewechius, followed by Heraldus, would read ritibus—“with the rites of Numa,” etc.
[3487] So the ms., reading res patrias, for which Heraldus, ritus patrios—“rites.”
[3488] So the ms., although the first five edd., by changing r into s, read cur-s-um—“course.” This story is of frequent occurrence in the later Fathers, but is never referred to by the earlier, or by any except Christian writers, and is derived solely from the Apostolic Constitutions. In the Greek version of the Apost. Const. the sixth book opens with a dissertation on schisms and heresies in which the story of Simon and others is told; but that this was interpolated by some compiler seems clear from the arguments brought forward by Bunsen (Hippolytus and his Age, more particularly vol. ii. pt. 2, § 2, and the second appendix).
[3489] Brunda or Brenda, i.e., Brundisium.
[3490] Hermes Trismegistus. See index.
[3491] So the ms., Elmenh., LB., Hildebrand, and Oehler, reading quod, for which the other edd. read qui—“who.”
[3492] This seems to be the reading intended by the ms., which according to Hild. gives dom, i.e., probably dominum, which Oehler adopts, but all other edd. read deum—“god.”
[3493] Arnobius rather exaggerates the force of the passage referred to (st. p. 173), which occurs in the beautiful digression on philosophers. Plato there says that only the philosopher’s body is here on earth, while his mind, holding politics and the ordinary business and amusements of life unworthy of attention, is occupied with what is above and beneath the earth, just as Thales, when he fell into a ditch, was looking at the stars, and not at his steps.
[3494] In cardinem vergere qui orientis est solis seems to be the reading of all edd.; but according to Crusius the ms. reads vertere—“to turn.” Hildebrand, on the contrary, affirms that instead of t, the ms. gives c.
[3495] i.e., originally earlier.
[3496] So most edd., reading desituros, for which Stewechius suggests desulturos—“leap down;” LB. exituros—“go out.”
[3497] Reference is here made to one of the most extraordinary of the Platonic myths (Pol., 269–274), in which the world is represented as not merely material, but as being further possessed of intelligence. It is ever in motion, but not always in the same way. For at one time its motion is directed by a divine governor (τοῦ παντὸς ὁ μὲν κυβερνήτης); but this does not continue, for he withdraws from his task, and thereupon the world loses, or rather gives up its previous bias, and begins to revolve in the opposite direction, causing among other results a reverse development of the phenomena which occurred before, such as Arnobius describes. Arnobius, however, gives too much weight to the myth, as in the introduction it is more than hinted that it may be addressed to the young Socrates, as boys like such stories, and he is not much more than a boy. With it should be contrasted the “great year” of the Stoics, in which the universe fulfilled its course, and then began afresh to pass through the same experience as before (Nemesius, de Nat. Hom., c. 38).
[3498] LB. makes these words interrogative, but the above arrangement is clearly vindicated by the tenor of the argument: You laugh at our care for our souls’ salvation; and truly you do not see to their safety by such precautions as a virtuous life, but do you not seek that which you think salvation by mystic rites?
[3499] Lit., “fastened with beam” (i.e., large and strong) “nails.”
[3500] Cf. on the intercessory prayers of the Magi, c. 62, infra.
[3501] Pl. Cf. Milman’s note on Gibbon, vol. 2, c. xi. p. 7.
[3502] Lit., “certain fires.”
[3503] Plato, in the passage referred to (Phædo, st. p. 113, § 61), speaks of the Styx not as a river, but as the lake into which the Cocytus falls. The fourth river which he mentions in addition to the Acheron, Pyriphlegethon, and Cocytus, which he calls Stygian, is the Ocean stream.
[3504] So the ms., according to Hild., reading parvæ; but acc. to Rigaltius and Crusius, it gives pravæ—“of no mean.”
[3505] So LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading doloris afficiat sensu, by merely dropping m from the ms. sensu-m; while all the other edd. read doloribus sensuum—“affects with the pains of the senses.”
[3506] i.e., not compounded of soul and body.
[3507] Or, “not unsuitably,” absone.
[3508] Lit., “in the failure (or ‘disappointment’) of,” etc.
[3509] i.e., neither immortal nor necessarily mortal.
[3510] So Gelenius emended the unintelligible ms. reading se-mina by merely adding s, followed by all edd., although Ursinus in the margin suggests se mîam, i.e., mi-sericordiam—“pity;” and Heraldus conjectures munia—“gifts.”
[3511] So almost all edd., from a conjecture of Gelenius, supplying ut, which is wanting in the ms., first ed., and Oehler.
[3512] It is worth while to contrast Augustine’s words: “The death which men fear is the separation of the soul from the body. The true death, which men do not fear, is the separation of the soul from God” (Aug. in Ps. xlviii., quoted by Elmenhorst).
[3513] In the first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Ursinus, and Orelli, both verbs are made present, but all other edd. follow the ms. as above.
[3514] In the first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Ursinus, and Orelli, both verbs are made present, but all other edd. follow the ms. as above.
[3515] Lit., “and unknown.” Here Arnobius shows himself ignorant of Jewish teaching, as in iii. 12.
[3516] So the ms. and LB., followed by Oehler; in the edd. id is omitted.
[3517] The ms. reading is a no-b-is quibusdam, for which LB. reads nobis a qu.—“to us,” and Hild. a notis—“by certain known;” but all others, as above, from a conjecture of Gelenius, a no-v-is, although Orelli shows his critical sagacity by preferring an emendation in the margin of Ursinus, a bonis—“by certain good men,” in which he sees a happy irony!
[3518] Lit., “not touchable by any contact of body,” neque ulla corporis attrectatione contiguas.
[3519] Arnobius considers the reductio ad absurdum so very plain that he does not trouble himself to state his argument more directly.
[3520] There has been much confusion as to the meaning of Arnobius throughout this discussion, which would have been obviated if it had been remembered that his main purpose in it is to show how unsatisfactory and unstable are the theories of the philosophers, and that he is not therefore to be identified with the views brought forward, but rather with the objections raised to them.
[3521] Cf. c. 28, p. 440, note 2.
[3522] So the ms., followed by Orelli and others reading institutum superciliumque—“habit and arrogance,” for the first word of which LB. reads istum typhum—“that pride of yours;” Meursius, isti typhum—“Lay aside pride, O ye.”
[3523] So the edd., reading in totidem sexus for the ms. sexu—“into so many kinds in sex.”
[3524] Lit., “in so great occupations of life.”
[3525] Cf. Plato, Phædo, st. p. 81.
[3526] So, by a later writer in the margin of the ms., who gives artificiosa-s novitates, adopted by Stewechius and Oehler, the s being omitted in the text of the ms. itself, as in the edd., which drop the final s in the next word also—“would raise and with unknown art strike out lofty buildings.”
[3527] Lit., “born.”
[3528] Throughout this discussion, Arnobius generally uses the plural, animæ—“souls.”
[3529] So Elmenhorst, Oberthür, and Orelli, reading par-a-v-it sibi et for the ms. parv-as et, “from continual failure has wrought out indeed slight smattering of the arts,” etc., which is retained in both Roman edd., LB., and Hild.; while Gelenius and Canterus merely substitute sibi for et, “wrought out for itself slight,” etc.
[3530] Lit., “or received understanding of God by the breath of any suspicion.”
[3531] The ms. gives c-etera-que, “and the rest,” which is retained in both Roman edd., and by Gelenius and Canterus, though rather out of place, as the enumeration goes on.
[3532] Lit., “equal to the highness (summitati) of the prince.”
[3533] So LB. and Orelli, reading qui-a; the rest, qui—“who.”
[3534] So Gelenius, reading divinitusfor the ms. divinas, i.e., “with a divine nature and origin,” which is retained in the first ed. and Orelli.
[3535] The ms., both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler, read ut, “so that there are.”
[3536] Cf. on this Platonic doctrine, ch. 24, p. 443, infra.
[3537] Lit., “a feeling of cold.”
[3538] Lit., “sound of voice at all.”
[3539] Lit., “of heaven terribly crashing.”
[3540] So the later edd., adopting the emendation of Scaliger, nothum—“spurious,” which here seems to approach in meaning to its use by Lucretius (v. 574 sq.), of the moon’s light as borrowed from the sun. The ms. and first four edd. read notum, “known.”
[3541] According to Huet (quoted by Oehler), “between that spurious and the true light;” but perhaps the idea is that of darkness interposed at intervals to resemble the recurrence of night.
[3542] Lit., “born, and that, too (et wanting in almost all edd.), into the hospice of that place which has nothing, and is inane and empty.”
[3543] So most edd. reading porrigeturfor the ms. corrigetur—“be corrected,” i.e., need to be corrected, which is retained in the first ed.
[3544] So Gelenius, followed by Canterus, Elmenh., and Oberthür, reading portione-m et, while the words tam lætam, “that he is so joyous a part” are inserted before et by Stewechius and the rest, except both Roman edd. which retain the ms. portione jam læta.
[3545] Lit., “sent to.”
[3546] So the ms., reading milvus, for which all edd. (except Oberthuer) since Stewechius read mulus, “a mule.”
[3547] Carduus, no doubt the esculent thistle, a kind of artichoke.
[3548] So, according to an emendation in LB., esui, adopted by Orelli and others, instead of the ms. reading et sui.
[3549] There has been much discussion as to whether the solifuga or solipuga here spoken of is an ant or spider.
[3550] The ms. reads discriminare, discernere, with the latter word, however, marked as spurious.
[3551] A kind of rug.
[3552] Mitra.
[3553] Strophium, passing round the breast, by some regarded as a kind of corset.
[3554] Mastruca, a garment made of the skins of the muflone, a Sardinian wild sheep.
[3555] Tribula, for rubbing out the corn.
[3556] Aurum is omitted in all edd., except those of LB., Hild., and Oehler.
[3557] Liber, a roll of parchment or papyrus, as opposed to the preceding codex, a book of pages.
[3558] The ms. reads vobis unintelligibly, corrected by Meursius bovis.
[3559] So Orelli and modern edd.; but Crusius gives as the ms. reading conspici-etur (not -et), as given by Ursinus, and commonly received—“Will he not…be seen?”
[3560] The ms. and first five edd. read et—“and,” changed in LB. to sed.
[3561] In this dialogue (st. p. 81) Socrates brings forward the doctrine of reminiscence as giving a reasonable ground for the pursuit of knowledge, and then proceeds to give a practical illustration of it by leading an uneducated slave to solve a mathematical problem by means of question and answer.
[3562] Lit., “his knowledge of things.”
[3563] So the ms. and edd., reading i-gnarum rerum, except LB., which by merely omitting the i gives the more natural meaning, “acquainted with the things,” etc.
[3564] Lit., “established in the limits of humanity.”
[3565] i.e., a square numerically or algebraically. The ms., both Roman edd., and Canterus read di-bus aut dynam-us, the former word being defended by Meursius as equivalent to binio, “a doubling,”—a sense, however, in which it does not occur. In the other edd., cubus aut dynamis has been received from the margin of Ursinus.
[3566] Æneid, vi. 472.
[3567] This clause is with reason rejected by Meursius as a gloss.
[3568] Founded on Plato’s words (Phædrus, st. p. 247), τῷ δ᾽ (i.e., Zeus) ἕπεται στρατιὰ θεῶν τε καὶ δαιμόνων, the doctrine became prevalent that under the supreme God were lesser gods made by Him, beneath whom again were dæmons, while men stood next. To this Orelli supposes that Arnobius here refers.
[3569] The vessels in which according to Plato (Timæus, st. p. 41), the Supreme Being mixed the vital essence of all being. Cf. c. 52.
[3570] Lit., “and endowed.”
[3571] The text and meaning are both rather doubtful, and the edd. vary exceedingly. The reading of Orelli, demoretur iners, valeat in ære quamvis, has been translated as most akin to the ms., with which, according to Oehler, it agrees, although Orelli himself gives the ms. reading as ær-io.
[3572] Lit., “acknowledge turnings in the course.”
[3573] Lit., “but retaining its own things, bind itself in earthly bodies.”
[3574] Lit., “of.”
[3575] So the ms. and edd., reading sua-de-ri, for which Oehler reads very neatly sua de vi—“can anything of its own power destroy,” etc.
[3576] Lit., “not suffer forgetfulness.”
[3577] Lit., “however the most solid unions of bodies may have bound them round.”
[3578] So the edd. reading privat immortalitate has omni, for which, according to Hildebrand, the ms. reads -tatem has omnis—“all these of immortality.”
[3579] Lit., “put on the blindness of oblivion.”
[3580] Cf. Lucretius, iii. 969, where life is thus spoken of.
[3581] The ms. reads ne videamu-s, changed in both Roman edd. into -amur—“that we may not be seen by you (as ignorant), how say you,” etc. Gelenius proposed the reading of the text, audiamus, which has been received by Canterus and Orelli. It is clear from the next words—quemadmodum dicitis—that in this case the verb must be treated as a kind of interjection, “How say you, let us hear.” LB. reads, to much the same purpose, scire avemus, “we desire to know.”
[3582] Lit., “before man.”
[3583] Lit., “placed outside.”
[3584] Quod enim.
[3585] Rebus ingressis.
[3586] So read by Orelli, artes suas antiquas, omitting atque, which he says, follows in the ms. It is read after suas, however, in the first ed., and those of Gelenius, Canterus, Hildebrand; and according to Oehler, it is so given in the ms., “its own and ancient.” Oberthür would supply res—“its own arts and ancient things.”
[3587] So the ms., reading constitut-a, followed by all edd. except those of Ursinus, Hildebrand, and Oehler, who read -æ, “how do they remember when established in the bodies,” which is certainly more in accordance with the context.
[3588] Lit., “of immortality.”
[3589] Cf. ch. 16, p. 440.
[3590] Lit., “of a lost memory.”
[3591] Lit., “of (a memory) preserved.”
[3592] Capite cum censeatur.
[3593] Lit., “poor in hearth, and of a poor hut.”
[3594] So the ms., reading malis, for which Ursinus suggested alis, “on the wings of which.”
[3595] i.e., to death.
[3596] The ms. reads securus, intrepidus—“heedless, fearless;” the former word, however, being marked as a gloss. It is rejected in all edd., except LB.
[3597] Lit., “by the freedom of impunity.”
[3598] Lit., “the one (immortality)…in respect of the equality of condition of the other”—nec in alterius (immortalitatis) altera (immortalitatas) possit æqualitate conditionis vexari; the reference being clearly to the immediately preceding clause, with which it is so closely connected logically and grammatically. Orelli, however, would supply anima, ἀπὸ τοῦ κοινοῦ, as he puts it, of which nothing need be said. Meursius, with customary boldness, emends nec vi alterius altera, “nor by the power of one can the other,” etc.
[3599] So the ellipse is usually supplied, but it seems simpler and is more natural thus: “But punishments (have been) spoken of” (memoratæ), etc.
[3600] So ms. and Oehler, for which the edd. read ec quis, “will any one.”
[3601] Lit., “the consequences of things.”
[3602] Lit., “the moving of wheels whirling.”
[3603] Lit., “in the unbroken course of ages”—perpetuitate ævorum.
[3604] Lit., “and to scatter the unbridled eagerness of boundless lust through,” etc.
[3605] Lucretius (iii. 417 sqq.) teaches at great length that the soul and mind are mortal, on the ground that they consist of atoms smaller than those of vapour, so that, like it, on the breaking of their case, they will be scattered abroad; next, on the ground of the analogy between them and the body in regard to disease, suffering, etc.; of their ignorance of the past, and want of developed qualities; and finally, on the ground of the adaptation of the soul to the body, as of a fish to the sea, so that life under other conditions would be impossible.
[3606] The ms. and first four edd. read has, “that these souls,” etc.; in the other edd., hac is received as above from the margin of Ursinus.
[3607] Cf. Plato, Phædo (st. p. 64 sq.), where death is spoken of as only a carrying further of that separation of the soul from the pleasures and imperfections of the body which the philosopher strives to effect in this life.
[3608] Lit., “in common.”
[3609] Pl.
[3610] This refers to the second argument of Lucretius noticed above.
[3611] i.e., the abandoned and dissolute immortal spoken of in last chapter.
[3612] Lit., “with.”
[3613] Lit., “degenerate into mortal nature.”
[3614] Arnobius seems in this chapter to refer to the doctrine of the Stoics, that the soul must be material, because, unless body and soul were of one substance, there could be no common feeling or mutual affection (so Cleanthes in Nemes. de Nat. Hom., ii. p. 33); and to that held by some of them, that only the souls of the wise remained after death, and these only till the conflagration (Stob., Ecl. Phys., p. 372) which awaits the world, and ends the Stoic great year or cycle. Others, however, held that the souls of the wise became dæmons and demigods (Diog., Lært., vii. 157 and 151).
[3615] Lit., “they”—eas.
[3616] Lit., “from the gapings and,” etc.
[3617] There may be here some echo of the words (John xvii. 3), “This is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God,” etc.; but there is certainly not sufficient similarity to found a direct reference on, as has been done by Orelli and others.
[3618] i.e., souls.
[3619] This passage presents no difficulty in itself, its sense being obviously that, as by God’s grace life is given to those who serve Him, we must strive to fit ourselves to receive His blessing. The last words, however, have seemed to some fraught with mystery, and have been explained by Heraldus at some length as a veiled or confused reference to the Lord’s Supper, as following upon baptism and baptismal regeneration, which, he supposes, are referred to in the preceding words, “laying aside,” etc. [It is not, however, the language of a mere catechumen.]
[3620] These “thin plates,” laminæ, Orelli has suggested, were amulets worn as a charm against serpents.
[3621] ms. Phyllis.
[3622] So the edd., reading instit-oribusfor the ms. instit-ut-oribus, “makers.”
[3623] Lit., “that colds and violent suns may not,” etc.
[3624] Lit., “of.”
[3625] Lit., “is set before.”
[3626] So the ms., first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Hildebrand, reading ex commodi sensu, for which all the other edd., following Ursinus and Meursius, read ex communi—“from common sense,” i.e., wisely.
[3627] Perhaps, as Orelli evidently understands it, “prefer Him to our own souls”—animis præponimus.
[3628] So Oehler, reading ea for the ms. ut, omitted in all edd.
[3629] Lit., “by your own and internal exertion.”
[3630] Lit., “of things.”
[3631] Lit., “wings will be at hand.”
[3632] The ms. reads di-cimus, “say;” corrected du, as above.
[3633] The first four edd. read res, “things above,” for which Stewechius reads, as above, sedes.
[3634] Sponte.
[3635] Here, as in c. 7, p. 436, n. 3, the edd. read Phædone, with the exception of the first ed., LB., Hildebrand, and Oehler, who follow the ms. as above.
[3636] Lit., “to the end of promising.”
[3637] Meursius suggests numini, “deity,” on which it may be well to remark once for all, that nomen and numen are in innumerable places interchanged in one or other of the edd. The change, however, is usually of so little moment, that no further notice will be taken of it.
[3638] So the ms., according to Rigaltius and Hildebrand, reading vitæ æternitate, while Crusius asserts that the ms. gives vita et—“with life and eternity.”
[3639] The ms. reading is, mortalis est qualitatis. The first five edd. merely drop est—“of mortal, of neutral,” etc.; LB. and the others read, es et, as above.
[3640] Lit., “heard from.”
[3641] So the ms., according to Crusius, the edd. reading cred-id-imus—“have believed.”
[3642] Lit., “if we believe that.”
[3643] So the ms., reading ad modum obsecutionis paratum—“prepared to the mode of compliance;” for which the edd. read adm. executioni—“quite prepared for performing,” except Hildebrand, who gives adm. obsecutioni—“for obedience.”
[3644] So the ms., according to Crusius, but all edd. read sequ-a-tur (for i)—“Is there anything which He has willed which it does not follow,” etc.
[3645] So all edd., reading mutabiles, except the two Roman edd. and Oehler, who gives, as the reading of the ms., nu.—“tottering.”
[3646] Lit., “in the doubtful condition of their lot.”
[3647] Lit., “which may have been of a name.”
[3648] LB., followed by the later edd., inserted si, “if they are,” which is certainly more consistent with the rest of the sentence.
[3649] The ms. reading is utterly corrupt and meaningless—immortalitatis largiter est donum dei certa prolatis. Gelenius, followed by Canterus, Oberthür, and Orelli, emended largi-tio…certe, as above. The two Roman edd. read, -tatem largitus…certam—“bestowed, assured immortality as God’s gift on,” etc.
[3650] i.e., who must therefore have received it if they have it at all.
[3651] Lit., “out, reduced to nothing with annihilation, not to be returned from.”
[3652] Lit., “they are held in a lasting bond,” i.e., of being.
[3653] Plato makes the supreme God, creator of the inferior deities, assure these lesser gods that their created nature being in itself subject to dissolution, His will is a surer ground on which to rely for immortality, than the substance or mode of their own being (Timæus, st. p. 41; translated by Cicero, de Univ., xi., and criticised de Nat. Deor., i. 8 and iii. 12).
[3654] The ms. and both Roman edd. read neque ullo ab-olitio-nis unintelligibly, for which Gelenius proposed nexusque abolitione—“and by the destruction of the bond;” but the much more suitable reading in the margin of Ursinus, translated above, ullo ab alio nis-i, has been adopted by later edd.
[3655] Lit., “be gifted with a saving order.” So the ms., reading salutari iussione, followed by both Rom. edd.; LB. and Orelli read vinctione—“bond;” Gelenius, Canterus, Elmenh., and Oberthür, m-issione—“dismissal.”
[3656] Lit., “that to the gods themselves the natures are intermediate.”
[3657] Lit., “supreme”—principali.
[3658] Cf. i. 48. On this passage Orelli quotes Irenæus, i. 21, where are enumerated several gnostic theories of the creation of the world and men by angels, who are themselves created by the “one unknown Father.” Arnobius is thought, both by Orelli and others, to share in these opinions, and in this discussion to hint at them, but obscurely, lest his cosmology should be confounded by the Gentiles with their own polytheistic system. It seems much more natural to suppose that we have here the indefinite statement of opinions not thoroughly digested.
[3659] Lit., “a generation of.”
[3660] Canterus, Elmenhorst, Oberthür, and Orelli omit ut, which is retained as above by the rest.
[3661] Lit., “obscene.”
[3662] Elmenhorst endeavours to show that Arnobius coincides in this argument with the Epicureans, by quoting Lucr. v. 165 sqq. and Lact. vii. 5, where the Epicurean argument is brought forward, What profit has God in man, that He should have created him? In doing this, it seems not to have been observed that the question asked by Arnobius is a very different one: What place has man in the world, that God should be supposed to have sent him to fill it?
[3663] i.e., so far from this being the case.
[3664] i.e., from one horse to another—desultores.
[3665] Rationibus et constitutionibus.
[3666] Lit., “it should be believed.”
[3667] Lit., “unless there were joined.”
[3668] So the ms., reading contentio, which Orelli would understand as meaning “contents,” which may be correct. LB. reads conditio—“condition,” ineptly; and Ursinus in the margin, completio—“the filling up.”
[3669] So the later edd., from the margin of Ursinus, reading quod temeritatis est maximæ for the ms. quem—“whom it shows the greatest rashness to speak of.”
[3670] Lit., “goddesses.”
[3671] So Gelenius (acc. to Orelli), reading as in the margin of Ursinus, terrenæ circumscriptionis, for the unintelligible reading of the ms., temerariæ, retained in both Roman edd., Canterus, and (acc. to Oehler) Gelenius. LB. reads metariæ—“a limiting by boundaries.”
[3672] Lit., “motions.”
[3673] Cf. Lucr., v. 229 sq. The same idea comes up again in iv. 21.
[3674] Lit., “in.”
[3675] According to Hildebrand, the ms. reads dissimular-ent circumscribere, so that, by merely dropping nt, he reads, “to dissemble and cheat;” but according to Crusius, iri is found in the ms. between these two words, so that by prefixing m Sabæus in the first ed. read m-ent-iri as above, followed by all other edd.
[3676] Lit., “to roll…in the mind.”
[3677] Rigaltius and Hildebrand regard decipere as a gloss.
[3678] So the ms., reading formari, followed by Hildebrand and Oehler; but all the other edd. give the active form, -are.
[3679] Lit., “from.”
[3680] The condition, i.e., of freedom.
[3681] LB., seemingly received by Orelli, though not inserted into his text, reads poscerent eos for the ms. -entur, which Hildebrand modifies -ent ea as above.
[3682] Lit., “certain.”
[3683] Lit., “by error.”
[3684] Lit., “the sad necessity should be laid upon them, that,” etc.
[3685] Lit., “for the want of daily things,” diurnorun egestati, for which Stewechius would read diurna egestate—“from daily necessity.”
[3686] Lit., “of.”
[3687] Lit., “poured forth all their blood.”
[3688] Lit., “of their labour.”
[3689] Lit., “at last by force of.”
[3690] So the ms. and edd., reading vilitatem, for which Meursius proposed very needlessly utilitatem—“and at an advantage.”
[3691] So, adhering very closely to the ms., which gives e-t sanguine supputandis augere-t insomnia milibus, the t of e-t being omitted and n inserted by all. The first five edd. read, -tandi se angerent insania: millibus—“harass themselves with the madness of reckoning; by miles should extend,” etc.,—the only change in Heraldus and Orelli being a return to insomnia—“harass with sleeplessness,” etc.
[3692] So restored by Cujacius, followed by LB. and Orelli, reading in grat-i-am (ms. wants i) voluptatemque, while the first five edd. merely drop -que—“to the grateful pleasure,” etc.
[3693] Lit., “most cruel.”
[3694] Lit., “among,” in oris, the ms. reading, and that of the first four edd., for which the others have received from the margin of Ursinus moribus—“(indulging) in so fierce and savage customs.”
[3695] Lit., “tables.”
[3696] Lit., “they should live.”
[3697] Lit., “lessen.”
[3698] In the ms. this clause follows the words “loss of their purity,” where it is very much in the way. Orelli has followed Heraldus in disposing of it as above, while LB. inserts it after “tips of their ears.” The rest adhere to the arrangement of the ms., Ursinus suggesting instead of his—“with these,” catenis—“with chains;” Heraldus, linis—“with strings (of pearls);” Stewechius, tæniis—“with fillets.”
[3699] So LB. and Orelli reading, con-fic-iendis corporibus for the ms. con-sp-iendis, for which the others read -spic-, “to win attention.” A conjecture by Oudendorp, brought forward by Orelli, is worthy of notice—con-spu-endis, “to cover,” i.e., so as to hide defects.
[3700] Lit., “passages of ways.”
[3701] Lit., “substitute.”
[3702] So the later edd., reading botulos; the ms. and early edd. give boletos—“mushrooms.”
[3703] For his, Heinsius proposes hiris—“with the intestines.”
[3704] Lit., “in a frozen condition.” As to the meaning of this there is difference of opinion: some supposing that it means, as above, preserved by means of ice, or at least frozen; while others interpret figuratively, “as hard as ice.” [Our Scottish translators have used their local word, “iced haggises:” I have put puddings instead, which gives us, at least, an idea of something edible. To an American, what is iced conveys the idea of a drink. The budinarius, heretofore noted, probably made these iced saucisses.]
[3705] Lit., “things”—res.
[3706] Scabilla were a kind of rattles or castanets moved by the feet.
[3707] Sambuca, not corresponding to the modern triangle, but a stringed instrument of that shape. Its notes were shrill and disagreeable, and those who played on it of indifferent character.
[3708] So the ms. and first four edd., reading virilitatem sui populo publicarent. Meursius emended utilitatem—“made common the use,” etc.; and Orelli, from the margin of Ursinus, vilitatem—“their vileness.”
[3709] The ms. reads in fornicibus obvi-t-ae, which, dropping t, is the reading translated, and was received by Elmenhorst, LB., and Hildebrand, from the margin of Ursinus. The other edd. insert nc before t—“bound.”
[3710] The translation does not attempt to bring out the force of the words ad oris stuprum paratæ, which are read by Orelli after Ursinus and Gelenius. The text is so corrupt, and the subject so obscene, that a bare reference to the practice may be sufficient.
[3711] The ms. reads, habitare atque habitare juss-e-r-unt. All edd. omit the first two words, the first ed. without further change; but the active verb is clearly out of place, and therefore all other edd. read jussæ sunt, as above. Oehler, however, from habitare omitted by the others, would emend aditare, “to approach,”—a conjecture with very little to recommend it.
[3712] These are all substantives in the original.
[3713] So the ms., reading non missione—“not by the sending;” but, unaccountably enough, all edd. except Hildebrand and Oehler read, jussione—“not by the command.”
[3714] So the ms..
[3715] Lit., “royal sublimity.”
[3716] Lit., “causes.”
[3717] The ms. and both Roman edd. read abscondere—“to hide,” for which the other edd. read, as above, abscedere, from the margin of Ursinus.
[3718] Lit., “go.”
[3719] By Hildebrand and Oehler, procreator is with reason regarded as a gloss.
[3720] The ms., both Roman edd., and Hildebrand read jussisset; but this would throw the sentence into confusion, and the other edd. therefore drop t.
[3721] LB., Hildebrand, and Oehler read quorum indu-c-tæ carceribus—“led into the prisons of which,” all other edd. omitting c as above. According to Oehler, the ms. has the former reading.
[3722] The ms. and both Roman edd. read in-f-ernarum paterentut aliæ laniatus muscularum, which has no meaning, and is little improved by Galenius changing ut into ur, as no one knows what “infernal flies” are. LB. and Orelli, adopting a reading in the margin of Ursinus, change intern. into ferarum, and join musc. with the words which follow as above. Another reading, also suggested by Ursinus, seems preferable, however, internorum…musculorum—“suffer rendings (i.e., spasms) of the inner muscles.”
[3723] Lit., “bound.”
[3724] Lit., “dilaceration of.”
[3725] Lit., “again and more frequently.”
[3726] Lit., “the salvation of.”
[3727] Lit., “height of.”
[3728] Lit., “things perfect, and preserving the measure of their completeness;” i.e., continuing so.
[3729] So the ms., LB., Oberthür and Oehler, reading claudum et quod minus esset a recto. All other edd. read eminus—“at a distance from the right.”
[3730] Lit., “less than.”
[3731] Lit., “material.”
[3732] Lit., “some power latent and cruelty.”
[3733] So the ms. and all edd.; but Orelli would change item into iterum, not seeing that the reference is to the indicated preference of his opponents for the simple truth.
[3734] Nescire Hildebrand, with good reason, considers a gloss.
[3735] Nihilfor the ms. mihi which makes nonsense of the sentence.
[3736] This somewhat wide-spread opinion found an amusing counterpart in the doctrines of Rorarius (mentioned by Bayle, Dict. Phil.), who affirmed that the lower animals are gifted with reason and speech, as we are.
[3737] Lit., “superior.”
[3738] Lit., “tending to no reasons.”
[3739] Omni vero verissimum est certoque certissimum—the superlative for the comparative.
[3740] Lit., “finished with the perfection of.”
[3741] Lit., “by perversity”—s-c-ævitate, the reading of the ms., LB., Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, all others omitting c—“by the rage;” except Stewechius, who reads servitute—“slavery.”
[3742] Or, perhaps, “the goodness of the Supreme planted”—generositas eos adsereret principalis.
[3743] Lit., “opposition;” i.e., “the setting of one party against the other.”
[3744] Lit., “weighed with balancing of equality.”
[3745] Lit., “bounded by the comprehensions of names;” i.e., possibly, “the good are certainly few enough to be numbered, perhaps even to be named.”
[3746] So LB., reading ex cruciatibusfor the ms. scruc.
[3747] Lit., “of.”
[3748] Lit., “admiration is sought for by the putting together”—congregatione.
[3749] Lit., “a comparison of the worst may effect that we,” etc.
[3750] So all edd. except Hildebrand, who gives as the reading of the ms., qui-d—“what! do they assert.”
[3751] Lit., “by the force of,” vi,—an emendation of Heraldus for the ms. in.
[3752] So most edd., reading pertinacifor the ms. -ium—“by the opposition of persistent virtues,” which is retained in both Roman edd., Gelenius, Canterus, Hildebrand, and Oehler.
[3753] So Stewechius and later edd., reading ut…auferant, except Hildebrand, who gives as the ms. reading, et…-unt—“shun…and remove,” etc. The first four edd. read ne…afferant—“that they may not bring upon themselves,” etc.
[3754] So the ms. and first four edd., Orelli (who, however, seems to have meant to give the other reading), and Oehler, reading corri-p-i, for which the others read -igi—“corrected,” except Hildebrand, who without due reason gives -rumpi—“corrupted.”
[3755] In the ms. imperfectum is marked as a gloss, but is retained in all edd., while improbabilem is omitted, except in LB., when im is omitted, and probabilem joined to the next clause—“however he may strive to be acceptable,” in order to provide an object for “strive;” and with a similar purpose Orelli thrusts in contrarium, although it is quite clear that the verb refers to the preceding clause, “struggles to amend.”
[3756] The ms. reads se esse, without meaning, from which LB., followed by Hildebrand, and Oehler derived se ex se—“himself of himself.” The rest simply omit esse as above.
[3757] Lit., “hold.”
[3758] Lit., “hold.”
[3759] Lit., “set in the.”
[3760] Lit., “utter the same (conjectures),” easdem, the reading of LB. and Hildebrand, who says that it is so in the ms.; while Crusius asserts that the ms. has idem, which, with Orelli’s punctuation, gives—“we have the same power; since it is common (i.e., a general right) to bring forth what you ask,” i.e., to put similar questions.
[3761] i.e., may be retorted upon you.
[3762] Here, as elsewhere, instead of muli, the ms. reads milvi—“kites.”
[3763] Cf. Plato, Timæus, st. p. 41, already referred to.
[3764] Or, perhaps, “cray-fish,” locusta.
[3765] The ms. reads quidem—“indeed,” retained by the first four edd., but changed into quia—“because,” by Elmenhorst, LB., and Orelli, while Oehler suggests very happily si quidem—“if indeed,” i.e., because.
[3766] Lit., “from.”
[3767] Rationes.
[3768] Cf. chs. 9 and 10 [p. 416, supra.].
[3769] Orelli, retaining this as a distinct sentence, would yet enclose it in brackets, for what purpose does not appear; more especially as the next sentence follows directly from this in logical sequence.
[3770] Lit., “the constitutions of things.”
[3771] Lit., “did not choose the souls of the human race to be mixtures of the same purity,” noluit, received from the margin of Ursinus by all except the first four edd., which retain the ms. voluit—“did choose,” which is absurd. Arnobius here refers again to the passage in the Timæus, p. 41 sq., but to a different part, with a different purpose. He now refers to the conclusion of the speech of the Supreme God, the first part of which is noticed in ch. 36 (cf. p. 447, n. 20). There the Creator assures the gods He has made of immortality through His grace; now His further invitation that they in turn should form men is alluded to. That they might accomplish this task, the dregs still left in the cup, in which had been mixed the elements of the world’s soul, are diluted and given to form the souls of men, to which they attach mortal bodies.
[3772] Lit., “things not principal.” Orelli here quotes from Tertullian, de Anim., xxiii., a brief summary of Gnostic doctrines on these points, which he considers Arnobius to have followed throughout this discussion.
[3773] Siwas first inserted in LB., not being found in the ms., though demanded by the context.
[3774] Lit., “have begun to leave.”
[3775] The ms. and first three edd., read vobis—“you,” corrected nobis, as above, by Ursinus.
[3776] So the ms.; but most edd., following the Brussels transcript, read dominum—“Lord.”
[3777] Utis omitted in the ms., first four edd., and Hild.
[3778] So LB., reading p-uncta for the ms. c-uncta.
[3779] So the ms., Hild., and Oehler, reading imman-ior; LB., from the margin of Ursinus, major—“greater;” the rest, inanior—“more foolish.”
[3780] The difficulty felt by Arnobius as to the origin of evil perplexed others also; and, as Elmenhorst has observed, some of the Fathers attempted to get rid of it by a distinction between the evil of guilt and of punishment,—God being author of the latter, the devil of the former (Tertullian, adv. Marcionem, ii. 14). It would have been simpler and truer to have distinguished deeds, which can be done only if God will, from wickedness, which is in the sinful purpose of man’s heart.
[3781] i.e., ills.
[3782] Lit., “with all the ages, in steady continuance.”
[3783] The ms., followed by Oehler alone, reads ducetis—“and you will think;” while all the other edd. read, as above, ducentes.
[3784] Here, too, there has been much unnecessary labour. These words—per voluntatem—as they immediately follow sine deo dicere nihil fieri—“to say that without God nothing is made”—were connected with the preceding clause. To get rid of the nonsense thus created, LB. emended dei…voluntate—“without God’s will;” while Heraldus regards them as an explanation of sine deo, and therefore interprets the sentence much as LB. Orelli gets rid of the difficulty by calling them a gloss, and bracketing them. They are, however, perfectly in place, as will be seen above.
[3785] Pl.
[3786] It would not be easy to understand why Orelli omitted these words, if we did not know that they had been accidentally omitted by Oberthür also.
[3787] Lit., “that apart from these it is pernicious.”
[3788] It must be observed that this sentence is very closely connected with the last words of the preceding chapter, or the meaning may be obscured. The connection may be shown thus: This one thing—that God is author of no evil—we are assured of; but as for all other questions, we neither know, nor care to know, about them.
[3789] This seems the most natural arrangement; but the edd. punctuate thus: “have been connected and associated with us for that which we desire.” The last part of the sentence is decidedly obscure; but the meaning may perhaps be, that the circumstances of man’s life which absorb so much attention and cause such strife, have no bearing, after all, upon his salvation.
[3790] So the ms., reading labefactare dissolvere; the latter word, however, being marked as spurious.
[3791] Lit., “pure.”
[3792] Lit., “hidden and enwrapt in darkness of nature,” abdita et caligine involuta naturæ,—the reading of all edd. except Hild. and Oehler, who follow the ms. abditæ cal.—“enwrapt in darkness of hidden nature.”
[3793] This has been supposed to refer to Heraclitus, as quoted by Clem. Alex., Stromata, v. p. 469 B., where his words are, “Neither God nor man made the world; but there was always, and is, and will be, an undying flame laying hold of its limits, and destroying them;” on which cf. p. 437. n. 8, supra. Here, of course, fire does not mean that perceived by the senses, but a subtle, all-penetrating energy.
[3794] Cf. ch. 52, p. 453.
[3795] Lit., “by ordinary necessity.” The Stoics (Diog. Lært., vii. 134) said that the world was made by God working on uncreated matter, and that it was perishable (§ 141), because made through that of which perception could take cognizance. Cf. ch. 31, n. 9, p. 446.
[3796] Orelli thinks that there is here a confusion of the parts of the world with its elements, because he can nowhere find that any philosopher has fixed the number of the elements either above or below four. The Stoics, however (Diog. Lært., vii. 134), said “that the elements (ἀρχάς of the world are two—the active and passive;” while, of course, the cosmic theories of the early philosophers affirm that the world sprang from one, and it seems clear enough that Arnobius here uses the word “element” in this sense.
[3797] Lit., “its material.”
[3798] A conjecture of Meursius adopted by Oehler, merely dropping u from aut—“or,” which is read in the ms. and edd.
[3799] Lit., “refute falsities placed.”
[3800] Cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deor., i. 1, 12, 19, 23, etc.
[3801] Lit., “something is given to them to life.” So the Stoics taught, although Chrysippus (cf. n. 9, ch. 31, p. 446) held that only the souls of the wise remained at all after death.
[3802] The ms., first four edd., and Oehler read et rerum contrarietatibus dissonare—“and that they disagree from the oppositions of things.” Hild. reads dissonora, a word not met with elsewhere, while the other edd. merely drop the last two letters, -re, as above; a reading suggested in the margin of Ursinus.
[3803] Lit., “a most vain thing,” etc.
[3804] So the ms., LB., Elmenh., Hild., and Oehler, reading conjectamus, the other edd. reading commetamur or -imur—“measure,” except Gelenius and Canterus, who read commentamur—“muse upon.”
[3805] Lit., “audacity of.”
[3806] Lit., “world which holds us.”
[3807] The first five edd. insert the mark of interrogation after “hollow:” “Whether does a solid axis,” etc.
[3808] So the edd. except. Hild., who retains the ms. reading in scientissime—“most unskilfully” (the others omitting in-), and Oehler, who changes e into i—“and being most witless show,” etc.
[3809] Lit., “touch.”
[3810] So the later edd., reading from the margin of Ursinus figi? cur alia, for the ms. figuralia, except LB., which reads figurari—“be formed.”
[3811] So the ms.; but all edd. except Hild. and Oehler omit nobis.
[3812] So the ms., reading folgora dilatarit, followed by LB.
[3813] Salsa, corrected from the ms. sola.
[3814] Alites et volucres; i.e., according to Orelli, the birds from whose flight auguries were drawn, as opposed to the others.
[3815] So Heraldus, whose punctuation also is here followed, omitting id est sapor—“that is, taste,” which Meursius and LB., followed by Orelli, amend, ut est—“as taste is” in each thing.
[3816] Vel is here inserted in all edd., most of which read, as above, oloris, which is found in the ms., in later writing, for the original, coloris—“colour,” retained by Ursinus, LB., and Oehler.
[3817] Lit., “that the nature of man is.”
[3818] So the ms., according to Crusius, reading nec pro suis; while, according to Hild., the reading is prorsus—“and are utterly without hesitation,” adopted in the edd. with the substitution of et for nec—“and that they altogether hesitate,” which, besides departing from the ms. runs counter to the sense.
[3819] Lit., “transfer to Him the undecided conversions of the breast.”
[3820] Lit., “He can be formed by no imagination.”
[3821] Lit., “which the obscurity of sacred divinity contains;” which Orelli interprets, “the most exalted being holds concealed from mortals.”
[3822] Lit., “and being fixed on.”
[3823] i.e., Christ.
[3824] As Heraclitus is reported to have said.
[3825] The ms., first five edd., and Oehler read supernatum, for which the other edd. read, as above, semper natum, from the margin of Ursinus. The soul is referred to.
[3826] So the later edd., following Elmenhorst, who emended dico for the ms. dici, omitted by the first four edd.
[3827] So most edd., reading sciolis, from the emendation of Gelenius; but the ms., first five edd., Hild., and Oehler read scholis—“by some schools, and (these) arrogating very much to themselves.”
[3828] Cf. ch. 13, p. 439; Plato, Rep., ii. st. p. 364, where Glaucon speaks of certain fortune-telling vagrant seers, who persuade the rich that they have power with the gods, by means of charms and sacrifices, to cleanse from guilt; and also Origen, contra Cels., i. 69, where the Magi are spoken of as being on familiar terms with evil powers, and thus able to accomplish whatever is within these spirits’ power.
[3829] Mentioned by Servius (on Æn., viii. 399) as composed by Tages, cap. 69 [p. 460, supra], and seemingly containing directions as to expiatory sacrifices.
[3830] Pl.
[3831] Lit., “a spirit of perpetuity.”
[3832] i.e., than the Supreme God.
[3833] Lit., “are.”
[3834] Lit., “all human things.”
[3835] i.e., reason.
[3836] The ms. reads fuisse me risui, which has no meaning; corrected, fuisse irrisui in most edd., and derisui by Meursius, Hild., and Oehler,—the sense being in either case as above.
[3837] Lit., “when it begins to approach to the feeling,” cum ad sensum; so read by Gelenius for the unintelligible ms. cum absens cum.
[3838] So the edd., reading quid sit cum eis animis actum for the ms. cum ejus nimis.
[3839] Lit., “of ancient and very old men.”
[3840] So the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading vinctionis; the other edd. junctionis—“union.”
[3841] Lit., “unknown questions.”
[3842] Pl.
[3843] Lit., “has run over.”
[3844] So the ms. and Oehler, reading ut, which is omitted in all other edd.; in this case, the words in italics are unnecessary.
[3845] So Orelli, reading cur (quur in most edd.) for the ms. quos. Instead of non—“not,” which follows, the ms., according to Oehler, reads nos, and he therefore changes quos into quæso—“I ask, does He free all of us altogether?”
[3846] There is clearly no reference here to a particular passage of Scripture, but to the general tone of Christ’s teaching: “Him that cometh unto me, I will in nowise cast out.” Orelli, however with his usual infelicity, wishes to see a direct reference, either to Christ’s words to the woman of Samaria (John iv. 13-15), or, which is rather extraordinary, to John vi. 35-37: “I am the bread of life,” etc. Cf. n. 9, p. 459.
[3847] Lit., “the right of drinking.”
[3848] Lit., “the kindness of.”
[3849] Lit., “what waits He for, inviting,” quid invitans expectat; the reading of the ms., both Roman edd. and Oehler. Gelenius, followed by Canterus and Elmenhorst, changed the last word into peccat—“in what does He sin,” adopted by the other edd., with the addition of in te—“against you.”
[3850] Lit., “exposes under decision of your own right.”
[3851] Cf. Plato, Rep., ii. st. p. 379: “of a few things God would be the cause, but of many He would not;” and x. st. p. 617 fin.
[3852] So LB., Orelli, Oehler, adopting the emendation of Ursinus, tu te muneris commoditate privaveris, for the unintelligible reading of the ms., tuti m. c. probaveris.
[3853] i.e., immortal, deos, so corrected by Gelenius for the ms. deus—“if either God made us.”
[3854] So most edd., reading inanis for the ms. animi; retained, though not very intelligible, in LB., while Hild. reads anilis—“foolish.”
[3855] So the ms. now reads verti; but this word, according to Pithœus, is in a later handwriting, and some letters have been erased.
[3856] So the edd., reading tibi desit? opem desideras tibi, except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. reading, t. d. o. desideranti—“as though He failed you desiring Him to bring help.”
[3857] So Ursinus, reading in ania cognomines for the ms. in alia, which Orelli would interpret, “call the reverse of the truth.”
[3858] Lit., “For the parts of bringing…has enjoined and given over,” partes…injunctum habet et traditum, where it will be important to notice that Arnobius, writing rapidly, had carried with him only the general idea, and forgotten the mode in which this was expressed.
[3859] Pontificium.
[3860] Here, too, according to Pithœus, there are signs of erasure.
[3861] i.e., admit.
[3862] This passage at once suggests John x. 9 and xiv. 6, and it is therefore the more necessary to notice the way in which Arnobius speaks (“so to say”), which is certainly not the tone of one quoting a passage with which he is well acquainted. [Elucidation I.]
[3863] Lit., “bent.”
[3864] Cf. i. 13 and 58.
[3865] Lit., “crops being invented.”
[3866] So the later edd., reading constiteritfrom the margin of Ursinus; but in the ms. and first four edd. the reading is constituerit—“has established,” for which there is no subject.
[3867] So the later edd., reading aversionem ex (LB., and preceding edd. a) religione for the ms. et religionem—“against us the hatred and religion of past ages.”
[3868] Lit,, “with the condemnation of.”
[3869] This shows that the division of the people into classes was obsolete in the time of Arnobius.
[3870] Turnebus has explained this as merely another way of saying the comitia centuriata, curiata and tributa.
[3871] So the edd. reading cum paratis bella (Oehler reads reparantes) for the ms. reparatis.
[3872] i.e., per clarigationem, the solemn declaration of war, if restitution was not made within thirty-three days.
[3873] This seems the most natural way to deal with the clause et ex acuminibus auspicatis, looking on the last word as an adjective, not a verb, as most edd. seem to hold it. There is great diversity of opinion as to what this omen was.
[3874] The ms. reads in penetralibus et coliginis. LB., followed by Orelli, merely omits et, as above while the first five edd. read in pen. Vestæ ignis—“do you maintain the hearths of Vesta’s fire.” Many other readings and many explanations of the passage are also proposed.
[3875] i.e. Servius Tullius. The first four edd. read Tullo, i.e., Tullus Hostilius.
[3876] Cf. v. c. 1.
[3877] The ms. reads edi in filosophia; the first four edd., Philos.; Elmenh. and Orelli, Etenim phil.—“For were phil.;” LB., Ede an phil.—“say whether phil.,” which is, however faulty in construction, as the indicative follows. Rigaltius, followed by Oehler, emended as above, Medicina phil.
[3878] Lit., “reached the coasts of.”
[3879] Lit., “of the intestines”—extorum.
[3880] In both Roman edd., Theutatem, i.e., Theutas. Cf. Plato, Phædrus, st. p. 274.
[3881] i.e., Pluto.
[3882] Pl.
[3883] Lit., “Castors,” i.e., Castor and Pollux.
[3884] i.e., sine ullius seminis jactu.
[3885] Lit., “forms of bodily circumscription.”
[3886] Lit., “what we do is.”
[3887] Lit., “thing.”
[3888] Lit., “how many steps are there of race.”
[3889] i.e., Jupiter and Picus.
[3890] The ms. reads genitor…Latinus cujus, some letters having been erased. The reading followed above—genitor is cujus—was suggested to Canterus by his friend Gifanius, and is found in the margin of Ursinus and Orelli.
[3891] Cf. above, “four hundred years ago,” etc., and i. ch. 13. It is of importance to note that Arnobius is inconsistent in these statements. [In the Edinburgh edition we have here “fifteen hundred years;” etc., but it was changed, in the Errata, to ten hundred and fifty.]
[3892] Lit., “be nursed with the breasts and dropt milk.”
[3893] Lit., “of what space.”
[3894] i.e., re.
[3895] So the ms., according to Crusius and Livineius, reading ac; all edd. except Oehler read aut—“head (i.e., source) or fountain.”
[3896] The ms. reads unintelligibly vertitur solæ; for which LB., followed by the later edd. reads, as above, vertimur soli.
[3897] Dr. Schmitz (Smith’s Dict., 3. v. Isis) speaks of these consuls as heading the revolt against the decree of the senate, that the statues of Isis and Serapis should be removed from the Capitol. The words of Tertullian (quoting Varro as his authority) are very distinct: “The consul Gabinius…gave more weight to the decision of the senate than the popular impulse, and forbade their altars (i.e., those of Serapis, Isis, Arpocrates, and Anubis) to be set up” (ad Nationes, i. 10, cf. Apol., 6).
[3898] Cf. vii. 49.
[3899] Lit., “contained.”
[3900] Pl.
[3901] Lit., “antiquity.”
[3902] Lit., “things.”
[3903] So Gelenius emended the ms., reading potens—“being able,” which he changed into potest, as above, followed by later edd.
[3904] Lit., “by such kinds of.”
[3905] The ms. and first edd. read et potestatibus potestatum—“and by powers of powers;” the other edd. merely omit potestatibus, as above, except Oehler, who, retaining it, changes potestatum into protestata—“being witnessed to by,” etc.; but there is no instance adduced in which the participle of this verb is used passively.
[3906] These words having been omitted by Oberthür, are omitted by Orelli also, as in previous instances.
[3907] The ms. and first ed. read etiam moderata continuatio; corrected, et immod. con. by Gelenius.
[3908] So the edd., reading infantes stentoreos, except Oehler, who retains the ms. reading centenarios, which he explains as “having a hundred” heads or hands, as the case might be, e.g., Typhon, Briareus, etc.
[3909] Lit., “measure.”
[3910] Lit., “things.”
[3911] Lit., “can be changed with no novelty.”
[3912] Lit., “provide,” conficiatis, which, however, some would understand “consume.”
[3913] Lit., “slaveries, their free births being taken away.”
[3914] Lit., “and.”
[3915] So the ms. first five edd., Hild. and Oehler, reading adscribere infortunio voluptatem, which is omitted in the other edd. as a gloss which may have crept in from the margin.
[3916] Lit., “our dark.”
[3917] The ms. and both Roman edd. read in carcerem natum inegressum; LB. and later edd. have received from the margin of Ursinus the reading translated above, datum, omitting the last word altogether, which Oehler, however, would retain as equivalent to “not to be passed from.”
[3918] Lit., “than an august thing.”
[3919] Orelli refers to Arrh., i. 12; but the doctrine there insisted on is the necessity of submission to what is unavoidable. Oehler, in addition, refers to Epict., xxxii. 3, where, however, it is merely attempted to show that when anything is withheld from us, it is just as goods are unless paid for, and that we have therefore no reason to complain. Neither passage can be referred to here, and it seems as though Arnobius has made a very loose reference which cannot be specially identified.
[3920] The ms., followed by Oehler, reads neque enim res stare…non potest, Christiana religio aut—“for neither can a thing not stand,…nor will the Christian religion,” etc., while L.B. merely changes aut into et—“for neither can a thing, i.e., the Christian religion,…nor will it,” etc. All other edd. read as above, omitting et.
[3921] According to Crusius and others, the ms. reads finem; but, according to Hild., fidem, as above.
[3922] Deus primus, according to Nourry, in relation to Christ; but manifestly from the scope of the chapter, God as the fountain and source of all things.
[3923] Lit., “propitiate with venerations.”
[3924] So the ms., reading ducitur; for which Oberthür, followed by Orelli, reads dicitur—“is said.”
[3925] Lit., “whatever belongs to them feels itself to be comprehended with a tacit rendering also of honour in,” etc., tacita et se sentit honorificentia, read by later edd. for the ms. ut se sentit—“but as whatever,” retained by Hild. and Oehler; while the first four edd. read vi—“feels itself with a silent force comprehended in the honour in,” etc.
[3926] So LB. and Orelli, reading alia etiamnum capita for the ms. alienum capita, read in the first five edd., alia non capita—“are others not chiefs;” Hild., followed by Oehler, proposes alia deûm capita—“other gods.”
[3927] According to Orelli’s punctuation, “whether there are these gods in heaven whom,” etc.
[3928] So LB. and later edd., from a conj. of Meursius, reading diebus lustricis for the ms. ludibriis; read by some, and understood by others, as ludicris, i.e., festal days.
[3929] The ms. followed by Hild. and Oehler, reads neque…in ulla cognatione—“in no relationship,” for which the other edd. give cognitione, as above.
[3930] So all edd., reading populares, except Hild. and Oehler, who receive the conj. of Rigaltius, populatim—“among all nations;” the ms. reading popularem.
[3931] Censeri, i.e., “written in the list of gods.”
[3932] Otherwise, “how many make up the list of this name.”
[3933] So Orelli, receiving the emendation of Barth, incogniti nomine, for the ms. in cognitione, -one being an abbreviation for nomine. Examples of such deities are the Novensiles, Consentes, etc., cc. 38–41.
[3934] Lit., “who, except a few gods, do not engage in the services of the rest.”
[3935] Orelli would explain pro parte consimili as equivalent to pro uno vero Deo—“for the one true God.”
[3936] Lit., “take the oaths of allegiance” or military oaths, using a very common metaphor applied to Christians in the preceding book, c. 5.
[3937] Lit., “suppliant hands.” It has been thought that the word supplices is a gloss, and that the idea originally was that of a band of soldiers holding out their hands as they swore to be true to their country and leaders; but there is no want of simplicity and congruity in the sentence as it stands, to warrant us in rejecting the word.
[3938] i.e., than the inventors of such fables had shown.
[3939] Lit., “from us infants;” i.e., as compared with such a man as Cicero.
[3940] Secundas actiones. The reference is evidently to a second speaker, who makes good his predecessor’s defects.
[3941] Lit., “are unwilling to admit into their ear the reading of opinions,” etc.
[3942] Both Christians and heathen, it is probable, were concerned in the mutilation of de Nat. Deorum.
[3943] So Gelenius, reading dicta for the ms. dictitare. The last verb is comprobate, read reprobate—“condemn,” by all edd. except Hild. and Oehler.
[3944] Lit., “with familiarity of speech.”
[3945] A formula used when they sought to propitiate the author of some event which could not be traced to a particular deity; referring also to the cases in which there were different opinions as to the sex of a deity.
[3946] Lit., “even of mean understanding.”
[3947] Lit., “by the renewing of perpetual succession.”
[3948] Lit., “that gods are born.”
[3949] Lit, “recurring,” “arising again.”
[3950] Lit., “make trial of themselves by these laws of sex.”
[3951] Lit., “all things,” etc.
[3952] Lit., “if the impurity of sexual union is wanting to the gods.”
[3953] So the first five edd.
[3954] Lit., “the other arrangement of members.”
[3955] Lit., “it is fitting to believe.”
[3956] The ms., followed by Hild., reads habet et animum—“has it a mind to, and does it,” etc.; for which Gelenius, followed by later edd., reads, as above, avet animus.
[3957] Cererem ab Iaccho, either as above, or “loved by Iacchus.” Cf. Lucret. iv. 1160: At tumida et mammosa Ceres est ipsa ab Iaccho.
[3958] Sensu obscæno.
[3959] The first five edd. read hortari—“exhorted,” for which LB, followed by later edd., received tortari; as above,—a conjecture of Canterus.
[3960] So Orelli, reading nec in contumelia quam opinamini stare for the ms. et, which is retained by all other edd.; Oehler, however, inserts alia before quam—“and that it is found in an insult other than you think.”
[3961] So later edd., omitting quam, which is read in the ms., both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler, “to think much more…than you believe.”
[3962] It is evident that Arnobius here confuses the sceptical Sadducees with their opponents the Pharisees, and the Talmudists.
[3963] The ms. reads tribuant et nos unintelligibly, for which LB. and Hild. read et os—“as though they attribute form and face;” the other edd, as above, tribuamus et nos.
[3964] Lit., “the joinings of the members.”
[3965] Lit., “with smooth roundness.” [Cf. Xenoph., Mem., i. cap. 4.]
[3966] Lit., “the raised gutter of the nose, easily passed by,” etc.
[3967] The veins were supposed to be for the most part filled with blood, mixed with a little air; while in the arteries air was supposed to be in excess. Cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deor. ii. 55: “Through the veins blood is poured forth to the whole body, and air through the arteries.”
[3968] Lit., “in the apprehension of mutual knowledge.”
[3969] The ms. and first four edd. read dotis causa—“for the sake of a dowry:” corrected as above, dicis causa in the later edd.
[3970] This argument seems to have been suggested by the saying of Xenophanes, that the ox or lion, if possessed of man’s power, would have represented, after the fashion of their own bodies, the gods they would worship. [“The fair humanities of old religion.”—Coleridge (Schiller).]
[3971] Ennius (Cic., de Nat. Deor., i. 35): Simia quam similis, turpissima bestia, nobis.
[3972] So the ms., followed by Oehler, reading nobis, for which all other edd. give vobis—“to you.”
[3973] Meursius would read naccas—“fullers,” for nautas; but the latter term may, properly enough, be applied to the gods who watch over seamen.
[3974] Or, “for the others are not gods,” i.e., cannot be gods, as they do not possess the power of divination. Cf. Lact., i. 11: Sin autem divinus non sit, ne deus quidem sit.
[3975] The ms., followed by LB. and Hild., reads sidereis motibus—“in the motions of the stars;” i.e., can these be in the stars, owing to their motion? Oehler conjectures molibus—“in the masses of the stars;” the other edd. read montibus, as above.
[3976] The ms., both Roman edd., and Oehler read habetur Diana—“is Diana esteemed;” the other edd., ut habeatur, as above.
[3977] i.e., Æsculapius.
[3978] i.e., Minerva. [Elucidation II. Conf. n. 4, p. 467, supra.]
[3979] “With nice skill…for them,” curiose iis; for which the ms. and first five edd. read curiosius—“rather skilfully.”
[3980] The ms. reads unintelligibly et imponere, for which Meursius emended componat, as above.
[3981] Mercury, grandson of Atlas by Maia.
[3982] Lit., “by the long duration of time.”
[3983] Lit., “skilled in notions”—perceptionibus; for which præceptionibus, i.e., “the precepts of the different arts,” has been suggested in the margin of Ursinus.
[3984] Lit., “and have skill (sollertias) in which individuals excel.”
[3985] According to Oehler, Portunus (Portumnus or Palæmon—“the god who protects harbours”) does not occur in the ms., which, he says, reads per maria præstant—“through the seas they afford;” emended as above by Ursinus, præstat Portunus. Oehler himself proposes permarini—“the sea gods afford.”
[3986] Pales, i e., the feeding one; Inuus, otherwise Faunus and Pan.
[3987] Otherwise, “from the absence of rain.”
[3988] So the margin of Ursinus, reading meretrix; but in the first four edd., LB., and Oberthür, genetrix—“mother,” is retained from the ms.
[3989] So LB., reading cura-t, the ms. omitting the last letter.
[3990] Lit., “salted fruits,” the grits mixed with salt, strewed on the victim.
[3991] Supplied by Ursinus.
[3992] So the edd. reading quid, except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. qui—“who.”
[3993] The ms. reads Vita.
[3994] [i.e., these names are derived from their offices to men. Have they no names apart from these services?]
[3995] i.e., those who subdue their own spirits. “Constancy” is the εὐπάθεια of the Stoics.
[3996] Referring to Dido.
[3997] As despairing lovers are said to have sought relief in death, by leaping from the Leucadian rock into the sea.
[3998] Lit., “where, I ask, is the (assertion) that,” etc.
[3999] Lit., “hold.”
[4000] In the ms. these words, aut si, are wanting.
[4001] Stewechius and Orelli would omit rebus, and interpret “about the same gods.” Instead of de—“about,” the ms. has deos.
[4002] The ms. reads fonti, corrected by Meursius Fontis, as above.
[4003] Lit., “circuit.”
[4004] Lit., “finished.”
[4005] i.e., the god.
[4006] i.e., time.
[4007] Lit., “the measuring of a certain space included in,” etc.
[4008] Cf. vi. 12.
[4009] Cf. Plato, Phædr., st. p. 246.
[4010] Lit., “the reversed order of the Greek name being repeated,” i. e., instead of ἥ-ρα, ἀ-ήρ.
[4011] The ms. gives Fluvionia.
[4012] Lit., “with the frequency (or fame) of vain,” etc.
[4013] Lit., “very.”
[4014] So Meursius emended the ms. sali—“sea.”
[4015] Lit., “the quality of this name has been adjusted.”
[4016] So Orelli, reading monte vertice; the last word, according to Oehler, not being found in the ms.
[4017] i.e., Cybele. Cf. Lucr., ii. 991 sqq.
[4018] Lit., “seeds.”
[4019] Fasti—“list,” “register.”
[4020] Lit., “motions.”
[4021] Cf. Servius ad Virg., Georg., i. 5: “The Stoics say that Luna, Diana, Ceres, Juno, and Proserpina are one; following whom, Virgil invoked Liber and Ceres for Sol and Luna”
[4022] Triviali—“common,” “vulgar,” seems to be here used for triplici.
[4023] Actæon.
[4024] Plato, Timæus, st. p. 30.
[4025] Lit., “of which things, however, if the opinion,” etc.
[4026] i.e., deifying parts of the universe, and giving them, as deities, the same names as before.
[4027] Lit., “the difference of their disjunction being preserved”—multi disjunctionis differentia conservata, suggested in the margin of Ursinus for the ms. multitudinis junctionis d. c., retained in the first five edd.
[4028] Lit., “of their own name.”
[4029] Lit., “for the sake of our name, men’s affairs are made harassing.”
[4030] Lit., “with flames of,” etc.
[4031] The ms., according to Crusius, reads nos—“us.”
[4032] Three was the most ancient number; and the names preserved by Pausanias, are Μελέτη, ᾽Αοιδή, Μνήμη.
[4033] Cicero (de Nat. Deor., iii. 21, a passage where there is some doubt as to the reading) enumerates as the four Muses, Thelxiope, Aœde, Arche, Melete.
[4034] The ms. reads Murtylus. Seven are said to have been mentioned by Epicharmis,—Neilous, Tritone, Asopous, Heptapolis, Acheloïs, Tipoplous, and Rhodia.
[4035] The nine are Clio, Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Erato, Polymnia, Ourania, and Calliope (Theog., 77–79).
[4036] Lit., “into the end of the same opinion.”
[4037] Lit., “in the middle,” “intermediate.”
[4038] i.e., Ephorus.
[4039] i.e., Hesiod.
[4040] Lit., “the undertaking of religion itself is brought into the danger,” etc.
[4041] An Umbrian village.
[4042] Lit., “that the number is nine.” [i.e., a triad of triads; the base a triad, regarded, even by heathen, as of mystical power.]
[4043] A grammarian who lived in the time of Augustus, not to be confounded with Cicero’s correspondent.
[4044] Novitatum.
[4045] The Etruscans held (Pliny, H. N., ii. 52) that nine gods could thunder, the bolts being of different kinds: the Romans so far maintained this distinction as to regard thunder during the day as sent by Jupiter, at night by Summanus.
[4046] So LB., reading relig- for the ms. reg-iones.
[4047] Lit., “the very skilful.”
[4048] Lit., “if the number nine bring on the name of,” etc.
[4049] Lit., “gives another’s might and power to gods presiding.”
[4050] Lit., “the title of this name.”
[4051] Lit., “after they have finished the mortality of life,” i.e., either as above, or “having endured its perishableness.”
[4052] Lit., “lying under.”
[4053] So most edd., following Gelenius, who reads esse nomenfor the ms. si omnes istud.
[4054] Lit., “who have deserved to,” etc.
[4055] The ms. reads immortalium, corrected in the edd. urbem Ilium.
[4056] Supposed to be either the genius attending Jupiter; the family god as sent by him; or the chief among the genii, sometimes mentioned simply as Genius.
[4057] Lit., “whom the commonalty receives.”
[4058] Consentes (those who are together, or agree together, i.e., councillors) and Complices (confederate, or agreeing) are said by some to be the twelve gods who composed the great council of heaven; and, in accordance with this, the words una oriantur et occidant una might be translated “rise and sit down together,” i.e., at the council table. But then, the names and number of these are known; while Arnobius says, immediately after, that the names of the dii Consentes are not known and has already quoted Varro, to the effect that neither names nor number are known. Schelling (über die Gotth. v. Samothr , quoted by Orelli) adopts the reading (see following note), “of whom very little mention is made,” i.e., in prayers or rites, because they are merely Jove’s councillors, and exercise no power over men, and identifies them with the Samothracian Cabiri—Κάβειροι and Consentes being merely Greek and Latin renderings of the name.
[4059] So the ms. and all edd. reading miserationis parcissimæ, except Gelenius, who reads nationis barbarissimæ—“of a most barbarous nation;” while Ursinus suggested memorationis parc.—“of whom very little mention is made,”—the reading approved by Schelling.
[4060] Lit., “shaken to its foundations.”
[4061] Æribus. Cf. Lucretius, ii. 633–636.
[4062] The ms. reads manas, corrected as above by all edd. except Hild., who reads Manias.
[4063] The ms. reads effunctorum; LB. et funct., from the correction of Stewechius; Gelenius, with most of the other edd., def.
[4064] The ms. and first ed. omit non.
[4065] Lit., “because of aversion.”
[4066] Lit., “the form of their race.”
[4067] i.e., ignorabitur et nescietur.
[4068] The ms. reads consolationem—“for each consolation,” i.e., to comfort in every distress.
[4069] The ms. omits et.
[4070] The dii inferi.
[4071] The dii superi.
[4072] Saturn and Hercules were so worshipped.
[4073] Apollo.
[4074] The ms., first five edd., and Oehler read terreor—“terrified;” the others tor., as above, from the conjecture of Gifanius.
[4075] Cf. ch. 40, note 21. It may further be observed that the Etruscans held that the superior and inferior gods and men were linked together by a kind of intermediate beings, through whom the gods took cognizance of human affairs, without themselves descending to earth. These were divided into four classes, assigned to Tina (Jupiter), Neptune, the gods of the nether world, and men respectively.
[4076] So LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading nomine ne; all others ut, the ms. having no conjunction.
[4077] Lit., “it is fitting that you stand in the limits of,” etc.
[4078] i.e., Summus Manium, Pluto.
[4079] Lit., “see altars built.”
[4080] Lit., “in the regions of heaven.”
[4081] The ms. reads tam (corrected by the first four edd. tamen) in regionibus—“in the divine seats;” corrected, religionibus, as above, by Ursinus.
[4082] Lit., “to the deluding of your deities.”
[4083] Lit., “is contained in a form of its own kind.”
[4084] i.e., manliness.
[4085] Lit., “which it is easy to perceive to be said by us with the greatest truth from,” etc.,—so most edd. reading nobis; but the ms., according to Crusius, gives vobis—“you,” as in Orelli and Oberthür.
[4086] Lit., “less auspicious.”
[4087] The ms., first four edd., and Elmenhorst, read, quæ—“which;” the rest, as above, que.
[4088] Lit., “what is opposed to them named,” nominatum; a correction by Oehler for the ms. nominatur—“is named.”
[4089] The ms. and both Roman edd. read signatorum—“sealed;” the others, except Hild., ignotorum, as above.
[4090] Lit., “drew the meaning of her name.”
[4091] Lit., “excelled the might of all.”
[4092] ms., “that these, too,” i.e., as well as Luperca.
[4093] No such discussion occurs in the preceding part of the work, but the subject is brought forward in the end of chap. 8, p. 478, infra.
[4094] In the first sentence the ms. reads utrique, and in the second utique, which is reversed in most edd., as above.
[4095] Lit., “ever at hand with gracious assistances.”
[4096] Lit., “are not of.”
[4097] i.e., the field of Cannæ.
[4099] Lit., “the parts.”
[4100] Lit., “it cannot be brought into any light of general understanding by you.”
[4101] Lit., “convexity.”
[4102] Lit., “be of.”
[4103] Lit., “to the state of the world.”
[4104] Lit., “who have been so formed, that some things are said by us,” nobis, the reading of Oberthür and Orelli for the ms. in nos—“with regard to us,” which is retained by the first four edd., Elm., Hild. and Oehler.
[4105] i.e., transit in vocabulum sinistri; in being omitted in the ms. and both Roman edd.
[4106] Lit., “the turning round of the body being changed.”
[4107] So Oehler, reading positione, sed tempore sed, for the ms. positionis et temporis et.
[4108] No mention is made of this deity by any other author.
[4109] Lit., “that he may do what.”
[4110] Lit., “good condition,” habitudinem.
[4111] Lit., “a disreputable act.”
[4112] So the ms. reading flagitiis, followed by all edd. except LB. and Orelli, who read plagiis—“kidnapping.”
[4113] Of this goddess, also, no other author makes mention but the germ may be perhaps found in Lucretius (ii. 1116–7), where nature is termed perfica, i.e., “perfecting,” or making all things complete. [The learned translator forgets Tertullian, who introduces us to this name in the work Arnobius imitates throughout. See vol. iii. p. 140.]
[4114] i.e., in cubiculis præsto est virginalem scrobem effodientibus maritis.
[4115] The first five edd. read Mutunus. Cf. ch. 11. [I think it a mistake to make Mutubus = Priapus. Their horrible deformities are diverse, as I have noted in European collections of antiquities. The specialty of Mutunus is noted by our author, and is unspeakably abominable. All this illustrates, therefore, the Christian scruples about marriage-feasts, of which see vol. v. note 1, p. 435.]
[4116] Lit., the “fancies” or “imaginations” of false gods. Meursius proposed to transpose the whole of this sentence to the end of the chapter, which would give a more strictly logical arrangement; but it must be remembered that Arnobius allows himself much liberty in this respect.
[4117] Of these three deities no other mention is made.
[4118] The ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler read qui—“who brings;” the other edd., as above, quia.
[4119] So the ms. (cf. ch. 11), first five edd., Oberth., Hild., and Oehler; the other edd. read Nodutim Ter.
[4120] So the ms., both Roman edd., and Oehler; the other edd. reading Vibilia, except Hild., Viabilia.
[4121] The ms. reads nam—“for,” followed by all edd. except Orelli, who reads jam as above, and Oehler, who reads etiam—“also.”
[4122] Orelli omits non, following Oberthür.
[4123] Both in this and the preceding chapter the ms. reads Melonia.
[4124] Lit., “obtained by lot the wardships.”
[4125] Lit., “signs.”
[4126] So the ms., both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler; the others reading Liburnum, except Elm., who reads -am, while Meursius conjectured Liberum—“Bacchus.”
[4127] Lit., “shameful impurity seeks after;” expetit read by Gelenius, Canterus, and Oberthür, for the unintelligible ms. reading expeditur, retained in both Roman edd.; the others reading experitur—“tries.”
[4128] The ms. reads Lemons; Hild. and Oehler, Limones; the others, Limos, as above.
[4129] The ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler read Murcidam; the others, Murciam, as above.
[4130] i.e., equestrian rank.
[4131] The ms. reading is quid si haberet in sedibus suos, retained by the first five edd., with the change of -ret into -rent—“what if in their seats the bones had their own peculiar guardians;” Ursinus in the margin, followed by Hild. and Oehler, reads in se divos suos—“if for themselves the bones had gods as their own peculiar,” etc.; the other edd. reading, as above, si habere insistitis suos.
[4132] i.e., deities. So LB. and Orelli, reading quid potestatum?—“what, O fathers of powers.” The ms. gives qui—“what say you, O fathers of new religions, who cry out, and complain that gods of powers are indecently dishonoured by us, and neglected with impious contempt,” etc. Heraldus emends thus: “…fathers of great religions and powers? Do you, then, cry out,” etc. “Fathers,” i.e., those who discovered, and introduced, unknown deities and forms of worship.
[4133] The ms. reads pertus quæ- (marked as spurious) dam; and, according to Hild., naeniam is written over the latter word.
[4134] So the ms. Cf. ch. 7 [note 10, p. 478, supra].
[4135] The ms. is here very corrupt and imperfect,—supplices hoc est uno procumbimus atque est utuno (Orelli omits ut-), emended by Gelenius, with most edd., supp. Mut-uno proc. atque Tutuno, as above; Elm. and LB. merely insert humi—“on the ground,” after supp. [See p. 478, note 6, supra.]
[4136] Meursius is of opinion that some words have slipped out of the text here, and that some arguments had been introduced about augury and divination.
[4137] Contendis, not found in the ms.
[4138] i.e., the predictions.
[4139] Lit., “will you make the same belief.”
[4140] Lit., “adapt themselves to the significations of the things which.”
[4141] Lit., “brothers of.”
[4142] i.e., demons.
[4143] Perhaps “abilities”—materiis.
[4144] The ms. reads cum—“with similar reason we may believe,” instead of cur, as above.
[4145] Lit., “novelty of the thing.”
[4146] Lit., “of places and divisions,” i.e., places separated from each other.
[4147] Lit., “affords to you the appearance of.”
[4148] Lit., “a severity of stern manner”—moris for the ms. mares.
[4149] Orelli here introduces the sentence, “For it cannot be,” etc., with which this book is concluded in the ms. Cf. ch. 37, n. 4, infra.
[4150] There can be no doubt that Arnobius here refers to Clemens Alexandrinus (Λόγος Προτρεπτικὸς πρὸς ῾Ελλῆνας), and Cicero (de Nat. Deor.), from whom he borrows most freely in the following chapters, quoting them at times very closely. We shall not indicate particular references without some special reason, as it must be understood these references would be required with every statement. [Compare Clement, vol. ii. pp. 305–13, and Tertullian, vol. iii. p. 34.]
[4151] Lit., “given to us an abridging,” i.e., an opportunity of abridging.
[4152] Lit., “committed to sepulture and born in,” etc.
[4153] Arnobius repeats this statement in ch. 22, or the name would have been regarded as corrupt, no other author making mention of such a goddess; while Cicero speaks of one Sun as born of Hyperion. It would appear, therefore, to be very probable that Arnobius, in writing from memory or otherwise, has been here in some confusion as to what Cicero did say, and thus wrote the name as we have it. It has also been proposed to read “born of Regina” (or, with Gelenius, Rhea), “and his father Hyperion,” because Cybele is termed βασίλεια; for which reading there seems no good reason.—Immediately below, Ialysus is made the son, instead of, as in Cicero, the grandson of the fourth; and again, Circe is said to be mother, while Cicero speaks of her as the daughter of the fifth Sun. These variations, viewed along with the general adherence to Cicero’s statements (de N. D., iii. 21 sqq.), seem to give good grounds for adopting the explanation given above.
[4154] i.e., in Proserpinam genitalibus adhinnivisse subrectis.
[4155] Lit., “of Jupiter, but the third.”
[4156] i.e., incestorum appetitorem.
[4157] So Cicero (iii. 23); but Clemens [vol. ii. p. 179] speaks of five, and notes that a sixth had been mentioned.
[4158] Lit., “by the violence of your terror.” The preceding words are read in the ms. ideo motos—“so moved by authority,” and were emended idonea, as in the text, by Gelenius.
[4159] Lit., “to what parts shall we transfer the duties of pious service.”
[4160] The ms. reads cum numen; Rigaltius, followed by Oehler emending, as above, meum; the first four edd., with Oberthür, tum—“then the deity is mine;” while the rest read cum numine—“with the deity.”
[4161] So LB., Orelli, and Oehler, reading tu tinnisfor the ms. tutunis.
[4162] Capitoliis. In the Capitol were three shrines,—to Jove, Juno, and Minerva; and Roman colonies followed the mother-state’s example. Hence the present general application of the term, which is found elsewhere in ecclesiastical Latin.
[4163] Lit., “Nor are the forms of married persons given to these by all artists;” nec read in all edd. for the ms. et—“and of married,” etc., which is opposed to the context.
[4164] Lit., “not of your own right.”
[4165] Concretione roris—a strange phrase. Cf. Her., iv. 180: “They say that Minerva is the daughter of Poseidon and the Tritonian lake.”
[4166] St. p. 21. The ms. reads quorum Nili lingua latonis; the two Roman edd. merely insert p., Plat.; Gelenius and Canterus adding dicor—“in whose language I am called the Nile’s,” Nili being changed into Neith by Elmenhorst and later edd.
[4167] Lit., “take account of herself.”
[4168] So Ursinus suggested in the margin for the ms. si verum.
[4169] The third Minerva now addresses the fourth.
[4170] Lit., “approaching the duties of religion.”
[4171] According to the ms. sic—“for so (i.e., as you do) yielding,” etc.
[4172] So all the edd., though Orelli approves of fictione (edd. -em), which is, he says, the ms. reading, “set forth with wanton fiction.”
[4173] The ms. and earlier edd., with Hild. and Oehler, read ex hominum de scriptis; LB. and Orelli inserting his after de, as above.
[4174] The ms. and both Roman edd. read esse, which is clearly corrupt; for which LB. gives scripsisse (misprinted scripse), as above.
[4175] i.e., “speak of them at all.”
[4176] Lit., “an idea of no writing.”
[4177] Lit., “been informed by books suggesting to you,” etc.
[4178] Lit., “does it not touch the feeling of your mind.”
[4179] Ursinus would supply eos—“that they are so.”
[4180] Atque ex seminis, actu, or jactu, as the edd. except Hild. read it.
[4181] The ms. reads dignitati-s aut; corrected, as above, d. sane, in the first five edd., Oberthür, and Orelli. [John x. 35.]
[4182] Quæsit fœditas ista coeundi.
[4183] Lit., “as far as to themselves, their first generation being completed.”
[4184] Lit., “forgetting the so great majesty and sublimity.”
[4185] Both plural.
[4186] Both plural.
[4187] The ms., first four edd., and Oberthür read conducunt—“unite;” for which the rest read condic-unt, as above.
[4188] i.e., usu, farre, coemptione.
[4189] The word here translated mistresses, speratas, is used of maidens loved, but not yet asked in marriage.
[4190] Lit., “dangers of destructions.”
[4191] Instead of “occasioned,” sevisse, which the later editions give, the ms. and first four edd. read sævisse—“that danger and destruction raged against,” etc.
[4192] Copulatis corporibus.
[4193] i.e., not his mother’s, but the dug of the goat Amalthea.
[4194] Lit., “rattles heard.”
[4195] Lit., “the eminence of the powers.”
[4196] Lit., “inundation.”
[4197] Lit., “Saturnian gravity.”
[4198] Cf. ch. 14, note 8, supra.
[4199] It is worth while to compare this passage with ch. 16. Here Arnobius makes Latona the mother of Apollo and Diana in accordance with the common legend; but there he represents the first Minerva as claiming them as her children.
[4200] In the ms. there is here an evident blunder on the part of the copyist, who has inserted the preceding line (“the archer Apollo, and of the woods”) after “the same.” Omitting these words, the ms. reading is literally, “the name in Greek is to the Dioscori.” Before “the name” some word is pretty generally supposed to have been lost, some conjecturing “to whom;” others (among them Orelli, following Salmasius) “Castores.” But it is evidently not really necessary to supplement the text.
[4201] Lit., “scatter.”
[4202] Orelli reads with the ms., LB., and Hild., babecali, which he interprets belli, i.e., “handsome.”
[4203] ms. and first five edd. read inde—“thence;” the others in se, as above. [Elucidation III.]
[4204] Orelli, without receiving into the text, approves of the reading of Stewechius, promptam, “evident,” for the ms. propriam.
[4205] Lit., “the benefits diminished by which it is lived.”
[4206] The ms. reads ex Jovis; the first five edd. Jove—“from Jove,” which is altogether out of place; the others, as above, ex ovis. Cf. i. 36.
[4207] The ms. reads et ablui diebus tantis…elevari; LB., Hild. and Oehler, statis or statutis…et levari—“and was loosed and released on fixed days;” Elm., Oberthür, and Orelli receive the conjecture of Ursinus, et suis diebus tantum…rel., as above.
[4208] Cf. iii. [cap. 41, p. 475, and cap. 30, p. 472].
[4209] i.e., hiding-place. Virg., Æn., viii. 322: Quoniam latuisset tutus in oris.
[4210] Pyth., iii. 102 sq.
[4211] ms. Meglac.
[4212] The ms. and most edd. give filias, making the Muses daughters of Macarus; but Orelli, Hild., and Oehler adopt, as above, the reading of Canterus, filiæ, in accordance with Clem. Alex.
[4213] So the ms. reading numquid dictatum, which would refer this sentence to the end of the last chapter. Gelenius, with Canth., Oberth., and Orelli, reads quis ditatam, and joins with the following sentence thus: “Who related that Venus, a courtezan enriched by C., was deified…? who that the palladium,” etc. Cf. v. 19.
[4214] The ms. reads quis mensibus in Arcadia tribus et decem vinctum—“Who that he was bound thirteen months in Arcadia? was it not the son,” etc. To which there are these two objections—that Homer never says so; and that Clemens Alexandrinus [vol. ii. p, 179, this series], from whom Arnobius here seems to draw, speaks of Homer as saying only that Mars was so bound, without referring to Arcadia. The ms. reading may have arisen from carelessness on the part of Arnobius in quoting (cf. ch. 14, n. 2), or may be a corruption of the copyists. The reading translated is an emendation by Jortin, adopted by Orelli.
[4215] Sardibus,—a conjecture of Ursinus, adopted by LB., Hild., and Oehler for the ms. sordibus; for which the others read sordidi—“for the sake of base lust.”
[4216] Lit., “the masculine one.”
[4217] As this seems rather extravagant when said of one of the immortals, læsam, “hurt,” has been proposed by Meursius.
[4218] Castor and Pollux.
[4219] Lit., “contained.”
[4220] The ms. reads Hieronymus Pl.—“is Hier., is Pl.,” while Clem. Alex. mentions only “Hieronymus the philosopher.”
[4221] These names are all in the plural in the original.
[4222] So LB. and Orelli, reading Alopas, from Clem. Alex., for the ms. Alcyonas.
[4223] These names are all in the plural in the original.
[4224] Lit., “you add.”
[4225] In the original, somewhat at large—unam potuit prolem extundere, concinnare, compingere.
[4226] All edd. read this without mark of interrogation.
[4227] The ms. reads Phætontem: for which, both here and in Clem., Potter proposed Phaonem, because no such amour is mentioned elsewhere.
[4228] i.e., either the arts which belong to each god (cf. the words in ii. 18: “these (arts) are not the gifts of science, but the discoveries of necessity”), or, referring to the words immediately preceding, obstetric arts.
[4229] Lit., “Euhemerus being opened.”
[4230] So Elm. and Orelli, reading Nicanore for the ms. Nicagora, retained by all other edd.
[4231] Lit., “with the care of scrupulous diligence.”
[4232] Meursius would join virginis to Minerva, thinking it an allusion to her title Παρθένος.
[4233] These terms are employed of hetæræ.
[4234] Lit., “the title itself of their names was.”
[4235] Qui sollicite relegit. Relegit is here used by Arnobius to denote the root of religio, and has therefore some such meaning as that given above. Cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum, ii. 28.
[4236] Lit., “an error of inadvertence.”
[4237] Lit., “with the sacrificial bowl.”
[4238] So the ms., both Roman edd., Elm., Hild., and Oehler, reading rursus; the others in cursu—“in the course.”
[4239] Patrimus, i.e., one whose father is alive, is probably used loosely for patrimus et matrimus, to denote one both of whose parents were alive, who was therefore eligible for certain religious services.
[4240] So the ms. reading terram tenere, for which Hild. would read tensam, denoting the car on which were borne the images of the gods, the thongs or reins of which were held by the patrimus et matrimus; Lipsius, siserram, the sacrificial victim. The reading of the text has been explained as meaning to touch the ground with one’s hands; but the general meaning is clear enough,—that it was unlucky if the boy made a slip, either with hands or feet.
[4241] Oberthür and Orelli omit non.
[4242] Lit., “notions.”
[4243] Lit., “placed in their ears.”
[4244] Lit., “and it has not been established by you,”—a very abrupt transition in the structure of the sentence.
[4245] Lit., “which was very near to disgrace.”
[4246] So the margin of Ursinus, followed by later edd., prefixing d before the ms. -eorum.
[4247] Lit., “has less bite, being weakened by the testimony of silent reviewing,” recognitionis.
[4248] Lit., “most enduring.”
[4249] Coetu. The ms. and most edd. read coalitu,—a word not occurring elsewhere; which Gesner would explain, “put away that it may not be established among men,” the sense being the same in either case.
[4250] Lit., “complain of the neglected insults of the other gods.”
[4251] Lit., “as a lover by.” Cf. Homer, Il., 14, 312.
[4252] i.e., of himself.
[4253] Lit., “except that which was full of religion.”
[4254] i.e., according to which such offenses should be punished.
[4255] Lit., “have willed.”
[4256] Lit., “full-grown race,” exoleti, a word frequently used, as here, sensu obscæno.
[4257] i.e., the actors, etc.
[4258] i.e., the crowd of adulterers, as Orelli suggests.
[4259] Lit., “draw enticements of pleasures from.”
[4260] Or, “Venus, the mother…and loving parent,” etc.
[4261] Lit., “of meretricious vileness.”
[4262] i.e., Cybele, to whom Mount Dindymus in Mysia was sacred, whose rites, however, were celebrated at Pessinus also, a very ancient city of Galatia.
[4263] ms. Sofocles, corrected in LB. Sophocles. Cf. Trach. 1022 sqq.
[4264] Lit., “towards (in) the last of the wasting consumed by the softening of his bowels flowing apart.”
[4265] Lit., “debauched and scoffers.”
[4266] So Orelli, reading et quando; ms. and other edd. et si—“and if ever.”
[4267] Arnobius is generally thought to refer here to the persecution under Diocletian mentioned by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., viii. 2.
[4268] The service in which these prayers were offered was presided over by the bishop, to whom the dead body was brought: hymns were then sung of thanksgiving to God, the giver of victory, by whose help and grace the departed brother had been victorious. The priest next gave thanks to God, and some chapters of the Scriptures were read; afterwards the catechumens were dismissed; the names of those at rest were then read in a clear voice, to remind the survivors of the success with which others had combated the temptations of the world. The priest again prayed for the departed, at the close beseeching God to grant him pardon, and admission among the undying. Thereafter the body was kissed, anointed, and buried.—Dionysius, Eccl. Hier., last chapter quoted by Heraldus. Cf. Const. Apost., viii. 41. With the Church’s advance in power there was an accession of pomp to these rites. [Elucidation IV.]
[4269] Cf. the younger Pliny, Epist., x. 97: “They affirmed that they bound themselves by oath not for any wicked purpose, but to pledge themselves not to commit theft, robbery, or adultery, nor break faith, or prove false to a trust.”
[4270] Lit., “whom our society joins together,” quos solidet germanitas. [Lardner justly argues that this passage proves our author’s familiarity with rites to which catechumens were not admitted. Credibil., vol. iii. p. 458.]
[4271] i.e., in their sight or estimation.
[4272] Lit., “conceive these torches.”
[4273] Lit., “have roared with tremblings of the earth.”
[4274] The ms. reads conru-isse auras temporum, all except the first four edd. inserting p as above. Meursius would also change temp. into ventorum—“the breezes of the winds.”
[4275] So the ms., reading comptu—tie, according to Hild., followed by LB. and Orelli.
[4276] Lit., “mixture.”
[4277] The words following the asterisk (*) are marked in LB. as spurious or corrupt, or at least as here out of place. Orelli transposes them to ch. 13, as was noticed there, although he regards them as an interpolation. The clause is certainly a very strange one, and has a kind of affected abstractness, which makes it seem out of place; but it must be remembered that similarly confused and perplexing sentences are by no means rare in Arnobius. If the clause is to be retained, as good sense can be made from it here as anywhere else. The general meaning would be: The gods, if angry, are angry with the pagans; but if they are not subject to passion, it would be idle to speak of them as angry with the Christians, seeing that they cannot possibly at once be incapable of feeling anger, and yet at the same time be angry with them. [See cap. 13, note 4, p. 480, supra.]
[4278] So most edd., inserting er; in ms. and Oehler, vid-entur.
[4279] So named either because he was said to have made use of the bird of Mars, i.e., a woodpecker (picus), in augury, or because according to the legend he was changed into one by Circe.
[4280] i.e., the Aventine. The story is told by Plutarch in his Life of Numa, c. 15, and by Ovid, Fasti, iii. 291 sqq.
[4281] The ms. reads sollemniter hæc, corrected, as above, solenne iter huc by all edd. except Hild.
[4282] So the ms. and most edd., reading pocula non parvi numeri, for which Elmh. and Orelli have received from the margin of Ursinus, poc non parva mero—“cups of great size, with pure wine.”
[4283] i.e., mulsum.
[4284] i.e., Faunus and Picus.
[4285] Capite.
[4286] Cæpitio.
[4287] Jupiter is supposed to say humano, meaning capite, to be understood, i.e., “with a man’s head,” while the king supplies capillo—“with a man’s hair.”
[4288] Anima(ms. lia).
[4289] Mæna. There is here a lacuna in the text; but there can be no difficulty in filling it up as above, with Heraldus from Plutarch, or with Gelenius from Ovid, piscis—“with the life of a fish.”
[4290] The ms. and both Roman edd. read Numa, corrected by Gelenius, as above, non.
[4291] The ms. and edd. read cred-i-musne—“do we believe,” for which Meursius suggests -e- as above.
[4292] Lit., “or whether.” Below the ms. reads corruptly ad ipsum—“to him.”
[4293] The ms. reads scire, but “knows” would hardly suit the context. Instead of adopting any conjecture, however, it is sufficient to observe, with Oehler, that scire is elsewhere used as a contraction for sciscere.
[4294] The ms. omits ut.
[4295] So Cujacius, inserting vi, omitted by the ms.
[4296] Lit., “so great.”
[4297] Lit., “the fumigation of verbenæ,” i.e., of boughs of the laurel, olive, or myrtle.
[4298] The ms. omits ut.
[4299] Lit., “the uncertain things of that ambiguity.”
[4300] Lit., “unless a mortal anticipated”—præsumeret, the ms. reading.
[4301] So Oehler, supplying quem.
[4302] Lit., “liveliness of heart is procured.”
[4303] Lit., “why.”
[4304] So Ovid also (Metam., i. 321), and others, speak of Themis as the first to give oracular responses,
[4305] So the ms. and edd., reading quam incestis, except Orelli, who adopts the conjecture of Barthius, nequam—“lustful Jupiter with lewd desires.”
[4306] So the ms. and edd., except Hildebrand and Oehler, who throughout spell Agdestis, following the Greek writers, and the derivation of the word from Agdus.
[4307] So Ursinus suggested, followed by later edd., ex utroque (ms. utra.) sexu; for which Meursius would read ex utroque sexus—“and a sex of both,” i.e., that he was a hermaphrodite, which is related by other writers.
[4308] Lit., “him.”
[4309] Lit., “of thirsting.”
[4310] Lit., “in time of need.”
[4311] So the reading of the ms. and edd., unum laqueum, may be rendered; for which Canterus conjectured imum—“the lowest part of the noose.”
[4312] So the edd., reading eo quo (ms. quod) fuerat privat sexu; for which Hild. and Oehler read fu-tu-erat—“of the sex with which he had been a fornicator.”
[4313] Lit., “these (i.e., the parts and the blood) are,” etc.
[4314] The ms. here reads Nata, but in c. 13 the spelling is Nana, as in other writers.
[4315] Lit., “as if.”
[4316] The ms. reads t-abulis, corrected as above p- by Jos. Scaliger, followed by Hild. and Oehler. The other edd. read bacculis—“berries.”
[4317] So all the edd., except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. reading sanguinarius—“bloodthirsty.”
[4318] So Salmasius, Orelli, and Hild., reading repertum nescio quis sumit Phorbas, lacte; but no mention of any Phorbas is made elsewhere in connection with this story, and Oehler has therefore proposed forma ac lacte—“some one takes the child found, nourishes it with sweet pottage of millet (forma) and milk,” etc.
[4319] [See vol. ii. p. 175.]
[4320] Lit., “his silence.”
[4321] Lit., “fury and madness.”
[4322] The ms., first five edd., and Oberthür, read exterriti adorandorum Phryges; for which Ursinus suggested ad ora deorum—“at the faces of gods,” adopted by Oehler; the other edd. reading ad horam—“at the hour, i e., thereupon.”
[4323] It seems probable that part of this chapter has been lost, as we have no explanation of this epithet; and, moreover (as Oehler has well remarked) in c. 13 this Gallus is spoken of as though it had been previously mentioned that he too had mutilated himself, of which we have not the slightest hint.
[4324] i.e., genitalia.
[4325] Lit., “so great motions of furious hazards.”
[4326] So most edd., reading veste prius tectis atque involutis for the ms. reading, retained by Hild. and Oehler, tecta atque involuta—“his vest being first drawn over and wrapt about them;” the former verb being found with this meaning in no other passage, and the second very rarely.
[4327] Lit., “from.”
[4328] i.e., the pine.
[4329] Nourry supposes that this may refer to M. Valerius Messala, a fragment from whom on auspices has been preserved by Gellius (xiii. 15); while Hild. thinks that Antias is meant, who is mentioned in c. 1.
[4330] So Orelli punctuates and explains; but it is doubtful whether, even if this reading be retained, it should not be translated, “bedewed these (violets).” The ms. reads, suffodit et as (probably has)—“digs under these,” emended as above in LB., suffudit et has.
[4331] Lit., “burial.”
[4332] So it has been attempted to render the ms., reading pausatæ circum arboris robur, which has perplexed the different edd. Heraldus proposed pausate—“at intervals round the trunk of the tree;” LB. reads -ata—“round…tree having rested.” Reading as above, the reference might be either to the rest from motion after being set up in the cave, or to the absence of wind there.
[4333] Lit., “could be done through (i.e. as far as concerns) fate.”
[4334] So Oehler, reading sacerdotum antistitiis for the ms. antistibus, changed in both Roman edd. and Hild. to -stitibus—“with priests (or overseers) of priests.” Salmasius proposed intestibus—“with castrated priests.”
[4335] i.e., in the ever-recurring festival of Cybele.
[4336] Lit., “length.”
[4337] So the edd., reading orari in alicujus substantiæ qualitate for the ms. erari restored by Oehler, num-erari—“numbered in the quality of some substance,” from the reading of an old copy adopted by Livineius.
[4338] Lit., “through the resistance of nature.”
[4339] b.c. 43.
[4340] Lit., “the feeling commonly implanted.”
[4341] Lit., “was regard of piety wanting”—defuit, an emendation of Salmasius (according to Orelli) for the ms. depuit.
[4342] Lit., “the depth and patience of his sleeping mother.”
[4343] Lit., “from the theft of taking by surprise”—obreptionis, for which the ms., first four edd., Oberth., Hild., and Oehler read object.—“of what he proposed.”
[4344] So Heraldus, reading conventionis hujusmodi cœtum for the ms. cœptum.
[4345] Sustulisse alvos graves.
[4346] Most edd. read as an interrogation.
[4347] Perhaps, “that she might not be subject to ill-will for having borne so.”
[4348] i.e., to form nooses with. The reading translated is an emendation of Jos. Scaliger, adopted by Orelli, peniculamenta decurtantem cantheriorum, for the ms. peniculantem decurtam tam cantherios, emended by each ed. as he has thought fit.
[4349] Lit., “the cares of art.”
[4350] Lit., “endowed with the honour of.”
[4351] The ms. here inserts de—“from the body from a divine (being).”
[4352] So the edd. (except Oehler), reading tum cum for the ms. tum quæ quod.
[4353] Balaustiis, the flowers of the wild pomegranate.
[4354] Dares supplied by Salmasius.
[4355] [The Abderitans were proverbially such. “Hinc Abdera, non tacente me.”—Cicero, Ep. ad Attic., iv. 16.]
[4356] Lit., “he says.”
[4357] Lit., “must rut”—suriant, as deer. The ms., first four edd., and Elm. read surgant—“rise,” corrected as above in the margin of Ursinus.
[4358] Lit., “acorns”—glandibus.
[4359] The ms. reads des-, emended as above ded-ignatus by Stewechius, followed by Heraldus and Orelli.
[4360] i.e., he-goats are made to yield milk.
[4361] Lit., “praiseworthy.”
[4362] Lit., “with.”
[4363] So the ms., both Roman edd., LB., Hild. and Oehler, reading rursus, for which the others receive the emendation of Gelenius, regis—“the king’s carelessness.”
[4364] Lit., “the law and fate.”
[4365] i.e., Attis.
[4366] The ms. reads satietati-s objecisset offensi, corrected as above by Hild., (omitting s), followed by Oehler. The conjectures of previous edd. are very harsh and forced.
[4367] Lit., “flows.”
[4368] Lit., “herself with sacred, herself with divine.”
[4369] [γραώδεις μύθους, 1 Tim. iv. 7. Compare Ignatius, vol. i. p. 62, note 3. But even the old wives’ tales among Hebrews were clean in contrast with the horrible amusements here imputed even to the girls at the loom, and children, among the Gentiles.]
[4370] Lit., “spoke with.”
[4371] i.e., the part cut off and buried separately.
[4372] So the ms., according to Crusius, the edd. inserting s, di-s-cere—“to learn.”
[4373] Lit., “on firmness of faith.”
[4374] Lit., “sent to public testifying.”
[4375] The festival of Cybele began on the 22d of March, when a pine tree was introduced into the mysteries, and continued until the 27th, which was marked by a general purification (lavatio), as Salmasius observed from a calendar of Constantine the Great. [An equinoctial feast, which the Church deposed by the Paschal observances. March 22 is the prima sedes Paschæ.]
[4376] Lit., “for solace of so great a wound.”
[4377] So Stewechius, followed by Orelli and Oehler, reading quibus Ia for the ms. jam, which would refer the action to Cybele, whereas Arnobius expressly says (c. 7) that it was the newly wedded wife who covered the breast of Attis with wools. Jam is, however, received from the ms. by the other edd., except Hild., who asserts that the ms. reads Iam, and Elmenh., who reads Ion.
[4378] i.e., priests of Cybele, their names being derived from the Phrygian river Gallus, whose waters were supposed to bring on frenzy ending in self-mutilation.
[4379] Lit., “with wailing.”
[4380] Lit., “with.”
[4381] Lit., “and the duty of defence itself.”
[4382] i.e., secret rites, to which only the initiated were admitted.
[4383] Lit., “which you deliver”—traditis; so Elmenh., LB., and later edd., for the unintelligible ms. tradidisse, retained in both Roman edd.
[4384] Lit., “deformity affixed to all.”
[4385] ms. fetam f. Cf. i. 36, n. 2, p. 422, supra.
[4386] So Heraldus, from Plutarch, Rom., 21, where Butas is said to have written on this subject (αἰτίαι) in elegiacs, for the ms. Putas.
[4387] Lit., “in like manner and with dissimulation.”
[4388] i.e., heart, lungs, and liver, probably of a sacrifice.
[4389] i.e., “divination, augury,” etc.
[4390] Vis Lucilii, i.e., semen. [He retails Pliny xxxvi. 27.]
[4391] Cf. iv. 24.
[4392] So the ms. and edd., reading gens illa, for which Memmius proposed Ilia—“and all the Trojan race.”
[4393] Lit., “riding upon”—inequitare.
[4394] Lit., “most open.”
[4395] Subsessoris.
[4396] Lit., “growling”—fremitum.
[4397] The ms. reads primo, emended as above by the brother of Canterus, followed by later edd.
[4398] i.e., testiculi.
[4399] Virilitate pignoris visa.
[4400] So Ursinus suggested, followed by Stewechius and later edd., concepti fœtus revocatur ad curam; the ms. reads concepit—“is softened and conceived,” etc.
[4401] Jupiter may be here called Verveceus, either as an epithet of Jupiter Ammon—“like a wether,” or (and this seems most probable from the context), “dealing with wethers,” referring to the mode in which he had extricated himself from his former difficulty, or “stupid.” The ms. reads virviriceus.
[4402] Lit., “encountered”—aggressus.
[4403] Lit., “sufficiently.”
[4404] i.e., Ceres.
[4405] Lit., “will any one want.”
[4406] i.e., handed down by antiquity. [Vol. ii. p. 176, this series.]
[4407] These seem to have been celebrated in honour of Dionysius as well as Zeus, though, in so far as they are described by Arnobius, they refer to the intrigue of the latter only. Macrobius, however (Saturn., i. 18), mentions that in Thrace, Liber and Sol were identified and worshipped as Sebadius: and this suggests that we have to take but one more step to explain the use of the title to Jupiter also.
[4408] Lit., “of.”
[4409] Lit., “that he might be a crop of”—seges, a correction in the margin of Ursinus for the ms. sedes—“a seat.”
[4410] So all edd., reading scenarum (ms. scr-, but r marked as spurious), except LB, followed by Orelli, who gives sentinarum—“of the dregs.” Oehler supplies e, which the sense seems to require. [Note our author’s persistent scorn of Jove Opt. Max.]
[4411] Lit., “neigh with appetites of an enraged beast.”
[4412] This clearly refers to the Æneid, x. 18.
[4413] Lit., “on the rear part.”
[4414] Suffragines.
[4415] So the margin of Ursinus, Elmenh. L.B., Oberth., Orelli, and Oehler, reading molli fimo for the ms. molissimo.
[4416] Lit., “censorial.”
[4417] Lit., “rage with thunders.”
[4418] So Gelenius, followed by Stewechius and Orelli, reading smilia for the corrupt and unintelligible ms. nullas.
[4419] Infulæ, besides being worn by the priest, adorned the victim, and were borne by the suppliant. Perhaps a combination of the two last ideas is meant to be suggested here.
[4420] i.e., seemingly so.
[4421] Lit., “under this axis of the world.”
[4422] So the ms., followed by Hild. and Oehler; the other edd. reading gens for mens.
[4423] Lit., “felt himself to be.”
[4424] Lit., “would the thing not be worthy that angry and roused.”
[4425] i.e., reduce to chaos, in which one thing would not be distinguished from another, but all be mixed up confusedly.
[4426] Lit., “what are your proper things.”
[4427] Every one since Salmasius (ad solinum, p. 750) has supposed Arnobius to have here fallen into a gross error, by confounding the Eleusinian mysteries with the Thesmophoria; an error the less accountable, because they are carefully distinguished by Clemens Alexandrinus, whom Arnobius evidently had before him, as usual. There seems to be no sufficient reason, however, for charging Arnobius with such a blunder, although in the end of ch. 26 he refers to the story just related as showing the base character of the Eleusinia (Eleusiniorum vestrorum notas); as he here speaks of mysteria(i.e., Eleusinia, cf. Nepos, Alc., 3, 16) et illa divina quæ Thesmophoria nominantur a Græcis. It should be remembered also that there was much in common between these mysteries: the story of Ceres’ wanderings was the subject of both; in both there was a season of fasting to recall her sadness; both had indecent allusions to the way in which that sadness was dispelled; and both celebrated with some freedom the recovery of cheerfulness by the goddess, the great distinguishing feature of the Thesmophoria being that only women could take part in its rites. Now, as it is to the points in which the two sets of mysteries were at one that allusion is made in the passage which follows, it was only natural that Arnobius should not be very careful to distinguish the one from the other, seeing that he was concerned not with their differences, but with their coincidence. It seems difficult, therefore, to maintain that Arnobius has here convicted himself of so utter ignorance and so gross carelessness as his critics have imagined. [Vol. ii. p. 176.]
[4428] Lit., “caverns.”
[4429] Lit., “in the whole.”
[4430] The ms. is utterly corrupt—flammis onere pressas etneis, corrected as above by Gelenius from c. 35., f. comprehensas.—Æl.
[4431] Lit., “also.”
[4432] Lit., “(they were) earth-born who inhabited.”
[4433] The ms. wants this name; but it has evidently been omitted by accident, as it occurs in the next line.
[4434] Lit., “of woolly flock.”
[4435] Cecropios et qui.
[4436] i.e. staff-bearers.
[4437] Cinnus, the chief ingredients, according to Hesychius (quoted by Oehler), being wine, honey, water, and spelt or barley. [P. 503, inf.]
[4438] Lit., “offices of humanity.”
[4439] Lit., “common health.” Arnobius is here utterly forgetful of Ceres’ divinity, and subjects her to the invariable requirements of nature, from which the divine might be supposed to be exempt.
[4440] So the conjecture of Livineius, adopted by Oehler, gene-t-ri-cum for the ms. genericum.
[4441] So Stewechius, followed by Oehler, reading redit itafor the ms. redita; the other edd. merely drop a.
[4442] Omnia illa pudoris loca.
[4443] Pubi.
[4444] Orpheus, under whose name there was current in the time of Arnobius an immense mass of literature freely used, and it is probable sometimes supplemented, by Christian writers. Cf. c. 19.
[4445] Lit, “put forth with Greek mouth.”
[4446] Lit., “tossing.”
[4447] It may be well to observe that Arnobius differs from the Greek versions of these lines found in Clem. Alex. (vol. ii. p. 177) and Eusebius (Præpar. Evang. ii. 3), omitting all mention of Iacchus, who is made very prominent by them; and that he does not adhere strictly to metrical rules, probably, as Heraldus pointed out, because, like the poets of that age, he paid little heed to questions of quantity. Whether Arnobius has merely paraphrased the original as found in Clement and Eusebius, or had a different version of them before him, is a question which can only be discussed by means of a careful comparison between the Greek and Latin forms of the verses with the context in both cases.
[4448] So LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading Erechthidæ O(inserted by Hild.) for the ms. erithideo.
[4449] i.e., Athenians.
[4450] The ms., 1st ed., Hild., and Oehler read ita—“It is thus not,” etc.; the others as above, ista.
[4451] Delatione calumniosa. [Conf. vol. ii. p. 175, col. 2.]
[4452] Cyceon. [P. 499, supra, and 503, infra.]
[4453] The ms. reads exci-ta, corrected as above, ex cista, in the margins of Ursinus.
[4454] [It is a pity that all this must be retailed anew after Clement, vol. ii. pp. 175, 177, notes.]
[4455] Lit., “by stealthy frauds.”
[4456] Lit. “is the honour of virginity snatched from them?”
[4457] Sine veniâ ac sine honoribus præfatis.
[4458] So Stewechius, LB., and Orelli, reading spec-t-u in t-ali for the ms. in specu ali.
[4459] Lit., “light.” [Note Clement, vol. ii. p. 175, col. 2, line 12.]
[4460] So the ms., Hild. and Oehler reading noscentis.
[4461] This allusion is somewhat obscure. Heraldus regards tricas Tellenas as akin in sense to t. Atellanas, i.e., “comic trifles;” in which case the sense would be, that Arnobius had been heaping up any trifles which would keep him back from the disagreeable subject. Ausonius Popma (quoted by Orelli) explains the phrase with reference to the capture of Tellenæ by Ancus Martius as meaning “something hard to get through.”
[4462] The ms. reads alimoniæ, corrected from Clem. Alex. by Salmasius, Alimontia, i.e., celebrated at Halimus in Attica.
[4463] Lit., “in pure senses.” [Ironically said.]
[4464] Cicero (de Nat. Deor., iii. 23) speaks of five Dionysi, the father of the fifth being Nisus. Arnobius had this passage before him in writing the fourth book (cf. c. 15, and n. 2), so that he may here mean to speak of Liber similarly.
[4465] Lit., “that he will be.”
[4466] So the ms., acc. to Hild., reading expe-titionis; acc. to Crusius, the ms. gives -ditionis—“(having accomplished) his expedition.”
[4467] Lit., “is surveying with all careful examination.”
[4468] ms. cuius. [Retailed from Clement, vol. ii. p. 180. As to the arguments the Fathers were compelled to use with heathen, see note 5, same volume, p. 206.]
[4469] i.e., the sceptic.
[4470] Cumwanting in the ms..
[4471] Lit. “by right of friendship.”
[4472] Lit., “of.”
[4473] Lit., “of holy divinity.” Orelli thinks, and with reason, that Arnobius refers to the words which Terence puts into the mouth of Chærea (Eun., iii. 5, vv. 36–43), who encourages himself to give way to lust by asking, “Shall I, a man, not do this?” when Jove had done as much. [Elucidation III.]
[4474] Lit., “to speak of any one as atheist…of those who,” etc.
[4475] So the ms. and edd., reading in eo, for which we should perhaps read in eos—“heap upon them.”
[4476] Subsicivis laudibus.
[4477] Lit., “to the reward (meritum) of divinity.”
[4478] Lit., “unwounded.”
[4479] So the edd., reading tardati for the ms. tradatis, except Hild., who reads tardatis.
[4480] i.e., the gods.
[4481] Exoletos. Cf. iv. c. 35, note 13, p. 487, supra.
[4482] Subditivis secretis.
[4483] Both Roman edd. and ms. read dicet—“shall say;” all others as above—dicit.
[4484] i.e., Jupiter.
[4485] Lit., “in the signification of his daughter.”
[4486] So the margin of Ursinus—ut reris for the ms. ut ce-reris.
[4487] Lit., “colours of.”
[4488] The ms. and both Roman edd. read indecorum est, which leaves the sentence incomplete. LB., followed by later edd., proposed de-cursum est, as above (Oehler, inde d.—“from these recourse has been had”), the other conjectures tending to the same meaning.
[4489] “We need only;” lit., “it is enough for us to.”
[4490] Lit., “heard.”
[4491] Lit., “in the obscure mind of senses.”
[4492] “Or at the time,” aut tum, the correction of LB, for the ms. sutum.
[4493] Lit., “fear of any reason and of religion.”
[4494] Lit., “proper.”
[4495] Lit., “from shut-up things.”
[4496] Rei.
[4497] Lit., “placed.”
[4498] Lit., “his suspicion and conjectural (perhaps “probable”) inference.”
[4499] Lit., “to be deduced with variety of expositions through numberless ways.”
[4500] The ms., first four edd., and Hild. read de his—“about these,” corrected in the others dîs or diis, as above.
[4501] Lit., “each.”
[4502] Pl.
[4503] Lit., “call.”
[4504] i.e., Proserpine. The readiness with which Arnobius breaks the form of the sentence should be noted. At first the gods represent physical phenomena, but immediately after natural events are put for the gods. In the ms. two copyists have been at work, the earlier giving Libero, which is rather out of place, and is accordingly corrected by the later, Libera followed by LB., Oberthür, Orelli, Hild., and Oehler.
[4505] The ms. reads primo. Cf. c. 20.
[4506] Proles.
[4507] [κυκεὼν, a draught resembling caudle. See p. 499, note 10.]
[4508] Lit., “by change of things.”
[4509] The ms. omits ad, supplied by Ursinus.
[4510] So all edd., except Hild. and Oehler, reading obscur-atisfor the ms. -itatibus.
[4511] Lit., “were placed above the interior truth.”
[4512] Lit., “with simple senses.”
[4513] i.e., involved in obscurity.
[4514] i.e., free from ambiguity.
[4515] Lit., “of shut-off obscurities.”
[4516] The reference is to the words in the middle of the chapter, “how do you know which part is simple?” etc.; Arnobius now saying that he does not see how this can be known.
[4517] Proles.
[4518] Lit., “for penalty and.”
[4519] Lit., “in their customs and conditions.”
[4520] i.e., if historical, the whole must be so, as bits of allegory would not fit in.
[4521] Cicero, pro Rosc. Am., c. 32.
[4522] The ms. and edd. read matris deæ—“of the mother goddess;” for which Meursius proposed deûm—“mother of the gods,” the usual form of the title. Cf. cc. 7 and 16. [See Elucidation V.; also note the reference to St. Augustine.]
[4523] The name is wanting in the ms. Cf. c. 28.
[4524] No Attic family of this name is mentioned anywhere; but in Cos the Nebridæ were famous as descendants of Æsculapius through Nebros. In Attica, on the other hand, the initiated were robed in fawn-skins (νεβρίδες), and were on this account spoken of as νεβρίζοντες. Salmasius has therefore suggested (ad Solinum, p. 864, E) that Arnobius, or the author on whom he relied, transferred the family to Attica on account of the similarity of sound.
[4525] Lit., “who have attached to themselves.”
[4526] Arnobius would seem to have been partial to this phrase, which occurs in the middle of c. 38.
[4527] Lit., “say.”
[4528] Lit., “with what shame and insult of the gods this is said to be done.”
[4529] Lit., “with.”
[4530] Lit., “din of.”
[4531] Passivè.
[4532] Lit., “strong in chastity.”
[4533] The ms., first three edd., Elm., and Oehler read commorantur—“lingers,” i.e., “continues to be spoken of;” the other edd. receive commemorantur, as above, from the errata in the 1st ed.
[4534] The ms., first four edd., and Oehler read gravitas—seriousness; corrected pr. as above, in all edd. after Stewechius.
[4535] So, perhaps, the unintelligible ms. dignorum should be emended digna rerum.
[4536] So all edd. since Stewechius, adding s to the ms. voluisse.
[4537] i.e., the mere fact that the stories were published, showed a wish to teach; but their being allegories, showed a reluctance to allow them to be understood.
[4538] The edd. read this sentence interrogatively.
[4539] i.e., “if you said exactly what you mean.” The reference is not to the immediately preceding words, but to the question on which the chapter is based—“what prevented you from expressing,” etc.
[4540] Lit., “perverse.”
[4541] Passivè.
[4542] Lit., “is it clear to you.”
[4543] Lit., “natures.”
[4544] Lit., “things.”
[4545] So most edd., reading occultatiofor the ms. occupatio.
[4546] So all edd., reading com-, except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. reading, im-pressio—“the assault of,” i.e., “on.”
[4547] Lit., “waves”—fluctibus, the reading of the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler; the other edd. reading fustibus—“stakes.”
[4548] So Meursius, changing the ms. o- into u-rigo.
[4549] The first four edd. retain the ms., reading partis—“brought forth;” the others adopt a suggestion of Canterus, raptis, as above.
[4550] Lit., “vastness.”
[4551] Addere garo gerrem, a proverb ridiculing a worthless addition, which nullifies something in itself precious, garum being a highly esteemed sauce (or perhaps soup), which would be thrown away upon gerres, a worthless kind of salt fish. Arnobius merely means, however, that while such stories are wrong, what follows is unspeakably worse.
[4552] Lit., “with undubitable knowledge.”
[4553] Lit., “it ought to have been so believed, and to be held fixed in thought just,” etc.
[4554] Lit., “are in this part of censure.”
[4555] Lit., “for.”
[4556] Lit., “the warp,” stamine.
[4557] i.e., if things are spoken of under their proper names.
[4558] The ms. reads ac unintelligibly.
[4559] Lit., “it remains that we.”
[4560] Lit., “series which is,” etc.
[4561] Singular. [But costly churches were built about this time.]
[4562] Non altaria, non aras, i.e., neither to the superior nor inferior deities. Cf. Virgil, Ecl., v. 66.
[4563] [It is not with any aversion to incense that I note its absence, so frequently attested, from primitive rites of the Church.]
[4564] The earlier edd. prefix d to the ms. eos—“that the gods,” etc.
[4565] Lit., “endowed with the eminence of this name.”
[4566] Lit., “and to satiety.”
[4567] The ms. wants se, which was supplied by Stewechius.
[4568] i.e., not act impartially and benevolently, which may possibly be the meaning of contrariis agere, or, as Oehler suggests, “to assail men with contrary, i.e., injurious things.” All edd. read egere, except Oehler, who can see no meaning in it; but if translated, “to wish for contrary things,” it suits the next clause very well.
[4569] Lit., “whom passion touches, suffer.”
[4570] So the ms., Stewechius, Hild., and Oehler, while the first four edd. and Oberthür merely add m to dolore, and join with the preceding pati—“suffer pain, are weakened.”
[4571] [See note 5, book. vi. p. 506.]
[4572] The ms. and most edd. read di-vina nobiscum—“the divine things along with us;” Heraldus rejects div. as a gloss, while Meursius, followed by Orelli, corrects dii una, and Oehler divi una, as above.
[4573] Lit., “are contained in vital substance.”
[4574] Arnobius here expressly denies that the Christians had any temples. There has been some controversy on the subject (Mosheim, book i. cent. 1, ch. 4, sec. 5, Soames’ ed.), surely as needless as controversy could be; for as the Christians must at all times have had stated places of meeting (although in time of persecution these might be changed frequently), it is clear that, in speaking thus, the meaning must be only, that their buildings had no architectural pretensions, and their service no splendour of ritual. [Diocletian’s mild beginning suffered Christians to build costly temples in many places. These he subsequently destroyed with great severity.]
[4575] Lit., “drawn out.”
[4576] So the edd., reading constructafor the corrupt ms. conscripta—“written.”
[4577] i.e., to suppose that temples are necessary to the gods, is to make them subject to human weakness.
[4578] Lit. “with fortifications of roofs.”
[4579] i.e., if you have regard merely to the weakness of men, a temple may be something wonderful.
[4580] Lit., “some.”
[4581] Lit., “formed by contrivance of a poor heart.”
[4582] Institutor, wanting in all edd., except Hild. and Oehler.
[4583] Arnobius here agrees with Clemens Alexandrinus, but Jos. Scaliger has pointed out that the name should be Cecrops. It is possible that Arnobius may have been misled by what was merely a slip of Clement’s pen. [See the passage here referred to, vol. ii. p. 184, this series.]
[4584] The preceding words, from “this of Hercules,” are omitted by the first four edd. and Elmenh., and were first restored from the ms. by Stewechius.
[4585] Lit., “first and.”
[4586] So the edd., reading habere districtos for the ms. destructos.
[4587] Lit., “that the things be thought to be.”
[4588] Lit., “knowledge being anticipated.”
[4589] These words, et tacitis, omitted by Oberthür, are similarly omitted by Orelli without remark.
[4590] So the edd., inserting quo- into the ms. reading ita-que—“it is therefore fitting,” which is absurd, as making the connection between the members of the sentence one not of analogy, but of logical sequence.
[4591] Cf. the speech of Thetis, Iliad, i. 423–425.
[4592] So the margin of Ursinus, Elm., LB., and Orelli, with Meursius, reading audiamini for the ms. audiamur—“we are heard,” which does not harmonize with the next clause.
[4593] Lit., “for the purpose of coming to know the thing.”
[4594] Lit., “if there are any others.”
[4595] So the ms., reading c-ogitare, corrected r-—“to beg,” in the margin of Ursinus and Elm. For the preceding words the ms. reads, poscantque de numine. The edd. omit que as above, except Oehler, who reads quæ—“what hope will there be, what, pray, to all,” etc.
[4596] So the ms., reading si uspiam poterit aliquando non esse, which may be understood in two senses, either not limited by space, or not in space, i.e., not existing; but the reading and meaning must be regarded as alike doubtful.
[4597] A Syracusan historian. The rest of the chapter is almost literally translated from Clement, who is followed by Eusebius also (Præp. Evang., ii. 6). [See vol. ii. p. 184, this series.]
[4598] i.e., the Acropolis.
[4599] In Thessaly, whither (acc. to Pausanias) he had fled in vain, to avoid the fulfillment of the oracle that he should be killed by his daughter’s son.
[4600] i.e., Athena Polias, or guardian of cities. Immediately below, the ms. reads Immarnachus, corrected in LB. and Orelli Immarus from Clem., who speaks of “Immarus, son of Eumolpus and Dæira.”
[4601] So the unintelligible reading of the ms., humation-ibus officia, was emended by Heraldus, followed by LB. and Orelli, is habuisse.
[4602] i.e., the temple near Didyma, sacred to Apollo, who was worshipped then under the name Didymus.
[4603] i.e., “lover of his father,” the name given ironically to the fourth Ptolemy, because he murdered his father.
[4604] Lit., “is.”
[4605] So the ms., both Rom. edd., Hild., and Oehler, reading quamvis pœnam; Gelenius, Canterus, Elm., and Oberthür omit vis, and the other edd. v, i.e., “as to what punishment the Egyptian,” etc. This must refer to the cases in which the sacred bull, having outlived the term of twenty-five years, was secretly killed by the priests, while the people were taught that it had thrown itself into the water.
[4606] i.e., “burial-places.” By this Oehler has attempted to show is meant the Hebdomades vel de Imaginibus of Varro, a series of biographical sketches illustrated with portraits, executed in some way which cannot be clearly ascertained.
[4607] ms. Barronis.
[4608] So the ms., first four edd., and Oberthür, reading Toli, corrected Oli in the others, from Servius (ad. Æn., viii. 345). Arnobius himself gives the form Aulus, i.e., Olus, immediately below, so that it is probably correct.
[4609] Lit., “the seats of.”
[4610] Ursinus suggested Valerius Antias, mentioned in the first chapter of the fifth book, a conjecture adopted by Hild.
[4611] The ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler read Aulus, and, acc. to Oehler, all other edd. Tolus. Orelli, however, reads Olus, as above.
[4612] The ms. and both Roman edd. read germani servuli vita without meaning, corrected as above by Gelenius, Canterus, Elm., and Oberthür, ut a g. servulo, and ut a g. servulis—“by the slaves,” in the others, except Oehler who reads as above, g. servulo ut.
[4613] The ms. and both Roman edd. read unintelligibly patientiæ, corrected paternæ in Hild. and Oehler, patriæ in the rest.
[4614] Lit., “the perpetuity of the omen sealed might stand.”
[4615] Lit., “through the times given to itself.”
[4616] The ms. reads s-oli,—changed into Toli by the first four edd., Elm., and Oberthür. The others omit s.
[4617] [“Belittle.” This word here is noteworthy. President Jefferson is said to have coined it, and I have never before seen it in a transatlantic book.]
[4618] i.e., “which you pretend to worship.”
[4619] So the edd., reading formar-e, except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. reading i—“that images be formed.”
[4620] The ms. and both Roman edd. read corruptly insolidi, corrected ita or sic coli, as above, in all except the last two edd.
[4621] [It is manifest that nothing of the kind was said by Christians. See p. 506, note 3, supra.]
[4622] i.e., you do not seek access to the gods directly, and seek to do them honour by giving that honour to the idols instead.
[4623] i.e., the transmission of the sacrifice to the gods is made dependent on idols.
[4624] This corresponds exactly to the English, “to shoot at the pigeon and hit the crow.”
[4625] Lit., “with vicarious substitution for.” [A very pertinent question as to the images worshipped in Rome to this day. There is one Madonna of African hue and features. See also Murray’s Handbook, Italy, p. 72.]
[4626] The ms. reads effi-gitur, corrected as above, effin., in all edd. except Hild., who reads efficitur—“is made,” and Stewechius, effigiatur—“is formed.”
[4627] Lit., “boy’s age.”
[4628] Flavus, so invariably associated with blue eyes, that though these are the feature brought into contrast, they are only suggested in this way, and not directly mentioned—a mode of speech very characteristic of Arnobius.
[4629] i.e., a fact which can be seen to be true by appealing to analogy.
[4630] So the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading donastis, the others donatis—“you give.”
[4631] As the appearance of the moon is the same in some of its phases as in others, it is clear that Arnobius cannot mean that it has thirty distinct forms. We must therefore suppose that he is either speaking very loosely of change upon change day after day, or that he is referring to some of the lunar theories of the ancients, such as that a new moon is created each day, and that its form is thus ever new (Lucr., v. 729–748).
[4632] Lit., “is changed through a thousand states with daily instability.”
[4633] Lit., “are.”
[4634] Lit., “intestine and domestic.”
[4635] The ms. reads leon-e-s torvissimam faciem, emended, as above, leonis t. f., in LB., Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, and l. torvissima facie—“lions of very stern face,” in the others. Nourry supposes that the reference is to the use of lions, or lion-headed figures, as architectural ornaments on temples (cf. the two lions rampant surmounting the gate of Mycenæ), but partially coincides in the view of Elm., that mixed figures are meant, such as are described by Tertullian and Minucius Felix (ch. 28: “You deify gods made up of a goat and a lion, and with the faces of lions and of dogs”). The epithet frugifer, however, which was applied to the Egyptian Osiris, the Persian Mithras, and Bacchus, who were also represented as lions, makes it probable that the reference is to symbolic statues of the sun.
[4636] Lit., “such a god to whose form and appearance the likeness of this image has been directed.”
[4637] Lit., “that.”
[4638] The ms. and both Roman edd. read unintelligibly sanquineo decotoro, for which s. de colore, as above, has been suggested by Canterus, with the approval of Heraldus.
[4639] The ms. here inserts puetuitate, for which no satisfactory emendation has been proposed. The early edd. read pituitate, a word for which there is no authority, while LB. gives potus aviditate—“drunk with avidity”—both being equally hopeless.
[4640] ms. sic, corrected by Gelenius si.
[4641] So Meursius, ac dicere, for ms. -cidere.
[4642] It is worthy of notice that although in this passage, as often elsewhere, Arnobius adheres pretty closely to the argument proposed by Clemens Alexandrinus, he even in such passages sometimes differs from it, and not at random. Thus Clement speaks merely of a “stone,” and Arnobius of an “unshaped stone.” The former expression harmonizes with the words of Maximus Tyrius (Serm., xxxviii. p. 225, Steph.), “The Arabians worship I know not whom, but the image which I saw was a square stone;” while Suidas (Küster’s ed., s.v. θεὺς ῎Αρης) agrees with Arnobius in calling it a “stone, black, square, unfashioned” (ἀτύπωτος). This is the more noteworthy, as at times Arnobius would almost seem to be following Clement blindly. [See Clement, cap. iv. vol. ii. p. 184, this series.]
[4643] So Arnobius renders Clement’s Cithæronian Hera.
[4644] So corrected in the notes of Canterus from Clem. for the ms. reading Carios, retained by the first four edd. and Elmenh. In Icaria there was a temple of Diana called Ταυροπόλιον.
[4645] The ms. and first four edd. read p-uteum—“a well,” corrected plut., as above, by Gifanius, and in the notes of Canterus.
[4646] The ms. reads ethedius, corrected in the notes of Canterus.
[4647] So all edd., except both Roman edd., which retain the ms. reading in the singular, suffraginem.
[4648] i. e., iii. 13. p. 467.
[4649] Lit., “it was allowed.”
[4650] So Meursius suggested amentes for the ms. reading animantis for which Heraldus proposed argumentis—“by arguments.”
[4651] Lit., “and most dissolved with the laxity of feminine liquidity.”
[4652] Divendere.
[4653] Lit., “with a workman’s preparing.”
[4654] Lit., “is there any figure to find.”
[4655] Habitus.
[4656] Ex foribus. Cf. Tertull., de Idol., ch. 15: “In Greek writers we also read that Apollo Θυραῖος and the dæmones Antelii watch over doors.”
[4657] So the edd, reading petas-un-culumfor the ms. -io-.
[4658] Lit., “are.”
[4659] Lit., “with strife of skills.”
[4660] ms. Phyrna, but below Phryna, which is read in both instances by Hild. and Oehler.
[4661] So Meursius, followed by Orelli, reading istic for the ms. iste.
[4662] i.e., either the conceptions in their minds, or realized in their works. Orelli, followed by the German translator Besnard, adopting the former view, translates “the ideas of the artists (die Ideale der Künstler) were full of fire and life.”
[4663] [See note 15, p. 511.]
[4664] [True, alas! to this day; notorious courtesans furnishing the models for the pictures and statues worshipped as saints, angels, etc.]
[4665] So Gelenius and Canterus, reading et for ms. est.
[4666] Lit., “with exertion of immense strength.”
[4667] ms. Pantarches. This was a very common mode of expressing love among the ancients, the name of the loved one being carved on the bark of trees (as if the Loves or the mountain nymphs had done it), on walls, doors, or, as in this case, on statues, with the addition “beautiful” (Suidas, s.v. Καλοί and ῾Ραμνουσία Νέμεσις, with Küster’s notes). [Vol. ii. p. 187, note 1, this series.]
[4668] Lit., “bones.”
[4669] Lit., “conditions,” habitus.
[4670] Lit., “similitude.”
[4671] Lit., “first among.”
[4672] Lit., “human things.”
[4673] [Isa. xl. 18-20; xliv. 9-20; xlvi. 5-8.]
[4674] i.e., the faculty of discernment, which is properly man’s.
[4675] Lit., “are in the limits of.”
[4676] The ms. reads his—“these”, emended, as above, vobis in the margin of Ursinus, Elm., and LB.
[4677] Lit., “and humble.”
[4678] i.e., a respectable woman.
[4679] i.e., the elephant’s tusk.
[4680] So Salmasius, followed by Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, reading furfuraculis, and LB., reading perforaculis for the ms. furfure aculeis.
[4681] So the margin of Ursinus, Meursius (according to Orelli), Hild., and Oehler, reading part-u-m for the ms. -e-—“is a part of your labour,” etc.
[4682] Lit., “of thy work and fingers.”
[4683] So the ms., both Roman edd., Elm., and Orelli, reading numinis favore, for which LB. reads favorem—“the favour of the propitious deity to succour.” [Isaiah’s argument reproduced.]
[4684] Lit., “thrown together.”
[4685] Rigaltius suggested confracta—“shattered,” for ms. -flata.
[4686] So the edd. reading cog- for the ms. cogit-amini.
[4687] Lit., “be moved with agitation of breathing.”
[4688] Lit., “outside,” i.e., before being in bodily forms.
[4689] So Ursinus and LB., reading retin-e-ntfor the ms. -ea-, which can hardly be correct. There may possibly be an ellipsis of si before this clause, so that the sentence would run: “If they had any natural properties, (if) they retain all these, what stupidity,” etc.
[4690] Lit., “deprived of moveableness of feeling.”
[4691] Lit., “a rational animal.”
[4692] Lit., “with deceit of vain credulity.” The edd. read this as an interrogation: “Do you, therefore, sink down, adore, and bring yourselves into disgrace?”
[4693] So Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, adopting a conjecture of Grævius, di-, for the ms. de-ducere—“to lead down.”
[4694] Lit., “resolved into members.”
[4695] Lit., “by the charm of.”
[4696] The ms. reads flev-ilium, for which Hild. suggests flex-, as above, previous edd. reading flat-—“of cast plates;” which cannot, however, be correct, as Arnobius has just said that the images were in part made of ivory.
[4697] Lit., “delays salutary for lastingnesses.” The sense is, that the lead prevents the joints from giving way, and so gives permanence to the statue.
[4698] Occipitiis.
[4699] Plantarum vestigia.
[4700] Lit., “from the art of obscurity.”
[4701] i.e., if the nature of the images is really concealed by the skill displayed in their construction.
[4702] Lit., “breathing.” [Ps. cxv. 4-8.]
[4703] Lit., “are relaxed from decay of rottenness.”
[4704] i.e., fall from their pedestals. For the ms. reading situs (retained in LB., as above), the margin of Ursinus, followed by the other edd. except the first four and Oberthür, read situ-—“lose their appearance from mould.”
[4705] So LB. and Oehler, reading famis in spemfor the ms. pannis, omitted in other edd. All prefix p, as above, to the next word, annos.
[4706] Deonerati proluvies podicis. [So Clement, vol. ii. p. 186, at note 1, this series.]
[4707] Lit., “incited by the truth of nature.” The ms. and both Roman edd. read d-, all others instincta, as above.
[4708] Lit., “the sacred dedication.”
[4709] Lit., “concealed in the restraint of.”
[4710] The ms. reads inrogati (the next letter being erased, having probably been s redundant) si inviti, corrected in the margin of Ursinus and Oehler, as above, -tis in.
[4711] Lit., “with the assent of voluntary compliance.” “Do you say,” or some such expression, must be understood, as Arnobius is asking his opponent to choose on which horn of the dilemma he wishes to be impaled.
[4712] Lit., “bindings.”
[4713] So Gelenius, Canterus, Elm., Oberth., and Orelli, reading nobilitent. No satisfactory emendation has been proposed, and contradictory accounts are given as to the reading of the ms. Immediately after this sentence, LB., followed by Orelli, inserts a clause from the next chapter. Cf. the following note.
[4714] It will be seen that these words fit into the indirect argument of Arnobius very well, although transposed in LB. to the end of last chapter, and considered a gloss by Orelli and Hildebrand. “See the consequences,” Arnobius says, “of supposing that the gods do not quit these images: not merely are they in a wretched case, but they must further lose their power as divinities.” Meursius, with, more reason, transposes the clause to the end of the next sentence, which would be justifiable if necessary.
[4715] Perhaps “into,” as Arnobius sometimes uses the abl. after in instead of the acc.
[4716] Lit., “compressed to the similitude of.”
[4717] Lit., “to adapt their similitude to.”
[4718] Lit., “a cutting taking place.”
[4719] i.e., of their character as independent and not compounded. This is precisely such an expression as that which closes the fourth book, and its occurrence is therefore an additional ground for regarding the earlier passage as genuine.
[4720] Claustris repagulis pessulis.
[4721] Cf. p. 481, n. 5. Geese as well as dogs guarded the Capitol, having been once, as the well-known legend tells, its only guards against the Gauls.
[4722] The ms., first four edd., and Elm. read nomine—“under the name of,” corrected momine by Meursius and the rest.
[4723] So the ms., reading decem; but as Clement says πεντεκαίδεκα πηχῶν, we must either suppose that Arnobius mistook the Greek, or transcribed it carelessly, or, with the margin of Ursinus, read quindecim—“fifteen.”
[4724] Stewechius and Heraldus regard these words as spurious, and as having originated in a gloss on the margin, scz. junior—“to wit, the younger.” Heraldus, however, changed his opinion, because Clement too, says, “Dionysius the younger.” The words mean more than this, however, referring probably to the fact that Cicero (de Nat. Deor., iii. 33, 34, 35) tells these and other stories of the elder Dionysius. To this Arnobius calls attention as an error, by adding to Clement’s phrase “but.”
[4725] Only rustics, old-fashioned people, and philosophers wore the beard untrimmed; the last class wearing it as a kind of distinctive mark, just as Juvenal (iii. 15) speaks of a thick woolen cloak as marking a philosopher. [Compare vol. i. p. 160; also ii. p. 321, n. 9.]
[4726] Impuberi.
[4727] Lit., “one.”
[4728] Lit., “punishment of violated religion.”
[4729] Clemens says merely “the Cyprian Pygmalion.”
[4730] Lit., “of ancient sanctity and religion.”
[4731] Lit., “imagination of empty lust.”
[4732] Cf. ch. 13.
[4733] So Gelenius, reading rebus for the ms. and first ed. re a (ms. ab) se.
[4734] Lit., “in the limits of.”
[4735] Lit., “agonizing restraint.”
[4736] Lit., “to.”
[4737] Cf. p. 315, n. 2, supra.
[4738] So Clemens narrates; but Thucydides (iv. 133) says that “straightway Chrysis flees by night for refuge to Phlious, fearing the Argives;” while Pausanius (ii. 59) says that she fled to Tegea, taking refuge there at the altar of Minerva Alea.
[4739] From Varro’s being mentioned, Oehler thinks that Arnobius must refer to various marauding expeditions against the temples of Apollo on the coasts and islands of the Ægean, made at the time of the piratical war. Clemens, however, speaks distinctly of the destruction of the temple at Delphi, and it is therefore probable that this is referred to, if not solely, at least along with those which Varro mentions. Clement, vol. ii. p. 187.
[4740] Lit., “his visitors,” hospitis.
[4741] Varro Menippeus, an emendation of Carrio, adopted in LB. and Orelli for the ms. se thenipeus.
[4742] Lit., “suspicion being averted.”
[4743] It has been generally supposed that reference is thus made to some kind of thieves, which is probable enough, as Arnobius (end of next chapter) classes all these plunderers as “tyrants, kings, robbers, and nocturnal thieves;” but it is impossible to say precisely what is meant. Heraldus would read Saraceni—“Saracens.”
[4744] Lit., “with obscurity of means.” The phrase may refer either to the defence or to the assault of temples by means of magic arts.
[4745] Lit., “interior motion.”
[4746] Lit., “lop away,” deputarent, the reading of the ms., Hild., and Oehler; the rest reading deponerent—“lay aside.” [The same plausible defences are used to this day by professed Christians. See Jesuits at Rome, by Hobart Seymour, p. 38, ed. New York, 1849.]
[4747] Lit., “pass to human offices.”
[4748] Lit., “crimes and wickednesses.”
[4749] Lit., “go,” vadere.
[4750] Lit., “with their golden and to-be-feared splendours themselves.”
[4751] Lit., “and without any favour,” gratificatione.
[4752] Lit., “what great thing have these images in them.”
[4753] So the ms., first four edd., Elm., Hild., and Oehler, reading mores et maleficia, corrected in the others a maleficio—“morals withheld from wickedness.”
[4754] Cf. ch. 12, p. 511.
[4755] The reference is probably to some statue or picture of Juno represented as girt with the girdle of Venus. (Il., xiv. 214).
[4756] Lit., “inferior.”
[4757] Formidinum.
[4758] Terrores.
[4759] Or, perhaps, “relate that images so frigid and so awkward.”
[4760] The ms., and both Roman edd. read monstruosissima-s torvi-tate-s annis; corrected by Gelenius and later edd. monstruosissimâ torvitate animos, and by Salmasius, Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, as above, m. t. sannis.
[4761] The ms., first four edd., Elm., and Oberthür read manus, which, with animos read in most (cf. preceding note), would run, “that they were even kept back, as to (i.e., in) minds and hands, from wicked actions by the preternatural savageness of masks.” The other edd. read with Salmasius, as above, maniis.
[4762] Lit., “cut away.”
[4763] Lit., “opinion of.”
[4764] Lit., “in that part of years.”
[4765] Lit., “attribute least.”
[4766] Lit., “divine spurning.”
[4767] [When good old Dutch Boyens came to the pontificate as Hadrian VI., he was accounted a “barbarian” because he so little appreciated the art-treasures in the Vatican, on which Leo X. had lavished so much money and so much devotion. His pious spirit seemed oppressed to see so many heathen images in the Vatican: sunt idola ethnicorum was all he could say of them,—a most creditable anecdote of such a man in such times. See p. 504, n. 6, supra.]
[4768] [In the Edin. edition this is the opening sentence, but the editor remarks]: “By some accident the introduction to the seventh book has been tacked on as a last chapter to the sixth, where it is just as out of place as here it is in keeping.” [I have restored it to its place accordingly.]
[4769] Lit., “those, moreover.”
[4770] Lit., “nor is any blame contracted.”
[4771] On this Heraldus [most ignorantly] remarks, that it shows conclusively how slight was the acquaintance with Christianity possessed by Arnobius, when he could not say who were the true gods. [The Edin. editor clears up the cases as follows:] This, however, is to forget that Arnobius is not declaring his own opinions here, but meeting his adversaries on their own ground. He knows who the true God is—the source and fountain of all being, and framer of the universe (ii. 2), and if there are any lesser powers called gods, what their relation to Him must be (iii. 2, 3); but he does not know any such gods himself, and is continually reminding the heathen that they know these gods just as little. (Cf. the very next sentence.)
[4772] Lit., “as many as possible.”
[4773] Lit., “in the series of.”
[4774] Lit., “are.”
[4775] i.e., M. Terentius Varro, mentioned in the last chapter.
[4776] Lit., “in that in which he is a god.”
[4777] Lit., “uniformity of quality being preserved.”
[4778] The ms. and edd. read ut in operibus feratur cassis—“so as to be borne among,” emended by Hild. and Oehler teratur—“worn away among.”
[4779] Lit., “in vain errors of inanity.”
[4780] The ms. and edd. have here forte—“perchance.’”
[4781] Lit., “gift of food.”
[4782] [It must have taken much time to overcome this distaste for the use of incense in Christian minds. Let us wait for the testimony of Lactantius.]
[4783] Or perhaps, simply, “the sacrifice is a living one,” animalis est hostia. Macrobius, however (Sat., iii. 5), quotes Trebatius as saying that there were two kinds of sacrifices, in one of which the entrails were examined that they might disclose the divine will, while in the other the life only was consecrated to the deity. This is more precisely stated by Servius (Æn., iii. 231), who says that the hostia animalis was only slain, that in other cases the blood was poured on the altars, that in others part of the victim, and in others the whole animal, was burned. It is probable, therefore that Arnobius uses the words here in their technical meaning, as the next clause shows that none of the flesh was offered, while the blood was allowed to fall to the ground. [I am convinced that classical antiquities must be more largely studied in the Fathers of the first five centuries.]
[4784] i.e., the juices which formerly flowed through the living body.
[4785] The heathen opponent is supposed to give up his first reason, that the sacrifices provided food for the gods, and to advance this new suggestion, that they were intended for their gratification merely.
[4786] Lit., “for the sake of.”
[4787] Lit., “with the fleeting tickling of.”
[4788] Lit., “with the levities of gladnesses.”
[4789] i.e., pleasure.
[4790] Naturalis initii consortia.
[4791] So the ms. and first ed., according to Oehler, reading cred-e-t, the others -i-—“does.”
[4792] Lit., “these.”
[4793] Arnobius says that the sacrifices give no pleasure to any being, or at least, if that is not strictly true, that they give none to the gods. [See Elucidation VI., infra.]
[4794] So the ms., LB., Oberthür, Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, reading consec-, for which the rest read consen-taneum est credere—“it is fitting to believe.”
[4795] Lit., “motion of anything.”
[4796] Cf. i. 18.
[4797] Lit., “set in indignations.”
[4798] Lit., “if this satisfaction of sacrifices is offered to.”
[4799] So the ms. and most edd., reading laeta, for which Ursinus suggested lauta—“splendid,” and Heraldus elata—“exalted.”
[4800] It is perhaps possible so to translate the ms. neque si sunt ulli apertissima potuit cognitione dignosci, retained by Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, in which case si sunt ulli must be taken as the subject of the clause. The other edd., from regard to the construction, read visi—“nor, if they have been seen, has it been possible.”
[4801] Lit., “kept with inviolable observance.”
[4802] Lit., “work.”
[4803] Lit., “remedy.”
[4804] So Panes seems to be generally understood, i.e., images of Pan used as playthings by boys, and very much the same thing as the puppets—pupuli—already mentioned.
[4805] So Panes seems to be generally understood, i.e., images of Pan used as playthings by boys, and very much the same thing as the puppets—pupuli—already mentioned.
[4806] Lit., “to have liberal pardons and free concessions.”
[4807] Lit., “in these.”
[4808] Lit., “following.”
[4809] Lit., “to varieties of manifold.”
[4810] Lit., “leap into.”
[4811] [This very striking passage should lead us to compare the widely different purpose of Judaic sacrifices. See Elucidation VI., infra.]
[4812] Lit., “from the hands to us,” nobis, the reading of the ms., both Roman edd., Gelenius, LB., and Oehler; for which the rest give vobis—“out of your hands.”
[4813] i.e., the learned men referred to above.
[4814] Lit., “whence.”
[4815] Lit., “so innumerable.”
[4816] Lit., “ruins.”
[4817] So Canterus suggests conf-iuntfor the ms. confic-—“bring about,”
[4818] Lit., “it is a thing of long and much speech.”
[4819] Lit., “the fortunes of perils.”
[4820] The ms. reading is hoc est unus, corrected honestus—“honourable” (which makes the comparison pointless, because there is no reason why a rich man, if good, should not be succored as well as a poor), in all edd., except Oehler, who reads seclestus, which departs too far from the ms. Perhaps we should read, as above, inhonestus.
[4821] So the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler, and the other edd., adding et auxilium—“and help.”
[4822] Lit., “whom not his mind, but the necessity of his property, made restricted.”
[4823] Lit., “inclines thither whence.”
[4824] i.e., the decision.
[4825] Lit., “both nations.”
[4826] Lit., “the favours of good work,” boni operis favor-es et, the reading of Hild. and Oehler (other edd. -em—“the favour of its service”) for ms. fabore sed.
[4827] Lit., “of most powerful name.”
[4828] Lit., “imitating a slave’s servility”—ancillatum, the emendation of Hemsterhuis, adopted by Orelli, Hild., and Oehler for the unintelligible ms. ancillarum.
[4829] Lit., “things.”
[4830] Lit., “in higher places.”
[4831] Lit., “what eminences is it found to be added,” addier. So Hild. and Oehler for the reading of ms., first four edd., and Oberthür addere—“to add,” emended in rest from margin of Ursinus accedere, much as above.
[4832] So the ms., reading conjectionibus, which is retained in no edd., although its primary meaning is exactly what the sense here requires.
[4833] The last clause was omitted in first four edd. and Elmh., and was inserted from the ms. by Meursius.
[4834] Lit., “whom.”
[4835] Lit., “say in the proclamation of.”
[4836] Lit., “more powerful commands,” i.e., by Christ’s injunctions. It seems hardly possible that any one should suppose that there is here any reference to Christ’s command to His disciples not to exercise lordship over each other, yet Orelli thinks that there is perhaps a reference to Mark x. 42, 43. If a particular reference were intended, we might with more reason find it in 1 Pet. ii. 17, “Honour all men.”
[4837] Lit., “established in.”
[4838] Lit., “weighed by their own force,” vi.
[4839] i.e., altariaque hæc pulchra.
[4840] Lit., “you show yourselves,” præstatis.
[4841] Lit., “most.” So Tibullus (Eleg., ii. 1, 13): “Pure things please the gods. Come (i.e., to the sacrifice) with clean garments, and with clean hands take water from the fountain,”—perfect cleanliness being scrupulously insisted on.
[4842] This Heraldus explains as “of worse omen,” and Oehler as “more unclean.”
[4843] Ingenuæ, i.e., such as any respectable person has.
[4844] To this the commentators have replied, that mules, asses, and dogs were sacrificed to certain deities. We must either admit that Arnobius has here fallen into error, or suppose that he refers merely to the animals which were usually slain, or find a reason for his neglecting it in the circumstances of each sacrifice.
[4845] [The wit of Arnobius must be acknowledged in this scorching satire. Compare the divine ordinances, Exod. xxix. 13, 14.]
[4846] Lit., “by slaughters of,” cædibus.
[4847] Lit., “under,” i.e., under the sacrifices on your altars.
[4848] So all edd., reading cerne-, except both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler, who retain the ms. cerni-tis—“you see.”
[4849] In translating thus, it has been attempted to adhere as closely as possible to the ms. reading (according to Crusius) qua si—corrected, as above, quæ in LB.; but it is by no means certain that further changes should not be made.
[4850] Lit., “prepare luncheons and dinners thence,” i.e., from the putrefying carcasses.
[4851] The ms. and first four edd. read ingentibus scrofis—“with huge breeding swine,” changed by rest, as above, incient-, from the margin of Ursinus.
[4852] Or “gloomy,” tetris, the reading of ms. and all edd. since LB., for which earlier edd. give atris—“black.”
[4853] Lit., “the tenderness of.”
[4854] [The law of clean and unclean reflects the instincts of man, as here appealed to; but compare and patiently study these texts: Lev. 10.10; Ezek. 22.26; Lev. 11; Acts 10.15; Rom. 14.14; Luke 11.41.]
[4855] Lit., “more.”
[4856] So the ms., Elm., LB., Orelli, Hild., and Oehler, reading vicerit, for which the others read jusserit—“has bidden.”
[4857] Lit., “prevailing with favourableness of omens,” ominum, for which the ms. and first four edd. read h-—“of men.”
[4858] That Arnobius had good reason to appeal to this scepticism as a fact, is evident from the lines of Juvenal (ii. 149–152): “Not even children believe that there are any Manes and subterranean realms.”
[4859] Lit., “and.” Immediately after, the ms. is corrected in later writing color-es (for -is)—“and the darkest colours.”
[4860] Similiter. This is certainly a suspicious reading, but Arnobius indulges occasionally in similar vague expressions.
[4861] Lit., “is white.”
[4862] Or, very probably, “the membranes with (i.e., enclosing) the brains,” omenta cum cerebris.
[4863] Goats were sacrificed to Bacchus, but not, so far as is known, to Mercury. Cf. c. 16, p. 524, n. 3.
[4864] Lit. “by the paction of some transaction is it,” etc.
[4865] So all except both Roman edd., which retain the ms. reading desi-d-eret (corrected -n- by Gelenius)—“wish.”
[4866] So the ms., Hild., and Oehler, reading d-atio, approved of by Stewechius also. The others read r-—“reasoning on behalf.”
[4867] Inci-ens, so corrected in the margin of Ursinus for ms. ing-—“huge.” Cf. ch. 18, p. 524, n. 10.
[4868] The ms. reads excitata conatus (according to Hild.); corrected, as above, by the insertion of ad.
[4869] Quam, i.e., the earth.
[4870] Singularly enough, for fecunditate Oberthür reads virginitate—“inextinguishable virginity,” which is by no means universally desired in the earth. Orelli, as usual, copies without remark the mistake of his predecessor.
[4871] Lit., “more prompt to lust of hurting.”
[4872] Lit., “nature of hurting.”
[4873] The ms. reads ad ea quæ facti sunt, understood seemingly as above by the edd., by supplying ad before quæ. Oehler, however, proposes quia—“because they were made for them.” The reading must be regarded as doubtful.
[4874] i.e., if sacrifices avail to counteract the malevolent dispositions of the gods.
[4875] Lit., “these.” This clause, omitted by Oberthür, is also omitted without remark by Orelli.
[4876] So the edd., reading farciminumfor the ms. facinorum, corrected by Hild. fartorum—“of stuffings.” Throughout this passage hardly one of the names of these sacrificial dainties is generally agreed upon; as many are met with nowhere else, the ms. has been adhered to strictly.
[4877] i.e., probably the hirciæ: of the others, silicernia seem to have been put on the table at funerals.
[4878] i.e., tæda.
[4879] So Salmasius and Meursius corrected the ms. catillaminu-a-m by omitting a.
[4880] i.e., tail-piece.
[4881] Salsamina, by which is perhaps meant the grits and salt cast on the victim; but if so, Arnobius is at variance with Servius (Virgil, Ecl., viii. 81), who expressly states that these were of spelt mixed only with salt; while there is no trace elsewhere of a different usage.
[4882] The first four edd. retain the unintelligible ms. diræ.
[4883] i.e., the entrails. The ms., first four edd., and Elm. read illa.
[4884] So the ms., LB., Oberthür, Orelli, Hild., and Oehler; but ærumnæ is found in no other passage with this meaning.
[4885] Lit., “first heads in gullets.”
[4886] By this, and the word which follows, we know from the etymology that “offerings” to the gods must be meant, but we know nothing more.
[4887] i.e., cut off for sacrifice.
[4888] Caro strebula.
[4889] Plasea.
[4890] The ms. reads unintelligibly nomen quæ, corrected by Gelenius omentum, as above.
[4891] Lit., “admonish the ease of the palate;” a correction of Salmasius, by omitting a from the ms. palati-a admoneant.
[4892] Næniæ.
[4893] Lit., “these kinds of ceremonies, too, were coupled and mixed,” etc.
[4894] On this Oehler remarks, that the books of Moses show that it was certainly used in the East in the most ancient times. But Arnobius has expressly restricted his statement to the use of incense “in these parts.”
[4895] Pium far.
[4896] [See p. 519, note 1, supra.]
[4897] Lit., “the returns by which the vital alternation is restored and withdrawn.”
[4898] So the ms., Hild., and Oehler, reading suffec-tionibus alienis, for which the rest read suffi-—“the fumigations of others.”
[4899] Lit., “feel and receive one contact.”
[4900] Lit., “as each has been made for the touching of a thing coming from without.”
[4901] So Gelenius and later edd., reading afficiturfor the unintelligible reading of ms. and Roman edd., efficit—“effects.”
[4902] So all edd., without remark, reading cog-it-atione, although “meditation” has nothing to do with the sense of smell, and has not been previously mentioned. We should probably read cog-n-atione—“relation,” i.e., to such objects.
[4903] So LB. and Oehler, reading ni-si. (ms. si), and other edd. inserting non, the negative being absolutely necessary to the sense, and supplied in the next clause.
[4904] Lit., “nor will it have its cause.”
[4905] Although this is clearly the meaning, Stewechius explained solidos by referring to the ancient belief that such offerings should be wholly consumed, and no fragment left.
[4906] Briæ, drinking-cups, but of their peculiar shape or purpose we know nothing.
[4907] Lit., “badly.”
[4908] Lit., “being strangled, may be.”
[4909] So LB., Orelli, and Oehler, reading with Salmasius m-u-scos (ms. -i-). Gelenius proposed cnissas, which would refer to the steam of the sacrifices.
[4910] Lit., “interior.”
[4911] So most edd., reading nimirum quia plus valet, for which the ms., followed by both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler, read primum. q. v., which Hild. would explain “because it prevails above all rather than;” but this is at least very doubtful.
[4912] Vino inferio.
[4913] Lit., “bound by religion.”
[4914] This is admirably illustrated in an inscription quoted by Heraldus: “Jupiter most excellent, supreme, when this day I give and dedicate to thee this altar, I give and dedicate it with these conditions and limits which I say openly to-day.”
[4915] Circumscriptione verborum.
[4916] Symphoniæ. Evidently musical instruments; but while Isidore speaks of them as a kind of drum, other writers call them trumpets and pipes.
[4917] At daybreak on opening, and at night on closing the temple, the priests of Isis sang hymns in praise of the goddess (cf. Jos. Scaliger, Castigationes ad Cat., etc., p. 132); and to these Arnobius refers sarcastically, as though they had been calls to awake, and lullabies to sing her asleep.
[4918] At daybreak on opening, and at night on closing the temple, the priests of Isis sang hymns in praise of the goddess (cf. Jos. Scaliger, Castigationes ad Cat., etc., p. 132); and to these Arnobius refers sarcastically, as though they had been calls to awake, and lullabies to sing her asleep.
[4919] i.e., March 27th, marked Lavatio in a calendar prepared during the reign of Constantius.
[4920] Lit., “and some rubbing of cinders added,” aliqua frictione cineris; an emendation of Ursinus for the possibly correct ms. antiqua f. c.—“the ancient rubbing,” i.e., that practiced in early times.
[4921] Lit., “anniversary.”
[4922] So the later edd., adopting the emendation of ad suas usionesfor the corrupt ms. ad (or ab) suasionibus.
[4923] i.e., feast at which the image of Ceres was placed on a couch, probably the Cerealia, celebrated in April. This passage flatly contradicts Prof. Ramsay’s assertion (Ant., p. 345) that lectisternium is not applied to a banquet offered to a goddess; while it corroborates his statement that such feasts were ordinary events, not extraordinary solemnities, as Mr. Yates says (Smith’s Ant., s.v.). See p. 519, n. 2.
[4924] Lit., “the impression of the cushions is lifted up and raised,” i.e., smoothed.
[4925] Thus the 25th of January is marked as the birthday of the Graces, the 1st of February as that of Hercules, the 1st of March as that of Mars, in the calendar already mentioned.
[4926] The former dedicated to Flora (cf. iii. 25), the latter to Cybele.
[4927] Singular.
[4928] So the margin of Ursinus, Elm., LB., Orelli, Hild., and Oehler; the ms. reading not being known.
[4929] Lit., “in dancing motions.”
[4930] So Meursius, Orelli, and Oehler, reading existimat-ve, all the others retaining the ms. -ur-—“Is Flora thought to be treated,” etc.
[4931] Lit., “adapts.”
[4932] Here also there is doubt as to what the reading of the ms. is. The 1st ed. reads sine culpa—“without blame,” which is hardly in keeping with the context, emended causa, as above, by Gelenius.
[4933] So Orelli explains certare hos spiritu as referring to a contest in which each strove to speak or sing with one breath longer than the rest.
[4934] Lit., “an animal of no value.”
[4935] Lit., “the modesty of their humility.”
[4936] Lit., “they contain their nature in a corporeal form.”
[4937] Lit., “of.”
[4938] Cf. p. 531, n. 8.
[4939] Lit., “by opposition of the parts of each.” Considerable difficulty has been felt as to the abrupt way in which the book ends as it is arranged in the ms. Orelli has therefore adopted the suggestion of an anonymous critic, and transposed cc. 35, 36, 37 to the end. This does not, however, meet the difficulty; for the same objection still holds good, that there is a want of connection and harmony in these concluding chapters, and that, even when thus arranged, they do not form a fitting conclusion to the whole work.
[4940] Lit., “of.”
[4941] Lit., “that effigies have been far removed from them.” This may be understood, either as meaning that the gods had not visible form at all, or, as above, that their likenesses made by men showed no resemblance.
[4942] in Orelli.
[4943] It is important to notice the evidence in this one sentence of haste and want of revision. In the first line we find a genitive (discordiarum—“dissensions”), but not the noun on which it depends; and in the apodosis a verb (disjunctas esse—“have been removed,” i.e., “are remote”) has no subject, although its gender imperatively requires that has res, or some such words, be supplied. One omission might have been easily ascribed to a slip on the part of the copyist; but two omissions such as these occurring so closely, must, it would seem, be assigned to the impetuous disregard of minutiæ with which Arnobius blocked out a conclusion which was never carefully revised. (Cf. Appendix, note 1, and p. 539, n. 8.) The importance of such indications is manifest in forming an opinion on the controversy as to this part of the work.
[4944] Lit., “are of…those meeting the functions of mortality,” obeunti-um, corrected by Gelenius (according to Orelli) for the ms. -bus, retained, though unintelligible, by Canterus, Oberth., and Hild.
[4945] [See p. 519, note 1, and p. 528, cap. 26, supra.]
[4946] Lit., “of.” [Cap. 29, p. 529, supra.]
[4947] Lit., “some time.”
[4948] Lit., “of.” [Cap. 29, p. 529, supra.]
[4949] Lit., “of.” [Cap. 29, p. 529, supra.]
[4950] Lit., “divine things.”
[4951] So the ms., both Roman edd., Hild., and Oehler, reading promptæ; corrected præsumptæ—“taken for granted,” in the rest.
[4952] i.e., offerings to parents, as the name implies, and other relatives who were dead.
[4953] 35 in Orelli.
[4954] Lit., “in the writings of which we read.”
[4955] Pl.
[4956] Lit., “by satisfaction of.”
[4957] 36 in Orelli. [See note 1, Appendix, p. 539, infra.]
[4958] Lit., “added evil heavier than evil.”
[4959] So later edd., reading vaderet from the margin of Ursinus, while the first three retain the ms. reading suaderet—“persuade.”
[4960] i.e., the slave writhing under the scourge.
[4961] Lit., “of so great power.”
[4962] i.e., Jupiter.
[4963] 37 in Orelli.
[4964] Lit., “which either a…made,” etc.
[4965] Lit., “very near to danger of carrying off liberty.”
[4966] Cf. ii. 73.
[4967] 38 in Orelli.
[4968] So the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler, reading volu-p-tates, i.e., the games and feasts spoken of previously; the other edd. read -n-—“wishes.”
[4969] Oehler explains frustra by otiose—“who was leisurely delighted,” but there is no reason why it should not have its usual meaning, as above. [See note 1, Appendix, p. 539.]
[4970] i.e., from heaven. Instead of e-vocari, however, Heraldus has proposed a-—“be diverted.”
[4971] Lit., “unfolding.”
[4972] Lit., “was in the cause of the vicious dancer.”
[4973] 39 in Orelli.
[4974] So all edd., rejecting s from ms. contemptu-s.
[4975] Lit., “draughts of air.”
[4976] So, by omitting two letters, all edd. except 1st and Ursinus, which retain ms. adult-er-ae—“adulterous.”
[4977] Lit., “light.”
[4978] in Orelli. The ms., 1st edd., and Ursinus want si.
[4979] Lit., “and restored.” [Conf. Pont. Max. here named, with vol. iv. p. 74.]
[4980] The ms. and Ursinus read reddere-t—“if he was to restore;” corrected, as above, by omission of t.
[4981] i.e., if he is a god. Cf. iii. 20; [specially, note 3, p. 469].
[4982] Lit., “the necks of.”
[4983] Lit., “the terror of coercion should begin from the father with whom.”
[4984] Lit., “even,” et.
[4985] Lit., “to his grief.”
[4986] The ms. reads rett-ulit, emended ret-—“gave back,” i.e., got rid of, by 1st ed. and Ursinus; and rep-, as above, by Gelenius and others.
[4987] 1 in Orelli. [See Appendix, note 1, p. 539.]
[4988] In the ms. and both Roman edd. the section translated on p. 539 is inserted here. Ursinus, however (pp. 210–211), followed by Heraldus (312–313), enclosed it in brackets, and marked it with asterisks. In all other edd. it is either given as an appendix, or wholly rejected.
[4989] Lit., “sublimity.”
[4990] 2 in Orelli.
[4991] So the edd., reading et for ms. ut (according to Crusius).
[4992] Lit., “restoration be supplied to his strength.”
[4993] So Gelenius, merely adding t to the ms. posse. The passage is, however, very doubtful.
[4994] Lit., “how weakly and feeble it is said.”
[4995] These words, non debuit oculorum negare conspectui, should, Orelli thinks, be omitted; and certainly their connection with the rest of the sentence is not very apparent.
[4996] Lit., “he was, and such as he had learned that he was, contained in the power of his divinity.”
[4997] Lit., “to ambiguous contradictions.”
[4998] 3 in Orelli.
[4999] Lit., “if your services of certain persons are certain,” i.e., if these facts on which your worship is built are well ascertained.
[5000] What species of snake this was, is not known; the Latin is therefore retained, as the sentence insists on the distinction.
[5001] Anguem.
[5002] Serpentem.
[5003] Lit., “bearing himself on feet, nor unfolding below his own goings.”
[5004] Lit., “to a.”
[5005] So Hild. and Oehler, reading labefac-t-amusfor the ms. -i-.
[5006] This sentence alone is sufficient to prove that these chapters were never carefully revised by their author, as otherwise so glaring repetitions would certainly have been avoided.
[5007] Here the ms. and both Roman edd. insert the last clause, “what…forests.”
[5008] in Orelli.
[5009] in Orelli.
[5010] Lit., “wanting.”
[5011] The ms., 1st ed., Hild., and Oehler read gener-ent, corrected in the rest, as above, -arent.
[5012] Lit., “all wicked and distinguished by no diversity.”
[5013] Lit., “the human race has been mixed in,” etc.
[5014] So all edd., reading vi morbi, except Hild., who retains the ms. vi urbi, in which case the italics should denote “of the disease,” instead of “to the city.” The construction, however, seems to make it impossible to adhere to the ms..
[5015] Lit., “to have erred much from.”
[5016] In Orelli.
[5017] Lit., “from the possession of Italy.”
[5018] So all edd. to Orelli, adding -em to the ms. quid. [See, concerning Pessinus, p. 492, supra.]
[5019] Lit., “a face too little expressed with imitation.”
[5020] in Orelli.
[5021] Lit., “did a stone drive,” etc.
[5022] Lit. “moved by.”
[5023] So the ms. and edd.; but, on account of the unnecessary repetition, Ursinus proposed to delete atri. Unger (Anal. Propert., p. 87) has suggested very happily arti—“of confined, i.e., small body.’”
[5024] Vim, suggested by Orelli, and adopted by Hild. and Oehler.
[5025] Lit., “subjected to.”
[5026] So Hild. and Oehler, reading moli for the unintelligible ms. more.
[5027] Lit., “so great assaults of war.”
[5028] So Oehler, adding -o to the ms. est. The word immediately preceding is in the ms. pavorem—“panic,” which is of course utterly out of place, and is therefore corrected, as above, f- in all edd., except 1st, Ursinus, and Hild.
[5029] So—ab Italia—Oehler has admirably emended the ms. habitabilia.
[5030] Lit., “if he is.”
[5031] in Orelli.
[5032] All edd., except Hild. and Oehler, begin a new sentence here, and change the construction, seemingly following the mistake of the 1st ed.
[5033] “To do…to show;” so the edd., dropping -nt from the ms. facere-nt…præbere-nt.
[5034] “To do…to show;” so the edd., dropping -nt from the ms. facere-nt…præbere-nt.
[5035] Lit, “showed.” Ursinus and Heraldus supposed that some paragraphs are now wanting which were originally found here. It should be noticed that in the ms. the usual subscription is found denoting the end of a book. “The seventh book of Arnovius (sic) ends, the eighth (i.e., Octavius of Minucius Felix) begins,” so that the present arrangement is not due to the binder, nor clearly to the copyist who wrote these words. Nothing can be more certain than that we do not have these chapters as Arnobius intended to leave them; but there is not the slightest reason to suppose that he actually left them otherwise than they have come down to us. Remembering this, we may well suppose that we have only the first draught of them. If so, the difficulties vanish, for nothing would be more natural than that, when Arnobius was drawing near the close of his work, the ideas of the conclusion in which the discussion was to be fairly summed up should force themselves upon his attention, and that he should therefore turn aside at once to give them expression roughly, without seeking completeness and elaboration, and should then hastily resume his argument, of course with the intention of afterwards revising and re-arranging the whole. We may infer that the re-arrangement was never effected, as there are sufficient proofs that the revision was never accomplished, whatever may have been the reason.
[5036] This section, which is found in the ms. after the first sentence of ch. 44, was retained in the text of both Roman editions, marked off, however, by asterisks in that of Ursinus, but was rejected by Gelenius and later editors as the useless addition of some copyist. Oehler alone has seen that it is not “a collection of words gathered carelessly and thoughtlessly” (Hildebrand), and maintained that we have in it the corrections of Arnobius himself. If the three paragraphs are read carefully, it will be observed that the first is a transposition and reconstruction of the first two sentences of ch. 39; the second a revision of the interrogations in ch. 41, but with the sentence which there precedes placed after them here, whilst the third is made up of the same sentences in a revised and enlarged form. Now this must be regarded as conclusive evidence against the hypothesis that these sentences were originally scribbled carelessly on the margin, and afterwards accidentally incorporated in the text. Cf. p. 532, n. 10.
[5037] Lit., “motions.”
[5038] Lit. “to the heights (apices) of gravity and weight,” i.e., of that constancy of mind which is not moved by trifles.
[5039] Lit., “of hurting and raging.”
[5040] i.e., evil dispositions.
[5041] Lit., “motions.”
[5042] So the ms., according to Crusius, inserting transiri, which is omitted by Hild., either because it is not in the ms., or because he neglected to notice that Orelli’s text was deficient. If omitted, we should translate, “that some pass, leaning forward, and rush with their heads towards the ground.”
[5043] Lit., “of something.”
[5044] Lit., “far and far.”
[5045] [For puer matrimus (one whose mother is yet living), see p. 486, note 11, supra. And for the argument, here recast, turn to cap. 41, p. 534.]
II. (Covered with garments, note 7, p. 469.)
[5046] Words of Jesus, vol. viii. p. 63, trans., ed. Edinburgh, 1858.
[5047] New-Testament Commentary, Kendrick’s trans., vol. iii. p. 120, ed. 1858.
III. (The eyes of Jupiter, p. 483.)
[5048] Eunuch., iii. 5.
[5049] August., De Civitate, book ii. cap. 7.
IV. (For those freed from the bondage of the flesh, p. 488 and note 11.)
[5051] Quoted in Tracts for the Times (p. 30), vol. iii., ed. New York, 1840.
V. (The pine…sanctuary of the Great Mother, p. 504.)
[5052] He was royal librarian at Versailles under Charles X. See his Travels in Italy (Clifton’s trans.), p. 501, ed. Paris, 1842.
[5053] It appeared in Paris 1764. A more literal translation (by the Abbé de Feller) was published, Liege, 1779.
[5054] Published in 1794.
[5055] Works, vol. vi. p. 140, ed. Paris, 1850.
[5056] De Maistre quotes, “Potest unus ita pro alio pœnam compensare vel debitum solvere ut ille satisfacere merito dici possit.” Bellarmin, Opp., tom. iii. col. 1493, ed. Ingolstadt, 1601.
[5057] See Jenyns, p. 67 (ed. eighth), Philadelphia, 1780.
[5058] Milton, Paradise Lost, ix. 785.
[5060] Plato, Repub., Opp., tom. vi. pp. 225–226, ed. Bipont.
[5061] De Maistre cites the example of Decius from Livy, vol. i. p. 477, Piaculum deorum iræ, etc.; and I commend the inquiring reader to his very curious and entertaining Éclaircissement sur les Sacrifices, pp. 321–425, ubi supra, appended to the same work. Let me also add a reference to the other Decius, vol. i. p. 607. See lib. viii. cap. 9, and lib. x. cap. 28. My edition is the valuable (Parisian) Frousheim & Crevier, a.d. 1735.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0321 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page