| << | Contents | >> |
Gregory Thaumaturgus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 216
Introductory Note to Gregory Thaumaturgus.
[206] νόθον.
[207] The text gives ἐκεῖ, for which Hœschelius and Bengel read είκῆ.
[208] τελειοῦθαι δὲ τῇ βλάσψῃ.
[209] ὑπ᾽ ἀλλήλων.
[210] τριβόλους.
[211] The words ἀλλὰ κεκρυμμένα are omitted by Hœschelius and Bengel.
[212] ἐι τι ῾Ελληνικὸν ἢ βάρβαρόν ἐστι τῇ φωνῇ.
Argument VIII.—Then in Due Succession He Instructs Them in Physics, Geometry, and Astronomy.
[213] The text is, καὶ μὴ τοῦθ᾽ ὅπερ εἶδος διαλεκτικὴ κατορθοῦν μόνη εἴληχε.
[214] πᾶν τὸ φιλόσοφον. Hœschelius and Bengel read πῶς, etc.
[215] The text gives ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτῆς, for which Bengel reads ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτῆς.
[216] ἐκχέοντα ἡμᾶς.
[217] ἐπιστήμη, science.
[218] τὰ πρῶτα Θεῷ ἶσον εἶναι τὸν σοφὸν ἄνθρωπον.
Argument X.—Hence the Mere Word-Sages are Confuted, Who Say and Yet Act Not.
[219] φιλοτιμίᾳ, for which φιλονεικίᾳ is read.
[220] The text is, ἢ κακῶν ἂν ἔλεγον, etc. The Greek ἤ and the Latin aut are found sometimes thus with a force bordering on that of alioqui.
[221] ἀφραίνομεν. The Paris editor would read ἀφραίνω μέν.
[222] ἀλλὰ γὰρ πᾶσι μέχρι ῥημάτων τὸ φιλοσοφεῖν στήσασιν.
[223] The text is, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἀλήθειαν ἡμῖν, οὐ κομψείαν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ λόγος ἄνωθεν. The Latin rendering is, sed quia veritatem nobis, non pompam et ornatum promisit oratio in exordio.
[224] The text is, καίτοι γε εἰπεῖν ἐθέλων εἶναι τε ἀληθές. Bengal takes the τε as pleonastic, or as an error for the article, τ᾽ ἀληθές. The εἶναι in ἐθέλων εἶναι he takes to be the use of the infinitive which occurs in such phrases as τὴν πρώτην εἶναι, initio, ἑκὼν εἶναι, libenter, τὸ δὲ νῦν εἶναι, nunc vero, etc.; and, giving ἐθέλων the sense of μέλλων, makes the whole = And yet I shall speak truth.
[225] The text is, καὶ ἡμᾶς ἑτέρους. The phrase may be, as it is given above, a delicate expression of difference, or it may perhaps be an elegant redundancy, like the French à nous autres. Others read, καὶ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἑτέρους.
[226] The reading in the text gives, οὐ λόγων ἐγκρατεῖς καὶ ἐπιστήμονας τῶν περὶ ὁρμῶν, τῶν δὲ ὁρμῶν αὐτῶν· ἐπὶ τὰ ἔργα καὶ λόγους ἄγχων, etc. Others would arrange the whole passage differently, thus: περὶ ὁρμῶν, τῶν δὲ ὁρμῶν αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὰ ἔργα καὶ τοὺς λόγους ἄγχων. Καὶ, etc. Hence Sirmondus renders it, a motibus ipsis ad opera etiam sermones, reading also ἄγων apparently. Rhodomanus gives, impulsionum ipsarum ad opera et verba ignavi et negligentes, reading evidently ἀργῶν. Bengel solves the difficulty by taking the first clause as equivalent to οὐ λόγων ἐγκρατεῖς καὶ ἐπιοτήμονας…αὐτῶν τῶν ὁρμῶν ἐγκρατεῖς καὶ ἐπιστήμονας. We have adopted this as the most evident sense. Thus ἄγχων is retained unchanged, and is taken as a parallel to the following participle ἐπιφέρων, and as bearing, therefore, a meaning something like that of ἀναγκάζων. See Bengel’s note in Migne.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0090 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page