| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 269
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[259] Or “taught,” or “adduced,” or “delivered.”
[260] This sentence is obviously out of place, and should properly come in probably before the words, “These contrivances, however, I hesitated to narrate,” etc., a few lines above in this chapter. The Abbe Cruice conjectures that it may have been written on the margin by some reader acquainted with chemistry, and that afterwards it found its way into the text.
[261] Some read φανερὸν for παρὸν.
[262] What cyanus was is not exactly known. It was employed in the Homeric age for the adornment of implements of war. Whatever the nature of the substance be, it was of a dark-blue colour. Some suppose it to have been blue steel, other, blue copper. Theophrastus’ account of it makes it a stone like a dark sapphire.
[263] Or, “with the head downwards.”
[264] There is some hiatus here.
[265] Or, “memory.”
Chapter XXXVII.—Illusive Appearance of the Moon.
[266] Or, “suspending a drum, etc., covered with,” etc.; or “frequently placing on an elevated position a drum.” For πόῤῥωθεν, which is not here easy of explanation, some read τορνωθὲν, others πορπωθὲν, i.e., fastened with buckles; others, πόῤῥω τεθὲν.
[267] Schneidewin, but not the Abbe Cruice, thinks there is a hiatus here.
[268] There are different readings: (1) ἐτυμολογικῆς; (2) ἔτι ὁλοκλήρου; (3) ὑαλουργικῆς, i.e., composed of glass. (See next note.)
[269] The Abbe Cruice properly remarks that this has no meaning here. He would read ὑαλώδεσι τόποις, or by means of glass images.
Chapter XXXIX.—Imitation of an Earthquake.
[270] There is a hiatus here.
Chapter XLI.—Making a Skull Speak.
[271] The Abbe Cruice suggests ἐπίπλεον βώλου, which he thinks corresponds with the material of which the pyramid mentioned in a previous chapter was composed. He, however, makes no attempt at translating ἐπίπλεον. Does he mean that the skull was filled with clay? His emendation is forced.
[272] Or, “rubbings of” (Cruice).
[273] Or, “they say.”
[274] Some similar juggleries are mentioned by Lucian in his Alexander, or Pseudomantis, xxxii. 26,—a work of a kindred nature to Celsus’ Treatise on Magic (the latter alluded to by Origen, Contr. Cels., lib. i. p. 53, ed. Spenc.), and dedicated by Lucian to Celsius.
Chapter XLII.—The Fraud of the Foregoing Practices; Their Connection with Heresy.
[275] The word magic, or magician, at its origin, had no sinister meaning, as being the science professed by the Magi, who were an exclusive religious sect of great antiquity in Persia, universally venerated for their mathematical skill and erudition generally. It was persons who practised wicked arts, and assumed the name of Magi, that brought the term into disrepute. The origin of magic has been ascribed to Zoroaster, and once devised, it made rapid progress; because, as Pliny reminds us, it includes three systems of the greatest influence among men—(1) the art of medicine, (2) religion, (3) divination. This corresponds with Agrippa’s division of magic into (1) natural, (2) celestial, (3) ceremonial, or superstitious. This last has been also called “goetic” (full of imposture), and relates to the invocation of devils. This originated probably in Egypt, and quickly spread all over the world.
[276] Or, “topic discussed;” or, “not leave any place (subterfuge) for these,” etc.
[277] Or “you will suppose.”
[278] See Aristotle’s Metaphysics, book i.; Cicero, De Naturâ Deorum, book i. (both translated in Bohn’s Classical Library); and Plutarch, De Placitis Philosophorum. lib. i.
[279] The mention of the Persians, Babylonians, and Egyptians shows the subject-matter of the lost books to have been concerning the speculative systems of these nations.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page