| << | Contents | >> |
Arnobius
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3456
Introductory Notice to Arnobius.
[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.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0321 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page