2 We
i; rr
ot :

i) ;
4

- -
3 ei

»

+ ps
“a es
Sao halae
ES 4

i
oN Esha hed
*

edd

3 1761 WU |

2)
i
2
2)
c
oO
=
uw
Oo
>
8
wn
c
Ww
2
2
>

Toranto

{Be ARY

(ibe, ALIN ID) Sh 1 Ibs tidh

CONTRIBUTIONS TO
BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC LITERATURE

EDITED BY

J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON B.D.

HON. PH.D. GOTTINGEN HON. D.D. HALLE
NORRISIAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY

VOE. OI

To BRUGES OF TYCONIUS
THE FOURTH BOOK OF. EZRA
EUTHALIANA

CAMBRIDGE
pale eo UNIVER SIEY: PRESS
1895

*

es
oe
:

eo late
iP

Pie aN Se iis

CONTRIBUTIONS TO
BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC LITERATURE

EDITED BY

J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON BD.

HON. PH.D. GOTTINGEN HON. D.D. HALLE
NORRISIAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY

VOL. ui.

oO. tat aves OF FYCONIUS

CAMBRIDGE
te OO NIVRSUPY PRESS
1894

London: C. J. CLAY anp SONS,
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE.

Glasgow: 263, ARGYLE STREET.

Cambritge: DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO.
Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
few Work: MACMILLAN AND CO.

THE BOOK OF RULES

OF

eye? ON aS

NEWLY EDITED FROM THE MSS WITH AN INTRODUCTION
aD ah BR AMINATION [INTO THE TEXT OF THE
BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS

BY

Pt BUILT MA.

CAMBRIDGE
mt TA UNIVERSEDY: PRESS
1894

[All Rights reserved]

Cambringe :
PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

TO
HK. E. BOWEN Esq. M.A.

HEAD MASTER OF THE MODERN SIDE
IN HARROW SCHOOL
FROM WHOM I LEARNT TFHE ELEMENTS
OF THE CRITICISM OF ANCIENT DOCUMENTS
I MOST GRATEFULLY

DEDICATE
MY FIRST BOOK

a

ee

es

on

oa

PREFACE.

iD trying to find a pre-Augustinian African writer, who from

his date and locality might be presumed to quote from
a Version similar to that used by S. Cyprian, I came across
Tyconius, the author of the Liber Regularum. A very slight
study was cnough to shew that it was impossible to ground any
satisfactory work upon the printed texts of that book. All the
editions hitherto printed are derived from a single late and
faulty Ms, so that the language appears almost wholly in-
comprehensible. Indeed it is not too much to say that the
Liber Regularum is here printed for the first time in something
of the form in which Tyconius wrote it.

It is, I believe, mainly this corrupt state of the text which
has prevented the recognition of the very important place which
Tyconius holds in the history of Biblical Interpretation in western
Kurope. I have approached the subject almost entirely from
the point of view of the textual criticism of the Old Latin
Versions, and have tried to vindicate for the quotations of Tyconius
their true position as the only considerable body of evidence
for the Latin text of the Prophets current in Africa between
the epochs of 8. Cyprian and 8. Augustine. But there is another
side to the Liber Regularum. It is the first book in western
Christendom which attempts to treat of the meaning and Inspira-
tion of the Bible as a whole, and which tries to find a method of
interpretation more thorough and scientific than the almost
hap-hazard selection of proof texts. The work of Tyconius seems
to be entirely original; there are hardly any traces of the
influence of previous writers in it. But it profoundly influenced
suceceding Latin writers from the time of 8. Augustine onward.

B. b

Vill PREFACE.

I hope that the improved text contained in this volume may
induce some scholar to investigate Tyconius’ methods and ideas,
which are well worthy of a more careful study than I feel myself
competent to give to them. A system of interpretation which
frankly recognises the historical meaning of prophecy without
thereby detracting from its spiritual essence should have some
interest in the present day.

The present work has grown out of the Kaye Prize Essay
for 1891, upon the Old Latin Versions of the Prophets. I
attempted to shew that an improved text of Tyconius was
essential towards a clearer understanding of this subject, and the
adjudicators of the Prize have kindly allowed me thus to modify
both the title and the contents of the Essay.

It remains now to thank the many friends who have helped
me at various stages in the preparation of this book, among
whom I wish especially to name Father Bollig, of the Vatican
Library, M. Henri Jadart, of Reims, and Dr Ceriani, of Milan,
through whose good offices I was able to procure a transcript of
the Monza Epitome. The Editor of this Series has been un-
wearied in his help both in the Text and the Introduction ; it is
chiefly due to him that the work is not disfigured by many
crudities of style and expression. To the never-failing kindness
of the late Prof. W. Robertson Smith I owe several suggestions

and references, besides a brilliant emendation in the text of
Rule I.

July, 1894.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION
L. The Writings of Tyconius
leks The Date of the Book of Rules

Ill. The Literary History of the Book of Rules

IV. The MSS and Editions of the Book of Rules
V. The Genealogy of the MSS
VI. The Text of the Monza Epitome .
VII. The Accuracy of Tyconius’ Quotations
VIII. The Latin Version used by Tyconius
Tyconius and 8, Cyprian
Tyconius and Habetdeus
Tyconius and the ‘Speculum’ (77)
Style and Vocabulary
IX. Selected Readings
THE Book or RULES
APPENDICES
I. The Monza Epitome
II. Notes on Orthography
INDICES :
I. Index of Biblical Quotations

II. Index of Latin words

PAGE
ROR VL
be

xvii

XVlli

XX1V

Xxx
XXXV1

x}

lxl

Ixvill
evil
1—85

89 —103
89

99
104-114
104

110

62

ERRATA.

Introd. p xlix, line 8 for canta V* read canta V
Text 10% omit comma after mansionem

30!5 for insequabantur read insequebantur and let the note read inseque-
batur V

60° for difinitur read definitur and insert in the notes difinitur RV
7074 for domu read domo and let the note read domu R

77° for nouissimis read nouissimus

INTRODUCTION:

I. The writings of Tyconius.

Tyconius the African lived in the latter half of the fourth
century and was a member of the Donatist community. This
schismatic Church came into existence after the great Diocletian
Persecution, having separated itself from the main body on the
question of the Lapsed. In Africa the Donatists formed a strong
party and kept up their organisation for a couple of centuries,
holding Catholic doctrine, but refusing communion both with the
lapsed and those who had received the lapsed. They were thus
an isolated body of Latin-speaking Christians. There were no
Greek Donatists, so that the Donatist Church had less tempta-
tion than the rest of Western Christendom to revise its Bible
from Greek Codices. So far as I know, the ‘Italic, ie. Augus-
tinian, type of text is never found in their works, and at a much
later date than Tyconius they seem still to have used the Old
Version when 8. Jerome’s translation had become the Catholic
text. Thus in the curious Dialogue Contra Fulgentium Donatis-
tum, printed in the appendix to S. Augustine’, where a Catholic
and a Donatist are made to dispute together, the Donatist uses
an Old Latin text, while the Catholic quotes from the Vulgate.
These considerations explain the absence of Greek influence in
the works of Tyconius whether in regard to his ideas or to the
text of his Biblical quotations. He was an African by nationality
and an African by religion.

1 Migne xliii 763.

xii INTRODUCTION.

Tyconius seems to have occupied a prominent and independent
position in the internal disputes of his Church*. His book on the
Donatist controversy called Bellum Intestinum has unfortunately
perished, and the little that is known about his life comes chiefly
from references scattered up and down in the works of S. Augustine.
Tyconius appears to have recognised the existence of the true
Church outside the Donatist community elsewhere than in Africa,
and on this ground he seems to have quarrelled with his party, yet
without joining himself to the Catholics. “Contra Donatistas,”
says S. Augustine’, “inuictissime scripsit, cum fuerit Donatista ;
et illic inuenitur absurdissimi cordis, ubi eos non omni ex parte
relinquere uoluit.” His greatest influence, however, both on his
contemporaries and on succeeding generations, was due to his two
exegetical works: the Book of Rules edited in this volume, and
the Commentary on the Apocalypse.

The Commentary of Tyconius on the Apocalypse is believed
to be lost. No Ms is known to exist at the present time, though
the Monastery of S. Gall possessed one in the 9th century. A
great portion of the work has however been incorporated by
various authors, as has been lately shewn by Dr Haussleiter in
the Zeitschrift fiir Kirchl. Wissenschaft, 1886, pp. 239—257,
where the whole question of the extant sources has been fully
worked out. The chief writers who used Tyconius as their main
authority in explaining the Apocalypse were Primasius, Bede, the
author of the Pseudo-Augustinian Homilies’, and above all
Beatus, a Spanish priest contemporary with Charlemagne, whose
book on the Apocalypse is little more than a series of extracts
from our author. This last work is very scarce; the only edition
(by Florez, Madrid, 1770) was not reprinted for Migne. There is
a copy in the Bodleian, but none in the British Museum or in the
Cambridge University Library. According to Dr Haussleiter, the
influence of the Commentary of Tyconius is further visible even

1 See Tillemont, vi 145—150, and the article Tichonius in the Dict. of Christian
Biography, for further information on the relations of Tyconius with his party.
From the point of view of the textual critic the one important factor of the
Donatist position is their isolation in Latin-speaking Africa. For the spelling of
the name Tyconius see Appendix u on Orthography.

2 Aug de Doct Christ iii 30.

* Migne xxxv 2417; see Tillemont, vi 150, and Haussleiter, pp 240, 242.

THE WRITINGS OF TYCONIUS. X11

in the ordinary recension of the Commentary of Victorinus of
Pettau, although this author lived a little before Tyconius, and his
genuine interpretations were quite different from those of the
African Donatist.

The Book of Rules has met with a better fate than the
Commentary on the Apocalypse. Two independent Mss survive,
besides an extensive Epitome and some interesting quotations
in supsequent writers.

In this work Tyconius attempts to deal with a real problem.
The Church had inherited the Old Testament and held fast to the
belief that the ancient scriptures wholly testified to the New
Covenant. Many Jewish prophecies are appealed to by the N. T.
writers, by the early apologists, and in such works as 8. Cyprian’s
Testimonia. But there still remained an enormous residuum
which was not obviously edifying, so that many verses from the
Prophets have been quoted by no ancient writer. It was this
unsurveyed region, the “prophetiae inmensa silua,’ which Tyconius
set himself to explore and map out. Consequently his longer
quotations are often from passages which no one else has touched.
His aim was to find general rules of interpretation which would
cover every case, and which therefore might be apphed to the
most unpromising subjects and images. Whatever we may think
of his results, they certainly seemed to meet the wants of the
men of his own time. It is a most extraordinary fact that the
Catholic world should have accepted the work of a schismatic
as a text-book of exegesis; that 1t was so accepted is the best
testimony to the success of the Book of Rules.

Tyconius divides all prophecies into two classes: those which
refer to Christ and His Church, and those which refer to the Devil
and his followers. It is acknowledged that many passages in the
prophetical books refer to Christ. But Christ is One with His
Church, the Body of which He is the Head. <A prophecy there-
fore which begins with something referring to our Lord may go on
to say something about the Church which is the Body of Christ.
Again, the Body of Christ is made up of parts; there is the Right
Hand and also the Left,—in other words true and false Christians.
Thus in any given prophecy one verse may refer to our Lord
Himself, and the next to the black sheep among the flock.

X1V INTRODUCTION.

Tyconius is careful to explain that reason alone can decide which
is meant.

A few examples will make our author’s method clearer. He
begins with Isaiah hu. He quotes the well-known words “ Hic
peccata nostra feret...... ipse uulneratus est propter facinora
nostra,” &c., which, as he says, the mouth of the whole Church
refers to our Lord. But then he goes on to quote from Is hi 10,
11: “Et Deus uult purgare illum a plaga et uult Deus a dolore
auferre animam elus, ostendere illi lucem et formare illum pru-
dentia’.” This, he says, can refer only to the Church, and not to
Christ. As the two verses in which these words occur are passed
over by 8. Cyprian, though he quotes the rest of the chapter in
full’, it is probable that he too felt a difficulty in applying them
to Christ. Yet the verses cannot be separated arbitrarily from
the rest. Tyconius saw this, and provided an explanation by
saying that to the mind of the prophet the Church and Christ
form one whole.

Again, in Cant v 1 the Bride says: “Iam black and comely*.”
This Tyconius understands to refer to the mixture of the good
and the bad in the Church, and he goes on to say: “Never can
I think that the Church, which hath neither spot nor wrinkle,
which the Lord with His own Blood cleansed tor Himself, can
in any part be black, except in the left, whereby the Name of
God ws blasphemed among the Gentiles.” He then explains how it
is that the Church can have any part black. The Bride, he says,
—that is of course the Church—is black and comely “as the tent
of Kedar, as the curtain of Solomon.” Here we have implied in a
single sentence the whole story of Hagar and Sarah, the bond-
woman and the free. For Kedar is the son of Ishmael, who was
rejected; while Isaac was chosen, whose heir is Solomon. Ishmael
or his representative is alvays with the Church, and in each age
is again cast out. Sometimes the bad part is called Ishmael,
sometimes Esau; but it is always reappearing, and, as ‘T'yconius
tells us in another place‘, the Church now suffers from false

brethren, but they will soon be cast out at the approaching end of
the age.

‘ p 2. 2 Test ii 13 and 15.
p 10. 4 pp 29—31.

THE WRITINGS OF TYCONIUS. XV

Rules 1 and If are occupied in expounding the above theory.
Rule 1 is an execursus explaining the authors idea of the
antithesis of Faith and Works, of the Promises and the Law. In
Rule 1v he goes back to Prophecy, and tries to find a method of
extracting edification out of those parts of the Old Testament
which obviously refer to special towns or countries. He makes a
distinction between what he calls Genws and what he calls Species.
Genus includes those statements which are universally true, the
general principles of God’s providence; Species includes particular
promises or threats which are fully appropriate only to the indi-
vidual cities or nations. In the view of Tyconius Genus and
Species are mixed up together in an almost inextricable confusion,
—he calls it “Spiritus eloquium subtile.” In successive verses
Genus may give place to Species or vice versa, or the whole verse
may be assigned to either category. “For while,” he says', “the
prophecy is still referring to the particular instance, the transi-
tion is often made to the general promise in such a way that it
is not at once clearly visible. We often find words used at first
which suit either interpretation, until at last some detail is
introduced too wide for the Species, and we discover that the
sense has become general.” Thus Nahum prophesied against
Nineve, and much that he says will suit the story of the destruc-
tion of the ancient city on the Tigris, but to shew that ‘Nineve’ is
not to be confined to that special city, some words are added which
are too great for a single town, such as “There was no end to the
nations thereof,” and “Thou hast multiplied thy merchandise
above the stars of the heaven,”—that is, the Church’.

In Rule v there comes a truly marvellous dissertation upon
‘Times, Seasons and Numbers. Nothing less than a quotation of
the original in full would do justice to the extraordinary ingenuity
by which almost any number can be made to mean any other.
Thus the time between the Death of Christ on the cross and His
Resurrection is proved to have been three days and three nights by
the following process of reasoning. The time in question appears
to be the evening of Friday, the whole of Saturday, and until
sunrise on Sunday. Tyconius says:—any part of Friday or Sunday
may stand for the whole day, because it is written “ Vespera et

File oes 2 Nah i 3, 16, p 42.

XVI INTRODUCTION.

mane dies unus” (Gei5) But Saturday must be complete, for
we read “A uespera in uesperam obseruari diem sabbatorum ”
(Lev xxiii 32). Finally, the Resurrection took place when it was
yet dark (Jn xx 1) on Sunday morning, because “competit
operibus Dei, ut non dies obscuraretur in noctem sed nox lucescat
in diem. ipsa enim nox inluminatur et efficitur dies, quod est
figura eorum quae facturus erat in Christo*” This is a happy
thought, whatever we may think of it as exegesis.

The sixth Rule is devoted to what Tyconius called Recapitu-
latio. This is by no means identical with what we usually mean
by ‘recapitulation’; and the neglect of the distinction has given
rise to a certain amount of misunderstanding from the time of
S. Augustine onward, and has produced a confusion in the text
of one of our principal manuscript authorities*. According to
the terminology of Tyconius a ‘recapitulation’ is made when a
Biblical writer is speaking both of the type and the antitype,
the promise and the fulfilment. For just as the Church and her
Head are not two but one according to the “subtle eloquence of
the Spirit,” and may therefore appropriately be the subject of
the same prophecy, so also the type and the antitype are in a
measure one in the prophet’s mind. Thus we read in Mt xxiv 15:
“When ye see that which was spoken by Daniel the prophet,
then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains.” What
was spoken by Daniel had come to pass long ago, for the direct
fulfilment had been only one of the types of the general coming
of Antichrist. But the Evangelist ‘recapitulates’ this and joins
the events together by saying ‘then’; that is, when a similar state
of things is seen again in the world. Tyconius seems to realise
that others might feel the difficulties of this method of interpre-
tation, in which both the class of beings to which a prophecy
refers and the time for which it is appropriate are left to the in-
telligence of the reader. He therefore makes ‘a digression to
shew that in several texts, even in the Epistles, much is really
hinted at rather than expressly stated, and that simply to take

1 Similar reckonings of the ‘three days and three nights” are found in Aug
Serm cexxi (=Eug 445) and Quaest Ev 17 (=Lug 447). In these passages S.
Augustine seems to be influenced by Tyconius. See also Cassian, contra Nest vi 23.

2 See pp xxxvi, xxxvii.

THE DATE OF THE BOOK OF RULES. XVII

what the Apostle says, and no more, would lead to manifest
absurdity.

The seventh Rule is occupied in shewing that prophecies
about the Devil and his followers are subject to the same rules
as those about Christ and His Church. As the Church is the
Body of Christ, so the wicked are the Body of the Devil. There is
however one difference. In the Church are false brethren. Jacob
and Solomon and other types of the Church have also a wicked
side; for the Church is black as well as comely. But the followers
of the Devil are altogether bad. Esau, Seir, Theman are types of
the bad alone. Even if the Evil One is said to be ornamented
with precious stones!, these ornaments are only the “men of
excellent intelligence and powerful genius” whom he has stolen
from God: “Omnia enim quae fecit Deus bona sunt; horum
diabolus usum non naturam mutauit?.”

II. The Date of the Book of Rules.

The date of the work is of some importance in estimating the
value of the text of the Biblical quotations, as we cannot suppose
that the Donatist Bible entirely escaped the tendency to eclectic
revision which prevailed in the fourth century. A few years
difference in the date of the publication of the Book of Rules
might conceivably have produced a very considerable change in
the text of the quotations.

The principal external evidence for the date is derived from
the consideration that the work is decidedly earher than 426 AD,
the date of the second edition of the treatise de Doctrina Chris-
tiana, in which §. Augustine contrasts the time when Tyco-
nius wrote with his own. “Non erat expertus hance haeresem
(Pelagianorum), quae nostro tempore exorta multum nos......
exercuit?.”

A passage in Rule v (de Temporibus) supplies a further clue
within the work itself. It runs as follows: “ Vnus dies aliquando
C anni sunt, sicut de Ecclesia scriptum est lacere tn ciwitate ubr et

1 Eze xxviii 13. 2 Rule vir, p 828.
3 See de Doct Christ iii 33.

XV1ll INTRODUCTION.

Dominus eius cruct fivus est tres dies et dimidium (cf. Ap xi 8, 9),
et: Oportet filiwum hominis Hierusalem vtre, et multa pati a
senioribus et principibus sacerdotum et scribis, et occidi, et post
tres dies resurgere; ipse enim tertio surrexit.” The “Son of
Man,” by which expression Tyconius here understands the Church,
not Christ?, will come to the end of the long struggle in three
days and a half—that is 350 years—after the Crucifixion. This
brings us to 383 AD at the latest: therefore it would seem that
Tyconius wrote before 383 AD.

il. The LInterary History of the Book of Rules.

The Rules of Tyconius are explained and criticised by S.
Augustine in his treatise de Doctrina Christiana 11 830—37. This
is no doubt the most important event in the history of the book.
The great African theologian suggests a fresh title for Rules II
and 11, and gently complains that the treatment of Promises and
Law is not quite full enough for the times of the Pelagian
controversy. He also warns readers not to forget that Tyconius
was not a Catholic: “Caute sane legendus est, non solum propter
quaedam in quibus ut homo errauit, sed maxime propter illa
quae sicut Donatista haereticus loquitur®.” But this is S.
Augustine’s hardest word, and indeed throughout the whole
review he treats Tyconius as an authority to be explained rather
than as a theorist to be criticised.

S. Augustine is moreover a prime authority for such of
Tyconius’ Biblical Quotations as he himself quotes. The only
passage of T'yconius’ own writing which is given word for word
is the preface, but wherever 8. Augustine quotes a verse to shew
how it is explained by Tyconius, he quotes it directly from the
Book of Rules.

T'wo examples are given below to make this clear. The right-
hand column contains quotations of the same verses from other
works of S, Augustine.

ae a 2 See pp 4, 7.
3 de Doct Christ iii 30.

REFERENCES TO THE BOOK OF RULES. pabis

We SExVI co

de Doct Christ iii (=Tye. p 33)
et sanctificabo
nomen meum
sanctum wlud magnum
quod pollutum est
inter nationes
quod polluistis
in medio earum,
et scient gentes
guoniam ego sum
a
dum sanctificabor
in uobis
ante oculos eorum.

contr ep 2 Pelag iv
et sanctificabo
nomen meum
magnum

quod profanatum est
in gentibus

et profanastis

in medio eorum,

et scient gentes

guia ego sum

dus, dicit Adonai dus,
cum sanctificatus fuero
in uobis
ante oculos eorum.

Esai xiv 12 (after “ Quomodo cecidit de caelo lucifer mane oricns”’)

de Doct Christ ii (=Tye. p 70)

de Genesi ad ltt xi

contritus est contritus est
in terra in terram
qui mittit qui mittebat

ad omnes gentes ad omnes gentes

In the last instance, the difference of reading corresponds
to a difference of interpretation; for “contritus est in terra” is
explained to mean that the Devil is defeated on earth in the
person of wicked men who perish, while “contritus est in terram ”
is referred to the fall of the Evil Angels.

It is worthy of notice in passing that the whole passage in
de Crenest ad litt xi from which Isaiah xiv 12 is quoted above
seems to shew the influence of Tyconius on S. Augustine.
Tyconius is not named, but S. Augustine argues from Isaiah xiv
and Ezekiel xxviii as in Rule vu, though the text of these
passages as he quotes them is independent of Tyconius. Such
words as these seem an echo of the Book of Rules: “Zw autem
diaistt sensu tuo, In caelum ascendam, super sidera caeli ponam
thronwm meum......et cetera, quae in figura regis uelut Babylonis
in diabolum dicta intelleguntur, plura in cius corpus conueniunt,
quod etiam de humano genere congregat.... Sicut enim qui erat
diabolus homo dictus est, ut in Evangelio: Inimicus homo hoc
fecit, ita qui homo erat diabolus dictus est... Et sicut corpus

sor INTRODUCTION.

Christi, quod est Ecclesia, dicitur Christus,...eo modo etiam
corpus diaboli, cui caput est diabolus...dicitur diabolus... Itaque
lucifer qui mane oriebatur et cecidit, potest intellegi apostatarum
genus uel a Christo uel ab Kcclesia, quod ita conuertitur ad
tenebras amissa luce, quam portabat’, quem ad modum qui
conuertuntur ad Deum a tenebris ad lucem transeunt, id est qui
fuerunt tenebrae fiant lux?”

In Cassian contra Nestorium vi 23 (C.S.E.L. xvii), about
429 AD, is a short réswmé of the first part of Reg v, but Tyconius
is not mentioned by name.

The Book of Rules is next referred to in the “ Liber de Pro-
missionibus” which is usually bound up with the works of S.
Prosper of Aquitaine, and which seems to have been written in
Africa between 450 and 455 ab*. I have thought it worth while
to quote the reference to Tyconius in full, as it shews how his
eschatological calculations were explained away by readers in the
succeeding century. The passage is de Promissionibus iv 18
(Migne li 848): “...... septimus dies qui mane tantum, et uesperam
non habebit. quam requiem sabbati omni praecepto diuinitas ipsa
seruandam commendat‘, ut uacantes ab omni opere malo mane
astemus (Ps v 5), ut contemplemur eum qui coronat in miseratione
et misericordia (Ps cii 2), omnes iuste iudicans et inique neminem
damnans. sed de his Tyconius multa conscripsit. consummationem
uero perfectionemque temporum trium annorum et sex mensium
—qui dicti sunt dies MCCLX, et menses faciunt XL et II—non
tantum Apocalypsis Iohannis quantum et Daniel propheta com-
mendat, quibus ciwitatem sanctam calcart (Ap xi 2)* ut aestimatur
ab haereticis et maxime Arianis, qui tunc plurimum poterunt.”

The next reference to the Book of Rules is found in the
commentary on the Pentateuch compiled by John the Deacon.
This John the Deacon certainly lived before Gregory the Great,
and he may be identical with Pope John III. A Ms of the com-
mentary exists at Paris®, from which Dom Pitra edited some
portions. The work consists of extracts from earlier writers,
among which is found one passage from Rule V‘. This is pub-

1 Cf Reg vu, p 83777, 2 Cf Regg tv, p 4879; v, p 5718,
3 See Migne li 731, 732. 4 Cf Reg v, p 62.
5 Cf Reg v, p 61. 6 Cod Lat 838, 7 See pp 55, 56,

REFERENCES TO THE BOOK OF RULES. XX1

lished in Spicilegrum Solesmense 1 294, 295. The extract is in-
troduced as a comment on Ex xii 40, and it is most likely that
John the Deacon was induced in this single instance to quote the
Book of Rules, because 8. Augustine had mentioned Tyconius
when commenting on that verse’. But the reference itself is in
any case independent, as John the Deacon makes an exact quo-
tation of some length, while 8S. Augustine merely refers to the
interpretation of Tyconius,

In the 6th century the Book of Rules is praised in general
terms by Cassiodorus, and recommended to students of Scripture’.
His contemporary Primasius on the other hand does not mention
this work, though his commentary on the Apocalypse is based on
that of Tyconius.

S. Isidore of Seville, about the beginning of the 7th century,
describes the Rules in the “Liber Sententiarum?,” Tyconius is
not once named, but the Rules are said to be the work of “certain
wise men.” 8, Isidore’s description is mainly taken from de Doct
Christ 11, but he must also have been familiar with the Book of
Rules itself. Thus in describing Rule tv he quoted Isaiah xiii 17,
adding Tyconius’ explanation’, though that passage is not men-
tioned by S. Augustine. The text of the quotations themselves
is assimilated to the Vulgate, as in the other works of 8. Isidore.

The account of the Rules which Bede prefixed to his La-
planatio Apocalypsis is entirely taken from S. Augustine. There is
however an interesting reference to them in Hincmar (Migne exxv
297). He is speaking of the heretic Godescalc: “imitari uolens
Isidorum de Ticonio et aliis sapientibus septem in sacris scripturis
regulas excerpentem, satis insulse nausiauit.” As S. Isidore
never names Tyconius it may well be that Hincmar himself had
read the Book of Rules. We shall see in the next section that
the oldest and best Ms of it now known was among the books
which Hinemar gave to the Cathedral library at Reims.

The remaining Testimonia Veterum to the Rules are the
Kpitomes and the “Memoria Technica.” The latter is a set of
seven Hexameters, first published in the French Departmental
Catalogue of 1849 (vol i 88) from a 13th cent. Ms at Laon. I

' Quaest in Hept ii 47. * Cassiod de Inst diuin litt x.
* Isid Sent i 19, + Reg rv, p 51%,

XXll INTRODUCTION.

have found the lines in two Mss at Rome, of the 14th and 15th
centuries respectively. From the extensive variations in these
MSS it is evident that the common original must have been much’
earlier than the oldest of the three, but there is no proof that
the verses are independent of S. Augustine’s review.

Two Epitomes of the Rules were published by Dom Pitra
in vol ii of the Spicilegiwm Solesmense. One? is merely a re-
petition of 8. Augustine’s remarks, and only noticeable for the
statement that 8. Augustine added three more Rules to the
Seven. As a matter of fact, in the earlier chapters of de Doct
Christ 111 S. Augustine gives some rules for interpreting certain
classes of Scripture passages, but in no sense does he attach them
to the Rules of Tyconius®.

The other Epitome, published in Spicil. Sol. 111 397, is more in-
teresting, though it also has no direct connection with the work
of Tyconius, being entirely based on SS. Augustine and Isidore.
This comes out very clearly from an examination of the text of
the Biblical quotations. §S. Isidore conforms Tyconius’ quotations
to the Vulgate, but S. Augustine quotes them exactly. The
Epitome agrees with 8. Augustine as far as he goes, but where
S. Isidore refers to a quotation of Tyconius not given by S.
Augustine the text of the Epitome agrees with 8S. Isidore,—that
is, with the Vulgate. For example, both 8S. Isidore and the
Epitome quote Isaiah xiii 5 and 11 together thus: Lt disperdam
omnem terram, et uisitabo super orbem mala, which is word for
word with the Vulgate, except that the latter has ut disperdet’.
On the other hand the direct dependence of the Epitome on
S. Augustine is unmistakeable in the description of Rule v:
“Duobus autem modis ualet haec regula aut tropo synecdoche
quod expositum est, aut legitimis numeris quos eminentius diuina
Scriptura commendat.” This is word for word from S. Augustine,
except that he writes “uigere dicit hanc regulam,” and that the
phrase “quod expositum est” stands for 8. Augustine’s explanation.

1 See p 86. 2 Spice. Sol. iii 445.

3 Jacob Perez of Valencia, who also gives ten rules in his commentary on the
Psalms (ap 1506) in imitation of the rules of Tyconius, is entirely dependent for
them on S. Aug de Doct Christ.

4 Contrast Reg iv, pp. 507, 511°.

REFERENCES TO THE BOOK OF RULES. XxX1l1

Three Mss of this Epitome are mentioned in the Spicilegiwm
Solesmense, one being of the 12th cent. I have seen two others,
one at Paris (Bibl. Nat. ms Lat. 14402), and one at Oxford
(Canonici Patr. Eccl. 88). No doubt there are several more’. The
Epitome generally occupies the fly-leaf at the beginning or the
end of a Biblical or quasi-Biblical Ms.

The discussion of the Monza Epitome belongs to the section
treating of the Mss of the Book of Rules.

AD Tyconius

400 See

\ :
5S. Augustine

oe.
Cassian
Auct. de Prom.
500

| \ ]
| Cassiodorus

Toh. Diaconus

600

S. Isidore

700

Obede
Epitome in Spice. Sol.

800

a

The mutual relations of the Patristic references to the Book of
Rules will be seen at a glance by the diagram here annexed.
Yet it hardly does justice to the preponderating influence of

1 Such a one must be Munich, Cod. lat. 22239 (Windberg 39), written ap 1279:
‘“f 226 de Tyconii vii regulis, id est modis loquendi diuersis in sacra scriptura ;
f 227 Arbores historiarum, etc.’”’ The lost Cluny ms may also have merely con-
tained the Epitome, not the Book of Rules itself; see p xxviii.

D: C

XX1V INTRODUCTION.

S. Augustine, for the sole reference to Tyconius’ book independent
of the review in de Doctrina Christiana is that by the author of
the de Promissionibus. He was an African, and perhaps for that
reason familiar with the book which his countryman had written less
than a century before’. But Cassian and John the Deacon quote
the Book of Rules only to illustrate a passage where Tyconius’
explanation had been already noticed by S. Augustine; Cassio-
dorus names Tyconius only in the sentence in which he recom-
mends the study of the de Doctrina Christiana; 8S. Isidore follows
S. Augustine’s remarks more than the original Seven Rules.
Therefore it is not unlikely that the fame of the book in the
Middle Ages and its preservation to the present day is entirely
due to S. Augustine. It was his recommendation, rather than
the intrinsic merit of the work of a Donatist, that secured the
respect of Latin Christendom.

IV. The MSS and Editions of the Book of Rules.

Of the five mss of the Liber Regularum of which we have any
knowledge one is now lost. The lost Ms however, together with
two of the others, was a transcript direct or mediate of one of
the remaining pair, so that its disappearance only affects the later
history of the text.

1. CopEx REMENSIS (R), saec. ix. Cod. lat. 364 of the
Municipal Library at Reims (Haenel’s 252 bis), formerly part of
the Cathedral Library. A vellum quarto of 35 leaves written in
neat Caroline minuscules with two columns of 28 lines on a page,
making 139 columns of writing, the last column being blank.
R never contained the last two-thirds of Reg vir; the text breaks
off in the middle of a sentence and the colophon FINIT LIBER
TYCONII is added in red. The present binding is modern, and the
only signatures (foll. lr, 9r, 17r, 25r and 33r) are also modern
and in Arabic numerals. At the foot of foll. 16v, 17r an ancient
hand has scrawled in capitals HINCMARVS ARCHIEPS DEDIT

SCAE MARIAE REMENSI. The same words appear on the last page.

1 See above, p xx, and Tillemont, xvi 28.

THE MSS OF THE RULES. XX¥V

At the bottom of the first page also is DEDIT etc, so that the Rules
may once have been bound up with some other work, on the last

page of which was written Hinemarus Archieps; but as it appears
from a scrawl on the fly-leaf at the end, written May 14, 1412,
that R then as now contained only the Liber Regularum “sine
primo folio,’ the loss must be ancient, if indeed what is now
missing was ever more than the fly-leaf at the beginning. The

same words (Hincemarus Archieps etc) in the same hand appear
in the 9th cent. Ms of Victor of Capua’s Harmony, which also
came from the Cathedral Library. As there is some evidence?!
that Hinemar knew of Tyconius independently of S. Isidore, there
is little reason to doubt the historical accuracy of the statement
that the book was given by him.

The text of R is divided into short paragraphs with capitals at
the beginning of them outside the line. These paragraphs seem
to be older than the Ms itself, as they now and then preserve the
right divisions in places where the text of R is corrupt’. The
usual contractions are found in R; ¢ for ae is rare, ae being generally
written in full; & is used even in such cases as d&e for de te;
i is lengthened before n at the beginning of a word to distinguish
‘in’ from ‘m.’ Quotations generally have } placed against them
in the margin. Titles, subscriptions, etc, are in regular red
capitals. The ink is still very black and the Ms in excellent
condition. The changes in the text seem all contemporary. There
are several long erasures underneath the present writing, but the
character of the text does not seem specially atfected at these
points®.

Sabatier was the first to make critical use of Cod. R. In the
year 1727, in the midst of the preparation of his great collection
of all the pre-Hieronymian Biblical quotations then available, he
was obliged to leave Paris on account of the Jansenist troubles,
and retired to a sort of exile at Reims*. This was the occasion
of his coming across our MS. He was for a time Librarian in

1 See p xxi, and compare Berger, Vulgate, p 281.

2 See Reg 1, pp 5722, 72, 24,

* Thus in the long erasure pp 6%4—7® R is the only witness for the certainly
genuine ‘Lucan’ for ‘Lucam,’ and ‘generaui’ for ‘genui.’

4 O, Lat, Bibl. Texts I xxvii, and Sab. III xxviii.

Ge

XXV1 INTRODUCTION.

the Monastery of S. Nicasius' and made a catalogue of the Mss
there, but he also quotes from the Mss belonging to the
Cathedral. In the earlier parts of the Bible Sabatier simply cites
Tyconius from the Maxima Bibliotheca Veterwm Patrum, tom. vi,
pp 49—67, but from Hier xxv 35 (chap xlix Hebr) onwards he
makes considerable use of R.

I collated R in July 1891, and saw it again in May 1892.
The Editor of this series also was kind enough to re-examine
several doubtful passages in September of the latter year, so that
I hope a considerable degree of accuracy has been insured. I
have not noticed all the interchanges of e and ae, but with that
exception I have tried to include every variation.

2. CoDEX VATICANUS REGINENSIS 590 (V), saec.x. A vellum
quarto containing the Book of Rules (ff 91—146), preceded by the
Life of S. Fulgentius and his two books de Remissione Peccatorum.
The writing is in one column with hardly any divisions; those
which are found are often badly placed and have no connection
with the paragraphs in R. Rules v and vi also are divided
differently. The style of writing is the ordinary minuscule.
‘Keclesia ; and its oblique cases are often written ‘ecct’ without
any termination. There are many changes in the text by a con-
temporary corrector (Vcorr), mostly designed to improve the
orthography and grammar, but including a few conjectural readings.
Besides the regular corrector there are a few changes made by a
later hand, possibly none other than the scribe of the Paris Ms.
V is described in Reifferscheid’s Bibliotheca Patrum Latinorum
Italica, p 407, but the text has never been published. I collated
the Ms in March and April 1892.

3. COD. PARISIENSIS (P), saec. xi, now Bibl. Nat. Lat. 2359,
but formerly belonging to the Monastery of S. Martin des Champs
near Paris. The original contents of P were Bede on the Acts,
followed by 8. Fulgentius and the Book of Rules as in Cod. V.
These are now preceded by a 12th cent. Ms of S. ‘ Ildefunsus,’ but
in the 13th century catalogue of the library of S. Martin des
Champs the two books are separate. Collated in September 1891.

1 Sab. III xxix.

THE MSS OF THE RULES. XXV1l1

4. Cob. OXONIENSIS (QO), saec. xii exeunt., now Marshall 21
in the Bodleian, but formerly at the Church of S. Peter in
Ghent. O contains Hilary on 8. Matthew with the Book of Rules
following it. The initial letters of each work are illuminated in
colours. Collated in June 1891.

5. “Cod. Claromarisci Abbatiae iucta Audomaropolim, quem
contulit P. And. Schottus, Soc. Iesu, anno 1618.” This Ms has
disappeared, and it is only known by the readings inserted in the
margin of the edition of 1622. What remained after the Revolu-
tion of the books of the Cistercian Abbey of Clairmarais near
S. Omer were removed to the 8S. Omer Municipal Library, but the
Tyconius is not there. As however the Abbey Library was burnt
in 1638, and moreover as only 117 out of the 270 Mss which were
at Clairmarais in 1789 are now to be found, it is no wonder that
this book is among the lost. Its readings are quoted with the
sign C,

6. A paper MS at Basle of the 16th century. It is unbound
and without class-mark?, Quoted as B,

7. CopbExX MOopoETIANUS (M), saec. 1x—x, numbered oa
in the Cathedral Library at Monza near Milan, is a vellum Ms of
210 leaves about 10in. x 63 in., containing ‘Ambrosiaster’ on the
Pauline epistles (including Hebrews). The last five leaves are
occupied with an abridgment of the Book of Rules. The extracts
embrace matter found on pages 1—39 and 50—68 of this edition,
and are simply headed with the words VI + TICONIL REGVLAE. At
the end of the volume is the note “ego Liuthprandus scripsi hoc
librum.”

I first heard of M through a communication kindly made to
the Editor of this series by Dom Amelli of Monte Cassino in the
summer of 18938. I was unable to go to Monza myself, but
Dr Ceriani of the Ambrosian Library at Milan most kindly had a
complete transcript prepared for me, which is given in full in
Appx. I (pp 89—98)?”,

1 “Hx Museo Faeschii,’ Haenel 656 bis.

2 I have also to thank Dr Varisco of Monza for kindly sending me very full
preliminary information concerning the ms.

XXVI111 INTRODUCTION.

M has been for a long time at Monza, possibly ever since it was
written. It seems to be identical with the volume described in
the catalogue of AD 1275: “Item in alio uolumine augustinus
super epistolas pauli” (Frisi’s Monza 11 1385). 8. Augustine did
not write a commentary on the Pauline epistles, but other errors
occur elsewhere in the Catalogue, so that the commentary of
‘Ambrosiaster’ may really be meant. Our MS is described in
Frisi 111 80, No. LXVII.

In the 12th cent. catalogue of the Cluny Library (published by
Delisle’) No 274 is thus described: Volwmen in quo continentur
vw libri Ticonti de multiplici uarietate et passiones sanctorum
Nazarw et Celst et sermones et hymni et masse, etc. If this was a
Ms of the Book of Rules it is quite lost, but the rest of the
contents of the Codex suggest that it may have been only the
second Epitome described on p xxii.

The text of the Book of Rules was first published by Grynzeus
at Basle in 1569 among the Orthodoxographa. Grynzeus’ text
was repeated (with several misprints”) in the first edition only of
de la Bigne’s Bubliotheca Patrum, Paris 1575°,

In 1622 the Jesuit Andreas Schott edited the Rules for the
Appendix of the Magna Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum. In the
margin he inserted several readings from the lost S. Omer Ms, and
he also appears to have now and then emended the text from
the same source*. But this is of very rare occurrence, and for
the most part even the misprints of the editio princeps are
repeated. Schott’s edition appears again in the Maxima Biblio-
theca, from which Sabatier mainly quotes, and the pages of which
appear in the margin of this edition. In 1772 another edition

1 41 237,

2 E.g. ‘esis’ for ‘eris’ in the last line.

3 The other editions of de la Bigne do not contain the Rules; see Tillemont, vi 148.

4 Thus in Reg ny, p 118 nequam ille seruus is the reading of the mss; Gryneus
left out nequam, but it is inserted by Schott, though it is a reading quite different
from the Vulgate. On the other hand he leaves mente for monte (Reg 1, p 2%),
though that is a simple printer’s blunder, and changes sewere—a mistake of the

editio princeps for sed seuere (Reg 111, p 16’)—into sed vere, which has remained in
all subsequent editions.

GENEALOGY OF THE MSS. XX1X

of Tyconius came out in Galland, tom. viii. Some of the mis-
prints in Schott’s edition were removed, and a few conjectures
made without any warning to the reader, but no MS was used.
Finally, Galland’s edition was reprinted in Migne, tom. xvi, with
several fresh misprints.

V. The Genealogy of the MSS.

The object of this section is to shew that Cod. V is the sole
ancestor of Codd. P O B C and the Editions. For the sake of
clearness I give here what I conceive to be the relations of the
Mss to one another, including the Monza Epitome (M). Greek
letters represent hypothetical lost Mss.

AD PA :

DOD

1000

1100

1200 -

1300

1400

1500 |

; B
1600 < Ed. Prine.

1. Derivation of B and p (the editio princeps) from O.
A large number of the extraordinary corruptions which have

XxX INTRODUCTION.

hitherto defaced the printed text of Tyconius come from O, the Ms
now in the Bodleian.
For example:

Reg 1, p 5° nouissimo aduentu Domini...nemo ut aliqui
putant mentietur R Voorr P M
metietur V*
mercietur O
mereretur p, altered by Schott into moreretur !

Tyconius is talking of “false Christs,” and says they appear
before, not at the time of the Last Advent.

Reg ul, p 157 sed minus liquet quid sit...ex fide R
licet VP
lucet O p

7,

The reading of O is evidently a mere correction of ‘licet,
though it makes sense in itself.

Reg Iv, p 33 custodiatis et faciates R VP Aug’ “*
operemint O p (= Vg, Eze xxxvi 27)
An illustration of the sporadic influence of the Vulgate on late
Patristic MSS.

Reg vu, p 79% tres pueri, qui regem...unum Dominum as-
serendo evusdem Der praesente wrtute confuderunt VP
evusdem Dei praesente (om uirtute) O C
eodem Der praesente all edd.

Schott conjectures evusdem Dei praesentia.
This instance shews a connection between Codd. O and C not

shared by VP.

Thus the texts of the editio princeps and Cod. O stand very
near to one another. The link of connection is the paper Ms B at
Basle. This Ms is evidently printers’ ‘copy. In the margin
are red chalk marks and the numeration of the pages of p, the
exact points where the pages begin being marked in the text,
with the catchwords printed out, thus:

1353 et crescendo / terram / omnem texit......

The greater part of B is written in a large clear Italic hand,
but the first page is not so professional in appearance. It seems

GENEALOGY OF THE MSS. XXX1

almost as if Grynzeus himself had begun it, and then ordered a
copy to be made by a writer. At the top left-hand corner are the
words

ex bibliotheca sti petri Gandensis,

which have been run through with a pen. The corresponding
words in O are on the fly-leaf at the end: Lib’ fi petri gand.’
eccle. The opening words in B are incipit liber Tichonij, as in O,
but this has been altered in the Ms to Tichondj liber (without
imcipit), which is the title in p. As far as relates to the text,
we find that, near as O and p stand together, B is nevertheless
between the two. Three examples will be enough.
Reg I, p 2% accepit omnem potestatem R VP C O M

For potestatem B has ptaten; accordingly ed. princ. and all
other editions have pietatem, though since Schott’s time potestatem
has had a place in the margin.

Reg Ul, p 22” fidelis Deus R
fideles Deus VP (C) O

fidelis Deus is in the text of both B and p, but in the margin
of B is al’ fideles, and in the margin of all editions is alias fideles.

Reg vu, p 73” illum ab Aquilone persequar R VP O
illum persequar ab Aquilone B p and edd.
The Greek of Joel ii 20 is tov do Boppa éxdid€w.
Both external and internal evidence therefore prove that p, the
editio princeps, was made from B, and that B is a copy of O. In
what follows the readings of O alone will be quoted.

2. Proof that Codd. VP O C constitute one family.

Reg 11, p 20* Salomon in prece dedicationis templi...inquit R
in praedicationis V
in predicatione P
un dedicatione O and edd.

P and O here give independent emendations of V.
Reg U1, p 29" quod pars mala simulet se Iacob

et stint duo sub uno nomine R
...et sine dubio uno nomine VP O and edd.

XXXll INTRODUCTION.

Reg Iv, p 48" minatur Deus ignem ex igni Israhel regi
Assyriorum, et dicit arsurum uelut stipulam R
et dicitur syrum uel ad stipulam V*
et dicit ad syrum uel ad stipulam Vcorr P O and edd.

V’s ancestor seems to have written a@ in the form cc (as indeed
we sometimes find in V itself); this is easily confused with w.

But some of the most striking and convincing proofs of the
close connection of the family VPOC come from the text of the
Biblical quotations. It must be borne in mind that for at least
two hundred years before the earliest of our MSS was written the
Vulgate had been the only Biblical text known in Western
Europe. Nearness therefore to the exact words of the LXX is a
proof of textual fidelity.

Reg Iv, p 42% sacerdotes eius profanant sacra R

prophetant VPO
BeBnrodow LXX Soph in 4
Reg Iv, p 42” Dominus...iustus in medio eius R
in templo VPO
év wéow@ LXX Soph i 5
Reg Iv, p 44¢ quoniam dedit timorem suum super
terram wtae, dornuet R
...uitae dormiret V*
...ut dormiret Vcorr P
...wtae ut dormiret O

The Greek of Eze xxxii 32 is 67Tv dé5@Ka (€5wxev Lucian) tov
poBov avtod eri yns Swns Kat KorunOnoetac.

As is so often the case, the corrupt word in V*—‘ dormiret ’—
is unchanged by the correctors and copyists, while the words
which were faithfully transmitted are still further corrupted by
conjecture.

Reg Iv, p 46°" accipe citharam, uagulare, ciuitas fornicaria
oblita; bene citharizare, multa canta, ut tui commemoratio fiat. R

(R has the misspelling ‘citharizari,’ a mistake not shared by the
others)

1. cytharam angulare V ; cytharam angularem PO

2. multa cantica canta VPO

GENEALOGY OF THE MSS. XXXI111

The Greck of Esai xxiii 16 is AaBe KiOapayv péwBevoov
ToS Topyn émireAnoMEVNn, KaAwS KLOAapLTOY TOAXA door
(va cov pveia yevnTat.

The rather harsh phrase multa canta is a literal rendering
of woAAa doov, and therefore cantica in VPO is not genuine.
Angularem in PO comes from angulare in V, which is a cor-
ruption of R’s word wagulare. ‘Vagulari’ seems to be a az. ey.
to express pewBeverv, a word which occurs here only in the whole
Greek O. Test.!. ‘Vagari’ is the word used in this passage by
Ambrose and Jerome.

Reg Iv, p 49" Confringantur arcus in Aelam R

ouvtpibyntw (Cod. A etc, but cuverpi8n B) ro tofov Aida,
Hier xxv 36.

confringanair VP

confringam nair O, and as ‘nai’ was otherwise inexplicable
it has been spelt with a capital N in all the editions, and treated
as a proper name! It was this corruption which seems to have
made Sabatier suspicious of the printed texts of Tyconius, and
which led him to publish some readings of R.

Reg Iv, p 50! erttque in nouissimis diebus auertam captiui-
tatem Aelam R

Kal €otat em eoxatwv TOY nuepov [Kal] atootpéw K.T.X.

Hier xxv 39

at ean aeternam captiuitatem aelam VP
Cites or: in aeternam captiuitatem elam C
Zeer in aeternum captiuitatem elam O and editions

This instance makes it quite clear that C also belongs to the
same family as VP and O.

3. Proof that V is the actual parent of P and O.

The instances given above only shew the close relationship of
VPO. Something more is needed to prove actual parentage. It
must not be a mere corruption in V, for that might have arisen
by faithfully copying a damaged exemplar. It must be some
peculiarity in the Ms itself, which has been mistaken by subsequent

1 A similar instance is found in Reg rv, p 4578, where, to express @pnvnua in Eze

xxvii 32 (which only occurs in the Lxx at that place), we find Jamenta in R, which
is changed in V and PO to lamentum. For lamenta see Rénsch 86.

XXX1V INTRODUCTION.

copyists. From the nature of the case such instances are rare,
but I have noticed the following examples.

a. There are several cases where RV* are together, while O
and P follow Veorr. Thus

Reg 1, p 1”*” Dominum eiusne corpus, id est Ecclesiam,

Scriptura loquatur, sola ratio discernit] R

That is: “Reason alone decides whether in a Messianic
passage the Scripture is speaking of the Lord Himself, or of His
Body the Church.”

For eiusne VPO have eiusque, which destroys the whole sense.
Nevertheless loquatur was read by V* as in R; but as there was
now no particle to govern the subjunctive, loquatur was changed
by the corrector into loquitur, and loqwitur is the reading of

P and O.

Reg vu, p 761 Abductosque non soluit. potest istud in
speciem conuenire] Vcorr P (hiat R)

For abductosque and istud, V*O have abductoque and inquit.
The first was obviously wrong, so the amended reading abductosque
is in the editions, but inqwit was never changed back in them to zstud.

b. Accidental defacements in V a cause of corruption.

Reg Iv, p 47” ista sunt] R
ista faciant VO

faciant is in the last line of a page of V, and the letters ac
have been injured by damp, not erased by a scribe. The reading
of P is fiant.

Reg vu, p 74% quasi] RVP, om quasi O and edd.

By some accident—I think some ink has come over from the
opposite page—‘ quasi’ has been nearly blotted out in V.

c. Marginal corrections in V misunderstood or neglected.

Reg 1, p 5* Dauid totam Ecclesiam Christum dicit] RM

V* omitted Christum, but it was added in the margin. P puts
the word in the text at the right place, but in O it is inserted
between totam and Ecclesiam.

Reg Iv, p 49" ex omnibus gentibus uenientibus] R

ex TavTwv TaY €Ovev Tov EXOdvTwY Zech xiv 16

GENEALOGY OF THE MSS. XXXV

V* omits gentibus, but it is given in the margin, apparently by
the first hand, and a sign of omission is placed thus :

omnibus A uenientibus.

gentibus is read by PO, but both these Mss mistook the sign
of omission for the medizval contraction for con, and so read
‘a uenientibus’ as conuententibus. The contraction for ‘con’
occurs nowhere in V.

d. Miscellaneous.

Reg Iv, p 51"" et tenebrescet oriente sole lumen et non
permanebit lumen eius] R (R has tenebriscet, as elsewhere)

This corresponds to Esai xili 10 cai cxoticOncetat Tov nALOV
avaTéXXovTos, Kal 7 cEAnVN OV SWcEt TO HOS aUTHS.

V omits orente sole lumen, leaving a space for about 25 letters.
P and O also omit, leaving no space.

Reg 111, p 24° stultum est et proteruum credere] R

et proteruum has been corrupted in V into et propterewm, which
the scribe wrote

& pp eum

Vcorr expunged these words by putting dots below; they are
altogether omitted in P and O.

Reg v, p 63° adducent fratres uestros] R (= tods aderdods
vpwv Esai lxvi 20)

for fratres uestros V has ff

This is read as omnes fratres by P

and fila filiorum by O

The reading of P is influenced by the Vulgate, which has
omnes fratres uestros.

There can, I think, be no other explanation of all these passages
except that V is the direct ancestor of both P and O. With
regard to C we cannot indeed take the paucity of readings pre-
served by Schott as satisfactory evidence for identity of text in O
and ©, yet even among these readings is one specially charac-
teristic of O, viz ‘diei’ CO for ‘Dei, p 57'%. This was so obviously
a blunder that it did not appear even in the editio princeps.
But if C and O be closely connected in error, then C is also
descended from V through an ancestor which contained the

blunders which C shared with O,

XXXVI INTRODUCTION.

VI. The Teat of the Monza Epitome.

i. Contents. (See pp 89—98.)

With three exceptions M consists of passages taken from the
first six Rules arranged in their proper order. Many sentences
are curtailed, and for the most part the Biblical quotations are
omitted, or only the beginnings and endings of the passages are
given. Some of those which are retained have had their text
assimilated to the Vulgate. The general aims of the compiler
seem to have been brevity and clearness. Difficult sentences and
phrases are often passed over altogether’, and the remarks of
objectors introduced by Tyconius are left out?.

The three passages where M deserts the order or the text of
the Book of Rules will be found on pp 98, 98. The first of these is
the passage “non de omnibus...unum corpus,” which belongs to
Rule 11, p 267". It is the only instance of such a transposition.
The remaining pair are from 8. Augustine. The closing words of
the Epitome (p 98) from “Omnes homines saluos fieri” to “decimatis
omne olus” are taken from the Hnchiridion § 103, and the passage
“ Et in genesi...nouissima hora est” comes from de Doct Christ iii
36 (Eugippius 873—875), part of S. Augustine’s review of the
Book of Rules.

This last paragraph merits special discussion, as it has a prima
facie appearance of being a part of the original text of Rule v1,
lost in Codd. RV from homoeoteleuton. In our Mss Rule VI, after
a remark on the obscurity of ‘ Recapitulation,’ begins with a quota-
tion of Lk xvii 29—32, which is explained as one of the passages
where all this present time in which our Lord’s Advent is taking
place is spoken of as a ‘day’ or an ‘hour. In de Doct Christ iii
S. Augustine prefaces his description of Rule v1 by explaining
Recapitulation in its ordinary sense of a summary, giving several
Biblical examples. He then says: “Fit ista recapitulatio etiam
obscurius,” and goes on to quote Lk xvii 29—382 followed by a
paraphrase of the explanation of it by Tyconius. Thus the first

1 Eg. ista...uidentur, 41”; sed hunc...subornauit, 5°°-*; et Spiritus,,.uideri

possit, 3117-%; et eo...properantes, 664-*.
2 E.g. sicut quidam..,Christus, 2!8-%,

THE MONZA EPITOME. XXxXvil

part of S. Augustine’s remarks does not correspond to anything in
our MSS of Rule v1, and when we find the passages reappearing in
M, we might suppose at first sight that there had been a lacuna
at this place in the ancestor of R and V.

But a closer inspection proves that M is here directly derived
from S. Augustine. In fact M altogether deserts the Book of
Rules at this point and quotes Lk xvii not from Tyconius but
from S. Augustine, giving afterwards 8. Augustine’s explanation of
it. This explanation is beyond question in S. Augustine’s own
words, not those of Tyconius; if then we find M following
S. Augustine here, there is no difficulty in believing that the
previous section also was taken directly from the same source.

i. Lhe-text.o1 WE,

The author of the Epitome treated the text of the Ms before
him with such freedom that singular variations of M are entitled
to little weight. Nevertheless he made use of a good exemplar,
so that M is often of great value in helping us to decide between
the readings of R and V. The combination RM against V is
more frequent than VM against R in the proportion of six to five,
but this is only the result of the numerous blunders of V. M and
V are in fact closely connected, and fall into common error in
several places.

The most important of these errors for the genealogy of the
MSS is to be found in Rule v, p 56", I give the passage in full.
(D is the commentary of John the Deacon. See p xx.)

RD sicut autem in prima parte VM sicut autem in prima parte
culusque temporis culusque temporis
tempus est, totum tempus est,
ita et nouissima hora ita et nouissima,
totus dies est. ut nouissima hora totus dies sit.
autem]enim D cuiusquam D culusque] cui: M
tempus est] om est D cuiusque temporis totum] temporis

cuiusq. temporis cuiusq. V
ita et] M; ita in V
“But just as the whole time (of any epoch) is (mystically
contained) in the first part of the epoch, so the last hour (of an
epoch) counts as a whole day.”

XXXVII1 INTRODUCTION.

Here the important reading in which VM unite against R is the
addition of ut nouissema to et nourssima, with a consequent change
of est to sit. Either reading by itself is grammatical, though
I believe that of VM really contradicts Tyconius. But however
that may be, we have at this point a fourth witness independent
of RVM in the Commentary of John the Deacon (see above
p xx). He quotes the passage independently of R, but like R
he omits ut nowissima and ends with est, not sit. R then is right
here against VM, and therefore VM are not textually independent,
and their united witness not always conclusive against R.

Other coincidences of MV against R in wrong readings are

1, 6% sed qui] R Vecorr; sed quis V*M Veorr gets quit
from the preceding quotation, while M makes the following
sentence run easier by omitting dicens 7.

2. 7 lucan] R; lucam MV ‘Lucan’ is the old spelling.

3. 11” in omnibus] R; omnibus gentibus VM.

4, 16' si enim mandaret a se prouentum postulari, et

legem destruxerat et fidem. ut quid enim legem daret,

si legem in omnibus facturum polliceretur ?] R

si legem in omnibus factorum... V
si se legem in omnibus factorum... M.

5. 328 ab specie in genere aut a genere in specie

in specie] R; in specilem MV (but not “in genus ”).

6. 39” achar] R; achan M; acham Vecorr (axxxx V*).

7. 51% cui enim hosti non opus est auro] R

cul enim ostis non opus est auro V
quis enim hostis aurum non quaerit M

Here M had the corruption (h)ostis, but makes grammar by
changing the construction.

8. 5578 et affligent] RD; et affligent eos MV

Here again the presence of D enables us to decide that R is
right and MV wrong.

9. 56° mensis] RD; mensis mensis M; mensis decimus V.

10. 606 dies saluationis] R; dies salutis M; dies saluta-
tionis V.

11. 66 legem] R; lege MV.

12. 66% die quo] R Aug (incl M when quoting Aug); die
qua MY,

THE MONZA EPITOME. XXX1X

13. 68! omnis ] RVcorr; omnes V*; oms M.
Of these instances I lay especial weight on 4, 8, 10, and 12.
Besides these there are several places where both M and V
have been influenced independently by the Vulgate, e.c. in those
quotations which have been altogether assimilated to the Vulgate
in M.
The following I believe to be a complete list of apparent
coincidence of R and M in wrong readings against V.
Coincidence in omission.
6° wocatus apostolus| V (= Vq and all Mss of Roi 1); om RM
This omission may be due to Tyconius himself.
24” qui liberi deo seruiunt] V; om RM
This is undoubtedly a genuine clause. These are the only
two clauses omitted by R and M together, and their agreement in
these two cases proves nothing, as M omits so many clauses both
in the quotations (e.g. 9%, 37", etc) and in Tyconius’ own words
(io fla de 107 OA ete),
Addition of m to ablatives.
9" in gloria enim mea] V; in gloriam enim meam RM
32” in terra] V; in terram RM (possibly right)
Readings such as these again prove very little, since even if
they be not correct they might occur independently.
-€. for &
65” idem] idé V; id-é- M; id est R
This is the only occasion where RM go wrong together in this
way.
Real various Readings.
237 quacsiuit fidelem cui id donaret] Reorr V ; quaes. fid. cui
donaret R*¥M
May not this be accidental? Reorv does not seem to have had
a different exemplar to R*
59” laudabo te] V Aug [=the Verona Psalter, (Gk and Lat)];
laudem diait tibi R: laudem divit M
The Vulgate and the old Psalters (exe Veron) have laudem diai
tik. M so often deserts the true text of Tyconius’ quotation for
the Vulgate that it is probable the scribe intended to write ‘dixit.’

xl INTRODUCTION.

VII. The Accuracy of Tyconius’ Quotations.

1. Before applying the quotations of Tyconius to the criticism
of the Lxx or even of the Old Latin Versions, it is most necessary
to examine how far he can be trusted as a witness at all. Patristic
citations are valuable for textual criticism in proportion as they
simply reproduce the codex used by the author, or at least enable
us to see what was the reading on which the writer is basing his
remarks. A Biblical Ms professes at least to reproduce its inherited
text, but a writer who is merely illustrating his own words by
quotations is under no such restriction. We ought not to use the
quotations of Tyconius as fragments of the African Latin or any
other Version, without enquiring what standard of accuracy these
quotations habitually reach. The African Fathers differ greatly
in this respect. S. Cyprian is very exact, and if he quotes a
passage a second time he almost always does so in the same
words. Tertullian on the other hand is acknowledged to be often
paraphrastic, while Prof. Sanday remarks of a contemporary of
Tyconius: “it may be said to be characteristic of Optatus that he
is able to recast a scriptural passage almost entirely in his own
words’.” Both slavish accuracy and free adaptation are found ; it
is not necessary to postulate a fresh version of the Bible for every
deviation from the customary word-for-word rendering.

There is a prima facie probability that in a single work an
ancient writer used, besides his memory, a single MS only; and
there is also a prima facie probability that in an original work on
the interpretation of Scripture the text familiar to the author—
the text, that is, that he means to quote from when he quotes
from memory—is the text of his own Ms. To prove that variations
in the quoted texts have any other source than the inaccuracy of
the author the variations must have some outside authority.

What, after all, are the proofs that a Latin Father is quoting
the Bible accurately, that is, from a book, or from a memory
as good as a book? Practically the proof is one of two: either
the quotations agree verbally with some other Latin Father or a
Latin Ms of the Bible, or, where a knowledge of Greek is excluded,

1 QO. Lat. Bibl. Texts ii, p Ixxxviii.

OCCASIONAL INACCURACY OF TYCONIUS. xl

the quotations agree verbally with some form of the original
Greek. Where neither of these is the case, only the strongest
internal evidence can remove the suspicion that the writer was
unable to give the exact words, or more probably did not care to
do so.

2. The standard of accuracy in the shorter quotations of
Tyconius is not always high. Though there are many verses
quoted which shew complete agreement either with some other
Old Latin authority, or else with every particle of the Greck,
yet in many passages we find renderings which are quite un-
supported, passages which are in fact simply paraphrases, conscious
or unconscious, and which have no real connection with the text of
any Latin Version.

The two instances given below shew Tyconius at his worst.
The first might be passed over as an allusion, but the second
professes to be a direct quotation,

(a) Reg 111, p 18*#

Superabundauit (gratia) in omnem carnem reuelata in Chris-
tum, qui ueniens restawrare quae in caelo et quae in terra euan-
gelizanit fidem his qua proaime et qui longe.

The italicised words are from Eph i 10 and ii 17, and the
variants can all be paralleled by various Old Latin authorities.
But ‘fidem, the point of the quotation, is unique. The Greek is
ecpnvnv, both in Eph ii 17 and in Isaiah Ivii 19, the passage in
the mind of 8. Paul. This is rendered by ‘pacem’ in Vert Cyp
Hil Hieron Aug’/; Ambst as well as in the Vulgate and the
Graeco-Latin bilinguals. It is therefore highly improbable that
fidem ever existed as a real variant to pacem. We need not
suppose that Tyconius himself intended to suggest that ‘faith’
was here spoken of in the Epistle: but ‘faith’ is the subject
of his discussion at this point, and he has used Scriptural lan-
guage to clothe his own thought. But from our present point. of
view we have an inaccurate quotation.

(OD): Keg at) 26"

Quid de illa lege dicemus quae aperte promissioni uidetur
aduersa ? sicut scriptum est in Esaia: S¢ me audisses Israhel, esset
stcut harena maris numerus tuus. ecce increpatur Israhel quod
uitio suo non fuerit factus sicut harena.

d 2

xlii INTRODUCTION.

(Cod. V omits steut after aduersa, and R by homoeoteleuton omits from
maris to the second harena. But the text as given above must be correct, as
the quotation from Isaiah is repeated on p 28’.)

If any quotation in Tyconius ought to be accurate it is this.
It is quoted twice in identically the same form, and it is the
subject of two pages of discussion. Yet it is a mere paraphrase.

It seems to be meant for Isaiah xlviii 18, 19. The extant
Old Latin of Esai xlviii 18, 19 is given by a quotation of Lucifer
de Reg Apost xi. It runs as follows: Sic dicit...Sanctus Israhel,
Ego sum Deus, ostendam tibi uiam in qua ambules ; et si audisses
mandata mea, facta fuisset ut fluuius pax tua et rustitia ut fluctus
maris, et factum esset sicut arena maris semen tuum et nati uentris
tui. This is in accordance with the Lxx; Tyconius is alone in
reading ‘me’ for ‘mandata mea’ (Tay évToA@y pov), in introducing
the vocative ‘Israhel,’ and in reading ‘numerus tuus’ for ‘semen
tuum.’ Perhaps ‘me’ and ‘Israhel’ come from Ps Ixxx 14 and
‘numerus’ from Esai x 22, but all that concerns us here is that
the citation is inaccurate, in spite of its formal introduction.

I do not know that any other explanation of these two passages
can be given, except that Tyconius had a treacherous memory and
that he did not always verify his references.

3. But the occasional lapses of Tyconius only throw into
relief his habitual correctness, especially in the long quotations.

A good example may be found in Eze xxvi 15—18, the only
passage in his quotations from the Prophets where both our frag-
mentary Old Latin Mss are extant. These are the Weingarten
fragments (w) and the Wiirzburg Palimpsest (h)', both assigned
by their editor E. Ranke to the fifth century.

In what follows, as it is the general correctness of Tyconius
rather than recensional peculiarities which is under discussion,
singular readings of h w or Tyc are italicised, singular omissions
marked with a caret, and singular variations in order marked with
a star.

1 The notation of w and h (Cod. Herbipolensis) is taken from Cornill.

LONGER QUOTATIONS OF TYCONIUS.

h

15 Haec dicit dms
ad te sor

non a uoce
ruinae tuae

in gemitu
uulneratorum
tworum

A interfectione A
in medio tui
commouebuntur
insulae

16 et descendent
a sedibus A
omnes principes
maris

et auferent mitras
a capitibus suis
et uestem

A suam

se despoliabunt
in stupore mentis
et dementia induentur
super terram
sedebunt

et timebunt
perditionem eorum
A ingemescent
super te

et accipient
super te
lamentationem
et dicent tibi
quomodo
destructa es

de mari

cluitas illa
laudabilis

quae dedit
timorem super
omnibus habi-
-tantibus in ea
1Snunc timebunt
insulae ex die
ruinae tuae

w
' Propterea quod
haee dicit dms
ad sor.

non a uoce
ruinae tuae

in gemitu
uulneratorum.

in euaginatione
gladii.

in medio tuo
commouebuntur
insulae.

16 et descendens

a sedibus suis
omnes principes
de gentibus (=.Lxx) maris
et auferent mitras
de capitibus suis.
et uestem
uariam suam

se dispoliabunt
in stupore mentis.
et stupebunt
super terram
sedebunt

et timebunt
interitum eorum
et ingemescent
super te

7 et accipient
super te
lamentationem
et dicent tibi.
quomodo
destructa es

de mari

ciuitas illa
laudabilis

quae dedit
timorem suum
omnibus habi-
-tantibus in ea.
18et timebunt
insulae ex die
ruinae tuae

Tye

' Haec dicit Dominus
ad Sor,
Nonne a uoce
ruinae tuae
in gemitu
uulneratorum,
dum interficiuntur
eladio
in medio tui
commouebuntur
insulae?
16 et descendent
a sedibus suis
omnes principes
maris
et auferent mitras
A
et uestem
uarlam suam
despoliabunt* se.
in stupore mentis
\ (=Lxx) stupebunt
A
A
et timebunt
in interitu tuo},
et ingemescent
super te,
Vet accipient
super te
lamentationem,
et dicent tibi,
Quomodo
destructa est
de mari
ciuitas illa
laudabilis,
quae dedit
timorem suum
omnibus inhabi-
-tantibus in ea!
et timebunt
insulae ex die
ruinae tuae,

xh

' The reading of both R and V is tuo, but Sabatier by error edited swo for R.

xliv INTRODUCTION.

In these four verses w has 6 points peculiar to itself, has 12,
and Tyconius 12. Z'yc differs from h 21 times and differs from w
15 times, but / differs from w 17 times. In other words our text
of Tyconius only differs from our fifth century Mss about as much
as they differ from one another’.

4. In books of the nature of a commentary, where dis-
crepancies are found between the text as quoted at the head of a
section and as quoted in the commentary, it 1s often a very
delicate matter to judge between the relative authority which
should be given to the two. Regarded as a question of the
textual criticism of the author, there is no doubt that the short
quotations in the commentary are generally less likely to suffer
than the long quotations. The shorter quotations are often
bound up grammatically with the author’s remarks, while on the
other hand the scribe is apt to weary of a long extract from the
Bible. He often becomes careless and hurries over his work®.
Sometimes scribes are worse than careless, and out of mistaken
ingenuity they emend Biblical quotations from the current version,
especially in places where there is some corruption already.
Happily in the case of O. Test. quotations made by Latin Fathers,
who used a version derived from the LXX, we can detect at once
emendations made from S. Jerome’s Vulgate, which was translated
from the Hebrew’.

The long Biblical quotations in Ecclesiastical writers are thus
exposed to subsequent corruption by scribes, and we may often
recover the Biblical text used by the writers from the shorter quota-
tions and allusions which occur in the midst of their argument.
But the case is entirely altered whenever the real text of the
writer himself is ascertained. The long Biblical quotations are,
it is true, exposed to subsequent corruption; but in the form in
which they were originally written down by the author, they repre-
sented more nearly the text he used than the shorter allusions
to the same passages in the course of his argument. It was worth

1 In Eze xxvi 15—18 the Greek codd. Alex. and Vat. differ nine times.

2 A conspicuous instance may be found in the long quotation from Eze xxviii
2—19, pp 77, 78, where V, our only authority, has omitted four long clauses and
several single words, all of which nevertheless appear in the commentary which
follows.

3 Cf p xxxv for an instance in the secondary mss of Tyconius.

VARIATION IN REPEATED QUOTATIONS. xlv

while to copy out five, six, or a dozen verses, but in quoting the
verses a second time a writer would not always take the trouble
to look up the passage in the MS again, or even to refer to what
had been copied out above’ When in the commentary a par-
ticular phrase is singled out and used to explain some doctrine or
point in the argument, then the form the quotation assumes ts of
the greatest weight. It is attested by all the authority of the
writer. But where the quotation is merely repeated, without
particular stress being laid on the form of the words, we are
simply dependent on the writer’s memory and habit of mind as to
whether it represents the text he used or not.

The chief variations in the repeated quotations of Tyconius
are given below. They do not include minor variations of order,
etc, nor the obvious superficial blunders of cod. V in the quotation
of Eze xxviii 2—19 on pp 77, 78% The number following the
reading refers to the page of the text. Where V alone is extant
the references are followed by the letter V.

1. 2 Regn vii 14 arguam eum 374% arguam...delicta eius 387% (cf Ps
Ixxxvill 33)
2. Esai xiv 13 contritus 704 confractus 71?
3. [G-concitat 70°; 75" V monat. 71, 75° ™ V, 767 V
4, mouet 7071 commouet 75!) 7% V
5. 18 reges gentium 70?) reges terrac 76'5 V
6. 20 quomodo uestimen- [quomodo uenisti] sicut uestimentum
tum 711)2 ce onge 4
i ern 7 i" eat 77? ¥
8. Hier xvii 27 consumet 62” conburet 641
9. XXxli 26 omnia regna 53” uniuersa regna 54°
10. 29 quia 543 quoniam 541%
Li super ipsam 54! in ipsa 54%
12a. Eze xxviii 4* sapientia 77% V scientia 792! V
b. 4» doctrina 777! V sapientia 7971 V
|) Coctrine (77%, -o 7 ~ ecientia. 79°, S04 Go ¥
13. 7 propter ae iis V___propterea 79° V
14. 9 dicturus es 77% V [narrans] narrabis 80% V (cf Ps xxi 23)

1 Tam assuming throughout that Tyconius is an independent author. The
whole state of things is changed in the case of a writer like Primasius, in whose
work on the Apocalypse the text at the head of the sections differs from that in the
commentary, because the commentary was taken for the most part from one source,
the text from another.

* K.g. morte 78', for monte; inferorum 78%, for igneorum.

xlvi INTRODUCTION.

15. Eze xxviii 13 deliciis paradisi 78*, — paradiso 8029 V

8031 V
16. 19 perditio factus es perditio facta es 8527 V
Vic wie 8
ic Xxxll_ 7 cooperiam 4418 operiam 45°
18. 10 terit ad+ ruinam expectantes 45! V (expugnantes R)
4422
19. 2Co1ii 18 a claritate in clari- in gloria ex...gloria 19”
tatem 19" a gloria in gloriam 21%?
20. 2 The ii 7* obtinet 52° [detinens] detinet 7475 V*
| (detinens é detineat Vcorr)
21. 7» donec 52° quoadusque 74° V
22.) Ap <xir. 1} sponsus: 3° sps 7127

Out of these twenty-two readings many may be seen at once
to be merely the result of Tyconius’ inaccuracy. Thus terrae 76
for gentium 70 in Esai xiv 18 (teév €Ovov) is a mere slip, absolutely
unattested elsewhere in any language; it could hardly have been
found if Tyconius had been in the habit of verifying his quotations
by his codex when he repeated them, or even if he had been in
the habit of referring to what he had previously written. The
argument in fact has a double conclusion: the general accuracy
and occasional inaccuracy of 'Tyconius makes it improbable (1) that
he could have consulted his codex for the inaccurate quotations,
and (11) that he could have done without his codex for the accurate
quotations. But if we are obliged to resort to the hypothesis that
Tyconius did not verify his quotations on repetition in order to
explain the merely careless blunders like terrae for gentium (No. 5)
and paradiso for delicits paradisi (No. 15), the same hypothesis
may be used to explain most of the substitutions of synonyms,
such as incitat for concitut (No. 4). These substitutions are neither
in the first nor the second series of a peculiarly ‘African’ or other
cast. The only instance to the contrary is that of the variation
between ‘gloria’ and ‘claritas’ in 2 Co i 18, where however
‘claritas’ is also the word used in the Vulgate.

Seven of the passages demand special treatment. These are
the complicated variations which I have grouped under No. 12,
and Nos. 4, 18, 22, and 6, 14, 20, where there is reason to think
that our Mss are corrupt. No. 12 mainly turns on the translation
of émuatnun. In Eze xxviii 3, 4°, 5 and 7 éuctn is rendered in

RENDERINGS OF é€mrioT7mn. xlvil

w (cod. Weing.) by doctrina; in verse 17, where w is wanting,
doctrina 1s found in m 675. Thus ‘doctrina’ is well supported,
and it is found as the rendering of Tyconius’ version, pp 77, 78, in
vv. 5,7, and 17. But in the repeated quotation on pp 79, 80 and
83 we tind ‘scientia’ instead. Moreover in v. 3 ‘sapientia’
renders éaict nun both in 77” and 79”, while in v. 4 correspond-
ing to the Greek émiotnun...ppovnces we find sapientia...doctrina
in 771, but screntia...sapientia in 79%. The rendering of
emsaTnun by saprentia in v. 3 is supported by Optatus. The
valuable pair of Greek cursives 62-147 transpose émiatypn
and d@povnocs in v. 4, and w has in that verse the corrupt reading
“numquid doctrina corum doctrina est tua aut sapientia tua fecisti,”
etc, which seems to have arisen out of a dittography of doctrina.
These variations are best shewn by a table:

Eze, Gk Mss 62-147 w Tyc (Ist quot) Tyc (2nd quot)
AXXVIU

3 ETLOTHUN €. doctrina sap. (= Opt) Sap.

4 ETT. p. doctrina bis Sap. scientia

4» pornos e. saplentia doctr. Sap.

5 ETLOT. €. doctrina doctr. scientia

re ET LOT. €. doctrina doctr. scientia
17 ET LOT. a [doctrina m 675, doctr. scientia

hiat w]

Thus screntia in the repeated quotation stands for doctrina
in the original, and if we suppose that sapientia and doctrina have
got transposed in verse 4 in cod. V (our only authority) this is true
without exception’, For the rest, it seems as if doctrinw were the
original rendering of évoTypn in all five places, but that in verse 3
suprentia had been substituted in the codex of Tyconius as in that
of Optatus, while in the remaining four passages Tyconius himself
replaced doctrina by a third word scientia.

In Nos. 4,18, and 22 the probable explanation of the differences
in quotation is simple corruption in the mss. In Esai xiv 16?
(No. 4) it is easy to see how ‘com’ might be lost after ‘ram’ in
the sentence concitat terramcommouet reges, especially when the
constant use of the simple verb ‘mouere’ with ‘ terra’ for ‘ earth-
quake’ is considered. Again in Ap xxii 17 (No. 22) Tyconius
expressly quotes the text on p 8 for the sake of the curious

1 Gf 213, 32% in V.

xl vill INTRODUCTION.

reading “sponsus et sponsa.” Yet on p 71 both our Mss have “sps
et sponsa,” that is “Spiritus et sponsa.” This must be a clerical
error in codd. RV, as Tyconius appears to have supported ‘sponsus’
in his Commentary on the Apocalypse, if indeed he did not invent
that reading’, As to Eze xxx1i 10 (No. 18), “erit ad ruinam
suam” p 44 corresponds to mpocdexopevot THY TTOTLY avTar, yet
on the next page Tyconius repeats the verse with the correct
translation ‘expectantes’ for ‘erit ad.’ Is it possible that the
corruption was already in his codex and was copied out mechani-
cally by him ?

The remaining instances (Nos. 6, 14, and 20) form a class by
themselves. In each case the second quotation occurs in that
part where V is our only authority, and I believe the text has in
each case suffered corruption by dittography.

The readings are as follows. I have bracketed the corrupt
anticipations of the following word in giving the readings of V.

6. Esai xiv 20 dv tpozrov iwartiov
quomodo uestimentum 70” RV (= Habetdeus 315)
[quomodo uenisti] sicut uestimentum 77% V
14. Eze xxviii 9 Xéywr épets
dicturus es 77° V (=w)
[narrans] narrabis 80" V
20. 2 The ii 7 6 catéywr
qui obtinet 52°(R)V_ (quod obtinet R)
qui{d] [detinens] detinet 74° V*
qui detinens é detineat Vcorr

I should not have ventured to assert that these readings were
corrupt and produced in the same way in all three cases, were it
not that readings of this kind are extremely common in V, so
common in fact, that 1t would be unlikely that the portion of text
in which we are dependent on V alone should contain no examples.
Below is a complete list of these cases of false repetition. Those
marked V have been unnoticed by correctors and have passed into
the later Mss and the printed editions; those marked V* have
been altered. The readings of M are given wherever it is extant.

1 Cf Ps-Augl (Migne xxxv 2452). ‘Sponsus’ found its way into the later mss
of the Vulgate, though not into the printed Editions.

DOUBLETS IN COD; ¥. xlix

5 synonymis| si non nimis R- non nimis nouimus V
7 unum] R uniunum V
11° non totum] RM totum non totum V
24° data] R data data V*
25" operatrix| R operatrixrix V*
32" sic Dominus] sed ds R; om M__ sic dicit dns V*
44°" uirtus eius] R uirtus eorumeius V*
46” multa canta] R multa cantica canta V*
52 ostendit omnes] Rh oms ostendit oms V*

oms ostendit Veorr
56" cuiusque temporis] R, cuius- temporis cuiusq. temporis cu-

quam temporis D, cui: tem- lusq. V
poris M
56” ita et noulssima hora] RD ita in nouissima ut nouissima

hora V(M) (ita et...M)

682 Verbum carne(m) factum pr Verbum carne factum quid

quid persequitur Verbum in persequitur in carne V
carne] Rh
71° de se et] de sede & R de se & de se & V*......

Besides these, there are the three passages under discussion
po ce 17 and SO",

Somewhat similar as shewing a tendency to amplification are
the following :

56° primus dies mensis est] KD primus dies mensis decimus est V
primus dies mensis mensis est M

59% vir spiritus Ecclesiae] RM septem sps ecclesiae septem V

64° tempus est] R totum tempus est V

69° Dominum Tesum] R dnm ihm xpm V

7327 Dominus noster Iesus Chris- dns ds nr ihs xps V

tus] R

These numerous cases of repetitions both simple and corrupt
in the text of V (in which it is important to notice that the cor-
rupt reading generally precedes the true reading’) are sufficient to
shew the probability of the phenomenon occurring also where R is
lost. It only remains to prove that in each of the three cases
mentioned on p xlvili the reading of V is impossible as it stands,

1 Some of these readings may have been due to corrections in the text of V’s
ancestor, misunderstood by the scribe of V. Compare p 48},

] INTRODUCTION.

and to explain the variation which remains between the text as
emended and the other form in which the quotations are found.

In Esai xiv 20 the text quomodo westimentum as it appears in
both codd. R and V on p 70 is in literal agreement with the text
as quoted by Habetdeus the Donatist at the Council of Carthage.
As we might expect, the text of the Version used by him is most
closely related to that of Tyconius. Quwomodo uestimentum was
thus no doubt the reading of Tyconius’ Bible. On the other hand
the reading of V on p 77 does not make any sense:—“Iterum
<in> corpus ipsius diaboli conuenit dicens: Quomodo uenisti
sicut uestimentum sanguine consparsum non est mundum, ita
nec tu eris mundus.” There is nothing about ‘coming’ in the
whole passage and wenisti and uesti(mentum) are evidently con-
nected. Either ‘uenistisicut’ is a sort of rough doublet of
‘uestimentum, or more probably ‘sicut’ was in this place loosely
substituted for ‘quomodo’ at this point by Tyconius on repeating
his quotation’. The scribe of V (or an ancestor of V) began to
write quomodo uestimentun as on p 70, but discovering his error
wrote sicut uestumentum, leaving the letters “quomodo uenisti” (for
“quomodo uesti-”) imperfectly cancelled. The process is exactly
similar to that by which multa canta p 46”, which stands for
mokNa aoov Ksai xxiii 16, became in V and the mss which
followed V multa canticacanta.

In Eze xxvii 9 rA€ywv pets is rendered “dicturus es” in the
formal quotation p 77™, and this is confirmed by w, which happens
to be extant at this verse’. But when the verse is repeated on
p 80” we find in V: “Numquid narrans narrabis in conspectu
interficientium te, Deus sum ego?” Now if narrans narrabis
were genuine it could only be regarded as a direct translation by
Tyconius himself from the Greek. To this there are three objec-
tions. First, there is no other passage where he refers to the
Greek. Secondly, the words Néywv éepeis are of no great im-
portance in the sentence; Tyconius makes no remark on their
special significance. Thirdly, narrans narrabis is not a trans-
lation of Aéywv pets. The verb ‘narrare’ occurs 15 times in

1 As quoniam 5444 for quia 543, propterea 79° for propter hoc 77°, and quoad

usque 7478 for donec 52%.
2 Cf k, Mt ii 6,13; Me x 39.

DOUBLETS IN COD. V. hi

the Vulgate N.T., and besides these places it occurs im Mt xii 36
in various forms of the Old Latin, but it is never a rendering of
Neyer or elrrety. In Eze xxviii 9 Hier’ has numquid loquens
dices, and in the Vulgate numquid dicens loqueris.

But if “narrans narrabis” cannot be a direct translation from
the Greek still less can it be a paraphrase of “dicturus es.” Tyco-
nius would scarcely substitute for “dicturus es” an imperfectly
naturalised Hebrew idiom, to which he himself attached a peculiar
significance’. On the other hand the simple narrabis alone might
very well be a paraphrase for dicturus es. I believe Tyconius
was influenced (consciously or unconsciously) by the familiar verse
Ps xxi 23: “narrabo nomen tuum fratribus meis.” An exact
parallel is afforded by his double quotation of 2 Regn vii 14, which
is given on p 37 correctly, but repeated on the next page in a form
influenced by Ps Ixxxvii 33.

Finally we come to the variations in 2 The ii 7. On p 52
Tyconius, after quoting Ps exxxvi 9 (“Felix est qui obtinebit, ete”),
says: “Obtinet autem, sicut scriptum est: Qui obtinet modo, donec
de medio fiat.” This is the reading of both Mss, except that R has
quod obt. for qui obt. On p 74, but unfortunately after R has
failed us, we find: “Tantum ut quid detinens detinet modo, quoad
usque de medio fiat.” For quid detinens detinet modo Veorr
substituted gui detinens est detineat modo. The Greek is over o
katéyov apts €ws €« pécou yévntat, and for 6 Katéyov ape the
extant Latin renderings are

qui nunc tenet teneat dd, Tert de Res Carn 24 Ambst
qui tenet nunc teneat Vg

qui modo tenet teneat Aug (de Ciwt Der)

qui tenet modo teneat Hesych (ap Aug Ep 198)

An improved text may shew that teneat was a later accretion in
some of these authorities. But even if it be not so, it is noticeable
that in none of them does ‘nune’ or ‘modo’ occupy the last place,
a fact which condemns the reading of Vcorr on p 74 and makes
the ‘detinens’ of V* suspicious, while its presence is easily
explained by the hypothesis of dittography. As between obtinere
and detinere, it is worth remark that the quotation on p 52 1s

1 See his disquisition on ‘‘disrumpens disrumpam,”’ p 3947).

li INTRODUCTION.

introduced for the sake of the word obtinere, to illustrate Ps
exxxvi 9. The quotation on p 74 is still further open to objection
on the ground of the expression quoad usque, which though it
has good African authority elsewhere’ is here only found in
Ambrosiaster'/,, while donec receives additional support from an
allusion in Tyconius 8°. |

VIII. The Latin Version used by Tyconius.

The confusion and variety of text in the forms of the “Old
Latin” has been a matter of common remark since the days of S.
Augustine. Successive adaptation of the language of a primitive
version to local dialects and irregular revision from Greek Mss
were probably the causes which produced this variety, but we
have hardly any historical traditions of the localities in which
such changes took place or the men by whom they were made.
In this confusion there is only one way out of the difficulty.
Our MSS can give us no help alone, for they are not connected
by sufficiently accurate traditions with local uses. It is only by
carefully studying the quotations of Ecclesiastical writers, of whom
we know where and when they wrote, that any fixed criteria can
be found for assigning the continuous texts of the Mss to Africa,
Gaul, or Italy. In all such investigations the quotations of §.
Cyprian are the starting point. Except Tertullian he is the oldest
African Father who quotes Scripture, and Tertullian’s evidence
in our present state of knowledge is rendered of doubtful value
by his acquaintance with Greek and his habit of paraphrase.
Cyprian on the other hand always uses a Latin Version and
quotes accurately and consistently.

For the Gospels Prof. Sanday has definitely proved the African
character of & (and in a less degree of e) by using the text of
Cyprian as a working standard*, No such investigation has yet
been made for any part of the Old Testament; I shall therefore
begin by comparing the text of Tyconius with that of Cyprian.
Kach book of the Bible must be treated separately, for we have no
reason to suppose that the original translation was all made at one

1 Cf k, Mt ii 13, v 18 bis, x 11, xiii 18; Me xii 36, xiii 30.
2 O, L. Bibl, Texts (k), vol ii,

TYCONIUS AND S. CYPRIAN. liu

time or by the same hand; in extreme cases, such as the Book of
Job on the one hand and the Book of Daniel on the other, it 1s at
once seen that the literary fates of the various parts of the Bible
have been quite independent.

In the Prophets the evidence is most full and clear in the
Book of Isaiah. I shall therefore begin by treating that book
separately.

For the sake of clearness it may be convenient to give at once
the conclusions which I shall try to prove.

1. The text of Tyconius in the Prophets is from the same
version as that used by 8. Cyprian, slightly altered in the Latinity
but presenting no clear traces of revision from the Greek.

2. This text is practically identical with that used by Habet-
deus, the spokesman of the Donatists at the Council of Carthage.

3. The text of the Speculum (7) is of the same version, but
greatly changed as to the Latinity.

Tycontus and S. Cyprian.

In the following extracts the references to S. Cyprian are by
Hartel’s pages, but in the Testimonia, unless otherwise stated, the
text followed is not Hartel’s but that of the Ms called by him L.
The pre-eminence of L in the Testimonia has been proved once for
all by Prof. Sanday in O. Lat. Bibl. Texts (4) 1 Ixii—lxiv, and his
judgment has been confirmed by Dombart the editor of Commo-
dian, and Brandt the editor of Lactantius, both of which authors
regularly use the Vestimonia for Biblical quotations.

Readings marked O, (following Prof. Sanday’s notation) are
from my collation of Bod]. Add. C 15, sec. x.

Cyp 366 Tyc 50, 51
Esai x1
6 Vlulate, ululate,
proximus est enim dies Domini proximus est enim dies Domini,
et obtritio a Deo aderit. et contritio a Deo aderit...
9 ecce enim dies Domini ecce enim dies Domini
uenit* insanabilis insanabilis* uenit
indignationis et irae indignationis et irae,
ponere orbem terrae desertum ponere orbem terrariwn desertum,

et peccatores perdere ex eo. et peccatores perdere ex eo.

liv INTRODUCTION.

Cyp 669

Tye 70 (71, 72, 75)

Esai xiv

13 Tu autem dixisti in animo tuo:
in caelum ascendam,
super stellas Dei
ponam sedem meam,
sedebo in monte alto
super montes altos in Aquilonem,
14 ascendam super nubes,
ero similis Altissimo...
15 tu wero ad inferos descendes
in fundamenta terrae,
16 et qui uidebunt te
mirabuntur super te.

Cyp 183

Esai

16 Hic homo qui concitat terram,
commouet reges ;
17 qui ponit orbem terrae totum
desertum.

tu autem dixisti in animo tuo:
In caelum ascendam,
super stellas Dei
ponam sedem meam,
sedebo in monte alto
super montes altos in Aquilonem,
ascendam super nubes,
ero similis Altissimo.
nune autem ad inferos descendes
in fundamenta terrae,
et qui uiderznt te.
mirabuntur super te.
ero] et ero Tyc 70 RB
te uiderint] Tyc 70 R
1YC AHR (ie 1016
X1V
Hic est homo qui concitat terram,
[com ]mouet reges :
qui ponit orbem terrae totum
desertum.
(Variants of Tyc)
~ hie est] 70, 71, 75bis; om est 76
concitat] 70, 751/,; incitat 71, 751/,, 76
commouet] 75?/,; mouet 70

[The quotations of S. Cyprian put down to Esai xxix 13 are really from
Mc vii 6 seq. The reading of Tyconius will be noticed in the next section. ]

Cyp 56

Tyc 3, 4

Esai xlv

1 Sic dicit Dominus Deus
Christo meo Domino
cuius tenui dexteram
ut exaudiant eum gentes...

ut] et W; om B
Cyp 77

Sic dicit Dominus A
Christo meo Domino
culus ego tenui dexteram
ut exaudiant eum gentes.

Tyc 2

Esai liii

4 hic peccata nostra portat
et pro nobis dolet...

5 ipse autem uulneratus est
propter facinora nostra...

6 et Dominus tradidit dlum
pro peccatis nostris...

Hic peccata nostra feret
et pro nobis dolet,
ipse uulneratus est
propter facinora nostra,
et Deus tradidit ewm
pro peccatis nostris.
ipse] et ipse VM
eum] RM; illum V

TY CONTOS: ANDiS. CY PRLAN, lv

Cyp 108 Tyc 76
Esai viii
3 aut enim subiectos uobis Omnes subditos uobis
subpungitis... conpuneitis.
Cyp 72 Lye 9 -AQ
Esai |xiii
9 Non senior neque angelus Non senior zon angelus,
sed ipse Dominus liberabit eos, sed ipse conseruauit eos,
guia diliget eos propter quod diligeret eos
et parcet eis, et parceret ilis ;
ipse redemit eos. ipse redemit eos.
liberauit WO conseruabit R, considerauit V
et ipse WMBO parcet R

The above extracts may be analysed as follows. References
in square brackets as [m 418] are to authorities not contained in
Sabatier.

Readings in which Cyp and Tyc are
agreed against other Latin authorities.

Esai xiii 6 [m 418]
1. proximus Cyp Tyc
prope m contritio Tye ni
3. aderit Cyp Tyc obtritio Cyp
ueniet m

Readings in which Cyp and Tye differ.

bo

Esai xiii 9 [m 418]
4. insanabilis uenit (order) Tye

5. insanabilis Cyp Tyce Tren Tren m
sine refrigerio m uenit insanabilis Cyp

6. uenit Cyp Tye Tren
adueniet 7
indignationis et irae Cyp Tye m
furore et ira plenus ren 8. terrarum T'yc
terrae Cyp Lren m

Esai xiv 13 [Aug de Gen ad Int xi (Hug 180)]

9. in animo tuo Cyp Tyc

sensu tuo Aug

10. stellas Cyp Tyce
sidera Ambr Aug Vig

at. Der Cyp Tyce (—Heb})
caeli Ambr Aug Vig

12. sedem meam Cyp Tye Ambr'/, Aug-Ps 59
thronum meum Aug (Tert Ambr1/,)

lvi INTRODUCTION.

Readings in which Cyp and Tyc are

agreed against other Latin authorities. Readings in which Cyp and Tye differ.

13. in monte alto Cyp Tyc
in monte excelso Ambr Aug
14. super montes altos Cyp Tye Ambr
super montes excelsos Aug
15. in Aquilonem Cyp Tyc
qui sunt ad Aquilonem Aug
qui sunt ab Aquilone Ambr

Esai xiv 15 [Aug (Zug 180)]
16. nune autem Tyce Aug (=LXX)
tu uero Cyp
Esai xiv 16
18. qui uiderint 7%yc
qui uidebunt Cyp
19. hic est homo Tyc*/,
hic homo Cyp

Esai xlv 1
20. Dominus Tyce Tert’™™ 11 Vig

(Barn 12)
Dominus Deus Cyp ‘Tert’
adv Iud 7
21. ego tenui Tye
22. ut exaudiant eum Cyp Tyc om ego Cyp rell
‘Tert’ adv Iud (illum)
exaudient illum Barn™
ut obaudiant eum V2g"/,
et obedire faciam ante eum Vig"/,
obaudire ante eum Lact

Esai lili 4, 5, 6
23. feret! Tyc Faustin (fert)

24, facinora Cyp Tyc portat Cyp Hil Ambr Fulg
iniquitates Hil Ambr Aug 25. Deus Tyc
Fulg Faustin Dominus Cyp Aug Fulg

26. eum Tye Aug'/, Fulg

illum Cyp Aug?/,
Esai lviii 3 [m 592]

27, et omnes Tyc m Tert?®* Ambr
(=LXX)
aut enim Cyp

28. subditos Tyce Ambr m
subiectos Cyp Tert

1 Possibly feret=fert. See esp. Ioh xv 5 e (d); Rénsch 286.

TYCONIUS AND S. CYPRIAN. lvi

Readings in which Cyp and Tyc are

agreed against other Latin authorities. Readings in which Cyp and Tye differ.

29. (compound of pungere) Cyp 29. conpungitis Tye m°" (-etis i)

Tye m subpungitis Cyp
succutitis Tert succutitis Tye
stimulatis Ambr stimulatis Ambr

Esai lxiii 9 [Priscillian 31]
30. non Cyp Tyc Vig Taps?/, (Tert?/,)
neque Jren Priscill
31. senior...angelus Cyp Tye Tren

(rpéaBus...dyyedos LXX) 32. non angelus Tyc
legatus...angelus Vig Taps?/, neque ang. Cyp Vig Taps?/,
nuntius...angelus Priscill Tren

angelus...legatus Tert de Carn Chr 11
legatus...nuntius Tert adv Mare iv 22
33. ipse Tyce Vig'/,(=Lxx B memph

Hieron)
ipse Dominus Cyp Tert/, Tren
34. ipse[Dominus] Cyp Tyce Tert?/, “oi, (=ixx RA X rel)
tren Vig" /. ipse Deus Tert adv Mare
ipse Dominus ueniet et Vig'/, 35. conseruauit eos Tye
Priscill liberabit (-uit) eos Cyp

saluoseos fecit Tert?/,( Priserll)
saluabit (-uit) eos Veg?/,

36. proper quod diligeret Tye
quia diliget Cyp
quoniam diligit Jren
eo quod diligeret Vig

37. parceret illis Tye

38. redemit Cyp Tye parcet eis Cyp
liberauit (-bit) Zren

We

Nhe

These 38 readings are not enough by themselves to enable us
to form a perfect estimate of the relation of the text of Isaiah in
Tyconius to that in Cyprian, but the general character of the text
does, I think, sufficiently appear.

In the first place the agreement of Cyp. and Tye. is greatest in
the long quotations. Now the quotations of 8. Cyprian are of
almost uniform quality, and reach the same standard of accuracy
whether they be long or short. But we have seen reason to
believe that the casual quotations of Tyconius are by no means
always to be relied on, while on the other hand the longer quota-

eo

lviil INTRODUCTION.

tions are very faithful to the Lxx. It is therefore not unlikely
that some of the differences between Cyp. and the shorter quota-
tions of Tyconius may be due to inaccuracy in the latter. Such
for instance would be the unsupported insertion of ego in 21, ds
for dns in 25, and possibly non for neque in 30. It is interesting
also to notice that the text of Tyconius has escaped the blunders
tu uero for nunc autem (viv Sé) in 16, and aut enim for et omnes in
27; these are found in no text independent of S. Cyprian.

Some of the nineteen readings where Cyp. and Tyc. agree
against other Latin authorities are expressions really characteristic
of the African version, and go far to prove the genuinely African
tenour of the text of Tyconius. They are as follows.

1. proximus (éyyvs) for prope. So Joh 11 18 e.

7. indignatio (@uu0s) for furor. ‘Furor, so far as I know,
never occurs in any African quotation, but it is the general O. T.
rendering of @vywos in Tren and Ambr. Cf Lc iv 28 ira a be ff q vg
Ambr, ‘iracundia’ ¢, but ‘furore’ df.

9. animus (d:avota) for sensus, mens, etc. Cf Esai xxxv 4 of
oduyowuxot TH Scavota, “qui estis pusill(ijanimes” Cyp 71 Habet-
deus 313, but “pusillanimes sensu” [ven Nouat, and “ modici
animi sensu” Hil?/,

13, 14 altus (OWnAds) for excelsus. Predominantly African ;
‘altus’ is found in the Gospels in ?/, e1/, d*/, a1/, and fvg'/s

24, facinus (avouta) for iniquitas. Again in Tyconius Esai
xliv 22, and Cyp. in Isaiah’/,; In the Gospels the only instance of
‘facinus’ is Mt xxiv 12 Cyp 335. |

These five renderings are by themselves sufficient to shew the
near relation of the text of Tyconius in Isaiah at least to that of
Cyprian. The two texts chiefly differ in points of Latinity, that of
Cyprian being as a rule more literally in agreement with the
Greek. Instances of this are: 2. contritio Tyc m, but obtritio
Cyp (cvvtpi8n); 29. conpungitis Tyc (m), but subpungitis Cyp

(Umovvacere)!.

1 An exception is 35—37, where we find for

éowoev avrovs, dia 7d ayamrav adrovs kal deldecOa aitav. Esai lxiii 9
liberabit illos quia diliget eos, et parcet eis. Cyp
conseruauit eos, propter quod diligeret eos et parceret illis. Tyc

Cod. R of Tyconius however reads

TYCONIUS AND S. CYPRIAN. lix

The ‘est’ in 19 is characteristic of all forms of the Old Latin
except the earliest stage of the African text.

When we turn to readings involving variation in the Greek, we
find the same marks of fundamental agreement between 8. Cyprian
and 'Tyconius as in the renderings. In estimating the differences
between two Latin authorities in matters which can be represented
in Greek it is of course necessary to be careful to avoid assuming
that all these differences actually correspond to real Greek variants;
for instance it is most improbable that No. 4 “insanabilis uenit”
for “uenit insanabilis” was produced by revision from the Greek,
though there are Greek Mss in which this change of order is
found. Again the Latin contractions for ‘God’ and ‘Lord’ are
more often confused than those used in Greek; Latin evidence in
fact for dns or dms against ds, and vice versa, is worth very little.

The only ditference in these thirty-eight readings which corre-
sponds to a Greek variant is No. 83, where Tye and Vig-Taps'/,
unite in resisting the temptation to add ‘Dominus’ to ‘ipse’
(avtos = 935). In the Greek avros alone is the reading of B
memph JHieron, but [o] Kupcos is added by & A Lucian, the Syr-
Hex, and nearly all other Mss. ‘ Dominus’ is found in Cyprian and
also in Irenaeus and Tertullian’/,, but “apse Deus” is the reading of
Tert adv Marc iv 22, while Priscillian and Vig-Taps'/, read “ apse
Dominus uenit et.’ Possibly all these additions may be independent.

In the earlier part of the same verse, Tyconius and Cyprian
agree in a noteworthy rendering. The Latin variations in Esai
Ixiii_ 9 between ‘senior’ and ‘legatus’ evidently go back to
meanings of the Greek mpéoBus: Cyp Tyc and Tren have ‘senior,
but Tert?/, Vig-Taps?/, and Priscillian have ‘legatus.’

Two other striking agreements of Cyp. and Tye. in matters
affecting the Greek are Nos. 10-11 and 22. No. 10-11 is
stellas Dei in Esai xiv 13, supported by 8. Cyprian and Tyconius
alone. The reading is absolutely certain in Tyconius, as he after-
wards quotes the verse again in the same words, saying “ stellarwm
Dei, id est sanctorum.” <All other authorities for the Lxx have

conseruabit eos propter quod diligeret eos, et parcet illis,
thus producing a text with nearly the same tenses as Cyprian.

1 Cf k. lii.

lx INTRODUCTION.

Tov act|é|pwv Tov ovpavov. But the Hebrew is bx 5). ls it
possible that ovvov of the Mss is a corruption of @v, and that the
original literal rendering of the LXx has been preserved only
in the African Latin'? At least this reading shews the intimate
connection of the texts of 8. Cyprian and Tyconius.

No. 22 affords another instance of agreement between Cyp.
and Tyc., this time in what appears to be a correction of the
originally literal Latin version by one who was not familiar with
the Greek. In Esai xlv 1 a consensus of Latin authorities read
TO XptaT@ pov Kuplw for To yptot@ ov Kupo, for which no real
Greek authority can be found®. But there are noteworthy Latin
variants in the rendering of the latter part of the verse. The
Greek is

emakovaat éutrpocbev avtov éOvn,
the Latin renderings being

obaudire ante eum gentes Lact (for once deserting Cyp)
et obedire faciam ante eum gentes Vig'/,

ut obaudiant eum Vzg'/,

exaudient illum Barn'**

but ut exaudiant eum Cyp Tyc ‘ Tert’advIud (illum)
(one MS of Cyp. omits wt, another reads et exaudiant)

Does it not appear as if ut ewaudiant eum was an early Latin
correction of exaudire ante ewm? In any case the rendering of
both S. Cyprian and Tyconius is sufficiently eccentric to demand
a common origin for the texts used by these Fathers.

Tyconwus and Habetdeus.

At the Collatio Carthaginiensis held in 411 A.D. between the
Catholics and Donatists a statement of Donatist doctrine illus-
trated by Scriptural proofs was read by Habetdeus a Donatist
Bishop. The text used by him is thus both localised and dated.
Most fortunately one of the quotations of Habetdeus coincides
with the end of one of Tyconius’ longer quotations ; it will not be

1 For a parallel instance see next section, p cx.
* Barn 12 is wholly assimilated to Ps cix in the best text (codd. &*I).

TYCONIUS AND HABETDEUS. Ix

necessary to do more than quote the two passages in parallel
columns to shew the essential identity of the versions’.

Habetdeus
(Du Pin’s Optatus ap 1702, p 315)

Tyconius 71 (77).

Esai xiv

20 quomodo uestimentum
conspersum* 77 sanguine
non erit mundum,
ita nec tu eris mundus,
quia terram meam perdidisti
et plebem meam occidisti.
non manebis in aeternum tempus
semeh nequam ;

21 para filios tuos interfici
peccatis patris sul,
ut non exsurgant.

quomodo uestimentum
sanguine* consparsum

non erit mundum,

ita nec tu eris mundus,
quia terram meam perdidisti
et plebem meam occidisti.
non eris in aeternum tempus
semen nequam ;

para filios tuos interfici
peccatis patris tui,

ut non resurgant.

Tyconius and the ‘Speculun’ (m).

The Old Latin Speculum (m), the second of those edited by
Weihrich in vol. xii of the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesvasticorum
Latinorum, is generally considered to contain a “degenerate Afri-
can” text, The passages quoted in it from Isaiah im common
with Tyconius are given below.

me 646

Tye 73

Esai v

6 et nubibus mandabo
ne pluant super eam pluuiam.

m 418

Nubibus mandabo
ne pluant super eam dbrem.

Tyce 50, 51

Esai xiii

6 Vlulate,

ululate,

prozimus est enim dies Domini,
et contritio a Deo aderit....

prope est enim dies Domini,
et contritio a Deo ueniet

1 The language of the other quotations of Habetdeus from Isaiah would lead to
a similar result. Among the characteristic ‘African’ expressions are facinorosus
(dvouos) Esai lxvi 3; fortitudo (doxis) Esai li 1; illic (éxet) Esai xxxv 8 ter, 9 bis;
iste (obras) Esaii13; quasi (ws) Esai lxvi 3 ter.

2 Prof. Sanday in Stud. Bibl. i 249; S. Berger, Vulgate 86 (where the fragment de
Fleury is Weihrich’s F of the Speculum). The connection between m and Priscillian
does not seem so close in the Prophets as in the book of Job and the Epistle of 8.
James.

lxi

9

10

i

12

20

i

(Item <llie:)

Ecce enim dies Domini

sine refrigerio adueniet
indignationis et irae,

ponere orbem terrae desertum,
et peccatores perdere ex eo.
nam stellae caeli et lucifer

et omne ornamentum caeli
lumen non dabunt,

et obscurabuntur sole* oriente
et* lunae non permanebit lumen

et mandabo uniuerso orbi mala
et imptis peccata eorum,

et perdam contumeliam iniquorum
et contumeliam superborum
humiliabo.

et erunt qui derelict sunt pretiose
magis quam aurum,

A

et homo pretiosus

magis quam lapis ex ‘affyr.

m 675

INTRODUCTION.

ecce enim dies Domini

ensanabilis wenit

indignationis et irae,

ponere orbem terrarwm desertum,

et peccatores perdere ex eo.

Stellae enim caeli et Orion

et omnzs ornatwra caeli

lumen non dabunt,

et tenebrescet oriente* sole

tlumen* et+ non permanebit lumen
evUs.

et infligam orbi terrae mala

et iniustis peccata eorum,

et perdam iniuriam scelestorum

et tniuriam superborum

humiliabo.

et erunt qui remanserint honorati

magis quam aurum

quod non tetigit ignem,

et homo honoratus erit

magis quam lapis ex Swfir.

omnis ornatura] conieci: omnis creatura
R; omnes ex ea rura V
oriente sole lumen] om V (spatio relicto)

Tyc 70 (71)

Esai xiv

Quomodo cecidit de caelo
lucifer gui mane oriebatur !

m 459

Quomodo cecidit de caelo
lucifer mane oriens !

Tyce 47

Esai xxiv

Cessauit superbia
et diuitiae impiorum.

m 692

cessauit cpudicitia
et diuitiae impiorum.

Tyc 10

Esai xxxili

Tabernacula tua

A non commouebuntur,

neque fatigabuntur

pali tabernaculi ezus

in aeternum tempus,

neque funes eius disrumpentur.

tabernacula

quae non commouebuntur,
neque agitabuntur

pali tabernaculi é¢uz

in aeternum tempus

neque funes eius vumpentur.

TYCONIUS AND THE SPECULUM. Ix

m 673 Tyc 9
Esai xlii
16 et adducam caecos Ducam caecos

in ula qua ignorabant in ulam quan non nouverunt,
et semitas quas nesceebunt et semitas quas non nouerunt
calcare faciam, calcabunt,
et faciam illis tenebras in lucem et faciam illis tenebras in lucem
et quae praua sunt diriga. et praua in directum.
haec uerba faciam, haec uerba faciam,
et non derelinquam eos. et non derelinquam eos.

caleare faciam] faciam illos calcare sess.
eos] illos sess.

m 491 Tyc 9
Esai xliv
21 ...e¢ Lsrahel quia puer meus es tu, Finvi te puerum meum, meus es tu,
et Israhel ne obliuiscaris mei. A Israhel noli obliuiscz mei.
ecce enim deleui ecce enim deleui
ut niuem trequitates tuas uelut nubem facinora tua
et ut caliyinem peccata tua. et sicut nimbum peccata tua.
m 592 Tyce 76
Esai lviu
3 e¢ omnes subditos uobis Omnes subditos uobis
conpungitis. conpungitis.

conpungetis sess al

m 593 Tye 57
Esai lviu
10 et tenebrae ¢7b7 Tenebrae tuae
erunt* ut meridies. sicut meridies* erunt.

It will not be necessary to analyse these passages in detail.
The amount of divergence is much greater than in the case of
Tyconius and §. Cyprian, who only differ 19 times in 14 verses,
while Tyconius and m differ 46 times in 13 verses. The Cyprianic
text being our working standard, these figures alone shew that m
has suffered much more change than Tyconius. At the same time
Tyconius and m agree in peculiar expressions which can only be
explained on the assumption that their texts go back to one
original version. A clear illustration of this is Esai xiii 10,

ol yap aotépes TOD ovpavod Kal o ?Opiwv

Kal TAS 0 KOTMOS TOU ovpavod TO das od SwMaovaL
Kal oKoticOnaeTat Tod 7ALov avaTéNXOVTOS

Kat 1) TEAHVN OV dwWaEL TO Haws avTHs.

lxiv INTRODUCTION.

Here cod. & has oikoc for kocmoc and several Mss have déyyos for
the second des; otherwise there is no variation. The only Latin
writer besides Tyconius and m who quotes the verse is S. Jerome,
who twice gives the verse literally from the Lxx'. Now although
m and Tyconius differ no less than seven times in their rendering
of Esai xiii 10, they agree in reading non permanebit lumen [eius]
for ov d@cee TO das avTHs, a coincidence still further extended if
we may regard the preceding words in Tyconius which correspond
to Kal 7 cednvn, viz “lumen et,’ as a corruption of “et luwnae” as
found in m. This paraphrase of the Greek is the more striking,
seeing that in the former part of the verse both m and Tyconius
have lumen non dabunt for To dads ov d@covar.

A point of contact such as this between Tyconius and the
Speculum is most important, more especially for the criticism of
the latter. It seems to shew that the constant departures from
the text of S. Cyprian and Tyconius found in m were not due to
an attempt to bring m into more literal accordance with the
Greek. Most of these variants from the Cyprianic standard
consist of synonyms, more or less accurate, such as iniquitas
for facinus, lucifer for Orion, contumelia for invuria. These are
extremely instructive for the criticism of the Latin text, while on
the other hand the value of the Speculum for the criticism of the
LXX is enhanced, if we have grounds for believing that most of
the late character of its text is due not to correction from the
Greek but to literary revision of the Latinity’.

A parallel instance of real agreement with the old African text
in m, side by side with superficial variation, is found in Esai v 26,
where Cyp 56 and 57 has et adtrahet illos, but in m 657 we find
et trahet eas. In both cases however the renderings point to «at
gupet avtous, which is otherwise absolutely unattested. Cod. B

has cal cuptet avtovs, and cod. A Kal cupte? avtois Qo pre).

1 See Sabatier ad loc. S. Jerome’s words are: Stellae enim caeli et omnis
ornatus caeli lumen suum (v. lucem) non dabunt: et obtenebrabuntur sole oriente
(v. tenebrabuntur orto sole), et luna non dabit lumen suum (v. lucem).

* There are a few cases where m deserts the older African Fathers in widely
spread distinctively Greek variations: e.g. Esai lviii 8 idwara is rendered by ‘ sani-
tates’ in Irenaeus, Lucifer, Ambrose and m 593 ; but Tert de Res Carn 27, Cyp 108,
291, 376, Latin mss known to Hieron, and Barn'*t 3 have ‘uestimenta,’ correspond-
ing to the Greek iudria, which is read by Barns 3, Iust-Tr 15, and codd. 147 91 106.

THE TEXT OF EZEKIEL IN TYCONIUS. lxv

In other prophetical books than that of Isaiah the evidence is
at once less in amount and more conflicting in character ; direct
comparison with the text of 8. Cyprian for the most part fails us.
In the Minor Prophets Tyconius and 8. Cyprian have in common
only the two verses Amos vili 9 and Mal iv 2, the latter being a
mere allusion in Tyconius. In Jeremiah there is only a reference
of no textual value to Hier ix 23, shared also by the Speculum.
In Daniel there is nothing. Indeed the quotations of Tyconius
from Daniel are so few, that it is impossible to discover whether
the version he used was translated from Theodotion or whether it
resembled the curious mixed text found in 8. Cyprian’. Finally,
out of the long passages from Ezekiel found in Tyconius, only
five verses are shared with S. Cyprian. These are given below.

Cyp 761, 767 Tyce 33
Eze XxXxvl
25 et aspargam super wos et aspergam wos
aquam mundaimn aquam mundam
et mundabimini et mundabimini
ab omnibus tnmunditiis uestris, ab omnibus A A
et ab omnibus simulacris uestris, A. A simulacris uestris,
26 et mundabo uos et mundabo uos
et dabo uobis cor nouum, et dabo uobis cor nouum,
et spiritum nouum dabo in uobis et spiritum nouum dabo in uobis
in uobis] in uos 761°, 767° ; uobis aqua munda R
1 Ae pila in uobis] in uos V
Cyp 158 Tyc 36
Eze xxxvil
11 dicunt : tpst dicunt :
arida facta sunt ossa nostra, arida facta sunt ossa nostra,
pervit spes nostra intervit Sspes nostra,
expirauimus. expirauimus.
12 propterea propheta et dic: propterea profetare et dic:
haee dicit Dominus, haec dicit Dominus,
Ecce ego aperio icce ego aperiam
monumenta uestra monumenta uestra
et educam uos et educam wos
de monumentis uestris de monumentis uestris

1 Whatever may be the connection between the J'estimonia and the early forms
of the Altercatio Simonis et Theophili (Harnack, Texte und Unters. 1), it is at least
clear that 8. Cyprian did not exclusively derive his knowledge of the uxx of Daniel
thence ; e.g. the quotation from Dan ix 4 ff in Cyp260 is not likely ever to have
found a place in the Altercatio.

Ixvi

14 et inducam uos interram Israhel. /\

dabo Spiritum meum in wos

et uluetis,

et ponam uos 7 terra uestra

et cognoscetis quoniamego Dominus
locutus sum, ete.

perit LO,WM*

INTRODUCTION.

et inducam uos in terram Israhel,...
et dabo Spiritum meum in uos

et uluetis,

et ponam uos super terram uestram
et scietis quia ego sum Dominus.

The readings in these five verses which bear on the Old Latin
version are as follows.

Readings where Cyp and Tyc agree
against other Latin authorities.

Eze xxxvi 25

simulacris Cyp?/, Tyc
idolis Aug

Eze xxxvil 11, 12 [m 424]

3.

facta Cyp Tyce Ambr
effecta m

expirauimus Cyp Tyc
interibimus (-iuimus) Ambr
om. m

Eze xxxvii 14 [m 424]

8.

spiritum meum in uos Cyp Tyce m
spiritum in uobis Jren
spiritum meum in uobis Ambr

Readings where Cyp and Tyc differ.

1g Ie

12.

aspargam super wos aquam mun-
2 1
dam Cyp*/, Aug'/,
asp. uos aqua munda 7'ye cod R
1
Aug'/,
asp. uos aquam mundam 7'yc cod

V

periit Cyp Ambr
interiit Tyce m

propheta Cyp

profetare Tyce m

prophetiza Ambr

aperio Cyp (aperio uobis Anibr)
aperiam Tyce Lren m

in terra uestra Cyp (in terram
uestram 7)

super terram uestram 7'yc [ren
Ambr

cognoscetis Cyp Iren

scietis Tyce Ambr m

quoniam Cyp Lren m

quia Tyc Ambr

ego Dominus Cyp Ambreet4

ego sum Dominus TZyc Tren
Ambro'' m

TYCONIUS AND TERTULLIAN. Ixvil

These twelve variants for the most part relate rather to matters
of accuracy than to recensional varieties!; none of the character-
istic common words (such as 60£a) occur, in rendering which
‘African’ authorities generally differ from the rest. This is the
more unfortunate, as the history of the text of Ezekiel in Africa is
most obscure. The ample quotations of Tyconius agree closely
with the fragments of the Weingarten Ms of the Prophets (aw); in
the long quotation from Eze xxviii I can only count 23 variations
in 16 continuous verses, and these mostly relate to minor matters.
But the text of w comes to us without a character; 1t may be
African, Gallican or Italian, revised or unrevised, and no leaf is
preserved in it from Isaiah, the book in which the geographical
affinities of text are most clear. On the other hand, against the
agreement of Tyconius and w stand in sharp relief the quotations
of Tertullian. In adv Marc 11 10 he quotes Eze xxviii 11—16,
differing from Tyconius in these six verses at least 17 times, three
of these being crucial various readings in the Greek. Yet we
cannot at once put down the whole of this variation to Tertullian’s
habit of quoting directly from the Greek, for he renders atoodpa-
yiopa by resignaculum, as opposed to signaculum (Tyce m) and
consignatio (Arnob-jun w). ‘Resignaculum’ in this passage is
especially singled out in Hieron’: “Et quia in Latinis codicibus
pro signaculo ‘resiqnaculum’ legitur, dum «caxofjrXws uerbum e
uerbo exprimens qui interpretatus est iuxta Lxx translationem
atoodpaytopa, id est resignaculum, posuit”.” No better evi-
dence could be given that resignaculum was a genuine Latin ren-
dering and not an eccentricity of Tertullian. Yet the text of
Tyconius contains many ancient readings opposed to the post-
Hexaplar tradition of the Lxx*; it can hardly be the result of a
late revision from the Greek. The whole question is evidently
most complicated, and needs a thorough investigation not from the
points of view of the text of Tyconius alone; the safest working
hypothesis in the meanwhile I suppose to be the recognition of
the fact that in the text of Tertullian everything is possible. Side
by side with Tertullian’s own paraphrases and translations we no

1 Compare on the other hand the same passage in Tertullian de Res Carn 29.
2 From Sabatier ad loc. 3 See pp cvili—cx.

Ixvill INTRODUCTION.

doubt often meet with genuine fragments of the oldest forms of
the Latin version.

One fact more remains to be noticed in connection with the
Old Latin of Ezekiel, which seems to suggest that that book under-
went a revision of its Latinity in very early times. In ‘Tert’ adv
Iud 11, a work which at least contains very ancient elements,
there is a long quotation extending from Eze viii 12 to ix 6. The
language of this extract recalls the peculiarities of S. Cyprian’s
quotations from Isaiah, for we find claritas = &0&a Eze ix 3 and
facinus = avopia Eze ix 4, though Cyp 90, 367 quotes the latter
verses with the rendering iniquitas. The only various reading
however between this quotation and Cyp concerning the Greek is
the curious phrase Taw signum for td onpetov in Eze ix 67.
‘Tau’ is omitted by 8. Cyprian, but it may have stood in his
version, for the title of Test ii 22, in which one of his citations
of the verse occurs, is “Quod in hoe signo crucis salus sit omni-
bus qui in frontibus notentur.” The reading of 7d as tad or tT
is unattested by any Greek Ms, but it is evident how easily
To cHmelon could be read t- cHmeIoNn®.

Style and Vocabulary.

Direct comparison will not carry us farther with the text of
Tyconius, but in so literal a version as the Old Latin much can be
done by a comparison of the usage of rendering in different
passages. In this department it is especially necessary to avoid
premature theorising. Judging by the results already attained in
the study of the Old Latin Gospels there are no general principles
to guide the student. Neither literal rendering of the Greek, nor
systematic transliteration of Greek words, nor the reverse of these,
is specially characteristic of the African version. The only method
which does not mislead is actually to catalogue all peculiarities,
trusting that on further knowledge we shall find some to be really

1 In ver 4 the Taw does not seem to be genuine in adv Iud 11, as it is omitted
by cod. \ (Oehler ii 732).

2 Comp. Barn ix év 7@ évl rdév cravpdv, which becomes in fie Latin habes in

una littera Tau crucem. Possibly the text of adv Iud may have been influenced by

Tert adv Marc iii 22. The verses are also quoted in the Altercatio Simonis, p 33.
See addl. note, p exix.

VOCABULARY. lxix

characteristic. Thus &, the best representative of the African text,
has many Greek transliterations such as eremwm for desertum
Mt xi 7, anastasis for resurrectio Mc xii 23, yet the same MS is our
principal authority in 8S. Matthew for s¢miltudo instead of para-
bola. Nothing but actually collecting the facts and grouping
them, and then taking the evidence of the groups, will reveal to
us the true literary history of the Old Latin Bible’.

In the following glossary most of the words used in the quota-
tions of Tyconius are included, except such terms as do not admit
of variation in translation from Latin into Greek. Besides giving
the words and their Greek equivalents I have added some illustra-
tions of their use in other ‘ African’ authorities, especially codd. k e
and the quotations of §. Cyprian. Asterisks denote that all
examples of a word in Tyconius have not been collected.

abiectus (efovfervnuévos) 1 Co i 28, 20
contemptibilis 7 567 d, vg Tert adv Marey 5 Aug.
ablative absolute (=Gk gen. abs.)
Zech xiv 12, 49
[see dum].
abominatio (8deAvyua) Mt xxiv 15, 5.
The phrase ré Bdédvypa tis epnpocews (Mt xxiv 15, Me xiii 14) ds rendered
as follows:
abominationem uastationis e Cyp 335 Tyc (Mt)
exsecrationem desolutionis & (Mc)
aspernationem desolationis 7 (Mc)
abom., desolationis a be d fh q vg Lren*/, Hil Aug (Mt)
acing vg [hiant b f| (Me);
Dan ix 27
execratio uastationum de Pasch Comp 261, 262
exsecr, uastationis ‘ Tert’? adv Iud 8
abom. desolationis /ren
desolationis interitus w Hesych ap Aug.
abstinere se (dvdAdoaed Oa with amo)
1 Ioh v 21, 70
cf Ac xxi 25 vg,
acceptabilis (Sexrés) Le iv 19 (=Esai lxi 2), 60, 65
acceptabilem e Cyp 75 (Esai)
acceptum rell (¢ncl m399),
accipere (SéyecOa) Hier xxxii 28, 54.
* (Aap Bavewv) Hier xxxii 15, 17, 53 and a dozen times elsewhere,
adesse (emepyecOac) Esai xiii 13, 51.

1 See especially Koffmane, Gesch. des Kirchenlateins, 39, 40.

lxx INTRODUCTION.

(nKewv) Esai xiii 6, 50 (=Cyp 366).
adhuce (é7:) Soph ii 15, 42 (tn a neg. sentence)
Eze xxxvii 23, 34 (in a neg. sentence)
Toh xx. 1,57 C=7ell)
[see iam, ultra],
(apre) 1 Toh ii 9, 68 (=Cyp 116 rel)
[see modo, nunc].
adicere (cvvemribecOa) Zech i 15, 76.
adimplere (¢umirdavac) Ps xc 16, 3,
adire (évrvyyavew) Sap viii 21, 20,
admittere (see facinus adm.),
adnuntiare (SiayyéAXewv) Ps ii 6, 72.
(karayyéAXev) Phil i 18, 70 (=Cyp vg rell),
adpropinquare (éyyi¢ev) Soph iii 2, 42
Esai xxxix 13, 8
Eze xxxvi 8, 36 (€Amigovow Gk Mss)
Ro xiii 12, 57 (=Cyp425 vg)
On Eze xxxvi 8 see p cx.
aeternum—in aeternum (eis rév aidva, €ws aldvos)
Gen iii 22, 81
2 Regn vii 13, 16 b¢s, 37
Ps xvii 51, 5 (usq. in saeculum V,=vg)
Esai xiv 20, 71, 77; xix 20, 43; xxxiii 20, 10
Hier xvii 25, 62
Eze xxvii 36, 46; xxviii 19, 78, 85
[see saeculum].
alienatio (¢koraois) Zech xiv 13, 49
mentis alienatione (ékardcet)
Eze xxvii 35, 46; xxxii 10, 44
[cf in stupore mentis].
alligatus—habe[n]s in te alligatum (éydé8eca)
Eze xxviii 13, 78, 81 (=w [Arnob-jun)).
but indutus es (évdéduaar) Tert adv Mare ii 10 Mier/,,
altus (¢Wnros) Esai xiv 13 bis, 70, 72; xiv 26, 52; xxiv 4, 47
so Cyp in Isaiah>/,
(excelsus 7el/)
[see excelsus].
ambo (dauddrepor) Mt xiii 30, 29 (=)
Lei 6, 13 (=rell)
utraque Mt xiii 30 rell (hiat e),
animatio (A@up0s) Esai xiii 13, 51
‘propter animationem irae (@vpov épyns) Domini, in die qua aderit
indignatio (Avpds) eius’
Avpos=animatio (Esai xlii 25) Cyp 253, 286, also joined with ira
[see indignatio, ira].

VOCABULARY. Ixx1

animus (dcdvora) Esai xiv 13, 70, 71 (=Cyp 669)
im Lei 51 dcavoia=sensu e, mente rell (cogitatione @).
apotheca (aro6nkn) Eze xxviii 13, 78, 81 (=v)
horrea Tert adv Mare ii 10
cf Le xii 18, 24 d e (apotheca)
elsewhere always horrea in NT in all Mss except d Wc iii 17 (vepositio),
apparere (Ae:roupyeiv) Dan vii 10, 60
ef Tert adv Prax 3 (edd)
and Ps ciii 4, where apparitores=Aecrovpyovs adv Marc ii 8, iii 9,
arbor (&vAov) Ge 1117, 61
ef Cyp 158, 405
elsewh, lignum, e.g. Eze xx 32, 35.
arbor nauis (ierds) Esai xxxiii 23, 10.
arguere (madeverr) Eze xxviii 3, 77, 79
erudierunt w.
emendare = radevew Cyp (157,) 181
arguere = edeyyeiv, but it 7s used for madevew as here in Ps xciii 12
Op Imp in Mt ii 39,
aspergere with double acc. Eze xxxvi 25, 33
pave ed vas kabapov vOwp LXX
aspargam super uos aquam mundam Cyp?/, Aug!/,
asp. uos aqua munda slug'/, Tye cod R
asp. uos aquam mundam 7'ye cod V.

cf Lev v 9 favei dé rod atyaros...... €ml Tov TOLYoV
asparget sanguinem...... parietem cod Lugd,

assumere (avadauavev) Esai lxiii 9, 10.
(rpoadéyerOar) Esai xlv 4, 8,
astrum (dorpor) Nah iii 16, 42
Eze xxxii 7, 44, 45
cf sideribus Le xxi 25 d e (Tert1/,), stellis rel]
[see stella (aornp) |.
auaritia (mcovegia) Col iii 5, 83 (=d, ve Tren Hil Aug)
cupiditas Cyp 645 [cf Le xii 15 ed e],
audire (eloaxovew) Ex xvi 28, 26
Soph iii 2, 42.
auersari (dmocrpéperbar wv. acc.)
ai 1G, 41, 53
cf Mt v 32 auersatus fueris * Cyp
auertaris, auerteris te rel,
auertere (aroarpepew) Esai xiv 27, 52
Hier xxv 39, 50.
(emeorpedew) Ps cxxv 1, 67
[comp conuerti],
aues (zrereiva) Eze xxxii 4, 44
In the Gospels anes =rerewa 3/, viz

5; oy

Ixxil INTRODUCTION.

Mciv4bcf
iv 32bcdf fig vg (hiat a), uolatilia e
Le xii 24 Of q.
auferre* (aipecv) Esai x 14, 75
[see extollere, ferre, tollere].
(droorpépev) Ro xi 26, 34.
(dgaipew) Esai x 13, 75; xiv 25 bes, 52; li 11, 2
Eze xxvi 16, 45; xxxvi 26, 33.
(aguoravat) 2 Regn vii 15 ter, 37.
beatus (paxapios) Mt xxiv 46, 11 (=Mss incl e)
Toh xiii 17, 26 (=Mss incl e), but felices Cyp 118
[see felix].
bellator, -trix (67\opayos) Esai xiii 4, 5, 50.
bonitas (ypyororns) Ps lxiv 12, 60.
cadere
cadent = paéovow Esai xiii 16, 51
? read by Tyconius for elident
ef Mt vii6 k Cyp 154.
qui ceciderunt=reOynkxores Esai xiv 19, 71, 76.
caedere (komrev) Zech xiv 12, 49,
cardines caeli (ra adxpa tov ovpavod)
Hier xxv 36, 49
elsewh. summum (a summo terrae, 9).
The rendering cardines tr this place was probably suggested by the pre-
ceding quattuor. ef exoriri for é&épyecOar used of the sun Gen xix
23, 85.
cauere (Srérew) Mt xxiv 4, 5 (=e Cyp 335), uidere rel,
cena pura (mapackevy) Ioh xix 42, 59 (=e gat), parasceue rell.
see Rinsch, /t und Vg 307, to which we may add Mc xv 47 &k.
ceruix (rpayndos) Hier xvii 23, 62
[see collum].
charisma (ydapicua) 1 Co xii 4, 69 (=Jren'/,)
gratia Lren}/,
donum Hil'/, Vig"/,
donatio d, m310, 324 vg Hil!/, Aug Vig?/s.
cibus (Spears) Col ii 16, 64 (= Tert relt).
circumstantia—circumstantiam pati (cvpdopaivew)
Esai xiii 8, 51.
circumuenire (xatacopifecOa) Ex i 10, 55.
clamare (xpa¢ecy) Eze xxvii 30, 45.
claritas (d0&a) Esai x 16, 48; xii 2, 81
Toh xvii 5, 2, 37 (=Cyp rell, exc af)
2 Co iii 18, 19 (but ef 21).
In Cyprian’s quotations from Isaiah claritas = 86£a/,,
[see gloria].

VOCABULARY. Ixxill

cogitatio (ovA7) Sap vi 3, 72
Hisai xiv 26, 525 xix 4, 43.
(Stadoyopos) Ro i 21, 84.
cogitationes = émirndevpara
7G XxXkVi-o |, go
[see studia],
colligere (auvayew) Zech xiv 14, 49
sie xi a Oe 14, 15, ole sem TR 46 oli 0, 9
alix 16.)82
so ke Cyp constantly in the Gospels
[see congregare].
collum (rpayn\os) Reo 10, 12 = Fit Ag)
cerulx d e, vg Tren.
collum occurs i all Mss in the Gospels*/,; in most other books it 7s
characteristically African.
ef eg. Esai lviii 5 collum Cypl08 Barn'’3 (Ambr)
but ceruicem Lucif 141 m593
[see ceruix].
comedere (ec@iew) Esai xxiv 6, 47.
(xateoOiew) Abd 18, 83, 85
Eze xx 47, 40
[see consumere, deuorare].
commemorari (n»ncOjvac) Ge xix 29, 85
Mt v 23 commemoratus &
recordatus Cyp ff f ve
rememoratus abegh q
[see reminisci ].
commemoratio (pveia) Esai xxiii 16, 46,
commercia, -orum (éeumdpior) (Esai xxiii 17), 46”
cf domum commercatorum Toh ii 16 e,
comminuere (cetew) Esai x 13, 75; xix 1, 43
commouere Agg ii 22, 80; Esai xiv 16, 75 (mouet, 70).
comminutio (currpif87) Prov xiv 28, 76.
commixticius (éemipicros) Eze xxx 5, 43,
commixtio (cippixros) Eze xxvii 33, 34, 46
[see promiscuus],
commutari (uerapoppotaGat) 2 Co iii 18, 19
transformari 375 vg Aug (cf Tyc 21)
transfigurari Tert adv Mare v 11
reformari d, Ambr
transferri Hil
cf Mc ix 2 commutata est figura eius /, transfiguratus est rel/,
conburere (kataxaiew) Eze xx 47, 40.
concisor (kémTor) Esai x 15, 79,
concitare (mapofvvew) Esai xiv 16, 10, 75 (=Cyp 183)
[see exacerbare, incitare |.

Ta

Ixx1v INTRODUCTION.

conexus see constructus.
confidere (zemoévar) Soph iii 2, 42
Zech xiv 11, 48.
confirmare (dvopOotv) 2 Regn vii 16, 37.
(ornpi¢ew) Eze xx 46, 40; xxi 2, 41
of Le ix 51 ¢ ¢.
confringere (ovvrpiBew) Esai xiii 18, 52; xiv 12, 71
Hier xxv 35, 49.
conterere Esai xiv 12, 70
(cf esp. Le ix 39 e)
[see conterere].

congregare (aOpoi¢ew) Eze xxxvi 24, 33.
(cuvayew) Eze xxxvii 21, 34; xxxix 2, 74
[see colligere].
conlidere (eSapifew) Ps cxxxvi 9, 52.
conpungere (vmoviocew) Esai lviii 3, 76 (=m592)
but subpungere Cyp 108,
conroborare (kparaoiv) Ps lxxix 16, 6 (confirmasti V)
=e Lei 80, ii 40; confortare, confirmare, a b ell.
conscelerare (dceBeiv followed by acc.)
Soph iii 4, 42
impie agunt (om legem) Lucif
reprobant legem m500.
conseruare (co¢ew) Esai lxiii 9, 9.
consolari (mapaxadcio Oar) Ps cxxv 1, 67
[see exhortari].
consparsus (meduppevos) Esai xiv 20, 71, 77
= Habetdeus 315.
constitutio mundi (kataBod7 Kocpov)
Toh xvii 24, 2, 37 (=rell incl Cyp 159),
constructus—(omne corpus) constructum et conexum = cvvappodoyovpevor kai
ovvBiBatopevov Eph iv 16, 3
constructum et subministratum = émiyopnyovpevoy
Kat cvvBiBaopevor Col ii 19, 3.
Thus in each case the words are transposed: so that constructus = ovvBiBa-
Cépevos, CONEXUS = ovvappoAoyovpevos.
The other Latin renderings are
Eph iv 16 compactum et conexum d, vg Jren Lucif Ambr Ambst
conexum et compactum Awzg?/,
Col ii 19 subministratum et constructum vg
subm. et copulatum Ambr
subm. et compaginatum A mbst (Iren)
compactum et conexum Awg
productum et porrectum m514 (Luc?f )
subministratum et prouectum d,,

VOCABULARY. Ixxv

consumere (efavadioxerv) Hier xxv 38, 49.
(karecOiew) Hier xvii 27, 62
[see comedere, deuorare].
consummatus (réAevos) 1 Toh iv 18, 25 (= Aug?/s)
perfectus Tert?/, Aug*/, Ambr Fulg ¢ vg
cf rereXetwpévot Loh xvii 23
perfecti a e f Hil
consummati b vg Ambr
perfecti consummati d,
contaminare (8«8nAouv) Eze xxviii 18, 78, 84
[see polluere, profanare].
(maivery) Eze xxxvii 23, 34
[see inquinare, polluere].
contegere (xadvmrew) Eze xxxil 7, 44, 45
= Ps liv 6 latiom™ exe Heb,
contemnens (davAiorpia) Soph ii 15, 42.
conterere (éxrpiBew) Ge xix 29, 85.
(cuvrpiBew) Esai xiv 12, 70
Eze xxvii 26, 74, 78; xxvii 34, 46; xxxii 12, 44
but confringere Esai xiv 12, 71
[see confringere ].
continere (xpareiv) Sap vi 2, 72
[see obtinere],
contritio (cuvrpy3y) Esai xiii 6, 50 (=m418)
but obtritio Cyp 366,
contumax esse (dzeiGew) Esai lxiii 10, 10
cf Esai l 5 ; lxv 2 Cyp,
contumelia (vBpis) Eze xxxii 12, 44
[see iniuria}.
(aryuia) Ro ix 21, 82; 2 Tim ii 20, 82
2 Tim 11 20 in contumelia V (Aiat R)=els drysiav, inhonorata Cyp 623
[see ignominia, iniuria}.
conuertere (emiotpédew) Esai xlix 6, 38,
(karactpépew) Agg ii 23, 80
but subuertere Ge xix 29, 85.
conuerti (amocrpépeoOa) Esai xiii 14, 51; xli 17, 9.
(emeatpeper Oar) Ps Ixxix 15, 6
Esai xliv 22, 9
Hier iii 12, 75
[comp auertere].
cooperire (karaxadvmrew) Eze xxxii 7, 44
hut operiam 45,
coram (é€vw7uov) A Gdcpres.d bbb ay Uf
(€vavriov) Hier xxv 37, 49.
creare (xri¢ew) Hize xxviii 14, 15, 78, 83 (=w)

Ixxvl INTRODUCTION.

Eph ii 10, 20 (=rell)
but condere Tert adv Mare ii 10 and v 17,
cubiculum (rapeiov)
‘cubiculorum opera Christum esse,’ 70
cf Mt xxiv 26, ecce in cubiculis Cyp 336 ¢ (d)
[see promptuarium |,
custodire—custodiamus 1 Ioh ii 3, 68 (=Cyp 546) stands for pudraEopev ®*.
All other documents, incl h Aug Lucif, have tnpépev, (ob)seruamus.
cf eg. Eze xxxvi 27, 33.
cydaeus (yvdaios) Bet 7, Do.
debellare (wodeyeiv) Ps cxix 6, 10
[see expugnare],
decenter (evoxnpoves) Ro xiii 13, 57 (=Cyp 425 Hil)
honeste m528 d, vg Aug Ambr,
decor (xa\Xos) Eze xxviii 7 6:3, 77, 80; xxviti 12, 78, 80 (—Terd);
xxviii 17 bs, 78, 83 (=~*/,)
[see species].
deformatio (udppocis) 2 Tim iii 5, 69 (=Cyp 224)
forma m515 d, vg Lucif Aug.
dehonestari (mapadevyparifer Gar)
Eze xxviii 17, [78,] 84 (= Meron°’)
in traductionem m675 Arnob-jun.
deicere (xatappinrew) Thren ii 1, 84.
(karaBadXew) Eze xxxii 12, 44; xxxix 3, 74,
deliciae (rpud7) Eze xxviii 13, 78, 80 (=rell); xxxvi 35, 34.
delictum 2 Regn vii 14 (Ps Ixxxviii 33), 38 R, not V
[elsewhere peccatum ].
delinquere (dyapraver) Ps 16, 20 V, not R
[elsewhere peccare].
demolitus (xa@npnyévos) Eze xxxvi 36, 34.
(xateckappévos) Eze xxxvi 35, 34.
deputari (AcyifecOa) Ro iv 3, 19; ix 8, 27 (= Hil Aug)
aestimantur Ro ix 8 d, vg.
desertor (adeotnkés) Eze xx 38, 35 (=m455),
desolari (épnyotcda) Eze xxxii 15, 45; (xxxv 14, 735) xxxvi 10, 36.
desolatio (€pyyeois) Hier xxxii 18, 53
[see uastatio and abominatio],
despoliare se (éxdvecrOa) Eze xxvi 16, 45 (=h w),
destruere (karapyeiv) Ro iii 31, 14 (=rell, eve euacuare Tert)
[see euacuare].
detegere (dmoxadv’ntew) 2 The ii 6, 74 (V, hiat R)
but reuelabitur ver. 8, 75
of 74%
detinere (karéyew) 2 The ii 6, 7, 74
[see obtinere and p li],

VOCABULARY. Ixxvil

deuastatio (48aros) Hier xxxii 18, 53.
deuorare (xarecOiew) Eze xxviii 18, 78, 84
[see comedere, consumere },
dicturus—dicturus es (Aéyar épeis)
Eze xxviii 9, 77 (=w)
[see narrare and p 1].
dignitas—tibi dignitatem read by Tyconius 9, for tibi indignationem (dei
cot Tov Ovpov pov Esai xlviil 9).
dilectio (ayarn) 1 Ioh iv 18 ter, 25 (= Tert?/, Aug?/,)
caritas g vg Aug?/, Ambr,
diligere (ayarav) Esai lxi 9, 10
1 Ioh iii 14, 68; iv 20, 68
diluculo (opé@pov) Eoamy 1,0 (<2 72 ve)
tempore eb g r* rhe
ante lucem @
but deluculo Os vi 4 A, [Toh] vili 2 e
of diluculo uigilabunt (=<pépiobor) Os vi lh Cyp 293,
dirigere (dvopOo0v) 1 Regn vii 18, 37
[see confirmare],
diripere (rpovopevew) Esai xiii 16, 51.
dirutus (xatepOappevos) Esai xlix 19, 82.
discens (ja6nT7s) Ac sy 10, 32
discipulorum d e, vg Tren Hil Aug
discens in the Acts h */, (discipulorum Ac vi 2)
wi om Mi Meh?)
[see discipulus].
discipulus (uadnr}s) Mt x 25, 6 (=Mss tne )
[see discens].
disponere (ovyrdccew) Ge xviii 19, 24.
(StarcOevar) Les Naue vii 11, 39
Eze xxxvii 26, 35.
dissoluere (karadvew) Mt xxvii 40, 75
destruere Mss, but hiant ek
cf Me xiii 2 e Cyp 49 (resoluatur /).
[in Mt xxiv 2 Tyc T* seems to support destruere (=e rell)],
doctrina (emiorjun) Eze xxviii 4°, 5, 7, 77; xxvii 17, 78 (=m675)
doctrina also occurs tn cod w Eze xxviii 3, 4 ter, 5, 7
[see sapientia, scientia, and
Introd p xvii].
domus (xarockia) Hier iii 12, 75
(a careless or corrupt q?—hiat R; Ps-Cyp de Paenitentia 16 has habitatio),
donec (dype 08, dypis dv) Ro xi 25, 34; Gal i 19, 17.
(€ws) Esai xxxiii 23, 10
Hier xxv 38, 49
Eze xxviii 15, 78, 83

Ixxvili INTRODUCTION.

2 The ii 7, 8, 52 (not 74)
[see quoad usque].
dum (ev with infin.) Eze xxvi 15, 45; xxxvi 20, 23, 32, 33; xxxvii 28, 35.
(with indic. for abl. abs.) Esai lix 9%, 74.
(with indic. for pres. part.) Esai lix 9°, 74.
edere (€cieww) Esai xxiti 18, 46, 47
_ [see manducare].
egens (mrwyos) Esai xxiv 6, 47
ef Le xvi 20 e
(egenus and egens are characteristically African for pauper: e.g. Esai
lviii 8 Cyp 108, 592),
egredi (amoorpepew) Eze xxi 5, 41, perh. for regredi.
(€xropeverOar) Hier xvii 19, 62, but exire zn v. 21.
(€€€pxecOa) Eze xxxvi 20, 32
[see prodire, which occurs once
(1 Ioh iv 1, 67), edse-
where e&épxerOar= exire.
comp k \xxviii],
eligere (€xdéyew) Eze xx 38, 35.
emittere (exBaddrevv) Mt xii 35, 84 (=k Cyp 670).
(exorav) Eze xxi 5, 41.
(e€arooredAev) Ge xix 29, 85,
emundare (xaOapi{ew) Eze xxxvii 23, 34
elsewh. mundare
cf Mt viii 2, 3 bis, x 8, xid5 &
[see mundare].
ensis (poudaia) Ge iii 24, 81
elsewh. gladius.
cf Ps xliv 4 Cyp 98,
eram, erat (jynv, jv) Ps cxix 7, 10; Sap viii 21, 20
Ion iii 3, 41; Nah iii 3, 42
Le i 6, 13 (=mss eve e) ; Ioh vii 39, 22 (=mss)
e Lei 6 has fuerunt.
fuit occurs in k about 30 times where the other Mss have erat.
fuit ete in Tyc is used to render
eyévovro Exi7, 55
eyeryOn ze xxviii 13, 14, 78; xxxvi 34, 34
yeyovey Gal ili 24, 18 (=rell)
cf also contumaces fuerunt (je(Oncav) Esai lxiii 10, 10,
ergo (apa) Gal 111 29, 7 (=rell)
propterea ergo maledictio Esai xxiv 6, 47 must stand for dia roto
apa dpa, but the first apa vs found in no other authority.
(ovr) Toh xix 42, 59; Col ii 16, 64, and elsewhere.
[see itaque].
eripere (¢£aipeiv) PS XG: [oee3,

VOCABULARY. Ixx1x

(pvec Oat) bs x 14-55,
esse (pévev) non eris=ov py pelvyns
Esai xiv 20, 71, 77
non manebis /abetdeus 315,
est ete is regularly supplied where the copula ts not expressed in the Greek
except in the following places :
after ecce, Ex 19, 59
after haec, Esai xiv 26, 52
after qui, Hier xvii 26, 62; xxxii 21, 53
Eph 1 10, ii 17, 18
cf also 3 Regn xiii 2, 41.
euacuare (xarapyetv) 1 Coi 28, 20 (cfr m567 Aug)
[see destruere ].
euacuari (kevotoda) Ro iv 14, 13 (=‘ Lulianus’ ap Aug)
exinaniri d, vg Aug
[see inanis fieri],
euangelizare (evayyeAiCer Oat)
Eph i 17, 18 (=d, vg rell)
adnuntiare Cyp 94 Tert.
euenire (emépxeoOa) Nah iii 18, 42.
exacerbare (mapofivew) Esai lxiii 10, 10
[see concitare, incitare],
exardescere (exkaiesOar) Abd 18, 83, 85
[cf succendere].
exasperare (mapopyi¢ew) Eze xxxii 9, 44,
exaudire (emaxovew) Ps cx 15, 3 [eicax- 8*B]
Esai xlv 1, 4
2 Co vi 2, 60 (=rell),
excelsus (vWydos) Eze xx 33, 34, 35
[see altus],
excitare (emeyeipew) Esai xii 17, 51
ereyeipew occurs in NT Ac xiii 50, xiv 2
the renderings are
excitare Ac xill 50 vg
incitare Ac xiv2d
suscitare Ac xili 50 d é, xiv 2 e, vg.
(excludere =[€k |BadAecv)
qui...uestitum nuptialem non habet...excluditur 83, cf Mt xxii 13, where
however latte” incl Habetdeus 314 have mittete (Barere D 28 13-69 etc)
[see expellere].
execratio (8déAvypa) Ap xvii 4, 82 (=Cyp 148, 196)
abominatio Pris vg
cf Le xvi 15 e Cyp 748
[see abominatio].
exhortari (mapaxadcio Oar) Esai xiii 2, 50
[see consolari].

Ixxx INTRODUCTION.

exinanire (¢kkevoov) Eze xxviii 7, 77, 80 (=w)
exinanire = kevooy is avoided by Tyc in NT
[Phil 11 7 se inaniuit Cyp 79 codd MB, 149 codd LMB semetipsum
exinaniuit, 79 cod L=vg, se exinaniuit sess Hartel 2/,]
[cf euacuari, inanis fieri].
expauescere (efordvar) Esai xiii 8, 51
[see stupere].
expellere (éxSad\ew) Gal iv 30, 30
cf k, e.g. Mtx 1
(eicere /azeur-it-ve)
[comp excludere].
(eEwbeiv) Loel ii 20, 73
Hier xxv 36, 49 (=d vg <Ac vii 45),
expirare (dvaporeivy) Eze xxxvii 11, 36 (= Cyp 148)
om m424
exsperauimus Cyp cod O,
desperauimus Hieron
interiuimus Amb
auulsi sumus in eis Tert Res Carn 29,
expugnare (zoAeyetv) Esai xix 2, 43
[see debellare].
exterminium (am@Aea) 2 The ii 3, 30
perditio Tert?/, Iren d, vg

interitus Ambr Aug?/s
[see interitus, perditio].

(apavopos) Soph ii 13, 15, 42.
extollere (aipev) Esai xlix 18, 81
[see auferre, ferre, tollere].
exurgere, perf. exsurrexit (dvoravac)
Ex 18, 565.
(€Eeyeipecv)
Cant iv 16, 74
Zech ii 13, 73.
(€meyeipew)
Esai xix 2, 43,
facinus (avopia) Esai xliv 22, 9; lili 5, 2 (=Cyp)
2 The ii 7, 30, 74, 84 (iniq. Zert red/)
so also Mt xxiv 12 Cyp 335 and 7/, in Isaiah
[see iniquitas].
facinus admittere (davoueiv) Esai xxiv 5, 47; xliii 27, 9
cf Dan ix 5, Cyp 260

ed as ee -misit Ex xxxii 7 7, but ...... -tem fecisti Eze xvi 52 w),
famulus (ais) Esai xxiv 2, 47

elsewh. puer, e.g. Esai xliv 1, 9,
felix (jaxapios) Pa cxxxvi 9,52

[see beatus].

VOCABULARY. Ixxx1

ferre (aipew) Poxc-12 23
[see auferre, extollere, tollere].
(pepe) Esai li 4, 2
Hier xvii 26, 62
[see portare].
festinare
uenire...,..festinet (Sswéerar) Esai xii 14, 51,
fidelis fieri (mictovcda) 2 Regn vii 16, 37.
fiens fiet et erit (ywopevos €orat)
Ge xvii 18, 24.
Probably derived from a conflation of tiens erit and fiet et erit. Lor the
latter construction see k ciil.
figmentum (7oinua) Eph ii 10, 20 (=r d, Aug)
factura Tert vg.
fingere (zAaooev) Esai xlili 7, 9; xliv 21, 9.
fornicaria (mopyn) —_ Esai xxiii 15, 16, 46
[comp meretrix].
fortitudo (icxvs) Esai x 13 bis, 75 (=Cyp Esai xi 2; xxxili 11 etc)
[see uires, uirtus].
fructum afferre (kapzogopetv) Ro vii 5, 12 (= Mt xiii 23 Mss)
fructicare d, vg
fructum ferre Jert Aug.
fulgere (Adurew) 2 Co iv 6 bis, 57
fulgere, fulsit Tyce
fulgere, illuxit d, Anbst
clarescere, claruit 7 dug
splendescere, illuxit vg dmbr Vig
cf Mt xvii 2 e,

fulgor (avy?) Esai lix 9, 74
cf Mc xiii 24 & (=qéyyos), splendor rel/,
funis (cxovwior) Esai xxxili 20, 23, 10.

generare (yevvar) Le iii 22, 7
(genuitabed f* rrhe Hil™ Fuustap Aug codd latt ap Aug)
Gal iv 24, 13, 29 (= Tert rell).
generare for gignere (except in genealogies) is predominantly African
e.g. Esai i 2 Cyp 40, 273, 430
(each time with a various reading in the inferior codices),
generatio (yeved) Ge xv 16, 61; Ex xiii 18, 61
Eccl i 4 bes, 4
Baruch vi 2, 61
[see saeculum],
gentiles (¢4vn) Nah iii 3, 42
geutilibus V, gentigentibus R ; possibly only a corruption of gentibus,
yet cf Cyp Test 111 34 (Hier x 2)
[see natio].

Ixxxll INTRODUCTION.

germinare (avareAdew) lob xi 17, 75
cf k Mc xili 28 (=expvewv).
gerund iz -dum Gal ii 4, 30.
-do Pe lnve2 1716;
gladius (¢yxepidvov) Eze xxi 3, 4, 5, 41
*gladius =payaipa and popdaia passim
e.g. Eze xxxii 11 bis, 44
[see ensis],
gloria (Sdéa) Esai xliii 7, 9
2 Co iii 18 ¢er, 19, 21
[see claritas].
(Scacpa) Thren ii 1, 84.
(kudos) Esai xiv 25, 52.
glorificare (Soéa¢ew) Ps xc 15, 3
Dan xi 38, 5
[see magnificare],
habitare (€voixeiv, karouxetv) Ge xix 29, 85
Soph ii 15, 42; Zech xiv 11, 48
Esai xxiii 18, 46; xxiv 5, 47
Hier xvii 25, 62
Hize, XxxVl 10; SO; XX4 Vio, 32 5. XXXVI UG Goo, ee ove
25>, 34; xxvili 2, 77, 78 (=w)
[see inhabitare].
N.B. habitare is never a transitive verb in Tyconius exc Eze xxviii 2,
but it is used in the passive twice (Hier xvii 25; Eze xxxvi 10).
(karacknvouv) Ps cxix 5, 10
Toel iii 17, 73.
ciuitates cum habitantibus (odes xatocxoupévas)
Esai x 13, 75.
hic (= art.)
hoc donum=y7 ydpis Sap viii 21, 20 (=Aug Arnobjun vg)
in hune mundum=eis rov koopov Ioh i 9, 4 (=rell incl Cyp)
in hoc mundo=eis rov koopoyv 1 Loh iv 1, 67
(in hoc saeculo g, in saeculo Luczf 261)
e loh i 9 has in hoc mundo
[see ille, iste].
holocausta (cAoxavtwpara) Hier xvii 26, 62.
honoratus (évtios) Esai xiii 12 brs, 51
pretiosus 418,
iam (ére in negative sentences) Ro vii 17, 15; Gal iii 18, 14
[see adhuc, ultra].
(76) 2. Che i 4,314: (==rell),
(ibi never occurs.
It is however twice brought into the teat by Veorr pp 48 and 75)
[see illic].

VOCABULARY. Ixxxill

idolorum seruitus (cidwdoXarpeia)
Col ili 5, 83 (=d, Cyp Aug)
idololotria Zrent4
simulachrorum seruitus vg,
idolum (eiSador) Eze xxxvi 17, 32
cf Ap ix 20 et idola, id est simulacra, aurea et...... ‘Cyp
[Test ur 59 W]
Ps exxxiv 15 idola Cyp 160, 321 Aug!
simulacra Cyp 160% Hil and the Psalters
[see simulacrum],
ignifer (ruppopos) Abd 18, 83, 85.
ignominia (dria) Esai x 16, 48
cf 1 Co xv 43, where also there is a rhetorical contrast,
as here, between atiysia and S0&a
ignominia Cyp 159 Hil
contumelia d, 429 Aug
ignobilitas Lren Amb vg
dedecoratio Tert
[see contumelia, iniuria],
ignorare (ov tdev) Ex i 8, 55
[see non],
ille (=article)
1. with adj. or part. loel 11 20, 73
Heal xiv 27, 52; xxiv 2 bis, 47
Eze xxvi 17, 45 (=A w); xxxvi 23, 33.
2. with proper names Soph ii 13, 42.
3. with a simple noun 2 Mach vii 29, 21 (=Cyp Lucif vg)
‘[ for 3, see hic, iste].
illic (éke‘) Eze xx 35, 35; xxxvi 20, 21, 22, 32, 33; xxxvii 21, 34
Mt vi 21, 82 (=k Cyp?*/,)
Toh xix 42, 59 (=e)
[¢f ibi].
illuc (éket) Hier xxv 36, 49,
imber (vers) Esai v 6, 73 (=Cyp 387 3 Regn xvii 14)
[but pluuiam / Ac xiv 17].
imperium (mpdcraypa) Ps ii 6, 72 (= Cyp Hil ete, not Aug)
[see ilussum, praeceptum ],
impietas (doéBera) Ami 3, 11, 53
Ro xi 26, 34.
impius (dce(37s) Esai xxiv 8, 47
Eze xx 38, 35
272 The ii 8, 75 (6 dvopos Mss, but cf Esai xi 4)
[see iniustus],
implere (éumimdavac) Eze xxxii 6, 44
[see replere, satiare].

Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION.

(mymrava) Eze xxviii 16, 78
[see replere],
inanis fieri (cevotoOa) 1 Coi17, 31 (=Cyp 169 Hil)
euacuari d,
[see euacuari].
incendere (dvarrew) Eze xx 47, 40
[see succendere].
flamma incensa (7 PAOE 7 eEadbeioa)
Eze xx 47, 40.
incidere (dAicxeoOa) Esai xiii 15, 52.
incitare (mapofdvery) Esai xiv 16, 71, 75, 76
In the two longer and more formal quotations of the passage, 70 and 75,
Tyconius has concitare like Cyprian 183
[see concitare, exacerbare],
incrementum (avénovs) Eph iv 16, 3; Col ii 19, 3(=d,1/, Fren!/, Lucif /,
Ambr1/, Aug?/s)
augmentum vg?/, m514 Lucif1/, Ambr"/,,
indignari (6vpotcGa) Esai xiii 13, 51 (= Mt ii 16)
(irasci rel/),
indignatio (@vyos) Esai xiii 9, 13, 51
Hier xxv 37, 49.
Ovpos=indignatio Cyp Esai xii 9
=ira Cyp Esai Ixvi 15
: [see animatio, ira],
indui (évdverGar) Esai xlix 18, 82.
inferi (déns) Esai xiv 15, 70, 75; xiv 19, 71, 76
portas inferorum, cf Mt xvi 18, 63
(infernus is confined to Huropean texts),
infligere (évréAXeoOa) Esai xii 11, 51
elsewh. praecipere (e.g. Esai xiii 4, 50) and mandare (e.g. Hier xvii 22, 62).
ingredi (eicépyeoOa) Eze xxxvi 20 bis, 32, 21, 22, 33; xxxviii 21, 34.
(elomopeverOa) Hier xvii 19, 62
[elsewh. see intrare, introire],
inhabitans (kaOnpevos ) Hier xxxii 29, 54.
(€voixov) Esai xlix 19, 82.
inhabitare (evockeiv, karotkeiv)
with ace. Esai xxiv 6», 47
Hier xvii 25, 62
Eze xxvii 35, 46; xxxii 15, 45
with in Esai xiv 23, 52; xxiv 1, 68, 47
Eze xxvi 17, 45; xxxvii 25%°, 34
[see habitare].
inhabitari facere (karoixeiv) Eze xxxvi 33, 33.
iniquitas (adicnua) Eze xxviii 15, 78, 83 (=w)
ef Ap xviii 5 Cyp Prms vg

VOCABULARY. Ixxxv

Ac xvili 14 / e [iniuria d].
(adckia) Eze xxviii 18, 78, 84 bis
[see iniustitia].
(dvopia) Eze xxviii 16, 78 (=2); xxxvi 31, 33, 33; xxxvil 23, 34
[cf facinus],
iniquus (davopos) Eze xxi 3, 41
[see scelestus],
iniuria (aripia) Eze xxxvi 7, 36
[see contumelia, ignominia}.
(UBprs) Hisar xii 1] bis, 5l—Cyp Zech x 113 Wve Ac xxvii 10
cf iniuriosus (vBpurtns) Cyp Esai i 12
(contumelia m418)
[see contumelia],
iniuriam facere (vSpitew) Esai xiii 3, 50,
iniustitia (ddcKcia) 2 Reon vii 14, 37
[see iniquitas],
iniustus (ad:xos) Soph iii 5, 42
Eze xxi 3, 41.
(daens) say eu ly Bh
[see impius],
inlustris (emupavns) Soph iii 1
=Cyp Mali 14
Tert Ac ii 20.
other renderings are
praeclarus Auct ad Novat (Soph iii 1), e, (Ac ii 20) [om c]
splendidus Lucif (Soph ii 1),
inponere (émitiOéva) Eze xxvii 30, 45
pe wr 10, TE = reil).
(repiriOevar) Esai 1xi 10, 3,
inpudicitia (avdadia) Esai xxiv 8, 47,
inquinare (piaiverv) Esai xliii 28, 9
ef Ag ii 14 Habhetdeus 314 and contr Fulg Donat.
Toh xviii 28 inquinarentur e (coinquinarentur g)
contaminarentur b ¢ f vg
polluerentur a ff
[see contaminare, polluere ],
insanabilis (aviaros) Esai xiii 9, 51 (= Cyp 366)
(sine refrigerio 7418)
[see sine],
insertus (e€xkexevtnuevos) Esai xiv 19, 71, 76.
intellectus (avveois) Esai x 13, 75
[see prudentia],
interest—quid interest (ri yap ;) Phil i 18, 70
[nihil mea 7ert adv Mare v 20, quid enim d, ve],
interficere (dvaipeiv) Eze xxviii 9, 77, 80

Ixxxvl INTRODUCTION.

2 The ii 8, 31 (= Tert Tren rell).
(drroxreivew) Mt xxiii 37, 63 (=e Cyp 44)
[see occidere].
(dum interficiuntur=eév ré oraca, cf 23 €v TO avaipeOhva
Eze xxvi 15, 45
interfectione h
in euaginatione w.
(cghayetv) Esai xiv 21, 71, 77 (= Habetdeus 315),
interire (dmodwdéva) Eze xxxvii 11, 36 (=m424)
periit Cyp 158.
interitus (dm@Aeva) Eze xxvi 16, 45 (=w); xxxii 15, 45
(perditio h Eze xxvi 16)
cf Mt vii 13 interitum / Cyp119, perditionem rell
[see exterminium, perditio],
intrare (cicépyecOa) Ge xix 23, 85
Hier xvii 25, 62
Eze xx 38, 35
Ro xi 25, 34
[see introire].
(elomopever Oar) Hier xvii 20, 27, 62
[see ingredi].
introire (ecioépyecOa) Ps cxlii 2, 20
Esai xxiv 10, 47
Mt vii 21, 69 (=k Cyp?/,)
[see intrare].
inualere (€moyvew) Os xii 3, 4, 28
[see ualere],
inuocare (émixadeiv) Ps xc 15, 3
elsewhere uocare e.g. Esai xliii 6, 9.
(kaXeiv) Hier xxxii 29>, 54,
inuocari (dvoyatecOa) Hier xxxii 29%, 54,
inutilis—inutilia=ra dyevq [Tod Kocpov| 1 Co i 28, 20
ignobilia m567 d, vg Aug.
ira (Avpos) Esai xiii 3, 50
Eze xx 33, 34, 35; xxxvi 6, 36; xxxvi 18, 32
[see animatio, indignatio].
(opyy) Esai xiii 9, 13, 51
Hier xxv 37, 49
Ro ii 5 bts, 84; iv 15, 13, 24; Col iii 6, 83.
iste (otros) Ps xxiir5, 29
Zech xiv 15, 49
Esai xxiv 3, 47; xlix 6, 38 (om Lxx)
fier in 12, 75; xvn 20, 62
Mt v 19, 69 (=rell); xxv 40, 68 (=corb Hil'/,)
Mc x 30, 59 (=4)

VOCABULARY. Ixxxvil

Le xviii 30, 59 (=e Cyp?/.)
1 Ioh 11 3, 68; iv 2, 68.
(=077.)
in isto mundo =ey r@ koop@ 1 Ioh iv 3, 68, but in hoc mundo 1 Ioh
wl, OF
iste qui uenit =o épyopevos 2 Co xi 4, 5
[see hic, ille],
ita (ovrws) Ksai xiv 20, 71, 77 (= Habetdeus 315)
Mt xxiv 46, 11 (=d e)
Gal iv 29, 30 (=rell)
elsewh. sic,
ita ut (wore) Hier xxx 28, 54,
itaque (otv) Col 11 5, 83 (= Cyp645 Tren)
so k Mt i 17, iii 8, v 48, ete
[see ergo].

(doTe) Gal iii 24, 18 (=rell),
itinera (daudoda) Hier xvii 27, 62, 64

cf émt rod dudddov Me xi 4
in platea a
in transitu(m) b (ce) d fz q
in biuio f vg.
iucundari (evppaiveoda) Esai xxiv 7, 47 (= Esai (xli 16;) liv 1; lxv 13 Cyp)
[see laetans],
iucunditas (evdpoavrn) Esai xxiv 8, 11, 47
Eze xxxvi 5, 35
cf Ac xiv 17 iucunditate dh
laetitia e, vg
[see laetitia],
iuratio (dpxos) Ge xxv 3, 23;
iussum (mpooraypya) Esai xxiv 5, 47
[see imperium, praeceptum],
iuxta (éyyvs) Hier xxxii 26, 53
[see proxime],
laedere (dd:xeiv) Ap ix 10, 60 (ef Prms ad laedendi)
nocere vg
nocendi h,
laetans (cvdpavopevos) Ps cxxv 3, 67 (=Hier vii 34 Cyp 85)
but iucundatus Aug on Ps cxxv
[see tucundari],
laetitia (evppoovwn) Eze xxxv 14, 73
[see iucunditas],
lamenta (Opyynua) Eze xxvii 32, 45
‘lamentas, fletus facere,’ Pacuv ap Non 132.
Opnynua does not occur again in the Greek Bible.
lamentatio (Opjvos) Eze xxvi 17, 45 (=A w); xxvii 32, 45 (=Am viii 10
Cyp 91)
[see lamentum].

Ixxxvill INTRODUCTION.

lamentum (6pjvos) Eze xxviii 12, [77,] 80 (=w)
[see lamentatio].
laudabilis (émaweris) Eze xxvi 17, 45 (=A w),
laudatio (aivecis) Hier xvii 26, 62.
legatus (mpécBus) Esai xiii 8, 50
[see senior],
lenire (zaveww, so Lucian and 62-147)
Esai xiii 3, 50.
cod R has mitigare
ef Nu xxv 11 leniuit Cyp 785,
but mitigauit Opt 63,
liberare (6vec@ar) Eze xxxvii 23, 34
Mt vi 13, 17
Ro xi 26, 34.

liberari (cwfeoGa) Ro ix 27, 27
[see saluari].

longe (oppo) Esai xxix 13, 8
Hier xxxii 26, 53.
(waxpav) Eph ii 17, 18 (=rell)
(never a longe) cf de longinquo,
longinquus

de longinquo=ek yijs moppobev
Esai xiii 5, 50
de terra longinqua=dmo yijs moppobev
Esai xliii 6, 9
(Probably the 0. Latin read ris for yns in Esai xiii 5, as B does in Esai
xliii 6)
cf Le xvii 12 e (=ék moppwbev)
[also Mc xi 18, xiv 54, xv 40 k=dz6 paxpoéer].
longinquus fieri (uaxpivver Gat)
Ps ecxix 5, 10.
lucere followed by cognate acc. (paivew)
luna non lucebit lumen eius
=ceAnvn ov py pavy 76 pas adrov Eze xxxii 7, 44, 45
omnia quae lucent lumen
=ravra ta paivovra pas Eze xxxii 8, 44, 45
cf luces cereum Plaut Cure 19; lucebis...facem Cas 1 30.
NB This construction is variously avoided in Ap viii 12,
lugere (evciv) Esai xxiv 7 bis, 47
[see plangere].
lumen (das) Sap v 6, 73
Am viii 9, 74 [; Mi iii 6, 74]
Esai x 17, 48; xiii 10 b¢s, 51; xlix 6, 38; lix 9, 74
Eze xxxii 7, 8, 44
2 Co iv 6, 57
[see lux].

VOCABULARY, lxxx1x

Mi ii 6 dies luminis for dies (so V, hzat R), probably only by con-
fusion with Am viii 9.

Esai xiii 10 lumen et for et lunae
[see permanere].

lux (pos) Esai xlii 16, 9; lili 11, 2
Le xvi 8, 79 (=Cyp 793 relt)
1 Toh 11 9, 68 (=Cyp 116, not h)
[see lumen],
magistratus (apyovres) Esai xiii 2, 50
elsewhere princeps = ap yer.
of k Mt x 18 magistratus = nyepdves (praesides rel/)
d Lucif 269 Ac xvi 19 magistratus =dpyorres (principes e, vg),
magnificare (dofa¢ewv) Esai x 15, 79
Ro i 21, 84 (=d, Aug'/,, Ambst)
clarificare Faust ap Aug
honorificare Habetdeus 315 Aug'|1.
honorare Zeno Aug" 1,
lorificare vg Aug!
- oo [see glorificare].
maledictum (oveidiopycos) Esai xliii 28, 9
ef Hier vilO Cyp 41
[see obprobrium].
malus (sovnpos) Mii is, 17. (=7ett) : xii 35 bis, 84
nequa(m) Mt xii 35 bis k Cyp 670
[see nequam],
mandatum (evrod}) Mtv 19, 69 (=rell)
be 1%, 13. (rel, exe ¢ F)
1 Toh ii 4, 68 (= Cyp 546)
Ro vii 11, 15 (=rell)
[see praeceptum].
manducare (éc@iew) 3 Regn ii 46%, 65
Esai x 17, 48
[see edere].
(xareoOiew) Eze xxxvi 8, 36.
manere (koragew) Canti7, 73 (= Ambdr),
manufacta, -orum (yeiporoinra) Esai xix 1, 43.

mercator (eumopos) Eze xxvii 36, 46
[see negotiator].

mercatus (éumopia) Nah iii 16, 42
Eze xxviii 5, 77, 79 (=w)
[see negotiatio].
(meretrix) ef Ap xvii 4, 82
[see fornicaria].
metueri (oBeicda) Esai xliii 5, 9
cfeg. Mtx28k Cyp',
Mti20k
[see timere],

g2

xe INTRODUCTION.

militare (émuorparevew) Zech xiv 12, 49,
minorari (jrravda) Esai xix 1, 43
[see superari].
miseratio (€Acos) 2 Mach vii 29, 21 (=Cyp rell),
misericordia (¢Acos) 2 Regn vii 15, 37
Ps xvii 51, 5
in misericordia et miseratio (R; tv V)=ev édéex kai oixtetppots
Ps ci 4, 21
[ for the change in order, see
nimbus].
[mitigare]=lenire zz cod R Esai xiii 3, 50
[see lenire].
mittere *(dmooréAXew passim).
(€uBadrrAev) Tes Naue vii 11, 39.
(eEarrooreAAev) Hier xxv 38, 49.
modo (dpru) Mt xxvi 64, 4, 45
2 The ii 7, 52, 74
[see adhuc, nunc},
multiplicari (w\covafev) Ro v 20, 13, 18
abundare rell, which also appears in an allusion p 15.
mundare (xaOapifew) Eze xxxvi 25 bis, 33, 33
[see emundare].
(oad eww) Eze xxxvi 29, 33
probably a mere piece of carelessness on the part of Tyconius,
mundus (xocpos) Tol 9;-4-xvir 0, 2. 37
1 Ioh iv 1, 3, 67, 68
Ro ty 13, is.
saeculuml =koopos does not occur,
mysterium (yuvornpiov) 2 The ii 7, 30, 74, 84 (=d, vg Aug etc)
arcanum Tert Res Carn 24
[see sacramentum].
(Stakovia) 1 Co xii 5, 69 RV
(mysteriorum for ministeriorum): same corruption Ambr/, (ap
Sabat.), and on p 307" R has ministerium for mysterium,
[narrare|—narrabis (Aéyav épeis)
Eze xxviii 9, 80
only in the repetition of the continuous quotation pp TT, 78.
(cf Ps xxi 23 narrabo (Siyyjnoowa) nomen tuum fratribus meis)
[see dicturus].
nasci—quae nascuntur (ra yevnpara)
Eze xxxvi 30, 33
ef nascentia Hab i117 Cyp 365
quae nata sunt Le xii 18 b fz ¢ vg.
natio (¢6vos) Sap vi 3, 72
Esai x 13, 75

VOCABULARY.

x¢cl

Eze xxviii 19, 78, 85; xxxii 9, 10,12, 44; xxxvi 7, 36;

xxxvi 19, 20, 21, 22, 23%, 30, 32, 33
elsewh. gens
e.g. Eze xxxvi 53”, 24, 36, 33, 34.
In Cyprian’s quotations from the Prophets
natio occurs Mi iv 3, Esai lv 4*
gens occurs 25 times
gentiles only Hier x 2 (codd-opt)
[see gentiles].
ne (=ut non) Esai v 6, 73; xxiv 10, 47
Eze xxxvii 23, 34
1 Coal; Si,
ne prohibitive does not occur ; but noli w. infin.
Hsai xiii 5, 6,.9; xliv 21, 9
Hier xvii 21 bis, 62
oly 28. Si.
negotiatio (€umopia) Esai xxili 18 bis, 46, 47, 84
Eze xxviii 16, 78, 83 (=w); 18, 78, 84
[see mercatus].
(éumopor) Eze xxxviii 13, 84
negotiationes V, perhups for negotiatores.
(ropispos) 1 Tim vi 6, 84
quaestus 7d, m514 vg Lucif Aug Amb Ambst
negotiator (¢uopos) Mt xiii 45, 84 (=c vg)
negotianti rell, tnel Cyp"|s.
(On p 84 cod R is missing, so perhaps Tyconius wrote negotianti.)
nepotes (rékva) Fiusai xii 18, 52.
nequam (ovnpos) Esai xiv 20, 71, 77 (= Habetdeus 315)
(cf Mt xxiv 48, 11)
[see malus],
nequitia (covnpia) Eph vi 12, 30, 54 (=vell),
nimbus (yvddos) Esai xliv 22, 9
also Ps exvi 2, 73 (nimbus et nubes=vedeAn Kat yvodos
(caligo rell: yvddos does not occur in any verse quoted by Cyp).
nimis (cdodpa) Exi7, 55 (opodpa oodpa LXX)
Zech xiv 14, 49
Eze xxvii 25, 78 (= Mtii10; Me xvi 4),
non (pndapos) Eze xx 49, 40
cf Acx 14d,
non with verbs of knowing:
hon nouerunt (ovK éyywcay) Esai xl 16*, 9
(ovK 7deccav) Esai xlii 16”, 9;
but Tyconius emphasises the distinction between
non cognouisti (od« éyves) Esai xlv 54, 8 and
nesciebas (ov« 7Oers) Esai xlv 5”, 8.

xeli INTRODUCTION.

noua nupta (vid) Esai xlix 18, 82
cf Ap xxi9 Cyp 85 Prms
elsewhere sponsa, ¢.g. Esai 1xi 10, 3,
nugari (uarawicba) Roi 21, 84
euanuerunt d, vg Habetdeus 315 Faust ap Aug Aug
cf euanuerunt 4 Regn xvii 15 vind,
nune (aprz) Ioh v 17, 61 (=a Victn-Afer)
modo e ell, adhuc b
[see adhuc, modo].
obprobrium (dverducpos) Eze xxxvi 6, 36; xxxvi 30, 33
cf Hier xxiv 9, de Pasch Comp 259
[see maledictum ],
obscurare (cvoxoratev) Mi iii 6, 74 (vb. neut.)
tenebricare Vig
Eze xxxii 7, 8, 44, 45
[see tenebricare].
obscurus—obscura nocte (€v dwpia)
Esai lix 9, 74
cf intempesta nocte Ps cxvili 147 Aug
te. “the dead of night,” when no one knows the time; ef Fest ap Lexx.
obtinere (xaréyew) 2 Theii7, 52
Tyconius quotes the verse for the sake of this word; on p 74 he quotes it
with detinere
[see detinere].
(kpareiv) Ps cxxxvi 9, 52
[see continere].
occidere (dmokréevveww, aoxreiverv)
Ex iv 23, 6
Esai xiv 20, 71, 77 (Habetdeus 315)
Mt xvi 21, 61 (=Mss exc e)
2 Co ii 6, 21 (Zert rell)
[see interficere].
onerari
onerata es=€BapvvOns Eze xxvii 26, 78
(suggested by Sabatier in loc.
honorata es V [hiat R], but V* actually has honore for onere p 63”.
Bapvvew elsewhere is always represented by [ad]grauare, yet it ts most
tmprobable that eSo&dabOns, the reading of Aquila and Theodotion
should have found its way into the text of Tyconius.)
onerari (popriferOar) Mt xi 28, 63 (=vell),
optimus (xpyords) Eze xxviii 13, 78, 81 (=w Tert)
bonus=xpyoros Mt xi 30 k Cyp?/,
optimus=bonus Mc x 17, 18 bis &
[cf pessimus],
*orbis terrae (7 ofcouyévn) Esai xxiv 1, 4, 47 ete. :

VOCABULARY. xcull

in 1 Par xvi 30, 75 orbem terrae corresponds to thy
oikouperny, as in Lucian.
*orbis terrarum ([7] ofkovpevn)
Esai lxii 4, 81 ete.
ornamentum (xécpos) Esai xlix 18, 82; lxi 10, 3
[see ornatura],
ornatura (xocpos)
omnis ornatura caeli Esai xiii 10, 51 ev cont=mas 6 Koopos Tov ovpavot
omnis creatura... R
omnis ex ea rura... V
omne ornamentum m418
cf 1 Tim ii 9d ornaturis capillorum = evrAéypacw
[see ornamentum],
ostendere (Sexviva) Ps cx 16, 3
Esai xlviii 9, 9; lui 11, 2.
ostensio—ostensio est duorum populorum, 28
cf abrat yap elow dvo SiadqKar Gal iv 24
and haec sunt enim duo testamenta, siue duae ostensiones, sicut in-
uenimus interpretatum TJert adv Marc v 4.
parabola (mapaBod7) Eze xx 49, 40.
participles :
present participles occur over a dozen times, but are often avoided by
construction with qui
[see dum].
participle in -Uurus
desolaturus Eze xxxv 14, 73
dicturus Eze xxvii 9, 77 (=w)
futurus Gal 111 23, 18
for Eze xxviii 9 see Introd p |.
parturitio («div) Esai xiii 8, 50 (=4 Mc xiii 8, Cyp Mt xxiv 8)
(dolor rell, incl e).
perditio (dm#de«.a) Esai xiv 23, 52
Eze xxvii 36, 46; xxviii 7, 77, 80, 19, 78, 85
[sce exterminium, interitus].
(a povopn) Esai xxxili 23, 10
[see uastatio],
peregrinari (mapockeiv) Ps cxix 6, 10.
peregrinatio (mapocxia) Ps cxix 5, 10.
perficere (karapri¢ev) Ps lxxix 16, 6.
(émcredetv) Zech iv Y, 81.
perflare (Siamveiv) Cant iv 16, 74.
perire (dmoA)vvat) Hear xxiv 12, 47> xl 26. 9
Eze xxviii 10, 77, 80
[see interire].
permanere—ct lunae non permanebit lumen eius=kxai 7 cedyjvy ov ddcet 76
es adtns Esai xiii 10, (51).

XC1V INTRODUCTION.

This is also the rendering in m418.

Tyc 51 has lumen et for et lunae
[see lumen].

(weivecv) 1 Ioh iii 14, 68 (=A q)
manere ell
[see perseuerare],

perseuerare (eivery) Esai xiv 24, 52
[see permanere].

pessimus (zovnpos) Eze xxxvi 31, 33
[see malus, nequam, and cf
optimus],
pinna (mrépvE) Mal iv 2, 74 (=de Pasch Comp § 19)
but ala Cyp 293.
plangere (mevOciv) Esai xxiv 4 bis, 47
cf Mt v 5 k Cyp, (lugere relZ)
[see lugere],
plangere se (kémrecOa) Mt xxiv 30, 4 (=ac fq)
lamentari e h Cyp 336 [exe 8]
lamentare se Cyp cod S
plangere f vg
concidere se 0,
plebs (Aaos) Esai xiv 20, 71, 77 (= Habetdeus 315); xliii 8, 9
Ro x 21, 11 (=d,); xi 2, 11 (=d, vg Aug)
elsewh. populus.
polluere (8e8ndotdv) Eze xxxvi 20, 21, 22, 23 Oi Se. Oo
[see contaminare, profanare].
(ytaivecy) Eze xxxvi 17, 32
[see contaminare, inquinare],
portare (aipecy) Hier xvii 27, 62
[see ferre, tollere].
(Bacragew) Ac xv 10, 12 (=e, vg Iren ete, baiulare d)
Gal v 10, 30 (=rell).
(péperv) Eze xxxvi 6, 36
[see ferre].
potare (morifew, wsed of human beings)
Hier xxxii 15, 17, 53, 54
so k3/, Cyp?/, a Mt (not Me) [Aiat e]
(potum dare or dare bibere eZ)
[potionare Hier xxxii 15 Ambr=Mc xv 36n; Esai xxix 10/ m681}],
potentes (weyioraves) Hier xxv 38, 49; xxxii 19, 53.
praebere aures (évariterOar) Sap vi 2, 72.
praeceptum (cvrod7)) 1 Ioh ii 3, 68 (=Cyp 546)

NB 1 Ioh ii 3, 4 éevronas...... evToAas
mandata...... mandatah vg Aug Lucif
but praecepta...... mandata Cyp Tyc

[see mandatum].

VOCABULARY. XCV

(rpooraypa) Eze xxxvii 24, 34
[see imperium, iussum],
praeclarus (évdofos) Esai xlviii 9, 9
ef Le xiii 17 latte exe a vg.
praeripium—et per praecripia fugient corresponds to kat ot Bovvot Kat of Spupot
kal karapayerat dro Wuxns ews capKov: kal €ara o pevywv
for praeripia cod V has precipitia, but praeripium (-rupium) ocewrs tn
Tert adv Marc iv 38, and per praeripium=kata tov Kpnpvov
Mc v 138e; see Rénsch, Collectanea 275.
praesens est (eoriv 767) 1 Ioh iv 3, 68
...est. lam g Aug
[cf saluus].
praeualere (caticxveww, vb. newt.) Ex i 7, 55
[cf uincere],

pressura (driWis) Col i 24, 6 (=Tert Aug)
Ap 1110, 60.
pressura zs ‘thoroughly African’ (4 Ixxxi) in most books, but it hus dis-
appeared from the Cyprianic text of the Apocalypse:
tribulatio=Odipes Pris®/;, and wherever tt occurs in h and Cyp, viz
Api9,h; ii 22, Cyp 640; vii 14, Cyp 131, 343
but pressura Ap ii 22, Tert de Pud 19; vii 14, Scorp 12
[see tribulatio].
primitiuus (mpetdrokos) Ex iv 22, 23, 6.
princeps sacerdotum (dpycepeds)
Mt xvi 21, 61 (=Mss eve e, which has sacerdotibus),
prodire (¢&épyecOa) 1 Ioh iv 1, 67 (=q)
exire m517 Lucif 261 Tren Aug vg
‘processisse’ Trt adv Mare v 16
[see egredi],
proeliari (mupardocew) Zech xiv 14, 49
praetendere Zert adv Marc iii 13.
proelium (7odeuos) Eccl ix 11, 79
profanare (8e8ndodv) Soph iii 4, 42
contaminant Luctf m500
profanare & Mt xii 5 (BeBndodv)
uiolare rel/
[see contaminare, polluere],
profetare (deponent imperative)
Eze xx 46, 40; xxi 2, 41; xxxvi 6, 36; xxxvii 12, 36
(=m424)
but profetabis ete e.g. Eze xxi 2, 41.
so also Am vii 15, 16 w
Mc xiv 65 &,
(V or Veorr has propheta?/,
so Eze xxxvii 12 Cyp 158.)
promiscuus (cvppixros) Hier xxxii 20, 24, 53
[see commixtio],

X¢CVl INTRODUCTION.

promptuarium (rapeiov) Eze xxviii 16, 78 (=w Arnob-jun)
proma Tert adv Mare ii 10
cf cella proma de Res Car 27 (Esai xxvi 20)
promptuarium Mt xxiv 26, Le xii 3 e
[see cubiculum].
prope (eyyis) Eze xxx 3, 43
[see proximus, iuxta],
propter etc
propterea (81a todo)
Mi iii 6, 74
Esai xxiv 6°, 47
Hize xxi 2, 41; xxvii 6,: 71 19° (7, (95): 2xxv1 6, oo,
xxxvii 12, 36
Ro iv 16, 24.
propter hoc (davri rovrov)
Eze xxviii 7, 77 (not 79).
(va Touro)
Esai xiii 7, 50; xxiv 6», 47
[ for propter quod see quod].
proxime (é¢yyvs) Eph ii 17, 18
iuxta dy
prope Cyp 94 Tert Hu vg
[see iuxta, prope].
proximus (adj.) (éyyis) Esai xiii 6, 50
Ioh xix 42, 59 (iuxta rell) (=Cyp 366 Esai xiii 6)
ef e Ioh 11 18
prope, in proximo rel/
[see iuxta, prope].
prudentia (cvveois) Esai liii 11, 2
[see intellectus],
purgare (kaOapi¢ew) Esai lili 10, 2
Hier xxxii 29, 54
[see mundare],
purgatio (ka@apo.s) Hier xxxii 29, 54.
quando (dre) Toh v 25, 37.
quasi (ws, wel) Esai x 17, 18, 48; xiii 8, 14, 51; lix 10 bis, 74
Gal iii 16 bts, 27 (=Jren vg)
[see sicut, tamquam, uelut,
ut].
-que—abductosque (rods év émaywyn) Esai xiv 17, 70, 76
eritque (kat éorac) Hier xvii 24, 62; xxv 39, 50.
*quia occurs about 20 times, but it is not nearly so convmon as
*quoniam.
This usage appears to be the same in all books of the Bible.
[quoad usque] (gos) 2 The ii 7, 74 (= Ambsi)

VOCABULARY. xevll

but donec 8, 52 (=d, vg Tert Aug).
quoad usque occurs
in the Prophets Cyp*/, (Esai xxii 14; xlii 4) in k"/19;
but donec occurs in the NT Cyp?/s, viz Mt v 26, Le xv 8; Ap vill
[see donec],
quod (zdioms)
eo quod (av@ dv) Am i 3, 53.
pro eo quod (av@ dv) Ge xxii 18, 23; xxvi 5, 23.
propter quod (dvri rod) Eze xxxvi 6, 36
(av@ ov ore) Eze xxxvi 34, 34
(Oca rov) Esai lxiii 9, 10
(€vexa Tov) Ami 11, 53
(610) 2 Co iv 13%, 21
but 86 Kai 2 Co iv 13 ts rendered by ideoque et
[cod R has propter quod here also with vg),
quomodo (6y rpémrov) Esai xiv 20, 71 [, 77] (=Mabetdeus 315); xiv 24 bis, 52
[For the reading of V p 77, see Introd p \}.
quotquot (dc0r) Zech xiv 12, 49
Gal ii 10, 14 (=d, Amobst)
quotquot annis (xar’ éviavrov)
Zech xiv 16, 49
cf Lic ii 41 Kar’ eros
quodquod annis e (so also Tyce 49 cod V)
secundum tempus d
per omnes annos a4 be f ff q vg.
recumbere (dvaxeoOar) Mt xxii 11, 83 (= Habetdeus 314 Lren)
discumbens rel/
but cf k Mt ix 10, Mc xiv 18,
redigere (d.ayecv) Eze xx 37, 35.
redimere (dzoAurpovv) Soph iii 1, 42.
(Aurpoov) Hsai xliv 22, 9; Ixiii 9, 10.
remanere (katadeimrecOa) Esai x 19, 48; xii 12, 51
elsewhere (e.g. Esai xiii 14, 51) relinqui
[relinqui Ioh viii 9 e #'].
reminisci (uvncOqva) Eze xxxvi 31, 33
[see commemorari ].
replere (dvtavamimdavac) Col i 24, 6.
(€umimAava) Esai xxiii 18, 46, 47
Eze xxvii 13, 78, 81 (du¢ inpl- w); xxxii 4, 44
[see implere].
(musmAavar) Ps cxxv 2, 67
[see implere],
reprehensio (apos) Cant iv 7, 10 (= Habetdeus 313, Ambr),
reprobari (a@ereiv) Esai xlviil 8 bis, 9
reprobauerunt Esaii2 Cyp 40¢44 opt (spreuerunt Cyp 40°44, 273, 430)

XCV1l1 INTRODUCTION.

cf Le vii 30 reprobauerunt e, spreuerunt rel/ vg
Toh xii 48 reprobat e, spernit red/ vg.
repromissio (emayyeAia) Gal iii 18", 14
elsewh, promissio.
requiescere facere (dvamavew) Mt xi 28, 63 (=Cyp48vi4, 183 [4] f ger?)
[requiescere faciam Cyp 48 MBO,O,
requiescam Cyp 48 L
requiescere /]
but reficiam sess?/, a b rell vg Iren Hil Ambr Aug.
resistere (dvtimimrew) Ac vii 51, 30 (=e, vg)
obstitistis d
contradixistis 2 (=avr[e]uare apparently).
resoluere (ékAvew) Esai xiii 7, 50.
respectio (emioxom?)) Esai xxiii 17, 46.
respicere (ém:Bdézewv) Ps Ixxix 15, 6
Eze xx 46, 40; xxi 2, 41; xxxvi 9, 36.
responsum (xpnyaticpos) Ro xi 4, 28 R
V adds diuinum with d, am
[diuinum responsum vgle™],
restaurare (dvaxepadaotcba) Eph i 10, 18 (=d, Ambst)
recapitulare Tert adv Mare v 17 Iren®/,
ad caput reciprocare Tert de Monog
instaurare Aug vg.
reuerti (adrocrpéedpecOa) Ge xv 16, 61
[see conuerti (and auertere) |.
(€vrpémecOa) Eze xxxvi 32, 33.
(émurtpeper Oa) Le xvii 31, 66 (=a e)
conuertatur d
redeat b ffi cfg vg
[see conuerti],
rigari (zori¢ec Gat) Eze xxxii 6, 44
so 1 Co iii 7, 8 Jatt.
riuus (papay&) Eze xxxvi 6, 36
so Esai xxxv 6 Cyp71; xl 4 Cyp69
[see uepres],
ruina (mraois) Eze xxvi 15, 18, 45 (=A w); xxvii 27, 45; xxxii 10 dvs,
44, 45
[see strages].
sacramentum (yvornpiov) Eph v 32, 7 (=TZert Cyp d,vg Aug Ambr)
mysterium Lren Ambst
[see mysterium].
saeculum (yeved) Ex i 6, 55
Ps civ 8, 60 (=& Mc xiii 30)
[see generatio].
(katpos) Mc x 30, Le xviii 30, 59 (=é& Mc x 30)

VOCABULARY. XC1X

(tempus Cyp*/, rell).
(aiwv) Esai 1xiii 9, 10
in saeculum (eis tov aidva)
Eze xxxvii 25, 26, 28, 35
[see aeternum],
sagitta (ro&evpa) Eze xxxix 3, 74
[see sagittatio ],
sagittatio (rofevya) Esai xiii 18, 52
[see sagitta],
saluari (awfec@a) Ro xi 26, 34
[see liberari].
saluatus (cecoopevos)
Eph ii 8, 20.
saluatio (carnpia) 2 Co vi 2, 60 (salus ell)
[see salus].
salus (cwtnpia) Esai xlix 6, 38
[see saluatio],
salutare (ro cwrnpuov) Ps cx 16, 3.
saluus—reliquiae...saluae factae sunt=Adupa...yéyovey Ro xi 5, 28
saluae] Z'ye Aug Ambst vg'e™ ; om d, am
[cf praesens].
sanctimonia (ay:acpos) 1 Co i 30, 20
sanctificatio 7 d, vg Hil Ambr Aug.
sanctitas (aywwovn) Roi4, 6
for scitatis R, we find scificationis V=ZJren Hil d, Vg
but cf 1 The ili 13 d, vg.
sanctus, sancte (ayvos, ayvas) 2 Co xi 2, 5 (= Habetdeus 313)
Phil i17, 69 (=d,)
caste 7 Aug, sincere vg
but — castus (dyvos)
Prov xx 9, 20,
sanitas (‘acis) Mal iv 2, 74
but curatio Cyp293 de Pasch Comp 266.
sapientia (¢pornos) Sap villi 21, 20
Eze xxviii 4, 77, 79.
Moopia) <29. Hier ix 23, 79.
(émcotnun) Eze xxviii 3, 77, 79
[see doctrina].
satiare (éumimAava) Eze xxvii 25, 78; xxvil 33, 46; xxxii 5, 44
[see implere, replere, satu-
rare],
saturare (€umimAava) Eze xxxii 4, 44
[see satiare],
scelestus (dvowos) Esai xiii 12, 51 (iniquus m418).
in Isaiah facinerosus = avopos

Cc INTRODUCTION.

Esai liii 12, lv 7 Cyp
Ixvi 3 Habetdeus
but sceleratus Eze xviii 20 Cyp 645
Le xxii 37 b
[see iniquus],
scientia (émuotnun) Eze xxviii 4*, 5, 79; xxviii 7, 80; xxviii 17, 83
substituted by Tyconius for doctrina in repeating his continuous quotation
of Eze xxviii 2—19.
[see doctrina and Introd
p xlviil].
sedes (Apovos) Esai xiv 13, 70, 71, 72 (=Cyp)
Hier xvii 25, 62, 63; xxv 38, 49
Eze xxvi 16, 45 (=A w).
Opovos=sedes Esai xiv 13 Cyp 669
=thronus Esai Ixvi 1 Cyp 76, 117 (perh.
influenced by Ac vii 49).
In the NT and Psalms thronus is predominantly African, exc Le i 52.
[see thronus].
seducere (m\avav) Mt xxiv 4, 5 (=Mss)
but fallere Cyp 365.
senior (mpécfus) Esai lxiii 9, 9 (=Cyp 72 Iren)
but legatus Tert adv Marc iv 22; de Car Chr 14
Myerlee
Vig?ls
nuntius Priscillian 31
[see legatus],
sermo (Adyos) Aim 11; os
Hier iii 12, 75
Eze xx 45, 40; xxi 1, 40; xxviii 11, [78,] 80; xxxvi
16, 32
Ro ix 6, 27 (uerbum d, vg Aug)
[see uerbum].

Si Qui (oirwves) Esai xii 15, 51.
sicera (cikepa) Esai xxiv 9, 47,
sicut (ov tpdzov) Esai xiv 20, 77 (cod V)
[see quomodo].
(xaOa) Ies Naue vii 25, 39.
(kaOarep) 1 Co xii 12, 6 (=rell)
2 Co iii 18, 21 (= Hw Ambr, tamquam reid).
(xaOos) Hier xvii 22, 62
Pilobaits. 5
Ro xi 26, 34.

(kara TO yeyp.=sicut scriptum est)
2 Co iv 13, 21 (=rell).
(domep) Toh v 26, 37 (= Tert rell, quomodo e)

VOCABULARY. cl

Gal iv 29, 30 (=d,, quomodo vg)
*(os) more than 20 times in all books
[see quasi, tamquam, uelut,
ut].
signaculum (droodpay:opa) Eze xxviii 12, 78, 80 (=m675)
consignatio w Arnob-jun;
both probably derived from
resignaculum Tert adv Marc ii 10
codd known to Hieron.

cf Hier xxii 24 signaculum J/ren

significationem h.
(odpayis) Ag ii 24, 81,
simul
simul crescere (cuvav€avec Oar) Mt xiii 30, 29=d chad,

simulacrum (ciSwAov) Eze xxxvi 25, 33; xxxvii 23, 34
1 Toh v 21, 70 (idolum g Tert)
[see idolum].
sine (=d- privative)
sine aqua (dvvdpos) Loel ii 20, 73
Soph u 13, 42
[inaquosus Cyp Esai (xli 19,) xliii 20, & Mt xii 43].
sine macula (d@wpos) Eze xxviii 15, 78, 83 (=w)
[inuituperabilis Tert adv Marc ii 10].
sine querella (dueunros) Lei 6, 13; Phil iii 6, 12 [=rel/].
but ef insanabilis (aviaros)
(aurum) quod non tetegit ignem (76 dmvpov),
species (ka\Xos) Esai lxii 3, 81=Cyp 77 sie (Esai liii 2)
[see decor].
speciosus (kaos) Cant iv 7, 10
Kkados=decorus Cant i 5, 10 bis,
spiritu elatus (avevyarodopos) Soph iii 4, 42
[spiritalis Luezf ],
splendor (Aayumnvn vid) Esai lxvi 20, 63.
stella (aornp) Ge xxvi 4, 23
Haai xii 10) 51» xiv 13,70, 71, 72
Bs ot bbto ree. c.4 blew a spay @
Abd 4, 72 (=dorpor, but &* has darépor)
[see astrum],
strages (mraos) Zech xiv 12, 15 bis, 49
[see ruina].
studia, -orum (émirndevpara) Os xii 2, 28
[see cogitationes],
stupere (€fiorava) Eze xxvi 16, 45 (=w); xxvii 35, 46; xxx 10, 44,
stupor—in stupore mentis (éxkoracer)

Eze xxvi 16, 45 (=A w)
[cf mentis alienatione],

Cll INTRODUCTION

sub with ace.
sub uirgam meam=v7o thy paBdov pov
Eze xx 37, 35
(sub uirga mea V),
subditus (vmodccos) Ro iii 19, 12.
(vmoxeipios) Esai lviii 3, 76
Baruch ii 4 ger
but Cyp108 has subiectos in quoting Esai lviii 3.
subiectus esse (vmordccecGat) Ro viii 7, 16.
subintrare (apewepxerOa) Ro v 20, 13, also 18 cod V (=rell)
[see subintroire].
subintroire (mapewépyecOa) Ro v 20, 18
subintrare rell and p 13
introire and its compounds are characteristically African
[see subintrare],
subsolanus (damydiétns) Hier xxxii 26, 53
Eze xx 47, 40; xxi 4, 41.
substantia (ra imdpyorvra) Mt xxv 14, 61, 84 (=d f Hil)
cf facultates 82%!
and O. L. Bibl. Texts 11 135, where we may add to Le xii 15 res uestras
CYP"|».
succendere (dvamrew) Hier xvii 27, 62
[see incendere],
(€xxavewv) Eze xx 48, 40.
superari (jrracda) Esai xiii 15, 52
[see minorari],
superducere (émayew) Gen xviii 19, 24
Esai xlviii 9, 9
Hier xxv 36, 37, 49,
superinponere (sepiriOévac) Esai xlix 18, 82,
superlatives (for positives)
[see optimus, pessimus, pro-

ximus].
surgere (avorava.) Hier xxxii 27, 54,
Suscitare (oikodopeiv, but cf Mc xiii 2, xiv 58 D)
Mt xxvii 40, 75.
Sustinere (yévew and vmopévew) Esai lix 9 bis, 74,
tactus (ad) 2 Regn vii 14, 37 (actibus for tactibus RV)
Eph iv 16, Col ii 19, 3.
tamquam (cs) Eze xxviii 2, 77, 79 (=w)

1 Pet 115, 83 (= Aug Fulg Priscil68 vg)
1 Co iv 7, 79 (quasi Cyp116 rell).

In Eze xxviii 6, where there is the same phrase in the Greek as in ver 2,
both w and Tyc have sicut for és.

VOCABULARY. Clll

[quasi 1 Pet ii 5 277]
[see quasi, sicut, uelut, ut].
tantum (-7Aaciov) Ps lxvii 18, 60
Me x 30, 59 (=Mss eae k)
Le xviii 30, 59 (=Cyp rel),
tenebrescere (cxora¢e) Esai xiii 10, 51
[see obscurare],
tenebricare (wvoxora¢ew) Am viii 9, 74 (tenebricabit) =‘ Tert’ adv Iud § 13
Cyp Mt xxiv 29 (oxoritev)
also f Me xiii 24 (oxori¢ev)
Vig Mi iii 6 (avokorti¢esy).
In Am viii 9 R has tenebriscauit ; other renderings ure
contenebrescet w
contenebrabit Tert adv Mare iv 41
tenebrescet ‘ Tert’? adv Iud § 10
obtenebrabitur Cyp 91.
cf contenebricanit (cuvecxoracer) 3 Regn xviii 45 Lucif
[see obscurare ],
thronus (dpcvos) 2 Regn vii 13, 16, 37
[see sedes],
timere (foBeicOa) Esai xiii 2, 50
Eze xxvi 16, 18, 45 (=A w); xxvii 28, 45
Lton av 18; 25 (= Teri 7, reli)
[see metuere],
titulus (orjAn) Esai xix 19, 43,
tollere (aipew) Esai xiii 2, 50; xxxiii 23, 10
Hier xvii 21, 62
Le xvii 31, 69 (=vell)
[see auferre, extollere, tollere],
totus (as) Eze xxxvi 10, 36
so k Mt 11 3, iii 5; Me xi 18: e/sewh. omnis or uniuersus,
transgressio (rapaBaors) Ro iv 15, 24
praeuaricatio d, vg Aug.
transire, 7). nevt. (mpoxérrew) Ro xiii 12, 57 (=Cyp 425)
praecessere d, vg Aug Ambr,
transmigratio (mapocecia) Eze xx 38, 35
incolatus 1455.
tribulatio (Aiyus) Ps xc 15, 3
[see pressura],
triticum (ciros) Eze xxxvi 29, 33 (= Hier xxiii 28 2 Cyp 715)
Mt xiii 25, 29, 30 Mss znel e (not &)
Le xxii 31 Cyp 288, 499 rell;
but frumentum
Agill Cyp 355
Hier xxiii 28 Habetdeus 314

ClV INTRODUCTION.

Mt xiii 25, 29, 30 &
Le iii 17 e,
tumultus (rapay)) Eze xxx 4, 43
[ef Mc xiii 8+et turbelae gq].
uagulari (peuBevew) Esai xxiii 16, 46.
uagulari is apparently dma£ Neyopevov. pepBevew does not again
occur in the Greek Bible,
ualere (icyveww) Ex i 9, 55.
(evoyvety) Esai xxxili 23, 10
[see inualere],
uastare (Svaoreipew) Esai xxiv 1, 47.
(mpovopevew) Esai x 13, 75; xxiv 3, 47.
uastatio (epics) Mt xxiv 15, 5 (=e Cyp 335)
‘desolutionis’ & Me xiii 14
[see desolatio and abomi-

natio].
(povopn) Esai xxiv 3, 47
Eze xxxvi 5, 36
[see perditio],
uelut (os) Ps cxiii 4 bis, 73; cxxv 1, 67
Esai x 14 bis, 75; xiv 19, 70, 76; xxiii 15, 46; xliv 22°, 9
[see quasi, sicut, tamquam,
ut}.
uepres (papay€) Eze xxxii 6, 44
[see riuus],
uerbum (Adyos) Esai i 10, 50
Hier xvii 20, 62
Eze xx 47, 40
Toh i 14, 7, 68; v 24, 36 (sermonem e)
[see sermo].
(pjpa) Esai xlii 16, 9.
uestis (iuaricpos) Zech xiv 14, 49.
uestitus (évdupa) Mt xxii 11, 83
uestem or uestimentum rell.
uestitus=%vdupa e.g. Mt iii 4, vi 28, vii 15 &; xxviii 3 e.
uexare (kakovv) Hier xxxii 29, 54
cf Ps xciii 5, cv 32, evi 39 latvt-vs (notheb),
uincere (karicyveww with gen)
Mt xvi 18, 63 (=ae corb Cyp?/, Opt Aug"|s)
praeualere rell
[cf praeualere],
(vixav) Ap ii 26, 71 (=rell).
uindicator (éxdicnr7js) Ps vill 3, 76
(am. Ney. 1 LXX)
‘nonnulli codices defensorem habent, sed uerius uindicatorem’
Aug'°,

VOCABULARY. CV

uires (icxvs) Zech xiv 14, 49
Cp i, XCii
[see fortitudo, uirtus],
uirtus * (dvvapis, passine).
(Suvvacreia) Sap vi 3, 72.
(toyvs) Eze xxxii 12 bis, 44
[see fortitudo, uires],
ultra (ére 72 negative sentences)
Hive x0 48 AO xx 5. 4) Xxver-36, 463 xxx 13.45 4
Rew OO) Oo Xxev 1 bee 8
[see iam, adhuc],
unguentum (dpwpa) Cant iv 16, 74,
uocem dare (dave, wsed of a bird’s cry)
Soph ii 14, 42
(cantare 7s used of the cock-crow in all Mss of the Gospels).
ut (as) Soph iii 3 bis, 42
Roi 21, 84 (= Habetdeus 315)
[see quasi, sicut, tamquain,
uelut].

On the whole I helieve the list bears out the conclusions
which seemed to be indicated by direct comparison with
Cyprian. Characteristic ‘ African’ words are found in all parts of
the Bible, words which can hardly be paralleled among O. Latin
authorities outside & e or Cyprian himself’. Moreover there are
several instances of strange or irregular readings, which prove on
reference to be no inaccuracies of Tyconius, but true peculiarities
of the Cyprianic version’. Indeed the use of presswra in the
Apocalypse for @XApus (= Tert), of the deponent imperative in
profetare (=k), and of saeculum for catpos in Mc x 30 (=k) seems
to be a survival of a yet earlier stage of the African Latin. On
the other hand there are not a few renderings which mark a stage
in the African text later than Cyprian’.

1 K.g. animatio, decenter, deformatio, facinus admittere, ille (=art.), imber, in-
dignatio (@uuos), parturitio, potare, proximus (éyyis), quotquot annis; we may add
to these the marked preference for iste, quoniam, and the avoidance of adpropiare,
epulari, furor, ibi, improperare and a longe.

2 See adesse, arbor, animus, cauere, emittere, expirare, imperium, lux, mandatum-
praeceptum, plebs, and requiescere facere.

* Kg. erat (nv) for ‘fuit,’ ewangelizare for ‘adnuntiare,’ pinna for ‘ala,’ plangere
se for ‘lamentari,’ princeps sacerdotum for ‘ pontifex,’ sanitas for ‘curatio,’ seducere
for ‘ fallere,’ sine (=d- privative), tuntum for ‘-plicia,’ and the constant insertion of
the copula where not expressed in the Greek.

n2

evl INTRODUCTION.

The only point to which I here wish to draw attention is the
differing usage in the various books. There are certain words,
among which are several of the most marked ‘ African’ expres-
sions, which are only found in certain parts of the Bible. The
following list contains the most noteworthy examples; it will be
noticed that the distinction is most marked between Isaiah and
Ezekiel.

adhuc (ért) Soph!/, Eze'/,

altus (dpnr0os) Hsai*/,

claritas (d0£a) Esai?/, Loh), (? 2 Cor"/,)
magnificare (dofdfew) Esai'/, Ro'/,

colligere (ouvdyewv) Zech\/ 1 Esai},

facinus (dvopia) Hsai?/, 2 Thes'/, ’
scelestus (dvouos) Esai),

felix (waxapios) Pst/,

fortitudo (tcxds) Hsat?/s

iniuria (vBpis) Lsaz*/,

—inquinare (aivew) Hsai'/,

introire (elaépyecOa) Ps!/, Hsai'/,
Mt/,

lumen (dds) Sap!/, Am/, Esaz®/,
Eze/, 2 Cor),

maledictum (ovediopos) Hsai'/,

pressura (Arius) Col/, Ap'/,

purgare (xaOapifew) Hsai!/, Hier'/,

sagittatio (rofevpa) Hsai!/, —

species (xaddos) Esai 1/,

ultra Eze"/,
excelsus Hze?/,
gloria Esaz'/, (?2 Cor'/,)
glorificare Ps!/, (Dan'/,)
congregare Hze?/,
iniquitas Hze?/.
iniquus Eze1/,
beatus Mt!/, Loh'/,
uirtus Hze?/,, uires Zech}/,
contumelia Hze!/,
contaminare Eze!/,
eee Eze],

intrare Gen1/, Hier!/, Hze/, Ro'/,

lux Hsac?/, Lc'/, (=rell)
1 Ioh!/, (=Cyp)

obprobrium 2e?/,

tribulatio Ps!/,

mundare Hze?/,

sagitta Hze}/,

decor Eze*/,

Thus there are at least twelve marked differences between the
vocabulary of Tyconius’ text of Isaiah and that of Ezekiel. This
can be explained in two ways: either the original translations
were independent, or the books of the African Bible suffered
independent revision. Unfortunately there is but little extant
testimony to decide this most interesting question. The fragments
of the Weingarten Ms (w), which agree so strikingly with the text
of Tyconius in Ezekiel, contain no verses from Isaiah, and the
quotations from Ezekiel in Cyprian amount only to twenty-three
verses. The single piece of direct evidence relates to the
rendering of dvoyia, which appears in Tyconius as ‘facinus’ in
Tsaiah but ‘iniquitas’ in Ezekiel. ‘Facinus’ is also the word

VARIATION OF THE RENDERINGS. evil

used by Cyprian in Isaiah, while in his quotation of Eze ix 4 we
find ‘iniquitas’ (Cyp 90, 367); on the other hand ‘facinus’ is
used in the same verse by ‘Tert’ adv Iud § 11 (Oehler 11 732)".
S. Cyprian therefore agrees with Tyconius, but the compiler of
adv Iud retains what seems to be the older rendering. If then
we might generalise from this single instance, it would seem that
the difference of usage in the text of Tyconius was the result of
partial revision of the African Bible anterior to 8S. Cyprian.

IX. Selected Readings.

The quotations of Tyconius are mainly useful to the Biblical
critic for the study of the Latin versions and their history, but
there are parts of the Latin Old Testament where Tyconius is an
important witness to the text of the LXx. His exegetical method
led him often to quote passages untouched by other writers, while
the isolation of his position as a Donatist, an African schismatic,
helped to preserve the Biblical text he used from emendation
from the Greek. It is most important to remember, before discuss-
ing readings offered by Tyconius, that there is always a very
considerable probability that any reading attested by him was
derived from a text which had not been influenced by the Greek
since the middle of the second century. In dealing with Tyconius’
text we are antecedent to the Hexapla, antecedent to the Decian
Persecution. Such a line of transmission may preserve genuine
readings independent, of all our Greek Mss. In a word, the textual
genealogy renders it not absolutely impossible that the Latin
Version, and therefore sometimes Tyconius as representing the
Latin Version, may be right where all other authorities have gone
wrong.

The following ten passages have been selected to shew what
help the Old Latin sometimes affords us in the criticism of the
text of the LXx, with special reference to the evidence of Tyco-
nius,

1 See above p Ixviil.

CVlil INTRODUCTION.

1. Examples of spurious additions to the LXx, found in most
Mss, but rejected by a small group including B T'yc.

Esai xxiv 5
mrrxa~av Ta Tpooctaypata SiaOynKnv aiwviov B al? cop
Hieron Tyc47
mpootaypata| + Kv A + pov 301
+ decxedace 62-147
+ duecxedacav & 198 22-36-48-51-
90-93-144-233-308
dvecxedacay is added under * in Q, but the word is
rendered without remark in Syr-Hea.

The Ms 198 is the same as 33 of the Gospels. The group
22-...-308 includes all the Mss assigned by Dr Field to the
Lucianic recension’. The Mss 62-147 contain Lucianic readings,
but their singular element is often akin to the Old Latin.

Eze xxx 3
nuépa trépas €Oveév éotac B cop sah Tyc43
neepa| om 106
+ veherns MSS Heron
In the Hexapla vededns is added under *« by 87 Syr-Hea

Thus here our Hexaplar authorities assert that vededns is an
addition, but B is alone among Greek Mss in omitting it. It is
found even in S. Jerome, who in his translations from the LXx in
the Prophets is generally very faithful to the Vatican text.

2. Examples of spurious additions to the LXx, found in B,
but rejected by other authorities including Tyconius.

Ksai xxix 13
eyyier wot 0 Nads ovTOS Tois YeiNeoL aAUTaV Timnoaly we NA 26
49 h sah Lust Tryph Tyc8
Tous yetreowy | pr Kat ev 301
pr ev (or é stl) 87 91 97 198 306

(SN has you for wou and tipovew for timo)

1 Field, Hexapla lxxxviii. Where all or most of these mss agree I shall quote
them under the sign }.

SELECTED READINGS. clx

0 Naos outos|+ ev Tw oTopaTL avTov Kae ev B A 62-147(om
ev bis) cop(om xav) Orig’ Heron

The words év 76 otopate adtod are in the Hexapla under asterisk
(*). The words used by Tyconius are: “non cognouste autem
illi dicitur gui...Deo labiis adpropinquet, corde tamen longe
separatus sit.” It is evident that the text of Tyconius contained
éyyiGer, but as that word is construed with rots yeiWeow the
addition €y T@ oTopate KTA could not have been there. Tye
therefore supports NA h Just. No punctuation is given to NA h,
but in the Sahidic rots yeiAeow is joined with tywwow, which
seems preferable to the division adopted by T'yconius.

Dr Hatch (Zssays in Biblical Greek pp 177—179) tries to
prove the existence of a still shorter form of the text in Isaiah,
a form in fact identical with Mt xv 8=Mk vu 6, in which éyyifee
jou is wanting. But the theory rests on Patristic authority only,
and in such cases it is often difficult to tell whether a Father
is not quoting the Prophet through the medium of the Gospel.
In the case of 8. Cyprian this is certainly what has happened.
He quotes the words in the same form three times (Hartel 712
736 and 801), the last place being the clearest and fullest. He
there says: “Sicut per Esaiam prophetam clamat et dicit Populus
iste lubiis honortficant me, cor uero eorum...doctrinas homuuwim
docentes. item Dominus in euangelio increpans similiter et
obiurgans ponit et dicit Leicitis mandatum Der, ut traditionem
uestram statuatis.” The last line is Mk vu 9 as quoted else-
where by 8S. Cyprian */;, and seeing that the Gospel passage was
in his mind it seems more reasonable to refer the whole quotation
to S. Mark (with the text of which it agrees literally), than to
postulate a direct reference to Isaiah. ‘The fact that the prophet
is distinctly mentioned does not militate against this view, since
in the Gospel also Isaiah’s name is prominently brought forward.

But if the passages in 8. Cyprian are references to the Gospel,
the evidence for an early African shorter recension of the verse
breaks down, and we can put in its place the form found in the
quotation from Tyconius, which supports the reading of NA sah
and / (the fifth century Latin Palimpsest of the Prophets at
Wiirzburg).

CX INTRODUCTION.

Ksai xlix 18
Z@ eyo, eyes Kupwos, 6te mavtas avtods évdtaon NA 26 49
86 198 239 306 (106 -cer) cop Tyc82 ‘Aug’ de Vnit Eccl
evovan| pr ws kocpov B al Hieron
+ ws atorny A 62-147 Ambr
+ ws Koopoy 23
Here again B Hieron are convicted of false addition, the words
being under asterisk in the Hexapla*.

3. Examples of corrupt readings which are found in all extant
Greek Mss of the Lxx, but not in the Old Latin.

Eze xxviii 7
Kal TPWTOVTLW TO KAAXOS Gov eis aTworecav w TycT7T cop sah?
Tpwaovow| otpwoovotv MSS Hieron (humiliabunt)

The Hebrew is 5m, which might be translated cai Be8n-

Awaovae (as Theodotion and most other interpreters), or Tpdcovae
(as Tyconius, who has wulnerabunt), but never otpwaovaw. The
Vulgate has polluent agreeing with Theodotion. The corruption
of tpwcovoty to cTpwaovaty Was easy. |

The expression “they shall wound thy beauty” is very harsh,
but for that reason all the more certainly the genuine rendering
of the LXX, since it is a literal translation of the Hebrew original.
Nevertheless tpwcovow has disappeared from all our Greek
Mss, a fact which tends to shew that in some books at least of
the Bible they all have a common element later than the chief
versions.

Eze xxxvi 8

0 Aads pou STL eyyiGovow Tod édOciv Tyc36 m660
eyytfovow | eXmifovotvy MSS cop

The Hebrew is X15 NIIP *D, so that it is evident that the

1 In the latter half of the same verse Tyc reads ws xocmov viudns with NA and
almost all other authorities including Hieron, but B 23 have ws xécpov ds viugn. I
believe B to have a worse text in Isaiah than in the rest of the Prophets; the read-
ings given above are comparable to the Western element in the Pauline Epistles
(Hort, Introd § 204).

* The Sahidie is NcexwNnc; for the rendering compare Iob xxxiii 23, Prov vii
26 in the same version.

SELECTED READINGS. CX1

reading of the MSS eAmizoycin is a corruption of errizoycin,
as in fact Schleusner conjectured in the last century’. Here two
points are worthy of notice:—(i) Tyconius and the Speculum
stand alone against all extant LXxX authority in supporting the
true reading éyyiGovoev?; (11) Tyconius and the Speculum do not
agree literally in their Latinity. The renderings run as follow:

populus meus, qui adpropinquat uenire T'yc36
populus meus, qui adpropriant uenire m660

Possibly qua stands in the place of an original guia (Cod V* of
Tyconius actually reads quiapropinquat), and the singular verb
in T'yc looks like a correction caused by ‘populus.’ But adpro-
p(r)jare® is a word not used in the earlier African text (4 Cyp),
and is therefore a correction in m. The circumstance is worth
noting, as illustrating what has been said before, that the ex-
tensive variations from earlier African authorities found in m do
not seem to have arisen through revision from the Greek.

Ksai xiv 13, stellas Dei (Cyp669 Tyc70) as a rendering of
T@V aoTépwv Tov ovpavod (Gk Mss cop Ambr Aug Hieron) has
been noticed in the preceding section‘, Here again the African
Latin agrees with the undoubtedly genuine Hebrew text against
the other LXx authorities.

4. In the preceding examples Tyconius has been the constant
member in a small group which has preserved the true text of
the LXX in places where the mass of authorities have trans-
mitted a corruption. I shall now give some examples of readings
where, owing to the defective state of the African Latin evidence,
Tyconius stands almost or quite alone in witnessing to the true
text.

Peck 16

Kal KaTapTioaL avTiy iv éepvtevoev 1) SeEut cou,
Kat emt viov [avOpwrov ov] éxpataiwoas ceavTe.

' Schleusner, Novus Thesaurus philologico-criticus, quoted by Cornill, p. 412.

? The Sahidic (Ciasca 299) is unfortunately wanting. The Coptic (Zattam 190)

has: ‘‘for they hope (ceep2eAttic) to come to this place.”

° For the spelling of adpropiare see Le x 34 in Bp Wordsworth’s Vulgate, Clem.
ad Cor 28 (lat), ete.
pal EG

Cxll INTRODUCTION.

The words in brackets are omitted by Tyconius 6.
It will be convenient to divide the discussion into two parts.

i. The original reading of Tyconius and the Old Latin.
ii. The original reading of the Lxx.

i. The text of Tyconius on p 6 is

et perfice eam quam plantauit dextera tua
et in filium conroborasti tibi.

This is the reading of cod R. In cod V the last line is

et filium hominis quem confirmasti tibi.
The Monza Epitome (M) as usual abridges the quotation, reading

“uineam de egypto et ct usque filium hominis quem
confirmasti tibi.”

Now the reading of VM only differs from the reading of the
ordinary Psalters by omitting ‘super’ before “fillum hominis.” ‘The
reading of R on the other hand is not that of any of the common
texts, and it approves itself as African by the word ‘conroborare ’
for the more usual ‘confirmare.’ ‘Conroborare’ has found a place
elsewhere three times in the Psalms in various texts!, but its
true character is best seen from the readings in Le i 80, 11 20,
the only places where cpatavotc@at occurs in the Gospels. Here
e has ‘corroborare’ in each place, while other texts have ‘con-
fortare’ or ‘confirmare’’.

But the reading of R as the genuine text of Tyconius, and
therefore also of the African Latin, is supported by two pieces
of negative evidence. The half verse et [in] jfilowm...tibi is
omitted by the 8. Germain Psalter (the text printed by Sabatier
as his chief authority), and a quotation of Ps lxxix 9—16 in
m 642, 643 breaks off at quam plantawt deatera tua. Thus we
have (1) the common text of ver. 16”,a smooth inoffensive reading;
(2) two authorities for omission, one in a continuous text, the
other a judicious ‘non-quotation’; (3) the reading of cod R,
which is harsh. Does it not seem likely that (3) is the original
form of the version ?

1 Ps cii 11 (vg), Ps civ 4 (codd. known to dug); Ps exli 7 (Aug Prosp).
2 ‘Corroborare’ also occurs Eph iii 16 vg, but no African evidence is here extant.

SELECTED READINGS. CX1ll

u. When we apply the reading et tn filiwin conroboraste trbr
to the criticism of the LXx text, the first point to notice is
that the construction which made a possible sense in Latin is
impossible in the Greek. The sense cannot be “...the Vine which
thy right hand planted and made strong for thyself into a son,”
for the Greek is émi viov not ets viov. In other words the Greek
which underlies the quotation of Tyconius was almost impossible
to construe, and consequently invited emendation. It is not till
we refer back to the Hebrew that we get any light. It runs thus:

52) mys WN m3)
95 mnype yo Sy

Whatever the true interpretation of this very dithcult passage
may be, there can be little doubt that here our present Hebrew
text is the parent of the Lxx. When we find that the best
text of the Old Latin agrees verbally in an unintelligent word-
for-word rendering of the Hebrew, it is difficult to avoid believing
that the av@pwrov ov of the common text is an interpolation from
the similar words in ver. 18, inserted to make some kind of sense.
How close and how unintelligent this translation was may be
best seen by comparing the Hebrew and the Latin word for word.
Nothing but the influence of the original Hebrew, as expressed
through two faithful unintelligent translations, explains the omis-
sion of the relative before ‘ conroborasti.’ We can scarcely suppose
Tyconius would or could have emended his Latin Psalter from the
Hebrew directly ; his text therefore must have come through the
Greek LXX in a purer form than survives to-day in our Mss.

If this view of the passage be accepted, it is important to
notice that the bizarre spectacle of the reading of a single 9th
century Latin patristic MS preferred to all other LXxX authorities is
quite justifiable from a genealogical point of view. Cod R is the
best Ms of 'yconius, our other authorities for his text having been
corrupted in this passage from the Vulgate; Tyconius is in this
place the only representative of the African version, our other
authorities being absent, or omitting the half verse; the African
version is our oldest direct authority for the LXx, and it has
been several times proved to be right when the best Greek Mss
have gone wrong.

CX1V INTRODUCTION.
Esai xi 3
The mss of the LXX vary so much in this verse that it will be

convenient to quote at once the Hebrew as it stands in the
Massoretic text as a sort of standard.

MNP DA wad NY 1K
maa ody cpxd yy
The Mss of the LxXx fall into two groups

a includes A and 62-147
8 includes B* cop sah Hieron and SAB™.

It will be convenient to take the half verses separately,
the division being after AND, as in all Lxx texts, not after

wap as in the Massoretic punctuation.

The readings after éy@ ovuvtacow, which begins the verse in
all authorities except 62-147 (which have éy@ cuvTedéow) are :—

a. nylacpévos eloiv: Kal eyo ayw avtovs’ A 62-147

B. Kal éy@ ayw avtovs’ B* cop sah Hieron

Kat eyw| om eyw sah’

B.. Kal éy@ ayw avtovs’ nytacuévot ciciy’ Kal éyo ayo
avtous NAB™ Syr Hew al.

A comparison of a, 8 and 8, with the Hebrew will I think
shew the general superiority of a. It has equivalents, though
they are unintelligent, for each Hebrew word in its proper order:
at the same time if this equivalence had been reached by
emendation from the Hebrew we should have expected avtovs to
disappear; and, further, éy dy is scarcely a translation to ‘ND:
“T have called.”

8 differs from a by dropping the awkward clause mryvacpévor
etaiv, Which hangs in the air; while the most natural explanation
of 8, 1s that it is an unsuccessful attempt to emend 8 by a. a
in fact has been added to B. It is of course conceivable that 8
has been derived from 8, by homoeoteleuton, but in that case it is
very difficult to explain how 8, ever came into existence. It

1 The Bodleian ms of the Sahidic (D) gives the reading ,, but as Ciasca remarks

(Introd vol 2, xxxiv) the readings of this ms are of no value for the original form
of the version.

SELECTED READINGS. CXV

does not commend itself as an original, or as a translation, and
it does not appear in any text earlier than the Hexapla.

The reading of Tyce 50 is
quia ecce ego praecipro - sanctificatr sunt et woco eos.

“Quia ecce” is prefixed by no other authority and must be a
Latin insertion, either due to the translator, or to Tyconius him-
self, or more probably to a copyist’. Similarly cod R here prefixes
que to sanctificati sunt. This is rightly omitted by cod V, which
has however the corruption wocé for woco eos. In passages like this,
which in any case make no intelligible sense in the Latin, those
readings which are more in literal agreement with some Greek
text are to be preferred.

If then we reject “quia ecce,
lying Tyconius

2

we get as the Greek text under-

Oran , , 5) i a ’ 4
ey@ TVITATTW' NYLATMEVOL Elaiv’ Kal KANW AUTOVS

that is a, but with the better reading caX@ for éyo dyo. Unless
therefore we fall back once more on the inconceivable hypothesis
that Tyconius has emended directly from the Hebrew, the Old
Latin has again preserved the true rendering of ANP where
our Greek Mss have a corruption’,

The advtovs of LXX probably comes from a mistaken reading

of ANP as STN (7.e. DNS) ‘T have called them.’ So also
the next word 33 is read p23 im thie Lak, How wp

appears in the LXX as nytacpévor evoty is difficult to say; there
is no trace of a reading Hriacmenoic, though if we may conjecture
that as the original rendering of the Lxx the common text might
easily have arisen from it by reading the C as \\, a contraction
for etow (see Maunde Thompson’s Palaeography p 96, note).

Thus by taking the text of Tyconius, and reading Hriacmenoic
for the disconnected uriacmenoteici, we bring the LXxX into line

! Compare quia added before Os xii 3 by Tyc 28, and quae added after columba
Zeph iii 1, 2 by Tye 42.

2 Parsons ms 301 has eyw ovyracow kat eyw KaXw avuTous’ yyiacuevon ecowv. This
may be a reminiscence of the text preserved in Tyconius, but the position of the
clause kat eyw...avrous shews the text of this ms is the result of some complicated
process.

CXV1 INTRODUCTION.

with the Hebrew. It is to be noticed that this text is quite
independent of the renderings of Aquila, Symmachus and
Theodotion, fragments of whose versions are given in Field.

In the second half of Esai xiii 8 the attestation falls into the
same two groups. For spb 9995 we find

a. yiyavtes epxovtar Tov Ouvpov pov travaoa 62-147 Tyc50
...Tavoat Tov @, wou 106
B. yiyartes Epxovtat TANPOcaL TOV Ovpov wou NAB cop sah.

To render matoa in Tyconius we find linire (i.e. lenire) in cod V, but
mitigare in cod R. I have accepted lenire, mainly because rave is rendered
by lenire in Cyp 785, but by mitigare in Opt 63. Thus lenire appears in the
earlier African text, m7tigare in the later; as both readings are found in the
Mss of Tyconius, it is more likely that mztigare is the correction and lenire the
original than vice versa. In any case they represent the same Greek text.

It is very suggestive to find a pair of rival readings such as
these in the Lxx text, both pre-Hexaplar, and neither agreeing
with the Hebrew as we have it. This is not the place to discuss
the origin of the LXx paraphrase; I am only here concerned to
point out that the addition of Tyconius,—that is the Old Latin,—
to the witnesses for zratcar is another proof of the existence of an
extremely ancient element in the mixed ‘ Lucianic’ text. That
text contains many Hexaplar additions and other such changes,
but we also find in it readings demonstrably ancient and yet
independent of other known texts.

To sum up. What do we learn from the Old Latin Version of
the Prophets, of which version Tyconius is so often the only
representative ? The answer may be divided into five heads.

1. The Old Latin brings us the best independent proof we
have that the Hexaplar signs introduced by Origen can be relied
on for the reconstruction of the LXx. Passages in Hexaplar Mss
to which is prefixed the asterisk (*) profess to be no part of the
original LXx, but to have been added from other sources. No
such passage 1s found in any genuine form of the African Latin.
The only apparent exceptions to this statement, and they are

CONCLUSION. CXV11

surprisingly few, are cases where we have reason to suppose
that the asterisks themselves are misplaced.

2. The Old Latin together with the Hexaplar text (omitting
of course the passages under asterisk) often agree as to omission
with the text of B. The greater number of the passages under
asterisk are not found at all in B, nor throughout Isaiah in A,
though in many cases the words in question are inserted without
any qualifying mark into the text of all or nearly all other Mss.

3. Yet the same authorities (the Old Latin and the Hexaplar
text) convict B here and there of interpolation, especially in
Isaiah. It sometimes happens in the course of a few verses that
B will in one place be almost the only Ms which does not witness
to an interpolation, while in another B supports an interpolation,
either almost alone, or in company with a considerable following
of other Greek MSs.

4. When we turn from questions of insertion and omission to
questions of rendering of the Hebrew and the substitution of one
Greek word for another, we find that the Old Latin in the Prophets
sometimes supports ‘Lucianic’ readings. This fact proves that
among the constituents of the eclectic text most used by the Antio-
chene Fathers of the fourth century there was an ancient element
akin to the Old Latin, but quite independent of our leading Mss
codd. ANB. Of the numerous conflations and interpolations found
in ‘ Lucianic’ MSS there is naturally no trace in Tyconius.

5. There are renderings found in the Old Latin representing
Greek readings which have disappeared from every known Greek Ms,
but which, by comparison with the Hebrew, are shewn to preserve
the genuine text of the Lxx, from which the readings of our
present Greek Mss are corruptions. In these passages the Old
Latin is sometimes, but not always, supported by one or both
Egyptian versions. Such readings as those of the Old Latin in
Eze xxviii 7 and xxxvi 8 prove that our Greek Mss, so imposing
by their number and apparent independence, have common cor-
rupt elements, and that the agreement of these Mss does not of
necessity imply the general voice of antiquity.

To those who assent to these five conclusions the study of
the ancient versions of the Greek Bible cannot fail to be regarded
as of more importance than is generally recognised. If the three

CXVili INTRODUCTION.

or four dozen known Greek codices of the Prophets be not really
independent, but coincide here and there in palaeographical error,
then those versions in which these errors are not found have a
great independent value. We ought not to regard them as
merely secondary authorities to be used as supports to one side
or another when the Greek Mss are divided, but rather as primary
authorities whose variants are worthy always of careful attention
and sometimes of adoption, even when the Greek MSS are
unanimous on the other side.

Finally, may it not be asked whether what has just been said
has not a bearing on our view of the authorities for the text of
the New Testament? If the Greek codices of the Prophets, in
spite of their variations, be not wholly independent in text, and
coincide in errors from which some of the early versions are free,
is it impossible that the same may be the case here and there
in the New Testament? If here and there B falls from its
habitually high standard of purity of text and admits interpola-
tions, may not that be the case elsewhere than in Isaiah? The
general character of the ‘Neutral’ text so often represented by B
alone stands on a sure basis, but B may here and there desert
that text by an interpolation or by a substitution which may not
necessarily be self-betraying.

These however are but secondary considerations compared with
the general result, that in the Old Testament as in the New the
text of our oldest Mss as a whole is proved by the evidence of the
versions to be immensely superior to the later eclectic texts com-
monly used in the Greek-speaking churches from the middle of
the fourth century. These later revisions sometimes preserve
valuable fragments of older texts which would otherwise have been
lost altogether, but it is for such fragments alone that these re-
censions are valuable, and not for their continuous text.

Additional Note on the “ Altercatio Simonis et Theophili.”

THE Altercatio Simonis Judaet et Theophili Christiani, a work of the
5th cent., has been shewn by Harnack (Texte wnd U. 1, pt 3) to be a
recasting of a much earlier document, probably the lost Dialogue of Jason
and Papiscus. Moreover the earlier form of the A/tercatio exercised a very
important influence upon African writers in their choice of Messianic proof-
texts from the Old Testament. As this is especially the case in S. Cyprian’s
Testimonia and in the tract adversus Iudaeos commonly ascribed to Tertullian,
it becomes important to consider what influence the lost Dialogue, so far as
we can recover it from the Altercatio, may have had upon the Biblical text in
those works, If the text of the 7estimonia were dependent upon the original
of the Altercatio, it would cease to be our primary authority for the oldest
‘African’ Version.

Fortunately the Biblical text of the Testimonia appears in the vast
majority of cases to be entirely uninfluenced by any extraneous source.
Whatever circumstances may have guided 8. Cyprian in his choice of passages,
he seems to have verified them most accurately from his Bible, and variations
in the Testimonra from the ordinary printed texts of the Lxx have generally
Ms support. Moreover several of the favourite 2nd cent. proof-texts which
rest on a corrupt reading are significantly absent from S. Cyprian’s compila-
tion ; Harnack (p. 107) notices for instance that the well-known “Dominus
regnauit a ligno” (Ps cxv 10) is not found in it.

We may therefore assume with confidence that the text of the Testimonia
is also the text of 8. Cyprian’s Bible. Nevertheless the influence of the
lost Dialogue remains a very probable explanation of the rare lapses into
inaccuracy which occur now and then in the Testimonia. The texts in the
Altercatio are not unfrequently quoted quite loosely; it is not greatly
surprising to find there Deut. xxviii 44 (otros gorau eis kepadry, od &€ on eis
ovpay) in the form: Lritis gentes in caput, incredulus autem populus in cauda,
But the same strange paraphrase is found in Jest 1 211, Similarly the

' This striking resemblance is not noticed by Harnack, though it seems one of
the strongest arguments for the dependence of the Testimonia upon some form of
the Altercatio. This paraphrase also occurs in Commodian, possibly not directly
quoted from the Testimonia.

B. 2

CxX ADDITIONAL NOTE,

inaccuracies in the quotation of Esai xxix 11, 12 (Test 1 4) may be ety due
to the Dialogue which lies behind the Aen

Much the same results seem to come from the comparison of the tract
adv Iudaeos with the Altercatio, though the quotations in the Testimonia
reach a higher standard of accuracy than those in adv Judaeos. The question
of the authorship of this curious compilation would need a detailed study.
As is well known, about half the work consists of extracts from the third
book of Tertullian against Marcion; the remainder has been shewn to be
dependent upon an early form of the Altercatio by Harnack, who however
accepts the ascription of the whole to Tertullian. But to the Biblical critic
the authorship is chiefly of importance as determining the date, and from the
character of the independent Biblical quotations alone this must be placed at
least as early as S. Cyprian?, and probably earlier still. Whether therefore
the tract be compiled by Tertullian or not is a comparatively secondary con-
sideration, as in either case it belongs to the earlier stages of the African
Church.

The quotations of Tyconius appear to be quite independent of any form
of the Altercatio.

1 Dr Noeldechen’s study on this Treatise (Texte und U. x11, pt 2) has only come
into my hands as these sheets are passing through the Press. He not only accepts
the traditional authorship, but places the date in the earlier part of Tertullian’s
literary activity. On this hypothesis Tertullian used his book against the Jews as
material for his larger work against Marcion.

2 See above, p Ixviii.

LIBER REGVLARVM
EVOONIT.

R cod. Remensis 364, saec. ix.

V cod. Vaticanus Reginensis 590, saec. x.

M cod. Modoetianus, saec. ix—x.

D the excerpt from Rule v in the commentary of John the Deacon.

Eug the quotations from the Rules made by S. Augustine in de Doctrina
Christiana 11 30 ff. As there is no critical text of this work yet published, I
have cited S. Augustine by the excerpts of Eugippius (from Knoell’s edition,
Vienna 1885). The preface of Tyconius is quoted by S. Augustine, but not
included in Eugippius’ extracts.

All readings of R and V are given, but I have not recorded all the singular
readings and omissions of M.

The numeration in the margin gives the pages of the Maaima Bibliotheca
Veterum Patrum tom vi, the edition used by Sabatier.

LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIL

49 NECESSARIVM duxi ante omnia quae mihi uidentur libellum
aaa regularem scribere, et secretorum legis ueluti claues et
(M) luminaria fabricare. sunt enim quaedam regulae mysticae

quae uniuersae legis recessus obtinent et ueritatis thesauros
5 aliquibus inuisibiles faciunt ; quarum si ratio regularum sine
inuidia ut communicamus accepta fuerit, clausa quaeque
patefient et obscura dilucidabuntur, ut quis prophetiae in-
mensam siluam perambulans his regulis quodam modo lucis
“| Aug tramitibus deductus ab errore defendatur."!
10 = Sunt autem regulae istae:
I. De Domino et corpore eius.
II. De Domini corpore bipertito.
III. De promissis et lege.
iV. We specie et-genere.
15 V. De temporibus.
VI. De recapitulatione.
VII. De diabolo et eius corpore.

I. D&E DOMINO ET CORPORE EIVS.

Dominum eiusne corpus, id est Ecclesiam, Scriptura lo-
20 quatur, sola ratio discernit, dum quid cui conueniat persuadet

Titulus, INCIPIT LIBER REGVLA|RVM Tycontr R rubro; IN NOMINE DNI
INCIPIT | THICONI (THICONII V*) REGVLA LIB.I.|DE DNI CORPORE BIPERTITO.
Ao.

1—9 Necessarium ...... defendatur] ap Aug de Doct Christ 111 30; lee-
tiones excerpsi e cod Vat Pal 188 saec ix 2 regularem] RV*M; regulare
Aug (ms); regularum Veorr, Aug (edd) legis] M Aug; leges V; om R
11—17 IIL etc] om V* 13 promisis R 14 speciae V* et sic
aliquando 18 titulum non habent huic requlae RV 19 eiusne]
eiusque V loquitur Veorr 20 cui] cuique V

B. i

yA LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

uel quia tanta est uis ueritatis extorquet. alias una persona RV
conuenitur quam duplicem esse diuersa duorum officia ie
edocent.

Fsailii4,5,6 Sic per Esaiam: Hic inquit peccata nostra feret et
pro nobis dolet, ipse wulneratus est propter facinora nostra, 5
et Deus tradidit ewm pro peccatis nostris, et cetera quae
in Dominum conuenire omnis Ecclesiae ore celebratur.

10, = sequitur autem et dicit de eodem: Ht Deus uult purgare
illum a plaga et wult Deus a dolore auferre animam evus,
ostendere illi lucem et formare illum prudentia. numquid ei
quem tradidit pro peccatis nostris wult ostendere lucem, et
eum formare prudentia, cum ipse sit lux et sapientia Dei, et
non corpori eius? qua re manifestum est sola ratione uideri
posse quando a capite ad corpus transitum facit.

cfDanii34.35 Danihel quoque lapidem de monte praecisum et impegusse 15
in corpus regnorum mundi et in puluerem commolwisse Domi-
num dicit, montem uero effectum et impleuisse uniwersam 50
terram corpus eius. non enim—sicut quidam dicunt in con-
tumeliam regni Dei inuictaeque hereditatis Christi, quod
non sine dolore dico—Dominus totum mundum potestate et 20
non sui corporis plenitudine occupauit. dicunt enim eo
monte mundum impletum, quod liceat Christiano in omni
loco, quod antea non nisi in Sion licebat offerre. quod si ita
est, non opus erat dicere ex lapide montem effectum et in-
crementis mundum cepisse. Dominus enim noster Christus 25

cf Toh xvi ante mundi constitutionem hanc haburt claritatem, et cum
homo in illo Dei filius fieret non paulatim ut lapis sed uno
tempore accepit omnem potestatem in caelo et in terra,

Danii3s lapis autem incrementis factus est mons magnus et crescendo
terram omnem texit. quod si potestate implesset uniuersam 30

—_

fe)

2 diuersa] om R 3 edocet V* 4 sic] pr In 1sata (sic) R rubro
5 ipse] pret VM 6 eum] illum V 7 dominum] dm R omni V

ecclesiae R, et sic aliquando 8,9 illum purgare V 9 sufere R
(sic) 13 corporix R* 14 faciat V 15 danihel] pr IN DANIELO
R rubro; daniel R hoc loco praecisum] precissum R et]
om V 16 puluere R commoluisse] comminuisse V 23 antea]
ante ea R 25 coepisse R 27 in illo] ille V 29 magnus] om V
30 implesset] implesse R

REGVLA PRIMA. 3

a terram non corpore, lapidi non compararetur. potestas res
(M) est inpalpabilis, lapis uero corpus palpabile. nec sola ratione
manifestatur corpus non caput crescere, sed etiam apostolica
auctoritate firmatur: Crescimus inquit per omnia in eum qut Ephiv 15, 16
5 est caput, Christus, ex quo omne corpus constructum et conerum
per omnem tactum subministrationis tn mensuram untius curus-
que partis merementum corporis facit in aedificationem sut.
et iterum: Non tenens caput, ex quo omne corpus per tactus et Col ii 19
coniunctiones constructum et subministratum crescit in incre-
ro mentum Der. non ergo caput, quod ex origine idem est, sed
corpus crescit ex capite.
Ad propositum redeamus. scriptum est de Domino et
elus corpore—quid cui conueniat ratione discernendum— :
Angelis suis mandawt de te ut custodiant te in omnibus Ps xcu—6
15 urs tus, in manibus ferant te ne offendas ad lapidem pedem
tuum. super aspidem et basiliscum ambulabis, et conculcabis
leonem et draconem. quoniam in me sperauit eripiam eum,
protegam illum quoniam cognowt nomen meum. inuocabit
me et exaudiam eum, cum ipso sum in tribulatione, eriptam
20 et glorificabo eum. longitudinem dierwm adimplebo eum et
ostendam wl salutare meum. numquid de cuius obsequio
mandauit angelis suis Deus cidem ostendit salutare suum, et
non corpori clus ?
géuyso5 = Aterum: SSieut sponso imposuit mihi matram et sicut Esai tsi 10
“(| Huy Sponsam ornauit me ornamento.| unum corpus dixit utri-
usque sexus sponsi et sponsae, sed quid in Dominum quid
in Ecclesiam conueniat ratione cognoscitur. et idem Domi-
nus dicit in Apocalypsi: Hgo swum sponsus et sponsa. et Ap xxii16,17
iterum : Haverunt obuiam sponso et sponsae. Mt xxv 1
30 «= Kt iterum quid capitis quid corporis ratione discernen-
dum sit per Esaiam declaratur: Sic dicit Dominus Christo ksaixtv1

1 potestas]+enim V; pr quia M 3 manifestatur] monstratur V
8 per tactus] peractux V*; per tactum Veorr M 14 te 2°] om V*
17 eum] illum V 18 inuocauit RV, wide Sabat. ad loc; émxaréoerat
10.0.8 19 exaudiam] pr ego V ipso] eo V eripiam]+eum V
20 longitudinem]longitudinex V*; longitudine RVcorr; waxpérnta Lxx (codd)
21 obsequiux V* 22 salutaré suum V* vid 25 ornamentum
V* vid unum] unus R* vid 27 in eccla V*M 28 sponsus]
wide pie? 30 quid corporis] & corpori V 31 isaiam V

1—2

4 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

meo Domino cuius ego tenuc deaxteram ut exaudiant eum RV
gentes—sequitur et dicit quod non nisi corpori conueniat— |
et dabo tibt thesauros absconditos, inwisibiles aperiam tubi,
ut scias quoniam ego sum Dominus qui uoco nomen tuum
Deus Israhel, propter Iacob puerum meum et Israhel electum
meum. propter testamenta enim quae disposuit patribus
ad cognoscendum se Deus aperit corpori Christi thesauros
1coii9,10 inuisibiles, guod oculus non widit nec auris audiurt nec in
cor hominis ascendit, sed obdurati hominis qui non est in
corpore Christi; Ecclesiae autem reuelawit Deus per Spiri-
tum suum. ista quidem, quamuis hoc quoque Dei gratia sit,
adhibita tamen ratione aliquando facilius uidentur.
Sunt alia in quibus huiusmodi ratio minus claret, eo quod
siue in Dominum siue in corpus elus recte conueniat dictum ;
quam ob rem sola et maiore Dei gratia uideri possunt. sic 15
Mtxxviét in EKuangelio: A modo inquit widebitis filiwm hominis seden-
tem ad deateram wirtutis et uenrcentem in nubribus caelt. alio
loco dicit non uisuros uenientem in nubibus caeli nisi in
Mt xxiv30 nouissimo tantum die: Plangent se omnes tribus terrae, et tunc
uidebunt filiwm hominis uenrentem in nubibus caelt. utrum- 20
que autem fieri necesse est, sed primo corporis est aduentus,
id est Ecclesiae, iugiter uenientis in eadem claritate inuisi-
bili, deinde capitis, id est Domini, in manifesta claritate. si
enim diceret Modo uidebitis uenientem, solius corporis intel-
legendus esset aduentus; si autem Videbitis, capitis aduentus. 25
nunc uero A modo inquit widebites uenientem, quoniam corpore
suo iugiter uenit natiuitate et similium passionum claritate.
si enim renati Christi membra efficiuntur et membra corpus
efficiunt, Christus est qui uenit, quoniam natiuitas aduentus
Toh i 9 est sicut scriptum est: Inlwminat omnem hominem uenrentem 30
Ecli4 tm hune mundum. et iterum: Generatio uadit et generatio

on

=
°

1 meo domino] dno meo V 5 electum] dilectum R 6 testa-
menta] testa V* 9 obdurati homines V* 10 ecclesiae]
eccla V* reuelabit V* vid 11 gratiae di V 12) ale
quanto R 14 in dno...in corpore V 16 a modo] ammodo RB;
modo V 19 plangent se] plangentes V 24, 25 intelligendus V*M
25 capiti V 26 corpore] corpori R 27 similium]+ea V
passionem V* mox corr claritatem V*M 28 corpus] pr

quae V

od

REGVLA PRIMA. o

RV uwentt. et iterum: Sicut audistis qua antichristus went. 1 toh its
(™) iterum de eodem corpore: Si enim iste qui uenit alium 20oxi4
Lesum praedicat. unde Dominus cum de signo aduentus
sui interrogaretur, de illo aduentu suo coepit disputare qui
5 ab inimico corpore signis et prodigiis imitari potest. Cauwete Mt xxiv 4
inquit ne quis uos seducat; multi enim wenient in nomine
meo, id est Im nomine corporis mei. nouissimo autem ad-
uentu Domini, id est consummationis et manifestationis
totius aduentus eius, nemo ut aliqui putant mentietur. sed
10 quo plenius ista dicantur ordini suo relinquimus.
Nee illud erit absurdum quod ex uno totum corpus uolu-
mus intellegi, ut filtum hominis Eeclesiam; quoniam Ecclesia,
id est filii Dei redacti in unum corpus, dicti sunt filius Dei,
dicti unus homo, dicti etiam Deus sicut per apostolum : Super 2 The iid
15 0mne qui dicitur Deus aut quod colitur,—qui dicitur Deus
Ecclesia est, quod autem colitur Deus summus est,—ut on
templum Dei sedeat ostendens se quod ipse est Deus, id est
quod ipse sit Ecclesia. quale si diceret: i templum Der
sedeat ostendens se quod ipse sit Dei templum. aut: in Deum
20 sedeat ostendens se quod ipse sit Deus. sed hune intellectum
synonymis uoluit obscurare.
Danihel de rege nouissimo mm Deum inquit locus erus cfDanxi 36,38
glorificabitur, id est clarificabitur; ueluti Keclesiam in
loco Ecclesiae, in loco sancto, abominationem wastationis in cf Dan xi 313
25 Deum, id est in Ecclesiam, subornabit. et Dominus
totum populum sponsam dicit et sororem; et apostolus cant v1
uirginem sanctam, et aduersum corpus hominem peccatt. 3499x475
et Dauid totam Ecclesiam Christum dicit: Factens miseri- Ps xvii 51
cordias Christo suo Dawd et senint evus im aeternum. et
3 iesum] ihm RM; xpm V 5 imitare R 7 id est] ide V*
9 mentietur] metietur V* mox corr 10 quo] quod R dicentur V*
ordine V* 11 absordum R (ef p 2614) 15 qui dicitur 1°] Reorr
(2a p m); quod dicitur R*vid V 17 templum] RV*; templo VM
sedeat] redeat R* (sedeat R*) ipse est] ipse sit VM 18 templo VM
19 ostendit V 21 synonymis] scripsi, suadente WR Smith: si non
nimis RK (ex sinonimis); non nimis nouimus V obscurare.] sic punctum
habet R 22, 23 danihel...clarificabitur] supra ras in R 22 rege]
regno R 23, 24 in loco ecclesiae] om V* ; add Vcorr 24 abominationem]

abominatione RV 25 subornauit RV 28 christum] om V*; habet in
marg misericordiam V* vid 29 in aeternum] usque in sacculum V

6 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

apostolus Paulus corpus Christi Christum appellat dicens: RV
1coxiit2 Sreut enum corpus unum est, membra autem habet multa, oe
omnia autem membra ex uno corpore cum sint multa unum
corpus est, sic et Christus, id est Christi corpus quod est
coi2t Keclesia. iterum: Gaudeo in passionibus pro uobis et repleo s
quae desunt pressurarum Christi, id est Ecclesiae. nihil enim
etmtx25 defuit Christi passionibus, quoniam sufficit discipulo ut sit
cf 1The i19 secut magister. sic ergo aduentum Christi pro locis accipi-
emus. item in Exodo omnes filios Dei unum filium et
omnes primogenitos Aegypti unum primogenitum esse sic
Exiv22,23 Deo dicente cognoscimus. Dices inquit Pharaoni: Haec
dicit Dominus, Filius meus primitiuus Israhel. divi autem,
Dinutte populum ut seruiat mehi; tu autem noluisti dimittere
eum. wrde ergo, ecce ego occido filiwm tuum primitiuum. et
Psixxix 15,16 Dauid uineam Domini unum filium sic ait: Deus uirtutwm 1s

_

°

conuertere, respice de caelo et uide, wsitu wineam tuam. et
perfice eam quam plantawt dextera tua et in filium conrobo-
raste tobe.

Et apostolus filium Dei dicit qui filio Dei mixtus est:

Roil-4 Paulus seruus Lesu Christi, wocatus apostolus, segregatus in 2

euangelium Dei quod ante promiserat per prophetas suos in
scripturis sanctis de filio suo, qui factus est et ex semine
Dawid secundum carnem, qui praedestinatus est filius Dei in
uirtute secundum Sprritum sanctitatis ex resurrectione mor-
tuorum Lesu Christe Domini nostri. si diceret de filio suo 25
ex resurrectione mortuorum, unum filium ostenderat; nunc
autem de filio inquit suo ea resurrectione mortuorum Iesu
Christi Domini nostri. sed qui factus est filius Dei ex re-

1 dicens] om V(M) 2 unum corpus V 6 presurarum R; praes-
suram V* ecclesiae] ecclesia V* 8 magister]+eius VM
10 aegypti unum] aegyptiorum V 11 dicit inquit R; dicis inquit V* (dices
V») 12 primitiuus meus V 13 dimitte] demitte R; dimittere V*
populum] populum meum V demittereR 14 eum]eam R 16 uisita]
pr et V tuam] istam V 17 in filium] filium hominis quem VM; wide
Introd p cxi conroborasti] confirmasti VM 19 filio do V 20 uocatus
apostolus] om RM 21 euangelio V* 23 praedistinatus V* semp
24 uirtutem RV sanctitatis] sanctificationis V 24—p 7,16
mortuorum...generaui te] R supr ras, litteris minorib. sed ab antiqua manu

25 suo]+ut V 28 sed qui] sed quis V*vid M est] sit VM
ex resurrectionem V*

REGVLA PRIMA. 1

RV surrectione Christi apertius ostendit dicens de filio qui fuctus

(M)

n

in

an

pd

ie)

on

est ev ew semine Dauid secundum carnem, qui praedestinatus
est filius Dei. Dominus autem noster non est Dei filius
praedestinatus (quia Deus est et coaequalis est Patri) qui cx
quo natus est hoc est, sed ille cui secundum Lucan dicit in
baptismo: Filius meus es tu, ego hodie generaui te. Qui ex
semine Dauid, mixtus est principals Spiritur et factus est
ipse filius Det ex resurrectione Domini nostri Iesu Christi, id
est dum resurgit in Christo semen Dauid; non ille de quo
ait ipse Dauid: Sve dicit Dominus Domino meo. itaque facti
sunt duo una caro. Verbum caro factwm est et caro Deus,
quia non ev sanguine sed ex Deo nate sumus. apostolus
dicit: Mrunt duo in carne una. sacramentum hoc magnum
est,ego autem dico in Christum et in Keclesiam. unum nam-
que semen promisit Deus Abrahae, ut quanticumque Christo
miscerentur unus esset in Christo, sicut Apostolus dicit :
Omnes wos unus estes tn Christo Lesu. sv autem wos unus
estis in Christo Tesu, ergo Abrahae semen estis et secundum
promisstonem heredes, distat autem inter wnwm estes et unus
estis. quotienscumque alter alteri uoluntate miscetur wowm
sunt, sicut Dominus dicit: Lgo et pater unum sumus. quo-
tiens autem et corporaliter miscentur et Im unam carnem
duo solidantur wus sunt.

Jorpus itaque in capite suo filius est Dei, et Deus in cor-
pore suo filius est hominis, qui cotidie nascendo uenit et crescit
in templum sanctum Der. templum enim bipertitum est, cuius
pars altcra quamuis lapidibus magnis extruatur destruitur,

1 dicens] om V filio]+ suo VM 2 praedistinatus RV* et infr
3 autem] etenim V; enim M noster] V supr lin non est] R supr lin
di filius praedistinatus R; praedistinatus di filius V(M) 4 quia...patri]
Vining; om M 5 natus] creatus V lucan] R; lucam VM (secundu
V supr lin) 10 ait | sic dicit x x x x dns V*; post ait add in mg ipse
dauid Vcorr 11 est] in V supr lin 12 sumus] sunt V* mox corr M
14 christum...ecclesiam] xpo...ecclesia VM 15 xpi V 17 unus]
unum RVM wutroque loco 20 quotiescumque R unum] pr uni V
21, 22 quotiens] quoties R; quotienscumque V 22 miscentur] Rcorr
V > misexxxx R® 23 unus] unum V sunt. corpus] sic diuidit
RM 24 capite suo corpore R 27 destruitur] V'M; destruatur
Re aistraiur.¥

Le iti 22

Psi l4

esecines
cf Esai xlv 1

Toh i 14, 13

Eph v 31, 32

Gal iii 28, 29

Toh x 380

ef Eph ii 21

8 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

ef Mtxxiv2 neque in eo lapis super lapidem relinqutur. istius nobis RV
cf2Theii7 jugis aduentus cauendus est, donec de medio eius discedat ™
Ecclesia.

Il. Dr DOMINI CORPORE BIPERTITO.

Regula bipertiti corporis Domini multo necessarior et a 5

nobis tanto diligentius perspicienda et per omnes Scripturas
ante oculos habenda est. sicut enim ut supradictum est a
capite ad corpus ratione sola uidetur, ita a parte corporis ad
partem, a dextera ad sinistram uel a sinistra ad dexteram,
transitus reditusque ut in supradicto capite claret. 10

Esai xlv 3 ff Dum enim dicit uni corpori: Thesauros inuisibiles ape-
riam tibi, ut scias quoniam ego sum Dominus, et assumam te,
et adiecit: Tu autenv me non cognouisti quoniam ego sum Deus
et non est absque me Deus, et nesciebas me; numquid licet
unum corpus adloquatur in unam mentem conuenit thesauros 15
inuisibiles apertam tibi, ut cognoscas quia ego sum Deus
propter puerum meum Lacob, et tu autem me non cognouisti ?
in eandem et non accepit Iacob quod Deus promisit? aut
in unam mentem conuenit tu autem me non cognouisti et
nesciebus me? mnesciebas enim non dicitur nisi ei qui iam 20
scit, non cognouiste autem illi dicitur qui, licet ad hoc uocatus.
sit ut cognosceret, et eiusdem corporis sit uisibiliter, et Deo

of Hsai xxix labs adpropinquet, corde tamen longe separatus sit. huic
dicit tu autem me non cognouistt.

1 relinquetur VM 2 caxendus V* eius] cf p 74%

3 cclesia] add DE DNo ET CORPORE EIVS REGYLA | DE DNI CORPORE BIPER-

TITo R rubro; EXPLICIT LIBER PRIMYS . || INCIPIT LIB. II. | DE CORPORE DNI
BIPERTITO V; FINIT M

5 multa R 9 dextera] R sic semper; dextra V et sic saepius
10 transitus reditusque ut] reditus V 11,12 aperiam tibi inuisibiles V
12 dns R, sine uirga; ds V adsumam V* 16 quia] quoniam V
18 eandem] eadem V accipit R 20 enim] autem R 21 = illi
autem V dicitur] dr Reorr; dic R* vid 23 labiis]+quidem V
huic] hic V*

REGVLA SECUNDA. 8)

RY Iterum: ‘Ducam caecos nm wam quam non nouerunt, eb sai xiii 16
S77 semitas quas non nouerunt calcabunt, et fuciam alles tenebras
in lucem et praua in directum. haec uerba faciam et non
Eu derelinquam eos. ipsi autem conuersi sunt retro. numquid
5 quos dixit non derelinguam idem conuersi sunt retro, et non
pars eorum ?
Iterum dicit Dominus ad Iacob: Noli metuere quia tecum ¥sai stiii5—s
sum. ab Oriente adducam semen tuum et ab Occidente colli-
gam te. dicam Aquilont adduc, et Africo noli uetare ; adduc
10 filios meos de terra longinqua et filias meas a summo terrae,
omnes in quibus uocatum est nomen meum, in gloria enim
mea puraut illum et finat et fect illum, et produar plebem
cuecam, et ocult eorum sunt similiter caeci et surdas aures
habent. numaquid quos in gloriam suam parauit idem sunt
15 caeci et surdi ?
Iterum: Patres tut primo et principes eorum facinus ad- Vsaixtiii27-—
moserunt in me et inquinauerunt principes tur sancta mea, et
dedi pertre Lacob, et Israhel in maledictum. nunc audi me
puer meus Lacob, et Israhel quem elegi. ostendit illum Iacob
20 dedisse perire et Israhel maledictum quem non elegerat.
Iterum: Finai te puerum meum, meus es tu Israhel, nola Esai sliv 21,
obliuisct. met. ecce enim deleui uelut nubem facinora tua et
sicut nimbun peccata tua. conuertere ad me et redimam te.
numquid cuius peccata deleuit, cui dicit meus es tu et ne sul
25 obliuiscatur commemorat, eidem dicit conuertere ad me?
aut alicuius antequam conuertatur peccata delentur ?
Iterum: Scio quontam reprobatus reprobaberis; propter Esai xiviiis,9
nomen meunr ostendam tube dignitatem meam, et praeclara
mea superducam tibt. numquid reprobato ostendit dignitatem
30 Suam et pracclara inducit e1 ?
Iterum: Non senior non angelus, sed ipse conseruaurt €08, Esai lxiii 9,10

4 eos] V supr ras 4,5 numquid...retro] V ad calc pag 8 ab
occidentem V* vid 9 africum V* vid 11 gloriam...meam RM (=Jq);
12 paraui R! supr ras (apxx xR*) et feci] om V 16, 17 ammiserunt
R 20 maledictum] pr in V 24 cuius] om V*; alicuius V"
25 eidemj+et V 27 scio] om R reprobaueris R 30 suam
add V# super lin praeclara]+sua V 31 conseruauit] conseruabit

R; considerauit V eos] illis V

10 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

propter quod diligeret eos et parceret illis; tpse redemit eos RV
et assumsit illos et exaltawut illos omnes dies saecult. psi (My,
autem contumaces fuerunt et exacerbauerunt Spiritum Sanc-
tum. quos omnes dies saeculi exaltauit quo tempore con-
tumaces fuerunt aut exacerbantes Spiritum Sanctum ? 5
Iterum aperte Deus uni corpori firmitatem et interitum
Esai xxxiii20 promittit dicens: Hierusalem ciuitas diues, tabernacula quae
non commouebuntur, neque agitabuntur pale tabernaculr tur in
aeternum tempus, neque funes eius rumpentur. et adiecit :
Esai xxxiti 23 Rupte sunt funes tut quia non ualuit arbor nauis tuae, incli-
nauerunt uela tua et non tollet signum donec tradatur m
perditionem.
Iterum breuiter bipertitum ostenditur Christi corpus:
Cant ig, Fusca sum et decora. absit enim ut Ecclesia quae non habet
maculam aut rugam, quam Dominus suo sanguine sibi mun- 15
dauit, aliqua ex parte fusca sit nisi in parte sinistra per
Roi quam nomen Der blasphematur in gentibus. alias tota speciosa
cantiv7 est, sicut dicit: Zota speciosa es provima mea et reprehensto
non est in te. etenim dicit qua de causa sit fusca et speciosa:
cantis — SVt tabernaculum Cedar ut pellis Salomonis." duo taber- 4 Ew
nacula ostendit, regium et seruile: utrumque tamen semen
Abrahae; Cedar enim filius est Ismahel. alio denique
loco cum isto Cedar, id est cum seruo ex Abraham, diutur-
Pscxix5—T nam mansionem, sic ingemescit Ecclesia dicens: Heu me
quoniam peregrinatio mea longingua facta est, habitaut cum 25
tabernaculis Cedar, multum peregrinata est anuma mea. cum
odientibus pacem eram pacificus, cum loquebar dlrs debella-
bant me. non possumus autem dicere tabernaculum Cedar
praeter Kcclesiam esse. ipse autem dicit tabernaculum
Cedar et Salomonis unde fusca sum inquit et decora; non 30

i

O°

1 eos] illos V wtroque loco parceret] parcet R 2 assumpsit R
(sic); adsumpsit V* 3 exaceruauerunt V* 4,5 fuerunt contumaces V
5 exacerbantes] exaceruauerunt V* 8 agitabunt RV 11 non tollet]
noll& R 13 ostendit breuiter bipertitum V 15 sibi] om V
17 alias] alia V* 18 est...speciosa] om V*; add V* supr lin 19 non}
nulla V 20 ut 1°] & V*; fusca sum et speciosa ut Hug tabernacula
ug caedar V semp pelles Eug cod opt 21 tamen] om V*; add
V> in mg 22 ismahel V (plene); ismahel R (sic) 24 ingemescit]
ingemit V 27 loquebar] loquerer V 28 me]+gratis VM pos-
sum V dicere autem V

RV
(M)

en

=
On

REGVLA SECUNDA. 11

enim Keclesia in his qui foris sunt fusca est. hoc mysterio
Dominus in Apocalypsi septem angelos dicit, id est Eecle-
siam septiformem, nunc sanctos et praeceptorum custodes,
nune eosdem multorum criminum reos et pacnitentia dignos
ostendit. et in Euangelio unum praepositorum corpus di-
ucrsi meriti manifestat dicens: DBeatus «le seruus quem
aduentens dominus illius inuenerit tta facienten, et de eodem :
St autem nequam ille seruus, quem Dominus diuidit in duas
partes. dico numquid omnem diuidet aut findet 2? denique
non totum sed parte eius cum hypocritis ponet, i uno enim
corpus ostendit.

Hoe itaque mysterio accipiendum est per omnes Scrip-
turas sicubi Deus dicit ad merita Israhel periturum aut
hereditatem suam execrabilem. apostolus enim copiose ita
disputat, maxime ad Romanos, in parte accipiendum quic-
quid de toto corpore dictum est. Ad Israhel inquit quid
dicit? Tota die expandi manus meas ad plebem contradicen-
tem. et ut ostenderct de parte dictum, Dico, inquit, Numquid
reppulit Deus hereditatem suam? absit. nam et ego Isra-
helita sum ea semine Abraham tribu Beniamin. non reppulrt
Deus plebem suam quam praesciuit. et post quam docuit quem
ad modum haee locutio intellegenda esset, codem genere
locutionis ostendit unum corpus et bonum esse et malum
dicens: Secundum Huangelium quidem invmict propter wos, se-
cundum electionem autem dilecti propter patres. numaquid idem
dilecti qui inimici, aut potest in Caifan utrumque conuenire 4
ita Dominus in omnibus Seripturis unum corpus seminis
Abrahae in omnibus ecrescere et florere atque perire testatur.

1 qui] quae V* vid; q M 2 apocalypsim V dicit] om V*;
add V corr supr lin 4 eosdem]+et V 9 numquid in V supr ras
9,10 diuidit...findit...ponit V 10 non totum] pr totum V partem...
ponet] cf Mug 867 11 corpus ost.] ras in V 12 mysterio] corpus V
13 ad merita] merito V*; ob meritum V corr; ob merita M 16 quid]
om V 19 hereditatem] plebem V 20 abrahae V 21 presciit V
22 loquutio R semp inteligenda V*M esset| esse V* 25 patres|
pares V* 26 in caifan] M; in cain’ R (sic); in causa V 27 in
omnibus] omnibus gentibus VM “et, .

28 testatur] add EXPLICIT DE BIPERTITO DNI CORPORE | INCIPIT PROMISSIS (sic)

ET LEGE REGVLA R rubro; EXPLICIT . LIBER . SECVNDVS. | INCIPIT LIBER . III . DE
PROMISSIS ET LEGE Vu DE CORPORE DNI BIPERTITO EXPLC. | INCIPIT DE PROMISSIS

ET LEGE M

Mt xxiv 46

cf Ib 48, 51

Ro-x 21

RO X12

Ro xi 28

TZ LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

III. DE PROMISSIS ET LEGE. 52

Auctoritas est diuina neminem aliquando ex operibus RV
legis iustificari potuisse. eadem auctoritate firmissimum est )
numquam defuisse qui legem facerent et iustificarentur.

Ro iii 19, 20 Scriptum est: Quaecumque lex loqutur his qui in lege s
sunt dicit, ut omne os obstruatur et subditus fiat omnis mundus
Deo, quia non vustificabitur ex lege omnis caro in conspectu
Rovilt evus. per legem enim cognitio peccatr. iterum: Peccatum
Galiilé —-westrt non dominabitur, non enim estis sub lege. iterum: Lt
nos in Christum credimus ut tustificemur ex fide et non ex
operibus legis, quia non tustificabitur omnis caro ex operibus
Galii2t,22 legis. iterum: Sv enim data esset lex quae posset wuificare,
omnt modo ex lege esset wustitia. sed conclusit Scriptura
omnia sub peccato ut promissio ex fide Iesu Christi daretur
credentibus. sed dicet quis: A Christo et infra non iustificat rs
lex, suo tamen tempore iustificauit. huic occurrit auctoritas
apostoli Petri, qui cum gentes a fratribus sub iugo legis
Acxvl0 cogerentur sic ait: Quid temptatis Dominum inponere uolentes
wugum super collum discentium quod neque patres nostri
Roviis neque nos potuimus portare. et apostolus Paulus: Cum 20
essemus iInquit in carne passiones peccatorum quae per legem
sunt operabantur in membris nostris ut fructum afferrent
Philiii6 morte. et contra idem apostolus dicit: Justitia quae ex lege
est conuersatus sine querella. quodsi tanti apostoli auctoritas
deesset, quid dici potuit contra testimonium Domini dicentis: 4.
lonidt =Bece uere Israhelita in quo dolus non est. quod etsi Domi-
nus hoe testimonium non dignaretur perhibere, quis tam
sacrilegus, quis tam tumore stuporis elatus diceret Mosen et

_

°

3 iustificare R 4 numquam] non V 5 scriptum est] om V*;
add Veorr supr lin 5,6 dicit qui in lege sunt V 6 subditus]
subiectus V 7 iustificatur V 8 cognitio] agnitio V pec-

catum] peccatx R* mox corr 10 in xpo V* et] om V* 11 quia]

aa R (a ab antiqua manu) 12 possit uiuificari V* 13 esset]
esse V* 18 uolentes] om V*; add V*® supr lin 22 adferent V*
23 morti] mortui R 25 dicentis] dicens V* 26 et] om R 27 testi-
monio V* 28 stupore R mosen] R (sic); moysen V

RV
(M)

on

I

en

20

25

REGVLA TERTIA. 185:

prophetas uel omnes sanctos legem non fecisse aut justi-
ficatos non esse? cum et Scriptura dicat de Zacharia et
uxore eius: Hrant iusti ambo in conspectu. Der ambulantes
in omnibus mandatis et tustificationtbus sine querella; et
Dominus non uenerit uocare vustos sed peccatores.

Lex autem quomodo iustificare potuit a peccato, quae ad
hoc data est ut peecatum multiplicaretur? sicut scriptum
est: Lew autem subintrawit ut multiplicaretur peccatum. illud
autem scire debemus et tenere: numquam omnino inter-
ceptum esse semen Abrahae ab Isaac usque in hodiernum diem.
semen autem Abrahae non carnale sed spiritale, quod non
ex lege sed ex promissione est. alterum enim semen carnale
est, quod est ex lege a monte Sina quod est Agar in seruitutem
generans. ille quidem qui de ancilla carnaliter natus est,
qui autem ex libera ex promissione. non esse autem semen
Abrahae nisi quod ex fide est apostolus dicit: Cognoscitis ergo
quoniam qui ex fide sunt hi sunt filii Abrahae? et iterum:
Vos autem fratres secundum Isaac promissionis filii estis.

Semen ergo Abrahae non ex lege sed ex promissione est,
quod ex Isaac iugiter mansit. si autem constat semen
Abrahae ante legem fuisse, et illud esse semen Abrahae quod
ex fide est, constat et quia numquam fuit ex lege. non
enim potuit et ex lege esse et ex fide. lex enim et fides
diuersa res est, quia lex non est fide sed operum sicut
scriptum est: Lex non est ew fide, sed Qui fecerit ea uiuet in
eis. Abraham ergo fide filios semper habuit, lege numquam.
Non enim per legem promissio est Abrahae aut seminr evus
ut heres esset mundi, sed per tustitiam fidet. sv enim qui
per legem tpst sunt heredes, ewacuata est fides, abolita est
promissio; lew enim tram operatur. si ergo nec fides nec
promissio Abrahae destrui ullo modo potest, ab ortu suo

2 et] om V zaccharia V 4 iustificationibus]+di V
querela R*; quaerella V* 10 isaac] R*; issac R®: fortasse scribendum
Isac in hodiernum diem] ad hodiernum V 11 noncarnale] add
Vcorr supr lin 13 sina] sinai R seruitute V 14 dejJex V
18 autem] om V* 20 isaac] issac R 21 semen abrae V 22 et]
om V 23 et le] om V 25 est ex] et ex R* mox corr 26 semper

filios V 27 per legem] ex lege V 29 euacuata] uacua V abolita]
et uacua V 31 ullo modo] om V

Luci6

Mt ix 13

Ro v 20

Gal iv 24
1023;

Gal iii 7

Gal iv 28

Gal iii 12

Ro iv 13—15

14 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

iugiter mansit. nec data lege inpedita est quo minus RV
Abrahae filii secundum promissionem fide generarentur. br
ef Galiii7 dicit enim apostolus post CCcc et Xxx annos datam legem
Ib 18 non obfuisse nec destruxisse promissionem. Si enim ex lege,
non tam ex promissione; Abrahae autem per repromissionem 5
Ib 21 donauit Deus. et alio loco: Lew ergo aduersus promissa?
absit. videmus legem ad promissionem non pertinere nec
aliquando alteram in alteram inpegisse sed utramque ordinem
suum tenuisse. quia sicut lex numquam fidei obfuit, ita nec
Roiiis1 fides legem destruxit, sicut scriptum est: Legem ergo de-
strumus per fidem? absit, sed legem statuimus, id est
firmamus, inuicem namque firmant.

Ergo filii Abrahae non ex lege sunt, sed ex fide per
repromissionem. quaerendum autem quem ad modum hi
qui ex operibus legis negantur potuisse iustificari, in lege
positi et legem operantes iustificati fuerint. quaerendum
praeterea cur post promissionem fidei, quae nullo modo
destrui potest, data est lex quae non est ex fide, ex cuius

Galiiil0 operibus nemo iustificaretur quia quotquot ex operibus legis
sunt sub maledicto sunt. scriptum est enim: Maledictus qui
non permanserit in omnibus quae scripta sunt in libro legis ut
faciat ea.

Apostolus denique huic quaestioni prospiciens, cum
assereret omni modo filios Abrahae dono Dei semper fuisse
per fidem non per legem factorum, ex alterius persona 25

Galii19 respondit sibi dicens: Quid ergo lex factorum ? id est, si ex
fide filii cur data est lex factorum, cum sufficeret promissio

Galiitt generandis filiis Abrahae et fide nutriendis, quia Iustus ex
fide wiwit? ante quam enim se interrogasset Quid ergo lex

—

fe)

_

3

n

ie)

1 impedita R 2 fide] fidem V*; fidei Vcorr 3 quadrin-
gentos et triginta V 4 distruxisse V* 5 iam non V re-
promissionem] promissionem V* mox corr 6 promissa] + di V
7 uidimus V promissionem] promissa V 8 impegisse R
utraq. RV 9 numquam fidei] fide” numquam R (ef p 355) 10 distr-
V semp 14 promissionem V quemammodum R (vid Appa 11) hii R
15 lege] legem V* 16 legem] pr in V* 17 quae] quem V
21 permanserit] manserit V 23 questioni RV corr 24 adserer& V*
25 personam V* 26,27 id est.,.factorum] V supr lin 28 nutriendis]

nutriendi V

REGVLA TERTIA. 15

RV factorum, iam dixerat ut uiuerent qui ex lege iustificari non

) possent hoe modo: Quoniam autem ex lege nemo rustificatur

apud Deum, tustus autem ex fide wiwit. ostendit propterea

dictum esse per prophetam ex fide wiwit, ut manifestum

5 fieret quem ad modum uiuerent qui legem facere non potu-
issent.

Sed minus liquet quid sit Justus ex fide wit. non
enim potuit quisquam iustus in lege positus uiuere nisi
opera legis fecisset et omnia opera; sin minus maledictus

roesset. dedit Deus legem: dixit Non concupisces. statim
occasione accepta peccatum per mandatum operatum est
omnem concupiscentiam. necesse est enim passiones pecca-
torum quae per legem sunt operari in membris eius qui in
lege est. propterea enim data est ut abundaret peccatum,
15 quia wirtus peccati lex. wenundatus autem sub peccato vam
non quod wult operatur bonum, sed quod non uult malum,
consentit enim legr secundum interiorem hominem. expug-
natur autem altera lege membrorum trahiturque captiuuies
neque aliquando liberari potuit nisi sola gratia per fidem.
20 est autem crimen magnum perfidiae non adtendisse genus
armorum quibus wiolentia peccati expugnaretur: contra
maegnificae fidei est Inquisisse et uidisse. est ergo sacrilega
mens et male de Deo sentiens quae, cum legem nullo modo
humanitus posse fier1 et ad ulciscendum paratam uideret,
non intellexit esse aliquod remedium uitae, nec fieri
potuisse ut bonus Deus qui sciebat legem non potuisse fieri
alterum uitae aditum non reliquisset, et aduersum homines
quos ad uitam fecerat undique uersum uitae wias clusisset.

ie)
<n

2 possint V* autem] ait R 3 deum] R* vid; dnm R*
autem] om V* 3, 4 ostendit...uiuit] add V ad cale pag 5 quem-
ammodum R potuissent] possint V*; possent V® 7 liquet] lic&
V uiuet Vecorr (uiuit V*) 10. dixit] pr et V 11 occasio-
nem acceptam V* peccatum] om V* 14 abund& R; habundar&
ve 16 non quod} quod non V* non 2°] in V supr lin
18 altera lege] alteram legem R; aliter lege V 19 sola gratiam V* vid
20 attendisse V* 21 contra] & e contra V2; e contra M 22 mag-
nifice RV 23 legem] lege R 24 ad ulciscendum] adulescendum
R; ad ulciscendo V* mox corr 25 esse] om R*; add R* supr
lin remedio V* fortasse recte 27 alteram R aduersus
V* vid 28 clausisset V (et infr clausisse)

Gal iii 11

Ro vii 7, 8
ciips

Ro v 20
1 Co xv 56

Ch ikG vind —
23

16 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIL.

hoe fides non tulit, non admisit, sed cum infirmitate carnis RV
et uirtute peccati urgueretur dedit Deo claritatem. sciens 2
Dominum bonum et iustum et uiscera miserationis suae
contra opera manuum suarum non clusisse, intellexit esse
iter ad uitam et faciendae legis remedium uidit. Deus
enim cum diceret Non concupisces non nudauit quem ad
modum id prouenire posset, sed seuere atque decise dixit
Non concupisces: quoniam id fide repperiendum reliquit.
si enim mandaret a se prouentum postulari, et legem de-
struxerat et fidem. ut quid enim legem daret, si legem in 10
omnibus facturum polliceretur ? aut quid fidei relinqueret,
si fidem auxilium pollicendo praeueniret? nunc autem bono
ef Ro viil3 - fidei dedit legem ministram mortis, ut amatores uitae fide
uitam uiderent, et iusti fide uiuerent qui opus legis non ex 53
sua uirtute sed ex Dei dono fieri posse crederent. lex enim 15
a carne fierl non potest; quaecumque facta non fuerit
punit.
Quae ergo spes homini faciendae legis et fugiendae mortis
Ro vii7—9 nisi opis et misericordiae Dei, quam fides inuenit? Caro
legit Det subiecta non est, neque enim potest. qui autem in
carne sunt Deo placere non possunt. wos autem non
estis in carne sed in spiritu, si qudem Spiritus Der in
uobis est. st quis autem Spiritum Christi non habet, hic
non est etus. ostendit Spiritum Dei et Christi idem
esse. ostendit praeterea qui Spiritum Dei habuerit in 25
carne non esse. si ergo unus est Spiritus Dei et Christi,
prophetae et sancti qui Spiritum Dei habuerunt Spiritum
Christi habuerunt. si Spiritam Dei habuerunt, in carne
non fuerunt; si in carne non fuerunt, legem fecerunt: quia
caro est inimica in Deum et legi eius subiecta non est ; 30

qn

n

°

1 adm-R& hoc loco (vid Appx 11) 1, 2 carnis et uirtute] om R 2 ur-
gueretur] R*V*; argueretur Reorr; urgxer&ur V nunc 4 non]add V4
supr lin 6 denudauit V nunc; -abit V* vid 6,7 quemammodum R
7 possit V* dicise V* 8 concupiscis V* relinquit V*
9,10 distruxerat V* 10 si]+se M 11 facturum] factorum VM
relinqueretur V 13 fide] fidem R 15 dono] donum V* 16 quae-
cumque] quicumque V*; quae cum Vcorr 18 hominis V* vid 19 opis]
V*; opes R Veorr 27 qui] quo V (=quoniam) 29 si in carne non
fuerunt] om V fecerunt] pr non R

REGVLA TERTIA, 17

RV qui ergo ad Deum confugit accepit Spiritum Dei, quo accepto

T

5

fe)

en

20

3

qn

oO

mortificata est caro; qua mortificata potuit facere legem
spiritalis, liberatus a lege: quia iusto non est lex posita; et
iterum: Sz Spiritu Dei agimini non estis sub lege.

Qua re manifestum est quia patres nostri qui Spiritum
Dei habuerunt non fuerunt sub lege. quamdiu enim quis in
carne est, id est Spiritum Dei non habet, dominatur eius lex.
si autem tradiderit se gratiae, moritur legi et facit in illo
legem Spiritus, mortua carne quae Jegi Dei subiecta esse
non potest. quod enim gerebatur id etiam nunc geritur.
non enim quia sub lege non sumus cessauit interdictio illa
concupiscentiae et non magis aucta est; sed nos in reuelatam
gratiam concurrimus per fidem, edocti a Domino opus legis
de eius misericordia postulare et dicere: Fiat uoluntas tua,
et Libera nos a malo; illi autem in non reuelatam per eandem
fidem coacti metu mortis, quam ministra lege parato gladio
intentari uidebant.

Lex data est donee ueniret semen curt promissum est et
euangelizaret fidem. antea uero lex cogebat in fidem, quia
sine lege non possit exprimi fides ad exquirendam Dei gra-
tiam, eo quod peccatum uirtutem non haberet. data uero
lege passiones quae per legem sunt operabantur in membris
nostris urguentes in peccatum, ut uel necessitate urgueremur
in fidem quae imploraret gratiam Dei in auxilium tolerantiae.
custodiam carceris passi sumus, legem minantem mortem et
undique uersum insuperabili muro ambientem, cuius ambitus
sola una ianua fuit gratia. huic ianuae custos fides praeside-
bat, ut nemo illum carcerem effugeret, nisi cui fides aperuis-
set; qui hanc ianuam non pulsaret intra septum legis more-
retur. legem paedagogum passi sumus, qui nos cogeret

2 qua] quix V* 3 lex] om V 4 spiritu] spm V 5 est]
om V 11 cessauit]+enim V* mow eras 19 euangelizare V
in fide V 20 sine] siue R ad exquirendam] adquirendam R
21 uirtutum R 23 urguentes] V*; urgentes V*; urgentem R
urgeremur RV* 24 in fide V inploraret V in auxilio V
26 insuperabile V 27 custus V 27, 28 praesidebat] presidebat™
R (sic); cf p 20! whi ‘ur’ irrepsit ante ‘ut’ 29 qui] pr et V

septum] sepultum V*

B. 2

IEA worse)

Gal v 18

Mt vi 10, 18

Gal iii 19

Ro vii 5

18 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

studere fidei, qui nos cogeret in Christum. dicit enim aposto- RV
lus propterea datam legem, ut nos custodia sui concluderet ™)
ofRox4 in fidem, quam futurum erat reuelari in Christum qui est
finis legis, quo uixerunt omnes qui fide gratiam Dei ex-
Gal iii 23,24 Quisierunt. Prius inquit quam ueniret fides, sub lege cus- 5
todiebamur conclusi in eam fidem quam futurum erat reuelare.
lex itaque paedagogus noster furt in Christo, ut ex fide custifi-
caremur.
Lex inquam fidei erat demonstratrix. sed dicit quis: Si
in utilitate fidei data est lex, cur non ab origine seminis ro
Abrahae, si quidem iuge fuit? re uera iuge fuit: lugis et
fides ut genitrix filiorum Abrahae, iugis et lex per dinoscen-
tiam boni et mali. sed post promissionem filiorum Abrahae,
multiplicatis eis secundum carnem, multiplicandum erat et
semen Abrahae quod non est nisi ex fide. quae multiplicatio
euenire non posset sine adiutorio legis multiplicatae, ut mul-
titudo in fidem necdum reuelatam ut iam dictum est uel
necessitate deduceretur. prouidentia itaque Dei factum est
augendo gubernandoque semini Abrahae, ut seueritate et
metu legis multi compellerentur in fidem, et semen fulciretur 20
Rov2 -usque ad fidei reuelationem. Lex autem subintroiwut ut mul-
tiplicaretur peccatum. ubi inquit muliplicatum est peccatum
superabundamt gratia. non dixit data est sed superabunda-
vit. ab initio enim data est per Christum fugientibus legis
molestias atque dominium. abundauit autem multiplicata
lege, superabundauit uero in omnem carnem reuelata in
a enae) Christum, qui ueniens restawrare quae im caelo et quae im
terra euangelizauit fidem his qui proxime et qui longe, id est
peccatoribus Israhel et gentibus. iusti enim Israhel ex fide
in eandem fidem uocati sunt. idem namque Spiritus, eadem 30

Lal

5

n

5

1 xpoV 2 nos] non V concludere V* 3 xpoV
4 uixerunt] fixerunt R fide gratiam] fidem gratiae V 5 inquit]
inquid V* et sic plerumque 7, 8 iustificaremur] iustificarékur R
10 ab originix V* 15 nisi] om V 16 posset] posse R; possit V
adiutorium V* ut] et V 17 ut iam] sicut iam V 18 factum
est] sem e V (= sanctum est) 20 fulceretur V* 21 subintroiuit]
subintrauit VM 22 inquid V* 23 gratiam V data est] nata
év 23,24 superhabundauit V* 26 lege] legem V reuela-

tam R 30 eandem] eadem V

RV
(M)

on

REGVLA TERTIA. 19

fides, eadem gratia per Christum semper data est, quorum ple-
nitudinem ueniens remoto legis uelamine omni genti largitus
est, quae modo non genere a futuris differebant. aliter enim
numquam fuit semen Abrahae.

Quod si quisquam praeter haec iustificatus est, filius Abra-
hae non fuit. quoniam filius Abrahae dici non potest, si ex
lege et non sicut Abraham ex fide iustificatus est. ab eadem
namque imagine gratiae et spiritus in eandem transisse Kccle-
siam docet apostolus dicens: Nos autem omnes reuelata facie

10 gloriam Der speculantes in eandem imaginem commutamur a

I

on

20

25

30

claritate in claritatem. dicit et ante passionem Domini glo-
riam fuisse et negat ex lege excludi, id est exprimi, producti,
effici, potuisse. unde manifestum est ex fide fuisse. Vbi ergo
inquit gloriatio? exclusa est. per quam legem? numqud
operum? non: sed per legem fider. Quid enim Scriptura
dicit ? credidit Abraham Deo et deputatum est et ad wustitiam.
m gloriam ex eadem gloria transiuimus quae non fuit ex
lege. st enim ex operibus, fuit gloria, sed non ad Deum.
Ktenim impossibile est sine gratia Dei habere aliquem
gloriam. una est enim gloria et uno genere semper fuit.
nemo enim uicit nisi cui Deus uicerit, quod non est in lege
sed qui fecerit; in fide autem infirmum facit Deus aduersa-
rium nostrum, propterea ut que gloriatur in Domino glorietur.
sl enim quod uincimus nostrum non est, non est ex operibus
sed ex fide, et nihil est quod ex nobis gloriemur. nihil enim
habemus quod non accepimus. si sumus, ex Deo sumus, ut
magnitudo uirtutis sit Dei et non ex nobis. omne opus nos-
trum fides est, quae quanta fuerit tantum Deus operatur
nobiscum. in hoe gloriatur Salomon, scisse se non ex homine
sed ex Dei dono esse continentiam. Cum sciut inquit

2 gente R 8 imaginem R spiritus] spui V* vid; spu V nunc
eadem V* 9 dicens] dicxxx R* reuelatam faciem V
10 eadem V* 14 inquid V* gloriatio]+tua R numquid] pr
et V 16 deputatum] reputatum V est] om V ad] in V
17 in gloriam] om in V 18 gloria] gloriam V* ; habet gloriam Vcorr
deum] dnm R 19 aliquem] aliquam V 20 gloria] gloriam V*
22 deus infirmum facit V 23° ut]om V 25 et nihil] nihil V
26 accipimus R 29 nobiscum] scripsi ; in nobis. cum RV se]
om V 30 continentiam] pr omnex V; hominis continentiam Veorr

2—2

2 Co iii 18

Ro iii 27

Ro iv 8

cf 2 Co iii 18
cf Ro-iv 2

1Coi3l

Sap viii 21

20 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

quoniam aliter non possum esse continens nist Deus dederit,et hoc RV
wpsum autem erat saprentiae, scire curus esset hoc donum, adi
Dominum et deprecatus sum. iudicio Salomonis credendum
est non ex operibus sed gratia Dei omnes iustificatos, qui
scierunt opus legis a Deo impetrandum quo possent gloriari. 5

1coi27 ~~ dicit autem apostolus quem ad modum omms caro non glo-
reetur in conspectu Dei: mali omni modo quod Deum non

1Coi2s—81 cognouerint, iusti quod non suum sed opus Dei sint. Jnu-
tilia inquit et abiecta elegit Deus, quae non sunt ut quae sunt
euacuaret, ut non gloriatur omnis caro in conspectu Det. ex io
ipso autem uos estis in Christo Lesu, qui factus est nobis
sapientia a Deo et iustitia et sanctumonia et redemptio, ut se-
cundum quod scriptum est: qui gloriatur mm Domino glorietur.

Ephiis—1o et iterum: Gratia estis saluate per fidem. et hoc non ex
uobis, Dei donum est ; non ex operibus ne forte quis glorietur. rs
wpsius enim sumus figmentum creati in Christo.

Sic nulla caro aliquando ex lege, id est ex operibus, iusti-
ficari potest, ut omnis iustus ex Deo gloriam haberet. est
aliud quo nemo glorietur in conspectu Dei. Deus enim sic

lob xiv4,5 Suis operatur ut sit quod et dimittat, nemo est enim mundus 2
Psexli2 @ sorde nec si unius drei sit uita evus. et Dauid dicit: Non
introeas in vwudicio cum seruo tuo, quoniam non tustificabitur
coram te omnis utuens. et Salomon in prece dedicationis
templi: Non est inquit homo qua non peccauitt. iterum: Tibi
Provxx9 Sola deliqui, et: Quis enim gloriabitur castum se habere cor, 2;
aut quis gloriabitur mundum se esse a peccato? parum fuit
de casto corde, id est a cogitationibus, nisi et a peccato mun-
dum se nemo gloriaretur. omnis victoria non ex operibus sed
Ps ci 4 Dei miseratione conceditur, sicut scriptum est: Qui coronat 54

3 Regn viii 46
£516

1 quoniam] quia V 2 autem] om V hoc donum esset V
3 depraecatus R 5 impetrandum] implendum V possint V

6 quemammodum R 8 opus dei] di opus V sint] R*;
sunt R* 10 euacuaret ut] conieci; euacuaréurut R*; euacuarentur ut
Reorr V; euacuet Sp 567 not =xarapyhoy: cf p 17% in conspectu di
omnis caro V 11 nobis] uobis V 13 glorietur] glorizetur V (sic)
19 quo] quod V 20 demittat R 23 coram te] in conspectu
tuo V prece dedicationis] praedicationis V 25 deliqui] de-
linqui V (sic); peccaui R et: quis] om et V 27 corde casto V
a 2°] om V 28 se] om V ex] om V 29 qui te coronat V

REGVLA TERTIA. DA

RV te in misericordia et miseratione. et mater martyrum filio
(™) suo sic dicit: Vt in illa miseratione cum fratribus te recipiam. 2 Mach vii 28
iusti autem perfecerunt uoluntatem Dei uoto atque conatu
quo nituntur et concupiscunt Deo seruire.
5 Non est bene et melius in lege, quae si iustificasset omnes
lusti unlus essent meriti, quia parem de omnibus exigit ob-
seruationem ; sin minus operaretur maledictio. sin autem
disparis erant meriti—quis quantum credidit sibi dari tantum
gratiae Dei miserantis accepit,—ergo transformati a gloria in 2 Co iii 18

10 gloriam sicut a Domini Spiritu, id est ex eodem in eundem.
tale est enim quia post Christum fides data est quale quia et
Spiritus Sanctus, cum semper omnes prophetae et iusti eodem
Spiritu uixerint. non enim aliter uluere potuerunt quam
Spiritu fidei. quotquot enim sub lege fuerunt occisi sunt,

15 quia littera occidit Spiritus autem wiuificat. et tamen dicit 2 Co itis
Dominus de eodem Spiritu: Nise ego abtero alle non wentet, ton xvit
cum et apostolis iam dedisset eundem Spiritum. apostolus
autem sic dicit eundem Spiritum apud antiquos fuisse : Ha- 2 coiv1s
bentes autem eundem Spiritum fider, sicut scriptum est: credidi

20 propter quod locutus sum. eundem Spiritum fidei dixit habu-
isse eundem qui dixit: credidi propter quod locutus sum, et
id confirmat dicens: Ht nos credimus ideoque et loquimur. 2 co iv 13
dicendo et nos ostendit et illos eodem Spiritu fidei credidisse.
unde manifestum est quia haec iusti non ex lege sed Spiritu

25 fidei semper habuerunt.

Et quicquid per Dominum uenit plenitudo est, cuius pars
fuit per eundem, sicut paruulus qui, cum nihil minus habeat
a uiro, tamen uir non est, et per incrementa non nouorum sed
eorundem membrorum in eum uenit plenitudo corporis, ut

1 miseratione et misericordia V 2 in illa] illa V fratri-
bus]+tuis V 5 bene]om V iustificassent R*, sed n exp Reorr
7 sin autem] si autem V 8 dispares erant R; disparis erat V 9 ergo]
omV ajomV 10 domini] di V 11 et]omV 17 apostolis]

apostolos R; apl:s V nunc 18 sic dicit] xxdicit V* aput V*
19 sicut] sicr V* moz corr in scribendo 20 loquutus R 20, 21 eun-
dem spiritum...locutus sum] om R 20 fidei] V supr lin 22 ideo-
que] propter quod R ; ef Nov de Trin p 630 24 spiritu] spx R*; spu

R nune 26 dominum] dont R 29 eorundem] eorum R

cf Ioh vii 39

cf Eph i 18

Ro iv 21

22 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIL.

sit perfectus idem tamen qui fuerat paruulus. re uera non erat RV
Spiritus Sanctus ante passionem Domini, sed in illis qui per “™)
ipsum praesentem credebant, ut in ipso uictore et cuncta
perficiente signati perficerentur. nam iusti quos hic inuenit
habuerunt Spiritum Sanctum, ut Symeon et Nathanael et 5
Zacharias et Helisabeth et Anna uidua filia Fanuhel.

Promissio ergo a lege separata est, neque cum sit diuer-
sum misceri potest, nam conditio infirmat promissionem.
cogimur autem nos loqui ea quae sine igne doloris audire
non possumus. dicunt enim quidam, qui promissionum firmi- 10
tatem et quae ex lege est transgressionem nesciunt, promisisse
quidem Deum Abrahae omnes gentes, sed saluo libero arbi-
trio, si legem custodissent. et si pericula imperitiae quorun-
dam in eorum salutem patefacere prodest, sed cum de Deo
omnipotente sermo est moderari dicenda debemus, ne silenda 15
refutando memoremus, et ex ore nostro aliena licet audiantur.
quare cum tremore loquentes sua cuique pericula conside-
randa relinquimus.

Manifestum est praescisse Deum futuros de libero arbitrio
quos Abrahae promisit aut non futuros, alterum est duorum : 20
si futuros finita quaestio est, si non futuros fidelis Deus non
promitteret. aut si hoc est statutum apud Deum tunc pro-
missos dare si promissi uelint, profecto diceret, ne seruus
eius credens quia quod promisit Deus potens est et facere
ludificaretur Abraham. promissio autem illa est quae nihil 25
conditionis incurrit, sin minus nec promissio est firma nec
fides integra. quid enim stabile remanebit in Dei promis-
sione aut in Abrahae fide, si id quod promissum et creditum
est in eorum qui promissi sunt penderet arbitrio? ergo et
Deus alienum promisit et Abraham incaute credidit. ut quid 30

1 non erat]+in eo V 3 in ipso] ipso V 5 simeon V
nathanael] Reorr; nathanithel R* vid; natanahel V 6 helisabeth]
R*; helizabeth Reorr; elisab&h V 8 nam] non V 9 cogemur R
11 transgressione V* 14 in eorum] iustorum V salute V
16 refutando] reputando V 17,18 consideranda] om R 19 prae-
xscisse V* 21 fidelis] fideles V 22 statutum] statum R* mox corr
23 uelint] uellent V 24 deus] om V et] om V 27, 28 quid...

aut] R supr ras; (Qxxxxxx ... R*) 29 penderet] pend& R

REGVLA TERTIA. aes

RV etiam ipsa promissio debitum post modum facta est dicente

™) Deo: Benedicentur in te omnes gentes terrae, pro eo quod Gen xxi 18,
audist: wocem meam et non pepercist filio tuo dilecto propter
me? quia autem ex his quibusdam facile est et aduersum

5 Abrahae meritum liberi arbitrii calumnia strepere, etiam

post mortem ipsius Abrahae debitorem se eius confirmat
Deus, et propter eum se statuturum quod eius filio promitte-
bat dicens: Ho tecum et benedicam te: tibi enim et semint two Genxxvi3-—5
dabo terram hanc; et statuam iurationem meam quam turaur

10 Abrahae patri tuo, et multiplicabo semen tuum sicut stellas
caeli, et dabo tibi et semini two omnes gentes terrae, pro eo quod
audiwit Abraham pater tuus wocem meam. ecce firmatum est
debitum Abrahae, non enim potuit per liberum arbitrium
post mortem amittere quod uiluus meruerat.

15 Noluerunt autem gentes credere. quid faciet Abraham
cul debetur? quomodo accipiet fide et temptationis suae
debitum, cuius debitore Deo securus fuit ? cui si dictum esset
Dabo quod promisi et reddam quod iuraui si uoluerint gentes,
non crederet sed expectaret fortuitum. si conditione opus

20 est cum operario esse potest non cum mercede. operarius
enim potest uelle accipere aut nolle, non merces reddi aut
non reddi. omnes enim gentes in mercedem fidei datae sunt
Abrahae sicut Deus dicit: Merces tua multa est. non enim Gen xv1
si futuri essent et non quia futuri erant promisit. quia non

25 propter fidem Abrahae placuit Deo saluas fore omnes gentes,
quas non ante fidem Abrabae sed ante mundi constitutionem
possedit. sed quaesiuit fidelem cui id donaret ex quo esset
quod futurum statuerat. Abraham ergo non id meruit ut
essent sed ut per ipsum essent qui futuri erant quos Deus

30 elegerat, et conformes imagims fila suc faturos esse praeul- Ro viii 29
derat. in Genesi namque de praescientia Dei omnes gentes

1 ipsa] in ipsa R 1,2 dicente deo] dicendo V (sic) 4,5 quia
autem...abrahae] R supr ras (Qxxxx ... R*) 4 quia] ne qui V
quibusdam] quibus V 5 meriti V 6 eius] ipsius V 7 statu-
turum] staturum R 14 uiuus] iuuus R* 16 debetur] debitur R
post ras 17 debitore] debere V 19 expectare V* mox corr
21 merces] mercis V ut infra 23 mercis R*V 27 id] om R*M
28 quod] cui id V 29 sed ut per ipsum essent] om R

24 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Gen xvii 18," Abrahae promissas Scriptura testatur dicens: Abraham au- RV
tem fiens fiet et erit in gentem magnam et multam, et benedi- (M)
centur im eo omnes gentes terrae. screbat enim quia disponebat
Abraham filiis suis et domut suae post se, et custodient uias
Domini facere wustitiam et iudicium, ut superducat Deus in
Abraham quaecumque locutus est ad eum.

ef Esai i 19 Inuenimus autem et conditiones ut: Sz me audieritis et
uolueritis. ubi praescientia Dei, ubi firmitas promissionis in
huiusmodi conditionibus? dicit etiam apostolus propterea ex
fide et non ex lege datam esse promissionem ut firma esset ro

Roiv15,16 promissio. Lew inquit tram operatur; ubi enim non est lea
neque transgressio est. propterea ex fide ut secundum gratiam
jirma esset promissio omni semini. recte ut firma esset pro-
missio, adiecta enim conditione non est firma. satis enim
stultum est et proteruum credere in totum corpus conuenire 15
quod bipertito corpori dicitur. absit ut his dicat Deus si me
audieritis quos sciebat audituros, et quos antequam faceret
nouerat in imagine Dei perseueraturos, quos et promisit. non
est data conditio, id est lex, nisi implis et peccatoribus, ut aut
ad gratiam confugiant aut iustius puniantur si irritam fecerint. 20

1Timi9 ut quid lex ad iustos quibus lew posita non est, qui propitio
Deo legem sine lege faciunt, qui liberi Deo seruiunt, qui ad
imaginem et similitudinem Dei et Christi uiunt? uolentes
boni sunt. qui enim sub lege est metu mortis non est aper-
tus homicida; non est talis misericors, non est imago Dei. 25
displicet illi lex sed metuet ultricem, nec perficere potest,
quod non uoto sed necessitate faciendum putat. tradatur
necesse est propriae uoluntati, ut uoluntatis profecto prae-
mium recipiat qui animam non miscuit uoluntati Dei. dis-

on

4 domui suae] domus suae V 4,5 et custodient...facere] ut custo-
diens...faceret R (sed cf uxx) 7 et 1°] om R; ut R° supr lin 9 etiam]
enim V 11 inquid V* 14 adiecta] aiecta V* condicione V
(uid Appx 11) 15 et proteruum] & ppeum V (=et propter eum); V» exp
has litteras corruptas 17 et]om V 18 in]omV 19 data
data V* (corr a V4) 20 irritam] irritum V 20,21 fecerint ut] fecerunt
R*, -rint R* 21 non est posita V 22 qui liberi deo seruiunt]
om RM 24, 25 non est apertus homicida] om V 26 metuet] timet V
27 tradatur] traditur R 28 ut uoluntatis] V*; om R; ut uoluntas Vecorr
profecto] pro facto V 29 deij]om R

RV
(M)

en

Io

20

Or
OU

iS)
or

30

REGVLA TERTIA. 25

plicet i1li quod Deus uoluit. etenim uoluntate malus est qui
necessitate bonus est. lex operi inpedimento est non uolun-
tati, non est coniunctus Deo qui si mali poena non esset
malum sequeretur; nec uoluntatem Dei facit qui gemit quod
non suam faciat. et non est misericors qui timet esse crude-
lis: sub lege est, seruus est. non furtum odit sed poenam
metuit. furetur autem necesse est persuasus et uictus, quia
carnalis est sub uirtute peccati, Spiritum Dei non habens.
qui autem amat bonum imago Dei est et fide dominica uiuit,
ut heres iam non sit ancillae filius qui accipit legem in
timorem, sed liberae secundum Isaac qui non accepit sprritum
seruitutis in tumorem sed adoptiones filiorum clamantem Abba
pater. qui diligit Deum non timet seruiliter. scriptum est:
Timor non est in dilectione, sed consummata dilectio foras
mittrt temorem. quoniam timor poenam habet, qui autem timet
non est consummatus in dilectione. timor enim seruilis cum
odio est disciplinae, fili1 autem cum honore patris.

Aliud est timere ex lege, aliud honorare pro ueneratione
tremendae Dei maiestatis. eiusmodi similes sunt patri suo
qui in caelis est, commemorati et edocti amant bonum ode-
runt malum. non metu fugiunt malum, non necessitate faci-
unt bonum; sine lege sunt, liberi sunt, ipsi promissi sunt.
non ipsis dicitur Si me audieritis. cui dicitur Si me audieritis
potest et non audire; numquid conuenit in eum quem Deus
ante mundum praeuidit auditurum? et iusti quidem quos
Deus praesciwit sunt in ista lege. dicitur et ipsis Si me
audieritis, sed alia causa, non quia possunt non audire, sed ut
semper solliciti sint suae salutis, incerti exitus sui. non
enim securus est unusquisque ex numero se esse praesci-
torum, apostolo dicente: Ne ipse reprobus fiam. non est ergo
illis irae operatrix ista lex sed fidei exercitium, quo iugiter

2 impedimento R 5 suam] sua R et] on V 7 quia] qui V
9 et] om V 10 ut...sit] et...est V accipit] accepit V 11 timorem]
timore V 12 in timore V adoptionem V 16 dilectione]
dilectu V 18 honorare] om V 21,22 faciunt] faciant V* 23 cui
dicitur si me audieritis] om V 24 et non] etenim V conueniet V
25 ante] om V 26 praesciuit] praesciit V 27 alia] ad alia R
28 incerti] et certi V 29, 30 praescitorum] praesciturum V* 31 ope-

ratrix|rix V* (sic) mow corr quo] quod R

cf Gal iv 30

Ro viii 15

1 Ioh iv 18

Ro viii 29

LCorx7zi

26 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Dei gratiam quaerant laborantes ut perficiatur quod in illis RV
Deus praeuidit, et de libero arbitrio fuerint ad uitam desti-
nati. alias inpossibile est non audire eum quem Deus audi-
turum praeuidit, promisit, iurauit.
In quam uero partem lex proprie conueniat, licet uni 5
detur corpori, Dominus in Euangelio declarat dicens aposto-
oh xiii17,18 lis: St haec scitis beatt estis si feceritis ea. non de omnibus
uobrs dico; ego scio quos elegi. magna breuitas ostendentis
unum corpus et separantis! si enim diceret: Non de uobis
dico, aut: Non de omnibus dico, non ostenderet unum corpus. 10
nunc autem non de omnibus uobis dico ostendit quia et si non
de omnibus de illis tamen dixit, sicut quis dicat Non de toto
te dixi. duo autem corpora mixta sunt uelut unum, et in
commune unum corpus laudatur aut increpatur. sicut in
Exodo, cum quidam contra uetitum sabbati exissent manna 15
Exxvi28 colligere, ait Deus Moysi: Quousque non uultis audire legem
meam, cum Moses semper audierit ?
Quid de illa lege dicemus quae aperte promissioni uidetur
Hai xlvit aduersa ? sicut scriptum est in Esaia: Si me audisses Israhel,
esset sicut harena maris numerus twus. ecce increpatur 20
Israhel quod uitio suo non fuerit factus sicut harena. super-
est intellegere quia si semper non audierit semper exiguus
erit. et ubi firmitas promissionum? sed hoc fit quia prius
uolumus intellegere quam credere et fidem rationi subicere.
sl autem credamus omni modo ita fieri ut Deus iurauit, dabit 25
rationem fides quam perfidum est rationem quaerere, et in-
tellegemus firmitatem magis esse promissionum quam puta-
mus infirmitatem. hoc enim dictum si me audisses Israhel
commemoratio est iustitiae Dei et conformatio promissionum,

1 gratia V* 2 libero] libéro R (sic) fuerint] fuerunt R
ad uitam] in uitam V 5,6 uni detur] uidetur R 7 scitis] V>
supr ras 10 aut non de omnibus dico] om R ostendere V*
13 autem] enim V uelut] ut R (=uel); uelat V 14 commune]
commone R (cf p 511); commate V 15 sabbati] sabbatis V exissent]
exisse ut V*; exisset ut V corr 16 colligeret V 17 moses] moyses V
18 dicimus V 19 sicut] om V esaia] isaia V> 20 arena V
20, 21 maris...sicut harena] om R 21 harena] arena maris V 24 sub-
icere] RV; subiecere R* 26 rationem] rationes V 26, 27 intelle-

gimus V

REGVLA TERTIA. Date

RV ne quis putaret non libero arbitrio sed dispositione Dei quos-
dam factos ad mortem quosdam uero ad uitam. propterea
praesentibus dixit st me audissetis, ut manifestum fieret post
promisit, ut harenam futuros quia praeuidit audituros. ante

5 Dominum enim Christum, cum de hoc dictum est, numquam
fuit semen Abrahae sicut harena maris. quod probare facile
est. primum quia in Christo promisit hanc multitudinem :
Non in seminibus quast in multis sed quasi in uno, et semint
tuo quod est Christus. deinde quia omnes gentes promisit,

1o quod ante Christum fieri non potuit. et si fuit ante Domi-
num numerus filiorum Israhel sicut harena maris, sed cum
falsis fratribus qui non sunt filii Abrahae. non enim quia
omnes ex Abraham omnes filii Abrahae aut quia ex Israhel
li Israhel. sicut apostolus, cum se anathema optaret pro

15 Israhel quorum esset filiorwm adoptio et testamenta, ostendit
non esse huiusmodi filios Abrahae, sed de affectu carnalis
necessitudinis doleret quod ex ipso numero non essent, non
quod promissio Dei excidisset, dicens: Mon tamen excidit
sermo Dei, non enim omnes qui sunt ex Israhel hi sunt Israhel
20 neque quia sunt semen Abrahae omnes filti, sed in Isaac uoca-
bitur tubt semen; id est non qui sunt fildi carnis hi sunt filidt
Der, sed fil promissionis deputantur in semen.
Ergo in antiqua multitudine non fuit Abrahae semen, nisi
illi qui secundum Isaac fidei et promissionis filii erant. etiam
25 hoc exemplum inducit: Si fuerit numerus filiorum Israhel
sicut harena maris, reliquiae liberabuntur, id est exiguum. et:
Nist Dominus Sabaoth reliquisset nobis semen sicut Sodoma
essemus. ipsae reliquiae fuerunt semen Abrahae, ne omnis
Tudaea ut Sodoma esset. iterum cum assereret numquam
30 Deum hereditatem suam reliquisse sed sicut in aduentu Do-
mini pars Israhel salua facta est ita semper fuisse. Quid

1 ne quis...sed] om V 2 ad] aut V* uero] xxxxero V*
3 post] quia quos V 4 harenam R semp; V hic, et infr futuros]
+ideo promisit V 5 de hoc] hoc V 7 hanc] hune V* 13 ex
israhel] om ex V 14 ii Israhel] conieci: uel irt R; omnes israhel V
optaret]+esse V 18 excedit R 21 hij hii RV 24 etiam]
&liam V*; &ijam uoluit V corr 28 ipsae] ipse V (e pro ae saepe occurrit

in V et uice uersa)

Gal iii 16

cf Ro ix 3 tf

Ro ix 6—8

Ro ix 27

Ib 29

Ro xi 4, 5

ef Esai xl viii

’

Os xii 2—4

28 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

inquit dicit responsum? reliqui mihi septem milia uirorum RV
qui non curuauerunt genua Bahal. sic nunc reliqiuae secundum oa
electionem gratiae saluae factae sunt. dicendo sic nunc in hoc
tempore ostendit et ante sic factum in Israhel ut reliquiae, id
est modicum, saluum fieret. 5
Si autem nec fides nec ratio persuadet, sed ei qui pro-
missus fuerat dictum est: Sz me audisses Israhel, esset sicut
harena maris numerus tuus. et lacob qui ante quam nasce-
retur electus est, idem de libero arbitrio post modum repro-
batus est, sicut Osee dicit: Zudicowm Domini ad Iudam ut 10
uindicet in Iacob secundum uias etus, et secundum studia eius
retribuet ev. quia In utero supplantawt fratrem suum et in
laboribus suis inualut ad Deum, et tnualuit cum angelo et
potens factus est. siautem constat in Iacob dilectum consum-
masse, non est idem qui in laboribus inualuit ad Deum et

La

5

ef Gen xxv23 supplantator, sed duo in uno corpore. figura est enim dupli-

cf Gal iv 24

cf Deut xxxii
15

Gen xxvii 35

cis seminis Abrahae, id est duorum populorum in uno utero
matris Ecclesiae luctantium. unus est secundum electionem
de praescientia dilectus, alter electione suae uoluntatis ini-
quus. lIacob autem et Esau in uno sunt corpore ex uno 20
semine. sed quod perspicue duo procreati sunt ostensio est
duorum populorum.

Et ne quis putaret ita perspicue fore separatos duos popu-
los, ostensum est ambos in uno corpore futuros in Iacob, qui
et dzlectus uocatus est et fratris supplantator expressus. 25
itaque in duobus quantitas expressa est non qualitas separa-
tionis. ceterum ambo qui separati sunt in uno futuri ante
quam diuiduntur ostensi sunt. et Isaac Venit inquit frater
tuus cum dolo et accepit benedictionem. nisi ista locutio mys-
tica sit breuiter ostendentis duo in uno corpore, nonne contra 30

-rationem est ut benedictionem in proximum dolosus acce-

1 inquid V responsum]+diuinum V 2 genua] genu V
3 gratiae] om V dicendo] dicente R 9 electus] relictus V* mox
corr idem de] id est de R; idem V; saepe in MSS idem (idé) uix
differt ab id est (id é) 10 osee] osse R (cf issac p 131° not) 12 sup-
plantabit V* 19 alter] aliter V* electionem V* 21 ostensio]
ostentio R: ad Gal iv 24 cf Tert adv Mare V ii 284 23 perspicue]
Veorr; xxxspicuxx V* 28 diuidantur V 29 dolo et accepit]
dilectaccepit V* loquutioR . 31 dolosus] dolos V*; dolose V®

REGVLA TERTIA. 29

RV perit, Scriptura dicente: Qui non iurauit proaimo suo in dolo, Ps xxiii 4, 5
() ‘ste accipiet benedictionem a Domino? numquam autem Iacob,
id est Ecclesia, uenit ad benedictionem non comitante dolo, id
est falsis fratribus. sed non quia innocentia et dolus simul
5 ueniunt ad benedictionem simul benedicentur, quia gut potest cf Mt xix 12
capere capit, et unum semen pro qualitate terrae prouenit.
Non est autem contrarium quod malum fratrem uidetur
supplantasse, quia non dixit in utero supplantawt Hsau sed
fratrem suum. Esau autem ubique signum est et nomen
ro malorum, Iacob autem utrorumque, illa ratione quod pars
mala simulet se Iacob et sint duo sub uno nomine. pars
autera bona non potest se simulare Esau: inde est hoc nomen
malorum tantum, illud uero bipertitum. ceterum de libero
arbitrio nec Iacob omne semen bonum nec Esau omne malum,
15 sed ex utroque utrumque. ex Abraham ita bipertitum semen
ostensum est. natum est unum ex ancilla in figura, ut osten-
deretur et seruos futuros ex Abraham, et recessit cum sua
matre. post quam wero recessit inuentum est in alterius
semine, quod est ex libera, quod est ex Israhel qui accepit
20 legem in monte Sina, quod est Agar in seruitutem generans. Gai iv 24
illic in eodem populo secundum Isaac ex libera promissionis
filiz, id est sancti et fideles, multi procreati sunt. separatis
itaque a credentibus figuris Ismahel et Esau, in uno populo
totum post modum prouenit. illic ab origine utrumque Tes-
25 tamentum Agar et Isaac, sed pro tempore alterum sub alte-
rius nomine, delituit et delitescit, quia neque reuelato nouo
quiescit uetus generando. non enim dixit Agar quae im
senectute generautt, sed Quae est Agar in seruitutem generans.
Oportet autem ambos simul crescere usque ad messem. Mt xiii 30
30 Sicut ergo tunc sub professione veteris Testamenti latuit

1 scriptura] scriptum-éR suo] om V 5 benedicuntur V
6 capit] capiat V 9 et]omR 10,11 utrorumque...pars mala] R
supr ras 10 quod] quo R 11 sint duo sub] sine dubio V 12 inde]
om V, spatio relicto 16 natum] natunc V* unum] unam V*
17 et seruos] etiam seruos V 20 in seruitute R 21 secundum]
secundi V 21,22 ex libera...fideles] R supr ras 23 ismahel et]
conieci: irt (=israhel) R; israhel et V 25 isaac] R*V; issac R
26 dilituit et dilitescit R; delituit et delitiscit V 27, 28 in senectute
...est agar] om V 29 ambos] ambo V

30 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

nouum, id est gratia quae secundum Isaac promissionis filios RV
generaret ex libera, quod in Christo reuelatum est; ita et
nunc optinente nouo non desunt seruitutis filii generante
Agar, quod Christo iudicante reuelabitur. confirmat apostolus
id nunc quoque inter fratres geri quod tune inter illos gere-
Gal iv 28-29 batur dicens: Vos autem fratres secundum Isaac promissionis
filui estis. sed sicut tunc qui secundum carnem natus est per-
sequebatur spiritalem, ita et nunc. et necessario addidit :
Ib 30 Quid dicit Scriptura? expelle ancillam et filium eius, non
enim coheres ertt filius ancillae cum filio liberae. quod autem 10
dixit sicut tune persequebatur ita et nunc, non est inane.
apostolus enim interpretatus est persequebatur. nam Scrip-
efGenxxi9 tura dicit: Lwdebat Ismahel cwm Isaac. numquid fratres
qui circumcisionem Galatis praedicabant aperte illos et non
per lusum, id est sine indicio persecutionis, insequabantur ? 15
sicut ergo Ismahel genere ludendi persecutorem dixit, ita et 56
istos, qui filios Dei uelut per communem utilitatem, id est
disciplinam legis, a Christo separare et matris suae Agar filios
facere militant.
cf Gal ii 4 Alia enim non est causa qua filii diaboli inrepant ad ex- 20
plorandum libertatem nostram, et simulent se fratres et in
Paradiso nostro uelut Dei filios ludere, quam ut de subacta
cefGaivio libertate filiorum Dei glorientur; gue portabant iudiciwm
qualescumque uli fuerint, qui omnem sanctum persecuti sunt,
cf Ac vist. QUI prophetas occiderunt, qui semper Spiritui Sancto restite- 25
Philiii1s runt ; momaicr crucis Christi, negantes Christum in carne dum
cf2Theii3, eluSs membra oderunt, corpus peccati, filius exterminit in mys-
5 terium facinoris, qui ueniunt secundum operationem Satanae
Eph vil2 in omnr wirtute signis et prodigis falsitatis, spiritalia nequi-

on

1 gratia quod V 3 nouo non desunt] nouande sunt V filii]
fili V 7 filii] fili V qui] quae R* moz corr natus] naxtus
an, 9 quid] sed quid V 10 cum] om V 12 interpraetatus R,
et sic aliquando 14 circumcisionem] circumcisionis V*; -ones Veorr
15 insequabatur V 16 ismahel]+de V dixit] xxxit R*
17 communem] commoné R (ef supra p 2614) 18 matris] matri V
20 inter Alia et enim rasura in R inrepant] increpant V 21 simulant R
22 paradyso V ut] om V 23 portabant] RV*; portabunt V*
26 incarnem V- 27 filius exterminii] V* vid, filii exterminii V nunc; filius
-é- extermini R 27, 28 mysterium] V; ministerium R 29 signi R

REGVLA TERTIA. 31

RV trae in caelestibus, quos Dominus Christus quem in carne per- 2 The iis
secuutur interficiet spiritu orts sur et destruet manifestatione
aduentus sui. tempus est enim quo haec non in mystertis

sed aperte dicantur, inminente discessione quod est reuelatio ef2 The iis
hominis peccati, discedente Loth a Sodomis.

on

IV. DE SPECIE ET GENERE.

De specie et genere loquimur, non secundum artem
rhetoricam humanae sapientiae, quam qui magis omnibus
potuit locutus non est, ne crucem Christi fecisset imanem St ef1Coitt
ro auxilio atque ornamento sermonis ut falsitas indiguisset. sed
loquimur secundum mysteria caelestis sapientiae magisterio
Spiritus Sancti, qui cum ueritatis pretium fidem constituerit
mysteriis narrauit in speciem genus abscondens, ut in ueterem
Hierusalem totam quae nunc est per orbem, aut in unum
15 membrum totum corpus ut in Salomone. sed hoc tam occul-
tum est quam cetera quae non solum specie breuiante sed
etiam multiformi narratione occultantur, quam ob rem Dei
gratia in auxilium postulata elaborandum nobis est, et Spiritus ef sap vii 2,
multiplicis ingressus legendi eloquiumque subtile, quo, dum ad of Sir i7
20 inpedimentum intellectus specie genus aut generl speciem
inserit, genus speciesne sit facile uideri possit. dum enim
speciem narrat ita in genus transit ut transitus non statim
liquido appareat, sed talia transiens ponit uerba quae in

1,2 persecuntur] R (sic); p sequantur V (sic) 3 quo] quod V
in mysterlis] om in V

INCP DE SPECIE

5 Sodomis] add EXPLICIT REGVLA ET PROMISSIS ET LEGE

ET GENERE R rubro; EXPL* DE PROMe ET LEGE || INCIPe DE SPECIE ET GENERE*
LIBER Ile V; nulla diuisio sectionum in M

7 artem] uirtutem V; om M 8 r&horicam RV 12 cum] quo V
13 mysteriis] mysterii V 15 tam] non V; non tam M 16 speciae
RB sic aliquando breuiante] uerbiante V 17 multiformis V
19 wmultiplici V eloquiumque...ad] om R eloquium . que
V nunc _— suptile V quo dum] scripsi: quod V 20 generi speciem]
R nunc; generis speciem R*vid V 21 sit] si V possit uideri V

22 non] R supr lin

Eze xxxvi
1 6

32 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

utrumque conueniant, donec paulatim speciel modum ex-
cedat et transitus dilucidetur, cum quae ab specie coeperant
non nisi in genus conuenerint. et eodem modo genus
relinquit in speciem rediens.

Aliquando autem ab specie in genus non supradicto modo
sed euidenter transit et supradicto more reuertitur. ali-
quando supradicto modo transit et euidenter reuertitur simili
ordinis uarietate, aut ab specie in genere aut a genere in
specie finit narrationem. aliquando redit ex hoc in illud non
semel, et omnis narratio nec speciem excedit nec genus
praeterit in utrumque conueniens. haec uarietas trans-
lationis et ordinis exigit fidem quae gratiam Dei quaerat.

Sic Deus per Ezechielem loquitur et regressui eorum
qui ab Hierusalem capti et disparsi fuerunt gentium iungit
aduentum, et in terra quam patres nostri possiderant
exprimit mundum. septem enim gentes Abrahae promissae
figura est omnium gentium. actus est inquit ad me sermo
Domini dicens: filt hominis, Sdomus Israhel habitawt in terra
et polluerunt illam in uia sua et wm rdolis sus et peccatis
sus; secundum inmunditiam menstruatae facta est wia eorum
ante faciem meam. et effudi ram meam super eos, et disparst
allos inter nationes et uentilaur eos mm regiones, secundum utas
eorum et secundum peccata eorum wudicawi eos. et ingressr
sunt inter nationes quas ingressi sunt allic, et polluerunt
nomen meum sanctum, dum dicunt ipsi Populus Domini hic,
et de terra sur egresst sunt. et peperci wlis propter nomen
meum sanctum quod polluerunt domus Israhel in nationibus

2 cum quae] cumq: RV 6 more] modo VM reuertitur]
reuert&ur R 8,9 in speciem V 12 quae] que R*; qui Reorr

13 sic deus] sed ds R; sic dicit dns V*; ds M xxxzechielem R*;
hiezechielum R>; ezechielum V regressui] regibus V 14, 21 dis-
parsi V*; dispersi R Vcorr fuerant VM 15 in terram RM
possiderunt V*M; possederunt Vcorr 17 inquid V* 18 fili] filii
R, wid Appx 1 habitabit V* 19, 20 (pol)luerunt...secundum]
supr ras in R 19 illam] illum V et peccatis] et in peccatis
R* vid, mox corr 19, 20 peccatis suis] om suis V 22—24 et
uentilaui...inter nationes] om V 22, 23 secundum uias eorum et] om
R* ; add R* 24 illic et pollerunt R; et polluerunt illic V 25 hic]
hi V; cf auct ad Nouat § 10 26 sui] sua V

RV
vit

(M

20

{| Eug

REGVLA QVARTA. 33

2a m quas ingresst sunt illic. propter hoc dic domui Israhel : haec
(My ' dicit Dominus, non uobis ego facio domus Israhel, sed propter
nomen meum sanctum quod polluistis in nationtbus in medio
ss9 in quas ingressi sunt illic. incipit iungere genus: ‘Ht
5 sanctificabo nomen meum sanctum ilud magnum quod
pollutum est inter nationes quod pollurstis in medio earum, et
scient gentes quoniam ego sum Dominus, dum sanctificor in
uobis ante oculos eorum, et accipiam uos de gentibus et con-
gregabo uos ex omnibus terris et inducam uos in terram

10 westram. aperte excedit speciem: Ht aspergam uos aquam
mundam et mundabimini ab omnibus simulacris uestris, et
mundabo uos et dabo uobis cor nouwm, et spiritum nouum dabo

mm uobis, et auferam cor lapideum de carne uestra et dabo
uobis cor carneum, et spiritum meum dabo in uos, et faciam

15 ut mm dustitiis meis ambuletis et vudicia mea custodratis et
fuciatis. et habitabitis in terra quam dedi patribus uestris, et
eritis mihi in populum et ego ero uobis in Dewm, et mundabo
Ey uos ex omnibus inmunditiis uestris.. adtingit speciem non
tamen relinquens genus: Et uocabo triticum et multiplicabo

20 wllud et non dabo in uos fumem, et multiplicabo fructum ligna
et quae nascuntur in agro, ut non accipiatis ultra obprobrium
fans mm nationbus. et reminiscemint wias uestras pessimas

et cogitationes uestras non bonas, et odio habebitis eas ante
fuciem eorum im iniquitatibus uestris et in aboninationibus

25 e€0rum. non propter uos ego fucio, dicit Dominus ; notum est
uobis, confundimint et reuertimini de wis uestris, domus
L[srahel. haec dicit Adonar Doninus: in die qua mundabo

wos ab omnibus iniquitatibus uestris et inhabitart faciam
ciwitates,—in figura terrae Iudae quae bellis uastata fuerat

30 promittit innouarl mundum quia Deo recesserat,—et reaedt-

§ E

1 in] om R*; add R> 4 iungere] ungere R 5 meum
sanctum] tr R illud] illum V 6 eorum R 7 dum]
qui V 10 aspergam] adspergam Fug 10,11 aquam mundam]
V (sic); aqua munda R Lug; aquam munda Lug (cod): cf Lev v 9; Nu viii 7
Cod Lugd 11 simulachris V Fug (cod opt) 13 uobis] uos V
14 uos] uobis R* 18 immunditiis Lug attingit V 22 re-
miniscimini R 23 odio habebitis] odietis V 24 abhominationibus
Reorr 27 adonai dominus] dns adoneae dns R 28 faciam R*;
faciem R? 29 figura] figura R

B. 3

34 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

ficabuntur deserta et terra quae exterminata fuerit coletur, RV
propter quod furt exterminata sub oculis omnis praetereuntis.
et dicent: Terra illa quae fuerat exterminata facta est sicut
hortus deliciarum, et ciuitates desertae et demolitae munitae
consederunt. et scient gentes quaecumque derelictae fuerint in
circuitu uestro quia ego sum Dominus. aedificaui demolitas
et plantaur eaterminatas, quia ego Dominus locutus sum et
Sect.
Apostolus quoque in ingressu Jacob promissum esse
Ro xi 25,26 introitum gentium sic interpretatur dicens: Donec plenitudo
gentium intret, et sic omnis Israhel saluabitur. sicut scriptum
est: Veniet a Sion qui liberet et auferet immetates ab Tacob,
FO et eodem genere locutionis redit in speciem dicens: Secundum
Euangelium quidem inimict propter uos.
Item in Ezechiele incipit ab specie quae conueniat et in 15
genus, et finit in solo genere ostendens terram patrum mundi
easy esse possessionem. Haec dicit Dominus, Ecce ego accipiam
omnem domum Israhel de medio gentium in quas ingresst sunt
alloc, et congregabo eos ab omnibus qui sunt in circurtu eorum et
nducam eos in terram Israhel. et dabo eos in gentem in terra 20
mea et in montibus Israhel, et princeps unus erit eorum. et non
erunt ultra in duas gentes nec diudentur ultra in duo regna,
ne contaminentur adhuc in semulacris suis. et liberabo eos ab
omnibus iniquitatibus eorum quibus peccauerunt in ets, et
emundabo eos, et erunt miht in populum et ego Dominus ero 25
ilus in Deum. aperte transit in genus: Et seruus meus
Dawid princeps in medio eorum erit, pustor wnus omnium qui
in praeceptis mets ambulabunt et wudicia mea custodient et
facient ea. et inhabitabunt in terra sua quam ego dedi seruo
meo Lacob ubi habitauerint patres eorum, et inhabitabunt in ea 30

on

_
Oo

1 fuerit] fuerat V 2 fuit] om R 4 hortus] ortus V 5 con-

siderunt R 9 in ingressu] ingressu R 12 liberet et auferet] eripiat
et auertat R (=Vq) 13 loquutionis R 15 ezechiele] hiezechielo
R* supr ras; ezechielo V* vid; ezechiel V nunc 20 inducam] ducam R
terram] terra R 20,21 terra mea] tra mea V 21 montibus] omni-
bus R 22 duos V* mozx corr 23 ne] nec R simulachris
V (sic) 24,25 et emundabo] om et V 26 aperte] V*; a parte V>
28 ambulant V 30 habitauerunt V inhabitabunt] habi-

tabunt V

REGVLA QVARTA. By)

RV apst, et Dawid seruus meus princeps eorum in saecula. et

on

—
en

iS)
e)

Nn
D2

disponam illis testamentum pacis et testamentum aeternum erit
cum lis, et ponam sancta mea in medio eorum in saecula et
erit habitatio mea in eis, et ero illis Deus et ipst erunt mihi
populus. et scient gentes quia ego sum Dominus qui sanctifico
eos, dum sunt sancti in medio eorum in saecula, dicit Dominus.

Item illic regressui dispersionis Israhel gentium inserit
aduentum, et Aegypti heremum figuram populi deserti in
quo Ecclesia nunc esse manifestatur, et quod idem mali,
quamuis una cum populo Dei ex gentibus reuocentur in
terram Israhel, tamen in terra Israhel non sint. Viuo ego
dicit Dominus si respondero uobis, et st ascenderit in spiritum
uestrum hoc. et non erit quem ad modum dicitis uos:
Hrimus sicut gentes et sicut tribus terrae ut seruiamus lignis
et lapidibus. wiuo ego, dicit Dominus, nisi in manu forti et
brachio excelso et in tra effusa regnabo super uos, et educam
uos de populrs et recipram uos de regionibus in quibus dispersi
estis in manu forte et brachio excelso <et> in ira effusa, et
adducam wos in desertum populorum, et disputabo illic ad wos

facie ad faciem, quem ad modum disputaw ad patres uestros

im deserto terrae Aegyptt sic vudicabo uos, dicit Dominus. — et
redigam wos sub wirgam mean et inducam uos tn numero, et
eligam impios de uobis et desertores, quoniam ex transmi-
gratione eorum educam eos et in terram LIsrahel non intrabunt,

s et cognoscetis quia ego sum Dominus.

Item illic captiuitati montium Israhel promittit Deus
ubertatem et multiplicationem populorum usque in finem.
Quoniam dederunt inquit terram tuam sibt in possessionem
cum tucunditate inhonorantes animas, ut eaterminarent in

2 test. pacis et] om R 3 et ponam] ponam et R 4 eis] illis V
6 sancti] sancta V3; 7a dyid wou Lxx 7 regressui] regressio R
dispersiones V* 8 aegypti] aegyptum V (sic), ‘a’ exp Va (sic
fere semp) figuram]+fuisse V 9 esse] est V; exp V8
11 terram] Vcorr; terra RV* 17 uos] om R utroque loco 18 et
in ira] et om RV 19 in deserto V illic] illis V* corr in
scribendo 21 sic] sicut V* mow corr 22 sub uirga mea V, cf Roensch
412 23 impios] im supr ras in BR 24 eos] uos R in terra
R 25 cognoscitis R 26 captiuati V* 28 dederunt inquit] tr
R mox corr inquid V* 29 iocunditate V ut] atque V

j—2

Eze xx 31—38

Eze xxxvi
0

Eze xxxvii
11—14

Toh v 24—29

36 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

uastationem ; propterea profetare super terram Israhel et dic RV
montibus et collibus et riuis et nemoribus: haec dicit Dominus, to
Ecce ego in zelo meo et in ira mea locutus sum, propter quod
obprobrium gentium portastis. ecce ego leuabo manum meam
super nationes quae sunt in curcurtu uestro, hi iniuriam suam 5
accipient; uestri autem montes Israhel uuam et fructum ues-
trum manducabit populus meus qui adpropinquat wuenire.
quia ecce ego super uos et respiciam super uos et colemini et
semina<bi>mini, et multiplicabo super uos totam domum
Israhel usque in finem, et habitabuntur ciuitates, et quae deso-
latae erant aedificabuntur.

Item illic uelut in nouissima resurrectione prima signifi-
catur. Locutus est inquit ad me Dominus dicens: fila hominis
ossa haec omnis domus Israhel est. wpsi dicunt: arida facta
sunt ossa nostra, interwt spes nostra, expirauimus. propterea
profetare et dic: haec dicit Dominus, Ecce ego apertam monu-
menta uestra et educam uos de monumentis uestris et inducam
uos in terram Israhel, et scietis quia ego Dominus cum aperiam
sepulchra uestra et educam de monumentis populum meum, et
dabo Spiritum meum in uos et uruetis, et ponain uos super 20
terram uestram et scretis quia ego sum Dominus. numquid
cum perspicue surrexerimus tunc sclemus Dominum, et
non nunc cum per baptisma resurgimus ? aut mortul poterunt
dicere: Arida facta sunt ossa nostra, aut merito mortuis id
promissum esse credamus? quod est enim sacramenti ne in 25
ambiguum ueniret aperuit Deus. nam de nouissima carnis
resurrectione neminem Christianum credimus dubitare. et
Dominus per Iohannem has resurrectiones manifestat dicens:
Amen dico uobis quia qui uerbum meum audit et credit er qua
me misit habet witam aeternam, et in iudictwm non uentt sed 30

I

°

_

5

1 profetare] prophetare RV*; propheta V*, wide p 40'8 et Appx

3 meo] mea R* 4 portastis] portatis V leuabo] zelabo R
5 hijomR 6 accipiunt R 7 manducauit V* apro-
pinquat V*; appr- Vcorr 8 et respiciam super uos] om V 9 semi-
namini RV 16 prophetare R; propheta V 20 uiuitis R 22 cum
perspicue] perspicue V*; perspicue cum Vcorr surrexerimus] M ;
surreximus R nunc, surre supr ras; resurrexerimus V 23 potuerunt R
24 aut] ut R 26 ambigum V* 28 per] secundum VM

30 et supr ras in V uenit] ueniet V

REGVLA QVARTA. 37

RV transit de morte ad wtam. amen dico uobis quoniam uenit
hora et nunc est quando mortur audient wocem fila Der et qua
audierint wuiuent. sicut enim Pater habet wtam in se, sic
dedit Filio wtam habere in se. et potestatem dedit er et cudi-

s cium facere qua filius hominis est. 1ungit nouissimam resur-
rectionem: Nolite mirart hoc, quia ueniet hora im qua omnes
qui in monumentis sunt audient wocem filic Der, et exrent qua
bona fecerunt in resurrectionem witae, qui male fecerunt in
resurrectionem wudici. primo dixit Morture qui audrerint

10 uiwent, secundo Omnes qui in monumentis sunt exient.

Item quod in uno homine totum corpus significetur, in
Regnorum promittit Deus Dauid Salomonem dicens: Swsce- 2 Regn vii 12
tabo semen tuum post te qui erit ex utero tuo et parabo regnum
eius. apse aedificabit mihi domum. ista et in speciem et in

15 genus conueniunt. excedit speciem dicens: Lt dirigam
thronum e€tus usque in aeternum. iterum in utrumque: go
ero et in patrem et ipse erit mihi in filium. et sui wenerit
iniustitia eius arguam eum tm wirga hominum et in tactibus
filiorum honinum ; misericordiam autem mean non auferam

20 tb eo sicut abstuli a quibus abstuli e conspectu meo, et fidelis
fiet domus eius. iterum excedit speciem: Ht regnum erus
usque in aeternum in conspectu meo, et thronus evus erit confir-
matus usque in aeternum. quod autem uidetur in excessu
speciel thronum Christi promittere in aeternum, thronum

25 filiit hominis promittit, ita corporis Christi, id est Ecclesiae.
non enim propter Dauid promisit Deus regnaturum Chris-
tum, qui ante constitutionem mundi habuit hance claritatem. of Toh xvi
et per Esaiam sic dicit Deus Christo: Magnum tibi erit y

Esai xlix 6

1 transit] transiet Vcorr de]a V 2 quando] quo R* vid
audient}] audiunt R 3 habet uitam] tr V 4 se] semetipso V
6 mirare R 1. Bi) alt V; aia: Apps 8 qui]+uero R(=Vq);
+autem V male] mala V 8—16 male fecerunt...in aeternum] R
supr ras in char minore 10 secundo..,exient] R ad calc pag 5 BT,
hominem V (sic) 14 aedificauit V* 14,15 ista...genus] om V
15 excedit] pr et Reorr (supr lin) V 16 iterum] item V 17 patre
seethio. V. 18 tactibus] scripsi; actibus RV: apats Lxx 20 e con-
spectu meo] conspectumeo V*; conspectti met Vcorr 21 iterum]
item R 22 usque] om V meo] eius R 24 specie V
Zoe tlie Vs promittit ita] coniect; promitti R; promi & ita V*; pro-
misit & ita Veorr 27 habuit] promisit V 28 esaiam] R*V*;
isaiam Reorr Vcorr inter deus et christo ras in

38 LIBER REGVLARVM 'TYCONII.

stud, ut wocerts puer meus et statuas tribus Iacob et Israhel RV
dispersionem conuertas ; ecce posui te in testamentum generis
in lumen gentium, ut sis in salutem usque in nowissimum
terrae. quid maius filio Dei uocari puerum eius et Israhel
dispersionem conuertere, aut per eum factum esse ipsum 5
Israhel et caelum et terram et quae in eis sunt uisibilia et
inuisibilia? sed ei dicit magnum esse qui filio Dei mixtus
est ex semine Dauid. omnis enim promissio Abrahae et
Dauid ipsa est, ut semen eorum miscereretur ei cuius sunt
omnia, et esset coheres in aeternum, non ut propter ipsos 10
regnaret Christus qui est omnium rex a Patre constitutus.

Quid dicemus de Salomone? cum Deo est, an post idola-
triam reprobatus est? si cum Deo dixerimus, impunitatem
spondebimus idolorum cultoribus. non enim dicit Scriptura
paenitentiam egisse Salomonem, aut recepisse sapientiam. 15
si autem reprobatum dixerimus, occurrit uox Dei quae dicit
ne terrae quidem regnum Salomoni auferre propter Dauid,

$Re xill sicut scriptum est in Regnorum: Disrumpens disrumpam
regnum tuum de manu tua et dabo eum seruo tuo. uerwm in
diebus tuis non faciam haec propter Dawid patrem tuum; de
manu filrt tur accipram eum. uerwm omne regnum non acci-
pram, sceptrum unum dabo filio tuo propter Daud serwum
meum, et propter Hierusalem cumtatem quam elegr. quid
enim prodest Dauid, si propter eum filius elus regnum
terrae consequeretur caeleste perditurus? quo manifestum 25
est cum Deo esse Salomonem, cui ne regnum quidem terrae

2 Regn vit ablatum est propter Dauid, quod et dixerat: Arguam in

Ixxxviii 33 wirga hominum delicta eius, misericordiam autem meam non
auferam ab eo. quod si neque reprobatus est neque idolorum
cultores regnum Dei possident, manifestum est figuram fuisse 30

cf3 Regn iv Keclesiae bipertitae Salomonem, cuius latitudo cordis et

n

ie)

2 conuertas] Reorr; conuertax R* 3 ut sis] et sis V in
salute R 4 puerum eius] puer meus V 10 coheredes V* non ut]
ut non R 12 dicimus V salamone R 12,13 idolatriam] RV
(sic semper); wid Appx 1 13 inpunitatem V 15 salamonem R
aut] Reorr ; axx R* 16 si autem...uox dei] R supr ras occurr& R
17 salomoni auferre] salamoni auferre R; aufert salomone V*; auferret
salomone Vcorr 21 omnem regnum V* 25 caelesti V* vid
26 salamonem R ne] om V 27 arguam]+eum V 28 delicta]
peccata V misericordia...mea V 31 salamonem R altitudo cor R

REGVLA QVARTA. 39

RV sapientia sicut harena maris et idolatria horribilis. Dasrum- 8 Regn xi 1,
So pens inquit disrumpam regrum tuum de manu tua, werumta-
men in diebus tuis non faciam; de manu filii tut accipran
illud. sufficeret disrumpam, quid disrumpens disrumpam ?
aut quomodo de manu Salomonis, si dicit Non faciam in
diebus tuis sed de manu filii tut accipiam illud? iugis opera-
tionis est disrumpens disrumpam, sicut Benedicens benedicam Ge xxi it
et multiplicans multiplicabo semen tuum. ostendit enim sem-
per futurum Salomonem in filio, id est in posteris, culus pos-
ro tumis Salomonis temporibus non auferet Deus regnum sub
promissa patrum, sed corrigit illud usque in aeternum et

on

aufert iugiter, secundum idolatriam Salomonis im suo peccato
perseuerantis. alias quomodo de manu Salomonis disrum-
pens disrumpit aut non disrumpit, si non nunc est Salomon
in filiis bonus aut malus? quod autem dicit: Verum non 3 Regn xi 18

—
en

omne regnum accipio in speciem redit, incipiens aliam figaram
in filio Salomonis et seruo.
In Hiesu Naue quoque sic Dominus manifeste in uno
homine futurum corpus ostendit, sed hoc loco malum tan-
20 tummodo. Peccauit inquit populus et transgressus est testa- Tes Naue vi
mentum quod disposut ad illos, furati sunt de anathemate,
miserunt in uasa sua, cum solus Achar de tribu Iuda id
fecisset. quod corpus semper futurum intellegens Hiesus sic
ait, cum eum occideret: Hwterminet te Deus sicut et hodve. Ib 2%
Illud etiam multo necessarium est scire, omnes omnino

iS)
on

ciuitates Israhel et gentium uel prouincias, quas Scriptura
alloquitur aut in quibus aliquid gestum refert, figuram esse
Keclesiae: aliquas quidem partis malae, aliquas bonae, aliquas
wero utriusque. ergo si sunt aliqua quae etiam in gentes

2 inquid V* 2,3 uerumtamen] uerum V 4—6_ suffi-
ceret...accipiam illud] om V 5 et 10 salamonis R 9 salomonem R*
sic; salamonem R# 9,10 postumi R 10 auferet] aufert V sub]
secundum V 11,12 ut aufert V 12 idolatria V sala-
moni R 13 alias] alios V* salomonis RK et sic infra
14 aut non disrumpit] om R 18 hiesu] R> IHu V sic]
+dicit V manifeste] RV* vid; manifestans Vcorr 19 ostendi V
20 inquid V* 21 denathemate V* 22 achar] achan M; axxxx V*;
acham Vcorr tribu iuda] tribuloda R* 23 hiesus] ihs RV

28 partis] partes V malae]+tantum V 29 ergo si sunt] et si sint V

40 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

quae foris sunt uideantur conuenire, in parte tamen quae RV
intus est conuenitur omne corpus aduersum, sicut in Israhel
captiuo promittitur gentibusad Dominum reditus. inpossibile
est enim legem loqui ei qui in lege non est; de eo loqui
potest, non tamen ad ipsum. et si alicubi sine ista occasione 5
nominis Israhel specialiter alienigenas alloquitur, intus omni
modo credendi sunt, quoniam, et si eueniebat specialiter
quod profetatum est, Ecclesia tamen est. proprietas denique
non omnibus speciebus euenit. nam et Damascus et Tyrus
—quae et Sor—et aliae multae usque nunc extant, quas 10
Dominus penitus tolli nec restaurari dixerat.

In alienigenis autem ciuitatibus Ecclesiam conueniri
apertum est in Ezechiele, cui cum Deus diceret praedicere
interitum in Theman, quae est Esau, et in Dagon, quod est
idolum Allophylorum, intellexit parabolam esse aduersus

Evexx45— Hierusalem et templum. actus est inquit sermo Domini
ad me dicens: filt honwnis confirma faciem tuam super
Theman, respice in Dagon, profetare in siluam summam 58
Nageb, et dices saltut Nageb: audi uerbum Domain ; haec
dicit Dominus, Hcce ego incendo in te tgnem, et comedet in te 20
omne lignum wuiride et omne lignum aridum. non eatinguetur
flamma incensa, et conburetur in ea omnis facies in ea a
Subsolano usque ad Aquilonem, et cognoscet omnis caro quia
ego Dominus succendi wlud, non eatinguetur ultra. et diac:
non, Domine. wpsi dicunt ad me: nonne parabola est haec 25
quae dicitur? et factus est sermo Domini ad me dicens: prop-

—

5

1 partem R* mow corr 2 conuenitur] conuiuitur V* 3 pro-
mittit R dominum] dm V 5 adipsum tamen non V si alicubi]
si alicui R; sine alicubi V 6 alienigena R 8 prophetatum RV
ecclesia] eccl V (sic aliquando, sine terminatione) 9,10 tyrus quae]
tyrusque R; tirus quae V 10 sor] soor V aliae] aliquae V
11 dominus] ds V 13 hiezechielo R; ezechielo V cui
cum] quidim V* vid 15 allofilorum V: wid Appx aduersum V
16 factus] factum RV inquid V* 18 profetare] V; pro-
phé&are R 19 et dices saltui nageb] om V 20 incendo] R*;
incendio Rceorr; incendam V commed& R 22 flamma]
prineaR incensa] incensio R oms facies R in ea 2°]
om V 22, 23 a subsolano] absolano R 23 usque] & usque V*
cognoscet] Vcorr; cognoscit RV* 26 factus est]+inquit V (sic)

REGVLA QVARTA. 4]

RV terea filt hominis profetare et confirma faciem tuam ad
Hrerusalem, respice in sancta eorum, et profetubis super
terram Israhel. haec dicit Dominus, Ecce ego educum gla-
dium meum de uagina sua, et disperdam de te tniquum et

s~iustum. sic exiet gladius meus de waginu sua super omnem
carnem a Subsolano usque ad Aquilonem, et sciet omnis caro
quia ego sum Doninus, qui emisi gladium mewm de uagina
sua, non egredietur ultra. Confirma inquit factem tuam
super Theman et respice in Dagon, et interpretatus est
to dicens: confirma faciem tuam ad Hierusalem et respice in
sancta eorum, et ostendit non omnem Hierusalem dicens:
disperdam de te iniquum et iniustum, et ita futurum genera-
liter ait: sve exet gladius meus super omnem carnem a Sub-
solano usque ad Aquilonem. ostendit in Hierusalem esse

15 Theman, quam illic Deus interficiet et Dagon et omnia exe-
crabilia gentium, operante filto Dauid Salomone in filiis suis.
quae etiam euidenter deiecta templa Dei et demolita atque
spiritaliter exusta proiecit in torrentem, id est saeculum, qui
nascitur filius Dauid Losias, ut disrumpatur altare in Bethel,

20 sicut scriptum est: Altare altare, haec dicit Donwnus: ecce
filius nascitur domui Dawid, Iosias nomen tl.

Nineue ciuitas alienigenarum bipertitae Ecclesiae figura
est, sed quia ordine lectionem interpretando persequi longum
est, sat erit id quod in speciem conuenire non potest

25 dici. Hrat inquit Ninewe ciwtas magna Deo, cum esset
aduersa Deo, ut metropolis Assyriorum quae et Samariam
deleuit et omnem Iudaeam semper obpressit. sed in figura
Kcclesiae praedicante Iona, id est Christo, omnis omnino
liberata est. eadem Nineue omnino in sequenti profetia

30 peritura describitur, cul praedicans Dominus signwim est

1 prophetare RV*; propheta V2 2 respice in] respiciens V __ prophe-
tabis RV = 4 iniquum]inimicum V 8 egredietur] regredietur V* sed supr

ras inquid V* 11 omnem hierusalem] omnexxxxxxx V* 12 ini-
quum] inimicum V et ita] ita V 15 interficiet] interfecit V 17 quae]
qua V 18 qui] V*; q Vcorr 21 nascetur V 22 alien-
arum V bipertito R 23. ordinem R 24 sat] satis V
specie V 25 dici]dicere V inquid V magna deo] magna di R; magna
ado V 27 post deleuit ras in V oppressit V 28 omnino] pr

omnis R 29 proph&ia R; propheta V 30 cui] cum R est] om R

Eze xx 46

TSX

1b3
1b 4

3 Regn xiii 2

Ton iii 3

cf Mt xii 40

42 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Tonae in uentre cett. atque ut et ipse profeta ostendat non RV
esse illam ciuitatem specialem, interponit aliqua quae speciei
Nan iis modum excedant. Non erat inquit finis gentilibus allius,

Ib 16 cum esset cluitas unius gentis. et iterum: Multiplicasti
mercatus tuos super astra caeli, id est super Kcclesiam. et 5
Ib 19 iterum: Super quem non euentt malitra tua semper? numquid

potuit unius ciuitatis malitia super omnem hominem aut
semper uenisse, nisi illius quam Cain fratris sanguine funda-
efGeivi7 uit nomine filrr suc, id est posteritatis ?
Manifestius adhuc docet profeta Ecclesiam esse Nineue. 10
Soph iil3— Ket extendet inquit manum suam in Aquilonem—id est popu-
lum solis alienum aduersum Meridiano—et perdet Assy-
rium, et <ponet> wllam Nineue exterminium sine aqua im
desertum, et pascentur in medio ews greges, omnes bestiae
terrae. et chameleontes et herici in laquearibus eius cuba-
bunt, et bestiae wocem dabunt in fossis evus, et corui in portis
eius, gquoniam cedrus altitudo evus. ciwitas contemnens quae
habitat in spe, quae dicit in corde suo Hgo sum, et non est post
me adhuc! quomodo facta est in extermimum pascua bestia-
rum! omnis que transit per tllam sibilabit, et mouebit manus 20
suas. O inlustris et redempta ciutas, columba quae non
audit uocem, non recepit disciplinam. im Domino non est
confisa, et ad Deum suum non adpropinquaut, principes
eius in ea ut leones frementes, vudices evus ut lupt Arabiae
non relinquebant ir mane. profetae eius spiritu elati wire
contemptores, sucerdotes evus profanant sacra et conscelerant
legem. Dominus autem wustus in medio ews non faciet
uniustum.

1 co&i RV propheta RV _ ostendat] V*; ostendit Vcorr 3 in-
quid V gentilibus] genti gentibus R 6 euenit] uenit
NV: 9 posteritas R* 10 profeta] R* (sic); profecta R*; propheta V
11 inquid V 12 aduersus V meridianum Vcorr per-
dat R 13 ponet] addidi; O0jce LXx illam nineue] illa nineue
R; illud nineue V sine] siue V 14 greges] gentes R; gregis V
15 cameleontii V hericii] ericii R; hirci V 19 exter-
minio V pascua] ciuitas R 20 sibilauit R 21 inlustras
v* 22 audit] RV*; audiuit Vcorr 23 deum] dnm V 24 eius 1°]
om V* in ea ut] ineant R 25 relinquebant] relinquebunt V*;

relinquent V* prophetae RV spiritu elati] in spu uelati R
26 profanant] prophetant V 27 medio} templo V faciet] facit R

—

5

n
en

REGVLA QVARTA. 43

RV Aegyptus item bipertita est. cece inquit Dominus sedet Esai six 1
super nubem leuem et uenit in Aegyptwin.—nubcs corpus est
spiritale post baptisma et claritas filii hominis; primus est
enim aduentus Domini iugiter corpore suo uenientis, sicut

5 dicit: A modo widebitis wententem in nubibus caelii—Ht com- eee
minuentur manufacta Aegyptt a facie illius, et cor ipsorum
minorabitur in ills. et exurgent Aegypti super Aegyptios, et
expugnabit homo fratrem suun et homo proainum suum, et
expugnabit ciwitas supra ciwitatem, et exurget id est Aegyp-

1o tus super Aegyptum, et lex supra legem, sensus scilicet
diuersitate sub una lege, et turbubitur spiritus Aegyptiorum
in wpsis, et cogitationes eorum dispargam. et postquam nunc
generi speciem nunc genus speciel miscuisset adiecit dicens :

Die autem illo erit altare Domini in regione Aegyptiorum, et vsaixix19, 20

15 titult ad terminos eius Domino. erit autem in signum in
aeternum Domino im regione Aegyptiorum. non dixit Dece-
bit esse altare ad terminos Aegypti in aetcrnum, sed Erit.

Eizechiel uero apertius ostendit totum mundum esse
Aegyptum dicens: O dies! quia prope est dies Domini, dies tne xxx 2—

20 finis gentium ert. et ueniet gladius super Aegyptios. et
lungit speciem: Lt erit tumultus in Aethiopia, et cadent
wulnerate in Aegypto, et cadent fundamenta eius, Persae et
Cretes et Lydw et Lybies et omnes commiaticri, et fildi testa-
mente mer gladio cadent in ea cum ipsis. Hoc autem factum

25 est, cum post excidium Hierusalem descenderent in Aegyp-
tum et occiderentur illic a Nabuchodonosor secundum Hiere-
miae profetationem. fiet autem et generaliter nouissimo
die, quando cum Aegyptis fili testamenti ceciderunt, Aegyp-
tlorum more uluentes.

30 Item per Ezechiclem minatur Deus regi Aegyptiorum et

3 baptismum Vcorr fili V 6 facie] faciex x V* 7 minorabitur |
R*; inmorabitur R* aegypti] RV (sic) 8 et homo proximum suum]
om R 9 expugnabit] pugnauit V*; -bit Vcorr supra] super V
idest] RV*; om Vcorr 12 dispergam RV, cf pp 455, 5271 nunc] om V*
15 in signum] om in R 16, 17 decebit] licebit V 18 hiezechiel R;
ezechihel V 21 in] om V 23 crkaes R- lidii & libii Vs commisticii
ve 26 et occiderentur] ut occiderent R nobocodonosor R; naboc- R*
27 prophetationem RV 28 aegyptis] RV*; aegyptiis Vcorr ceciderunt |
R*V*; ceciderint Reorr Vcorr 29 more] morte V* 30 ezechihelum

RVcorr; ezechielum V*

44, LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

eius multitudini, quod essent terribiles in sanctos, inter RV
incircumcisos deputari, quod non conuenit nisi in eos qui
Eze xxxii 32. SIb1 circumcisione, id est sacris, blandiuntur. Quoniam igitur
dedit tumorem suum super terram uitae, dormiet in medio
mcwrcumcrsorum cum wulneratis gladio Farao et omnis multi- 5
tudo eius cum ipso, dicit Dominus. item illic a genere ad
Ere xxxit3— speciem: Haec dicit Dominus, Circumiaciam super te retia
populorum multorum, et extraham te in hamo meo, et extendam
te super terram. campt <replebuntur> tur, et constituam
super te omnes aues caelr, et saturabo omnes bestias uniuersae 1°
terrae, et dabo carnes tuas super montes, et satiabo sanguine
tuo colles, et rigabitur terra ab his quae de te procedunt. a
multitudine tua in montibus uepres inplebo abs te, et cooperiam
caelum cum eatingueris, et obscurabo astra eius; solem in
nube contegam et luna non lucebit lumen eius. omnia quae 15
lucent lumen in caelo obscurabuntur super te, et dabo tenebras
super terram tuam, dictt Dominus. iungit speciem: Ht exas-
perabo cor populorum multorum, cum ducam captiutatem
tuam in nationes in terram quam non noueras. excedit spe-
ciem: Lt contristabuntur super te multae nationes, et reges 20
earum mentis alienatione stupebunt cum uolabit gladius meus
super facies eorum in medio eorum, Fertt adt ruinam suam ex
die ruinae tuae. redit ad speciem: Quoniam haec dicit Dom-
nus, Gladius regis Babylonis uenit tibt in gladus gigantum,
et deicium uirtutem tuam, pestes a nationibus omnes, et perdent 25
contumeliam Aegypti et conteretur omnis wirtus evus. in
genus: Et perdam omnia pecora evs ab aqua multa, et non
1, 2 inter circumcisos V 4 uitae dormiet] uitae dormir& V*; om
uitae Vcorr 5 cum uulneratis] scripsi: cum uulneratus R; uulne-
ratus V pharao R 6 item] et V supr ras 7 circumiacium V*
super te retia] super tertiam V 8 extrahunt V* hamo meo]

amoneo V*; amo meo Vecorr 9 replebuntur] suppleuit Sabat.; om
RV 11 montes] oms R 13 implebo V 15 luna] R*
lunae Reorr V 16 lumen] V*; lumina R; lumine Veorr; wavra
Ta gpalvovra pas LXX super te] om V 18 ducu V* vid
19 tuam] tuae V* 21 alienationes R uolauit R 22 erit ad rui-
nam] RV: cf p 45!*; mpocdexduevor THY MTWoW LXX 23 tuae] suae R
ad] in V 24 babilonis V in gladiis] gladius R 25 deie-
ciam R pestis R omnis R 26 contumelia R eius]
eorum eius V (sic) 27 eius ab] om V

REGVLA QVARTA. A5

RV turbabit eam pes hominis ultra, et uestigium pecorum non cal-
cabit eam. tunc requiescent aquae eorum, et flumina eorum
ut oleum abibunt, dicit Dominus. species: Et dabo Aegyptum
in interitum, et desolabitur terra cum plenitudine sua et dis-

s pargam omnes tnhabitantes eam. genus: Et scient quia ego
sum Dominus. Operiam inquit caelum cum extinguerrs, et
obscurabo astra etus; solem in nube contegam, et luna non
lucebit lumen etus. omnia quae lucent lumen in caelo obscura-
buntur super te, et dabo tenebras super terram tuam. in pas-

ro sione Domini non in terra Aegypti tantum fuerunt tenebrae,
sed in toto orbe. sed nec capta Aegypto obstipuerunt
gentes, expectantes ruinam suam ea die ruinae eius.
Nam et de Sor scriptum est: Haec dicit Dominus ad Sor,
Nonne a uoce ruinae tuae in gemitu wulneratorum, dum inter-
1s ficiuntur gladio in medio tui, commouebuntur insulae? et
descendent a sedibus suis omnes principes maris, et auferent
mitras et uestem uariam suam despoliabunt se. im stupore
mentis stupebunt et timebunt in interitu tuo, et imgemescent
super te, et accipient super te lamentationem, et dicent tibr:

20 Quomodo destructa est de mari ciuitas illa laudabilis, quae
dedit timorem suum omnibus tnhabitantibus in ea! et time-
bunt insulae ex die ruinae tuae. iterum de eadem: In die
ruinae tuae ad clamorem uocis tuae gubernatores tur timore
timebunt, et descendent de nauibus ones remages tur, et wec-

59 tores et proretaue maris super terram stabunt, et ululabunt
super te woce sud, et clamabunt amarum super te, et inponent
super caput suum terram, et cinerem sternent, et acciprent
super te lamentationem filti eorwm, lamentam Sor: Quantum

4, 5 dispargam] V*; dispergam RVcorr 5 eam] in ea V
6 operam inquid V* extinguaeris V* 7 luna] scripsi,
uid supra; lune R; lunae V 8 lucent lumina R 8, 9 obscurabunt
V 11 obstupuerunt Rh 12 expectantes] expugnantes R 13 sor]
soor V scriptum] pr sic V 14 a wuoce ruinae tuae] a
ruinaxuae V 15 insulae] in sole V* 16 descendent] discedent
V 17 wariam suam] aurium suum V dispoliabant V*; -bunt Vecorr
18 stupebunt...inge(miscent)] R supr ras 20 quae] qui V 22 in-
sulae] insyle R 23. gubernatoris R 23, 24 timore...remiges tui]
om R 26 uocem suam RV 28 filii eorum] scripst ex Lxx; filiorum RV
lamentam] lamentum V sor] R semp, V hic

Eze xxxii 7, 8

cf Le xxiii 45

Eze xxxii 10

Eze xxvi 15—
8

Eze xxvii 27

46 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIIL.

inuenist. mercedem de mari! satiasti gentes multitudine tua, RV
et a comnuatione tua locupletasti omnes reges terrae. nunc
autem contrita es in mari, in profundo aquae commicztio tua,
et omnis congregatio tua in medio tut. ceciderunt omnes
remages tur, omnes qui inhabitant insulas contristati sunt super 5
te, et remiges eorum mentis alienatione stupuerunt, et lacrima-
tus est wultus eorum super te. mercatores de gentibus exibila-
bunt te; perditio facta es, et ultra non eris in aeternum, dicit
Dominus. numquid in unam insulam conueniunt quae dicta
sunt, aut sola potuit locupletare omnes reges terrae? sed 10
aliqua relinquimus locis oportunis, quibus etsi strictim dican-
tur uideri possunt.
Tyrus bipertita est, sicut per Esaiam, qui post multa
Esai xxiii15_speciel et generis hoc quoque adiecit dicens: Hrit post sep-
tuaginta annos Tyrus sicut canticum fornicariae. accipe 1s
citharam, uagulare, cwitas fornicaria oblita ; bene citharizare,
multa canta, ut tut commemoratio fiat. et erit post septua-
ginta annos respectionem faciet Deus Tyri, et iterum restitue-
tur in antiquum <, et erit commercium omnibus regnis terrae>.
numquid credibile est uniuersa regna terrarum Tyrum uenire 29
negotiandi causa? quod si ueniant, quae utilitas praedixisse

aaa futura Tyro commercia omnibus regnis terrae, si non Tyrus
Keclesia est in qua orbis terrarum negotium est aeternae uitae ?
1b 18 sequitur enim et ostendit quod sit eius negotium dicens: H¢t

erit negotiatio evus et merces sancta Domino. non enim illis 2;
colligitur, sed wlis qui habitant in conspectu Domini. omnis
negotratio evus edere et bibere et repleri in signum memoriale in
conspectu Domini. si ergo negotiatio eius sancta Domini,
quomodo potest omnibus esse regnis, nisi ubique fuerit ista

Tyrus ? 30
1 mercede R 3 contrita] contristata V 4 congratio R

5 insulas] siluas R 7 mercatores]+eorum V 7,8 exhibilabunt

V*; exsibilabunt Vcorr 8 te] & RK es et] est V*; es Veorr

11,12 dicuntur V 13 iesaiam Reorr 15 fornicariae] fornicari R

16 cythara V-_uagulare] R, péuBevoov Lxx; angulare V citharizari R;
cytharizare V 17 multajl+canticaV 18 facitdnsR 19 et erit...
terrae] om RV 20 ‘tyrum] tyro R 22 futuro R commertia R
23 qua] quo R orbis] omne V 25, 27, 28 negotiatio] negotia R
25 mercis RV* 27 aedere V* memoriale] memoriae V 29 regni V

REGVLA QVARTA, 47

RV = Sequitur enim et aperte ostendit quid sit Tyrus dicens:
Ecce Dominus corrumpet orbem terrarum et wastabit Ulm et Psai xxiv 1
nudabit faciem eius. disparget eos qui inhabitant in eo, et
ertt populus sicut sacerdos,—num illius orbis cuius negotiatio

5 sancta Domino ?—et fanwlus sicut dominus et famula sicut
domina. et erit emens sicut uendens, et qui debet sicut alle cur
debetur, et qui fenerat sicut ille qui feneratur. quia corrup-
tione corrumpetur terra et uastatione uastabitur terra, os enim
Domini locutum est ista. planait terra, corruptus est orbis

10 terrae, planxerunt alti terrae. terra autem facinus admisit
propter eos qui habitant in ea, quia transierunt legem et muta-
uerunt iussa, testamentum aeternum. propterea ergo male-
dictio comedit terram, qua peccauerunt qui inhabitant in ea.
propter hoc egentes erunt qui inhabitant terram,—numquid

15 ill egentes esse possint, quibus in omnibus regnis terrae of Esai xsi
negotiatio est edere et bibere et repleri, non quodam tempore,
sed im signum memoriale im conspectu Domini ?—et relin-
quentur homines pauct. lugebit witis, lugebtt winwn, gement
omnes quorum tucundatur anima. cessawt iucunditas tym-

20 panorum, cessauit inpudicitia et diwtiae tmpiorum. naumaquid
sanctorum cessabit uox citharae? confust sunt, non biberunt
unum, amarum factum est sicera eis gue bibunt ilud. deserta
est omnis ciwitas, claudent domos ne introeant. ululate de
wuino ubique, cessauit omnis iucunditas terrae, et relinquetur

25 cutates desertae, et domus derelictae peribunt. haec omnia
erunt terrae in medio gentium. si deserta est omnis ciuitas,
quae sunt gentes in quarum medio ista sunt ?

3 eos|]+his V disperget RV, cf pp 455, 5271 4 num] numquid R
negotio R 6 uendens] pret V quid debet V* 8 et] e V* 9 ista]

haec V corruptus] curuatus V 10 admisit] amisit V
11 inhabitant V* vid quia] qui R 12 iussa testamenti
aeterni V 13. comed& R habitant Veorr 14 propter hoc]
numquid ill R erunt] erant V 15 possunt V 16 nego-
ciatio R 17 memoriale] memoriae V 18 gemant V To io-
cundator V*, iocundatur Vcorr 19, 20 cessauit] scripsi, rémavrat LXx;
cessabit RV utroque loco 19 iocunditas V 19, 20 tympanorum]
tympano cum V 22° Minti) RV corns. Sook eis] illis V
deserxo V* 23 claudent domos] plaudent oms V 23, 24 de uino]

diuino V 24 cessabit V iocunditas V 27 sunt 2°] faciant V

48 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Etsi aliqua horum uidentur et iam perspicue fieri, tamen RV
omnia spiritalia sunt. omnem ciuitatem desertam spirita-
liter mortuam dicit, sed Tyri illius meretricis, non cuius est

Fsaixxiv6 negotiatio sancta toto orbe. quod autem dixit relinquentur
homines pauci—saluo utique statu—eorum qui peribunt. pauci 5
relinquuntur ex eis quos spiritaliter mortuos dicit, qui per re-
cordationem uixerint, quos Ecclesia non interfecerit, sicut
multis in locis legimus. sed quia propositum nobis implendum
est duobus contenti sumus exemplis. minatur Deus ignem
ex igni Israhel regi Assyriorum, id est aduerso corpori, et dicit 10

Fsaix16—19 arsurum uelut stipulam, paucosque ignem fugituros. Mittet
inquit Dominus Sabaoth in tuwm honorem ignominiam, et in
claritatem tuam ignem ardentem, tet ardebit+ lumen Israhel
tet erit iit ignis, et sanctificabit illud in flamma ardente—
scilicet lumen Israhel—et manducabit quasi faenum siluam.
mm ilo die ardebunt montes, et per praeripia fugient, quast qui
fugit a flamma ardenti. et qui remanserint ab illis erunt
numerus, et puer scribet illos. Qui remansertt inquit ab ills,
non ab igni, non enim potest ignis qui conburit ardere; qui
autem ex conbustis superauerint ignis efficientur. et in 20
Zacharia legimus illos remanere quos Ecclesia non occiderit,
quod ad se conuertantur ; ceteros uero spiritaliter cruciatibus
interficere, si quidem stantibus oculos eruat, et carnes tabes-

Zech xiv— cere faciat. Habitabit inquit in Hierusalem confidens. et

_

5

1 et iam perspicue] imperspicue V*; perspicue Vcorr 3 est]
‘hierusalem:

om V 4 negociatio R tota R quod autem dixit] R; ihs autem
V (sic), fortasse omnia a prima manu 5 peribunt] perimunt' V
6 relinquuntur] relinquentur V 7 uixerunt V ecclesia] ecclesi-
asticus V interficerit R sicut] si V 8 praepositum
¥ nobis] orbis V 10 assiriorum V 10,11 dicit arsurum
uelut] dicitur syrum uel ad V* (dicit ad Veorr pro dicitur) 11 fugituros]
futurus V 12 tuum honore ignominia V* vid 13, 14 et
ardebit...ignis] debebat esse ‘ardebit. et erit lumen Israhel ut ignis’
14 erit ibi] Vcorr; ardebit V* vid; erit tibi R scificauit R
flammam ardentem R 15 manducauit R 16 praeripia]
precipitia V 17 fugit] fugiat R ardente V 19 non ab
igni] om V comburit R 20 superauerit R et] om V
21 remanere] remeare V 22 cruciantibus R 23 oculos seruat R

24 hierusalem] irl V

REGVLA QVARTA. 49

RV haec erit strages qua caedet Dominus populos, quotquot mili-
tauerunt aduersus Hierusalem: tabescent carnes eorum stan-
tibus eis super pedes suos, et oculi eorum fluent a foramini-
bus eorum, et lingua eorum tabescet in ore eorum. et erit

sinilla die alienatio magna super illos, et adprehendet unus-
quisque manum provimi sui, et implicabitur manus eius
manur proximt eius,—id est caecus caecum ducens. et Judas
proelabitur in Hrerusalem, et colliget wires omnium populo-
rum, aurum et argentum et uestem in multitudinem nmis. et

10 haec erit strages equorum et mulorum et camelorum et asino-
rum et omnium pecorum quae sunt in castris illis, secundum
stragem istum. et erit quicumque relicti fuerint ex onnibus
gentibus uenrventibus super Hierusalem, et ascendent quotquot
annis adorare regem Dominum omnipotentem, celebrare diem

15 festum scenopegqrae.

Aelam alienigenarum est. huic speciali iungit generalem,
monstratque bipertitam. Haec dicit Dominus, Confringantur
arcus in Aelam principatus eorum. excedit speciem: Lt
superducam quattuor uentos a quattuor cardinibus caeli, et

20 dispergam illos per omnes uentos caelt, nec erit gens quae illuc
non uenriat, quae expellat Aelam. redit im speciem: Lt
terrebo illos coram inimicis eorum qui quaerunt aniwnas
eorum, et superducam im eos secundum tram indignationis
meae, et nuttam post eos gladium meum, donec consumat eos.

25 lungit genus: Ht ponam sedem meam in Aelam, et perdam

1 haec] Veorr; haxx V* cedet V dominus] ds V
quodquod V* 2 hierusalem] irl V 4 eorum 1°] suis V
linguae...tabescent R 5 illos] eos V adprehendit V*
6 implicabitur] implebitur V 8 praeliabitur R uires] uiros V
9 aurum] pr et V in multitudine nimia V* 10 haec]
om Veorr mulorum et] multorum V 11 pecorum] om R
illis] illius R 13 gentibus] om V*; add in mg quotquot]
quodquod V* 14 dominum omnipotentem] scripsi; ihm dm potentem
R; dnm dm omipotentem V caclebrare V 15 scenophegiae
KR; scinofegiae V*; scenofegiae Veorr 16 elam V hoc loco huic]
hic V 17 monstrat quae V (sic) confringantur] con-
fringanair V Patil Urs vecri us excedit] pr et V
et] om V 22 eorum] R supr lin 23 secundum] se-
cum R

B. 4

Hier xxv 35
—39

50 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

unde regem et potentes ; eritque in nowissimis diebus auertam RV
captiutatem Aelam, dicit Dominus. numquid credendum est (M)
non fuisse gentem quae non uenerit ad expugnandam Aelam,
aut illic sedem Domini, cuius captiuitatem auertit, nisi
Kcclesiae sit figura ? 5
Aliquae uero species sinistrae tantum sunt, ut Sodoma,
Esaiil0 sicut scriptum est: Auwdite werbwm Domini principes Sodo-
Apxi8 —- morum, et: Quae uocatur spiritaliter Sodoma et Aegyptus, ubi
et Dominus eorum cruct fixus est. ex his Sodomis exiet Loth,
2Theis quod est, Dascessio, ut reueletur homo peccatt. Babylon ciui-
tas aduersa Hierusalem totus mundus est, qui in parte sua,
Esai xiiil quam in hac Hierusalem habet, conuenitur. Visio inquit
aduersus Babyloniam, et dicit aduersum orbem terrarum uen-
Fsai xii 2~ turos sanctos Dei milites. Tollite signum et exaltate uocem
ullis. nolite tumere exhortamint manus, aperite magistratus, 15
quia ecce ego praecipio. sanctificati sunt, et woco eos ; gigantes
ueniunt wram meam lenire, gaudentes simul et iniuriam
facientes. uox multarum gentium in montibus similis gentium
multarum, uox regum et gentium collectarum, cum Babylonem
gens et rex Medorum euerterit. sequitur enim et dicit qui 2°
sunt isti reges, et quae Babylon. Deus Sabaoth praecepit
genti bellatrici uenire de longinquo de summo fundamento
caelt, Deus et bellatores eius corrumpere uniuersum orbem
terrae. ululate, proximus est enim dies Domini, et contritio a
Deo aderit. propter hoc omnes manus resoluentur, et omnis 25
anima hominis trepidabit. turbabuntur legati, parturitiones

_

fo}

1 regem] Vcorr; regenxx V*; reges R eritque] erit V auertam]
ag&ernam V 3 quae] qui R uenerit] nouerit V 4 auertit]
uertit V 5 ecclesiae] ecclesiasticus V* ; ecclesiastica Vcorr figu-
rae R 6 aliquae] quae V 7 audit V* 7,8 sodomorum]
sodomam V* 8 uocatur] secatur V 11 aduersa] aduersus V
qui] om V 12 hierusalem habet] israhel haec V inquid V*
13 babyloniam] babylonem V aduersus V 14 exaltate]
exultate V uocem] uicem V 15 illis] illius R
16 sanctificati] pr qui R uoco eos] uocé V 17 ueniant R
lenire] cf Cyp 78514: linire V; mitigare R 18 similis] similes V
19 collecturum V* cum babylone V 20 euerterit] euenerit R

21 sunt] sint V precipit R 22 fundamenta V 26 legati]
ligati R

(M)

on

10

60

I

on

20

25

REGVLA QVARTA. al

RV enmm ilos habebunt quasi mulieris parturientis, et patientur

curcumstantiam ; alius ad alium expauescent, et facies eorwin
sicut flamma commutabuntur. ecce enim dies Domini insana-
bilis uenit indignationis et irae, ponere orbem terrarum deser-
tum, et peccatores perdere ex eo. diem Domini ex quo passus
est dicit, ex quo spiritaliter interficitur mundus, interfi-
ciente exercitu Dei, dum eius lumen iniqui non uident, sicut
sequitur dicens: Stellae enim caeli et Orion et omnis ornatura
caeli lumen non dabunt, et tenebrescet oriente sole + lumen et +
non permanebit lumen evus. et infligam orbi terrae mala et
miustis peccata eorum, et perdam iniuriam scelestorum et iniu-
riam superborum hunuliabo. et erunt qui remanserint—id
est quos supradicti milites non occiderint—honorati magis
quam aurum quod non tetigit ignem, et homo honoratus ertt
magis quam lapis ex Sufir. caelum enim indignabitur et
terra commouebitur a fundamentis suis propter animationem
wrae Domini, in die qua aderit indignatio eius. iungit spe-
cilem: Ht ertt que relict sunt quast capreola fugiens, et sicut
ous errans et non ertt que colligit, ut homo ad populum swum
conuertatur, et uenire in tribum suum festinet. qui enim incr-
dert superabitur, et si qui collecti sunt gladio cadent. et filiae
corum in conspectu eorum +cadentt, et domos eorum diripient,
et uxores eorum habebunt. ecce excito uobis Medos, qui non
computant pecuniam, neque auro opus est ills. subtiliter
adstringit genus ; cui enim hosti non opus est auro nisi Eccle-

1 enim] om V mulieres parturientes R patientur] parietas
V 2 circumstantia V aliam V 6 interficietur R
8 sequitur] seruentur V caeli] om R et orion] exteriore V
omnis] omnes V ornatura] conieci, cf. Roensch 42: creatura R ;
ex ea rura V; 6 Kécmos LXX 9 tenebrisc& R; tenebrescit V
oriente sole lumen] R; om V, spatio relicto circiter xxv litterarum
9, 10 lumen et...eius] Kal 7 cedjvn od doce TO Pws avTTAS LXX 10 orbi]
mortui V 13 supradicti] supputadicti V occiderit V
14 homo] pr non V erit] fuerit R 15 sufir] sophyr R
16 suis] om V propter] propterea V aminationé R 17 in-
dignatio] cf Lxx; indignationis RV 18 capriola V 19 colligat V
20, 21 incederit V 21, 22 filiae earum V* vid 22 domus V
24 conputant V 25 adstringit] scripsi; aut stringit R; item in-
serit V (M) hosti] ostis V; hostis M auro]+et argento V
ecclesiae] ecclesiasticus V

4—2

52 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

siae quae spiritali fruitur uita? Sagzttationes vwuenum con- RV
fringent, et filris uestris non miserebuntur, et super nepotes
uestros non parcent ocult eorum.
Omnia spiritaliter, sicut de eadem Babylonia scriptum
Psexxxvig est: Felix est qui obtinebit et conlidet paruulos tuos ad petram. 5
neque enim regem Medorum quod obtinuerit aduersum Baby-
lonem dixit felicem, et non Ecclesiam quae obtinet et conlidet
filios Babylonis ad petram scandali. obtinet autem, sicut
2Theii7 scriptum est: Qui obtinet modo, donec de medio fiat. et post
multa speciei et generis in clausula periochae aperte ostendit 10
omnes gentes esse Babylonem et eas in terra atque in monti-
Esai xiv 22— bus suis, id est in Ecclesia, perdere. Haec dicit Dominus,
Ponam Babylonem desertam, ut inhabitent hericw in alla, et
erit in nihilum, et ponam illam luti uoraginem in perditionem.
haec dicit Dominus Sabaoth dicens, Quomodo dixi sic ert, et 15
quomodo cogitawi sic perseuerabit, ut perdam Assyrios im
terra mea et in montibus mets, et erunt in conculcationem. — et
auferetur ab eis tugum eorum, et gloria ab umeris eorum
auferetur. haec cogitatio quam cogitaut Dominus in orbem
terrae totum, et haec manus alta super omnes gentes orbis 20
terrae. Deus enim sanctus quod cogitauit quis disparget, et
manum illam fortem quis auertet? quotienscumque autem
post excidium minatur ruinae ciuitatis habitationem bestia-
rum et auium inmundarum, spiritus inmundos dicit habita-
turos in hominibus quos Spiritus Sanctus deseruerit. non 25
enim hance iniuriam possunt interfecti habitatores aut ruina
sentire.

1 spiritali] spiritalit~ V 5 qui] quod R optinebit V
collidebit V tuos] suos R 6 aduersus V 7 eccle-
siam] aecclesiasticus V collidet V 8 optinet V 9 qui]
quod R 10 specie V in clausula periochae] scripst ; in clausa
perichae R; clausula periocae V 10,11 omnes ostendit omnes V*,
omnes 2° nunc eras 13 desertum V ericii V 14 illam]
illud V 16 quomodo] quem ad modum V perseuerauit R
17 conculcatione V 18 aufertur V ab] R supr ras humeris
V 20, 21 orbis terrae] R supr ras 21 disparget] dispergit R;

par
disgit V (sic) et] om R 22 quotiescumque R 24 et
auium inmundarum] om V 25 srs sps V (sic) deseruit R
26 ruinam R

REGVLA QVARTA. 53

RV Sermones inquit Amos, quos widit super Hierusalem ; et Amit
™) coepit: In tribus impietatibus Damasci et in quattuor non 13
auersabor eam, eo quod secabant serris ferreis in utero habentes.

et iterum: In tribus impietatibus Idumaeae et in quattuor wu
non auersabor eam propter quod persecutus est in gladio fra-
trem suum. et multas alias ciuitates alenigenarum in Ec-
clesiae figuram conuenit. ubicumque autem Idumaeam,
Theman, Bosor, Seir nominat, fratres malos significat ; sunt
autem possessiones Esau. serras uero ferreas homines dicit
duros et asperos, qui secant parturientes Ecclesias.

Item omnes gentes quae sub caelo sunt in ciuitate Dei
iram Dei bibere et illic percuti Hieremias testatur dicens:
Sic dicit Dominus Deus Israhel, Accipe calicem wuint meri de Mier xsxii 15
manu mea, et potabis omnes gentes ad quas ego mitto te,
et woment et insanient a facie glad, quem ego mitto in medio
allarum. et accepr calicem de manu Domini, et potaurt gentes
ad quas misit me Dominus ad ipsas: Lerusalem et ciutates
Tudae et reges evus et principes evus, ut ponerentur in desola-
tionem et in deuastationem et in sibilationem; et Farao regem
20 Aegypti et pueros eius et potentes evus et uniuersum populum
elus et omnes promiscuos eius; et reges omnes aliengenarum,
Ascalonem et Gazam et Accaron et quae contra faciem Azoti ;
et Idumaeam, et Moabitatem, et filios Ammon, et regem Tyri
et regem Sidonis, et reges qui trans mare sunt, et Dedan et
Theman et Bosor, et omnem circumtonsam a facie, et omnes
promiscuos que commorantur in deserto, et omnes reges Aelam,
et omnes reges Persarum, et uniuersos reges a Subsolano qua
longe et qui iuxta sunt, unumquemque ad fratrem suum, et
omnia regna terrae quae supra fuciem terrae sunt. et dices lis:

Sic dicit Dominus omnipotens, Bibite et inebriamine et womite,

on

—
re)

~
an

wv
Cyt

30
2,4 quatuor R 4 idumeae RV* 7 idumeam RVcorr

9 autem] R*; aut R* 11 quae] qui R in ciuitate
Dei] om BR 12 bibere] uiuere V* 15 uoment] uenient R
16 accipi R 18 et reges] om et R 18, 19 desolatione...deuastatione
...Slbilatione V 19 pharao regi R 20 et 3°] om V
21 promiscuos] praemiscuos V 22 ascalonem] asalonem V* 23 idu-
meam V* moabitem V 24 sidoni R 25 a faciae V*

26 premiscuos RV aelam] helam R; elam V 29 supra] super V

30 sic] haec V

54 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIL.

et cadetis et non surgetis a facie gladw, quem ego mitto in RV
medio uestrum. et erit si noluerint accipere calicem ita ut
bibant, dices: Sic dicit Dominus, Bibentes bibetis, quia um
ciuitate in qua winuocatum est nomen meum super ipsam
incipio uexare wos, et uos purgatione non eritis purgati, quia 5
Hier xxii gladiwm ego inuoco super inhabitantes super terram. Potabis
inquit Mierusalem, ciutates Iudae et reges evus et principes
Tb 26 eius; deinde dicit: Ht uniuersa regna terrae quae super faciem
terrae sunt, ut ostenderet ab speciali Hierusalem transitum
fecisse ad generalem, in qua sunt omnes gentes terrae quas 10
Ib 29 illic Deus percutiet, sicut et interpretatus est dicens: Quo-
nam in ciuitate im qua inuocatum est nomen meum in ipsa
incipio uexare wos, et wos purgatione non eritis purgati. num-
quid Hieremias, cum esset in corpore, qui de Iudaea et
carcere numquam nisi in Aegyptum tractus, perspicue adiecto
mero in calice ut potum dare omnibus gentibus quae sub
caelo sunt, aut’ nunc praeter Kcclesiam profetat? quodsi
tune quoque et nunc in EKcclesiam locutus est, manifestum
est et omnes gentes ilicubi Hieremias loquitur conueniri in
principali eorum parte. si quid enim summum Satanas in
corpore suo, $1 quid dextrum, si quid graue habet, caelestibus
miscuit ut bellantium est mos fortibus fortes opponere. unde
cf Eph vil2 apostolus dicit non esse sanctis pugnam aduerswum humana,
sed aduersus spiritalia nequitiae in caelestibus.

ol
en

nN

fe)

1 caditis R 2 erit] erint V (sic) 6 ego...in(habitantes) |
supr ras in R terram] terra ammon R 7 iuda R 13 purga-
tione R eritis] estis R 13,14 numquit V* 14 iudaea et]
iudeae V 15 aiecto V 16 ut]id V dare] RV: fortasse pro daret,
sed cf Roensch 445; Priscillian 42} quae] qui R 17 praeter|
per V 17, 18 profetat...ecclesiam] om R 17 prophetat V
18 ecclesia V locutus] R (sic); locus V 20 enim] om BR
20, 21 in corpore...graue] si quid graue si quid dextrum in suo corpore V

22 est] on R 23 pugna V aduersum] aduersus V humana]
humanitatem V

24 caelestibus]+ EXPLICIT DE SPECIE | ET GENERE | INCIPIT DE TEMPORIBVS |

REGVLA R (rubro); + EXPLICIT DE SPECIAE. ET GENERE, AMEN || INCIPIT DE
TEMPORIBYS. LIB | QVINTVS V

(M)
5

§ D

q D

He

on

§ D

20

RV
D

REGVLA QVINTA. Do

V. DE TEMPORIBUS.

Temporis quantitas in Scripturis frequenter mystica est
tropo synecdoche, aut legitimis numeris, qui multis modis
positi sunt et pro loco intellegendi ; synecdoche uero est aut a
parte totum, aut a toto pars.

Hoe tropo cccc annos seruiuit Israhel in Aegypto. nam
Sdicit Dominus Abrahae: Sciens scies quia peregrinum erit
semen tuum in terra non sua, et dominabuntur eorum et afflr-
gent annis cocc; Exodi autem Scriptura dicit CCCC XXX annos
fuisse Israhel in Aegypto. an non omne tempus seruiuit ?
quaerendum ergo, ex quo tempore: quod inuenire facile est.
dicit enim Scriptura non seruisse populum, nisi post mortem
Ioseph.1 Mortuus est inquit Ioseph et omnes fratres evus et
omnes saeculi illius, fildi autem Israhel creuerunt et multiplh-
cati sunt et cydaei fuerunt et praeualuerunt nimis, multipli-
cabaut autem eos terra. exsurrexit autem rex alter swper
Aegyptum qui ignorabat Loseph, et diait genti suae: Eece gens

filiorum Israhel magna multitudo, et walent super nos ;

uenite ergo circumueniamus eos. ‘si autem post mortem
Ioseph coepit seruire populus, ex cccc et XXX annis, quibus
in Aegypto moratus est, deducimus LXXX annos regni loseph

—regnauit autem a XXX annis usque in CX,—et erunt reliqui ¢

2 temporis] temporum V supr ras M mystica est] mysticae sunt R
3 tropo synecdoche] M Eug 872; tropo cyNekAoke dug cod Pal 188;

‘TPOTTWCYNEKAWKH: R; tropo sinedoche V 4 synecdoche] «cYN€EKAWKH

R; sinedoche V est] post totum VM 6 cccc] quadrin-
gentos V et sic semper annos] om KR 7 dictum est
Abrahae peregrinum: sic incipit D; uid Introd p xx dominus] ds V
scies] sciexs V (sic) 8, 9 adfligent eos VM 9 annis]
annos D exodo D cccc et xxx D 10 Israhel] om V in
aegyptum D an...seruiuit] om D 11 ergo] + est D
facile est] om est D 12 enim] dns RB 13 mortuus...io-
seph] om V 15 cydaei] cydei R; cythei V; xvdato. Lxx nimis] om
Vv 19, 20 quod si tune coepit: sic rursus incipit D 20 cccc et xxx]
D; quatrigentis & triginta R; quadringentis & triginta V quibus]
pr ex V 21 moratus] demoratus V diducimus Veorr 19.9.6.
septuaginta D 22 autem] enim V XXX annis] quadragesimo

anno D, sed cf p 648 cx] centesimo decimo D

Ge

mvs

ef Ex xii 40

Ex

cf C
122

i 6—10

re xli 46;

56 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

seruitutis [srahel anni cccL, quos Deus dixit cccc. si autem RV
omni tempore peregrinationis suae seruiuit Israhel, plus est (M)
quam Deus dixit; si ex morte Ioseph secundum Scripturae
sanctae fidem, minus est. quo manifestum est centum a toto
partem esse, nam post CCC annos pars aliorum centum anni 5
sunt: propterea dixit CCCC annos.
Sic in omni summa temporis, ut puta post nouem dies
prima hora decimi diei dies est, aut post nouem menses
Sap vii1,2 primus dies mensis est, sicut scriptum est: Jn utero matris
figuratus sum caro decem mensuum tempore coagulatus in 10
sanguine. sicut autem in prima parte cuiusque temporis
totum tempus est, ita et nouissima hora totus dies est, aut 12
reliquiae mille annorum mille anni sunt. sex dies sunt
mundi aetas, id est sex milia annorum. in reliquiis sexti diei,
id est M annorum, natus est Dominus, passus et resurrexit. 15
itidem reliquiae M annorum dictae sunt mille anni primae
resurrectionis. sicut enim reliquiae sextae feriae, id est tres
horae, totus dies est, unus ex tribus sepulturae Domini, ita
reliquiae sexti diel maioris quo surrexit Ecclesia totus dies
Mtxii40 est, id est M anni. hoc enim tropo constant tres dies et tres 20
noctes. noctis autem et diel XXIII horae unus dies est, nec
adiciuntur noctes diebus nisi certa ratione. alias dies solos
cfGalils dicimus, sicut Apostolus dicit mansisse apud Petrum diebus
XV: numquid opus erat dicere totidem et noctibus? sic 61
Geis enim scriptum est: Vespera et mane dies wnus. quod si nox 25

1 israhel] om DM anni ccc] anni -cccct: R; annis trecentis quin-
quaginta V* (anni trecenti...Vcorr); anni ccctx D quos] quod V
2 omni tempore] omnem tempus V*; omne tempus Vcorr isra-
hel] om D 3,4 secundum...fidern] om D 4 quo manifestum
est] quos manifestatum D 6 cccc] quadringintos VD 7 sic] si hic V
8 prima...dies] om V diei dies] om dies D 9 mensis]+decimus V;

_pr mensis M 10 decem mensuum tempore] decimmensti V; decem
mensium D coagulatus]+sum DM 11 autem] enim D cuiusque
temporis] cuiusquam temporis D; cui:temporis M; temporis cuiusq-
temporis cuiusqs V (sic) 12 totum] om V est 1°] om D ita et]
RDM; ita in V nouissima] RD; +ut nouissima VM dies sit VM
13 sunt 1°] sint VM 14 sex milia] V; vie R reliquis V* 15 my]
mille V semper 16 itidem] idem V 19 surrexit] resurrexit V
20 id est] om V constat V 21 horae] hore R unus dies]
unum tempus V 22 alias] RV»; alius V 23 aput V* 25 uespere R

REGVLA QVINTA. ‘ay

RV et dies unus dies est, nouissima hora diei et totum diem
et noctem transactam retinet. similiter et nouissima hora
noctis totam noctem et diem futuram: hora enim pars est
utriusque temporis. hora qua sepultus est Dominus pars est
5 sextae feriae cum sua nocte quae transierat, et hora noctis in
qua resurrexit pars est inminentis diel. ceterum si neque 1n
die praesenti nox est praeterita neque in nocte praesenti dies
crastinus, non die resurrexit Dominus sed nocte. quoniam dies
ab ortu solis est, sicut scriptum est: Luminare maius imitium Ge irs
1o diet; Dominus autem ante solis ortum resurrexit. nam
Marcus dicit: Oriente sole, non orto sed orente, id est ad Mcxvi2
ortum eunte; Lucas autem: Diluculo. sed ne de hac locutione 1 xxiv!
ambigeretur alteri euangelistae aperte noctem fuisse testan-
tur. nam Matheus nocte dicit uenisse mulieres ad monu- cf Mt xxviiil
15 mentum et uidisse Dominum, Johannes uero cwm adhuc tene- ton xx 1
brae essent. si autem Dominus ante solem, id est ante
initium diei resurrexit, nox illa pars est inlucescentis diel.
quod et competit operibus Dei, ut non dies obscuretur in
noctem sed nox lucescat in diem. ipsa enim nox inlumina-
20 tur et efficitur dies, quod est figura eorum quae facturus erat
in Christo, quoniam Deus qui diait de tenebris lumen fulgere 2 co iv 6
fulsit in cordibus nostris, qui inluminauit tenebras, sicut scrip-
tum est: Tenebrue tuae sicut meridies erunt, et: Now tran- fie ss
siuit, dies autem adpropinquaut ; sicut in die decenter ambu-
25 emus. prius est enim quod carnale est, deinde quod spiritale. 1 Co xv 46
Dies ergo primus et nouissimus a toto pars est. solus
medius plenus fuit a uespera in uesperam secundum Dei
conditionem atque praeceptum, sicut Mosi dicit in Leuitico
a wespera in uesperam obseruari diem sabbatorum. quidam Lev xxiii 32
30 autem putant ex die computandum, quoniam Dominus tres ct Mt xii 40
dies et noctes dixit, non tres noctes et dies. sed hoc non

1 unus dies] unum tempus V diem totum V 2 trans-
actum V* 3 noctem] om V futurt V 5 quae] qui R
5,6 in qua] quae V*; qua Vcorr 6 imminentis R 12 delu-
culo R loquutione R 13, 14 alter euangelista...testatur R
13 noctem] nocte V 17 est] erat V inluciscentis RV 18 ob-
scuraretur V 19 diem] die V 20 facturus] facta V 24 adpropin-
quabit V die] diem V 27 dei] VReorr; dixm R* 28 moysi V

in leuitico] om V 29 obseruari] obscuraui V 30 putant] dicunt V

58 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

longa ratione destruitur. si enim ex die initium sepulturae, RY
in nocte finis; si autem in die finita est, a nocte coepit.
nam si dies utrimque concluditur, plus erit unus dies. Di-
cunt praeterea non posse in die noctem esse praeteritam nec
in nocte diem futurum, sed separatos tres dies et noctes 5
oportere adsignari, computantes primum diem quo cruci fixus
est, alterum trium horarum separatarum, tertium sabbati
—erit dominicus dies quartus! qui autem hanc circumuen-
tionem uitant consentiunt a nocte quidem computandum,
sed noctes a diebus debere separari, dicentes in tribus horis 10
tenebrarum inportunarum primam noctem, alteram sabbati,
tertiam inlucescentis dominici. noctes quidem ueluti tres
sunt, sed dies duo: primus in tribus horis post tenebras,
secundus sabbati! non enim qui separatos dies promittit
potest dicere in nocte qua resurrexit fuisse diem futurum. 15
quod si in id consensit, consentiat necesse est in reliquis diei
sextae feriae fuisse noctem praeteritam. quasi tenebrae
inportunae fuerunt, tres tamen horae lucis eiusdem sunt
diel, nec amiserunt ordinem suum, quo minus pars esset diei
ac noctis suae. taceo tres horas tenebrarum noctem esse 20
non potuisse, quod praeter ordinem fuerint conditionis Dei.
quicquid enim signi est non turbat elementorum rationalem
fRensvu cursum. non enim quia stetit sol et luna in diebus Hiesu et
Kzechiae solus sol reuersus est; aliquid cursus inter solem et
lunam mutilatum est et detractum uel additum diei ac nocti, 25
et noua exinde coepit temporum aut neomeniae supputatio,
Geild quam statuit Deus in sole et luna esse in tempora dies et
annos, sicut in Genesi scriptum est. multo magis in illo die
nihil turbatum est, cui non sunt adiectae tres horae tenebra-

2 in noctem R si autem finis R 3 utrimque] utrumq. RV
4 noctem esse] tr V 5 in noctem V* vid 7 separatarum |
reparatarum V 8 dominicus] dni V 12 inluciscentis V*
dominice V* ; dominicae Vcorr uelut R 14 separatos]
separatus V* promittit] R; promit Vcorr; promitxxx V* 16 con-
sensit] consentit V reliquiis Vcorr 17 quasi] quae si Vcorr
19 amiserunt] admiserunt V 20 horas] horae V* 22 signi]
signis R rationalem] rationale R; rationabilem V 23 in diebus]
ominV ihu RV _ et 2°] aut V 25 additum] addictum V*

ac] aut V 27 in solem et lunam V tempora] temporum V

REGVLA QVINTA. Dg

RV rum ut essent Xv horarum, sed pars ipsius diei obscurata est

| Bug

on

—
Lo it

$4] Eug
873

(M)

—sexta in nonam. quod si non solem obscuratum et rursum
ostensum diem dicimus, quod nomen, quem ordinem damus
ipsi diei qui fuisse dicitur inter sextam ferlam et sabbatum,
nisi bis sabbatum fuit et ebdomadas illa octo dies habuit ?
certe, si contentio ratione minime sedari potest, compendio
probamus tres horas tenebrarum non pertinere ad sepulturam
Domini, eo quod adhuc ulueret. non enim potuit esse an
corde terraé nisi ex quo mortuus est et sepultus est, quod
factum est in tribus horis sextae feriae intra duodecimam.
quoniam post occasum solis non licebat Iudaeis sepelire, cum
esset cena pura initium sabbati, sicut Iohannes dicit: Jdlic
ergo propter cenam puram Ludaeorum, quonam proximum
erat monumentum, posuerunt Lesum. dies autem noctibus
dignitate non nouitatis ordine praeferuntur, ut omnes mas-
cull primogenitis, sicut dictum est: Genwit filios et filias et
obut, cum contra legem sit naturae ut omnes illi masculos
primum genuisset. nobis autem totum tempus dies est;
omnia noua sunt, figurae transierunt.

Ex legitimis numeris sunt septenarius, denarius, duode-
narius. idem autem est numerus et cum multiplicatur, ut
LXX, DCC; uel totiens in se, ut septies septeni uel decies
deni. sed aut perfectionem significant, aut a parte totum,
aut simplicem summam. perfectionem, ut VII spiritus Ke-
clesiae, aut ut dicit: ’ Septies in die laudabo te," aut: Septies
tuntum recipiet in wsto saeculo. similiter decies, ut alius
euangelista dicit: Centies tantum recipiet in isto saeculo. et

1 esset V 1,2 xv horarum...nonam] quindecim nam V 4 inter
sextam] interfectam V* ; intersectam Vcorr et sabbatum] et sabbatort
¥ 5 nisi bis sabbatum] nisi si uis sabbatum V ; nisi sabbata R ebdo-
madas] ebdomada V 6 61] sic ¥ compedio R 8, 9° ii eor ¥
9 est et] uel V 10 horis sextae] hore sexte V duode-
cima V 12 cena pura] caena pura R; pura cena V* (pura caena Vcorr)
initiux V* sabbatis V 13 caenam R 14 erat] fuerat V
15 nouitatis ordine] nouitaordiné R*, mox corr 17 cum] quod V~ 20 nu-
meri sunt V* 21 autem est] tr V 22 septuaginta uel septin-
genti V toties R septeni] .vur. R uel] aut V
23 a toto parté R, wid infra 24 aut]MVcorr; ut V*; ait R (sic) ut]
& V* 24,25 ecclesiae]+septem V 25 laudabo te] V Lug; laude
dixit tibi R; laudem dixit M 26 decies] denarius VM

Mt xii 40

Toh xix 42

ef Gev 4

cf Apid

Ps exviii 164
Le xviii 30

Mc x 30

60 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Danihel angelorum et caeli uel Ecclesiae innumerabilem RV
(M)

Dan viil0 multitudinem denario numero complexus est dicens: Milies
nulia apparebant ili et decies milres decries milia circumsiste-

psixviil8 bant. et Dauid Currus inquit Dei decies nulies tantum. et

pscivs de omni tempore Dauid: Jn mille saecula. item per duode- 5

efApviit narium de omni Ecclesia dictum est CXL. et duodecim

Mtxix28 tribus omnes gentes, sicut: Ludicabitis x11 tribus Israhel. a
parte totum est, quoniain certum tempus legitimis numeris

Apiito — difinitur ut in Apocalypsi: Habebites pressuram X dies, cum
significet usque in finem. LXX autem annos in Babylone to
idem tempus esse importunum est nunc probare.

Praeter legitimos etiam numeros, quodcumque tempus in
quodcumque numero frequenter breuiauit Scriptura, sicut
supradictum tempus Hora appelatum est, dicente apostolo ;

sci3 Nouissima hora est; et Dies, sicut: Ecce nunc dies salua- 15

(Esai 2) tionis; et Annus, sicut per Esaiam: Praedicare annum
Domini acceptabilem. quoniam non ille quo Dominus prae-
dicauit solus fuit acceptabilem, sed et iste quo praedicat,

2covi2 — sicut dictum est: Tempore accepto exaudiw te, quod aposto-
lus interpretatur: Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile. finis de- 20

leivi9 nique huius anni diem iudicii iunxit dicens: Praedicare

Psixivi2 annum acceptabilem et diem retributions. et Dauid Bene-
dices inquit coronam anni bonitatis tuae.

Aliquando hora dies et mensis annus est, sicut in Apoca-

Apixts — lypsi: Parati in horam et diem et mensem et in annum, quod 25

Ib 10 est tres anni et dimidius. ibidem, menses pro annis: Datum
est ev laedere homines mensibus quinque. aliquando dies

Apxi3- denario numero C dies sunt, sicut in Apocalypsi: Dies MCCLX,

nam milies ducenties centies et sexagies centeni centumui-

milies] milias R decies
8 totum est] toto V*;

2 milies] mille V
milia] denaria V

3 apparebunt V
4 currus] cursus R

totum Vcorr certum] centum V 9 ut] omR apocalypsin V
x] decim V* 10 annos] om V babyloné R 15 sicut]
om R* 15, 16 saluationis] salutationis V; salutis M 17 domini]
dnm V* ; dno Veorr 21 diem] idem V 22 annum]|+dni V
23 bonitatis] benignitatis V 24,25, 28 in apocalypsin V 25 et in]
om in V 26 dimidium V menses] mensis R 27 laedere]
ledere RM ; delere V mensibus] menses V 28 centum dies V
29 et]om V centini R centumuiginti] centies R

REGVLA QVINTA. 61

RV ginti sex nulia dies sunt, qui fiunt anni CCCL mensibus trice-
() norum dierum. ibidem, unus mensis denarlo numero centum
menses sunt, ut: Ciwitatem sanctam calcabunt mensibus XLII,
nam XLIT centeni Hil et CC menses sunt, qui sunt anni CCCL.
5 Tempus aut annus est aut centum anni, sicut Tempus et
tempora et dimidium temporis, quod est aut tres anni et
dimidius aut CCCL. item unus dies aliquando centum anni
sunt, sicut de Ecclesia scriptum est iacere in ciuitate ubi et
Dominus eius cruci fiwus est tres dies et dimidium, et: Oportet
ro filium hominis Hierusalem wire, et multa pati a senioribus et
principibus sacerdotum et scribis, et occidi, et post tres dies
resurgere; 1pse enim tertio surrexit.
Generatio aliquotiens et C anni sunt, sicut Dominus dicit
Abrahae: Quarta autem generatione reuertentur huc. in
rs Kxodo uero non de seruitutis sed de totius peregrinationis

Ap xi 2

Ap xii 14

ef Ap x8)9

Mt xwiral

Ge xv 16

tempore dictum est: Quinta autem generatione ascendtt Ex xiii 1s
populus ex Aegypto, id est post cccc et XXX annos. item

62 generatio aliquotiens X anni sunt, sicut Hieremias dicit:
Lritis in Babylonia usque ad generationes VIL.

20 ~=©°Ternarilum numerum eundem esse, qui et denarius,—id
est plenus,—in Euangelis deprehenditur. nam Matheus
dicit tribus seruis creditam Domini substantiam ; Lucas uero
X, quos X in tres redigit, dum et ipse a tribus dicit exactam
rationem.

25 Aliquotiens unus dies M anni sunt, sicut scriptum est:
Qua die gustaueritis ex arbore morte moriemint. et VII dies
primi VII anni sunt; sex diebus operatus est Dominus et
requewt ab omnibus operibus suis die septimo, et benediart et
sanctificauit illum. Dominus autem dicit: Pater meus usque

30 nunc operatur. sicut enim mundum istum sex diebus opera-
tus est, ita mundum spiritalem, qui est Kcclesia, per sex
milia annos operatur, cessaturus die septimo quem benedixit,
fecitque aeternum.

1 fiunt] sunt V 1,2 trecenorum V*; trigenorum Vcorr 7 cen-
tum] V4; centeni V*; om R 12 tertio]+die V 13, 18, 25 ali-

quoties R 14 reuertetur V huc] hoc V* 15 sed de totius] om R* ;
add R* 20, 21 id est plenus] idé plenius V 21 in euangelio V
27 dominus] ds V 30 nunc] modo V 31 ecclesiam V* vid

32 operatur] operator R 33 aeternum] prin R

Baruch vi 2

ef Mtxxvl4ff

ef Le xix 13 ff

Ge ii 17

Ge ii 2,3

Toh v 17

62 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Hoc est quod Dominus inter cetera mandata nihil aliud Rv
crebrius praecepit, quam ut obseruemus et diligamus diem
sabbatorum. qui autem praecepta Dei facit sabbatum Dei
diligit, id est septimum diem quietis aeternae. propterea
Deus hortatur populum non intrare portas Hierusalem cum
onere in die sabbati, et minatur portis et intrantibus per eas

een exeuntibus, sicut Hieremiae mandat dicens: Vade sta
im ports filiorum popult tui, in quas ingrediuntur reges Iuda
et egrediuntur, et in omnibus portis Hierusalem, et dices ad
eos: Audite uerbum Domini qui intratis in portas istas. haec 10
dictt Dominus, Custodite animas uestras, et nolite tollere onera
in die sabbatorum et nolite exire portas Hierusalem et nolite
efferre onera de donubus uestris in die sabbatorum, sicut man-
dau patribus uestris; et non audierunt in auribus suis, et
indurauerunt cerwicem suam super patres suos, ut me non 15
audirent neque percipirent disciplinam. eritque st me audie-
ritis, dicit Dominus, ut non inferatis onera per portas ciutatis
huius in die sabbatorum, ut non faciatis omne opus uestrum, et
sanctificetis diem sabbatorum, et intrabunt per portas ciuitatis
huius reges et principes sedentes in sede Dawid et ascendentes 20
im currus et equos, upst et principes eorum, wri Iuda et qui
inhabitant Hierusalem. et habitabitur ciwitas haec in aeter-
num, et wenient de cimtatibus Iuda et tciwitatibust+ Hierusa-
lem, et de terra Benvamin et de terra campestri et de terra
quae ad Austrum, adferentes holocausta et incensa et manna 25
et tus, ferentes laudationem in domum Domini. et si me non
audieritis ut sanctificetis diem sabbatorum, ut non portetis
onera neque intretis per portas Mierusalem in die sabbatorum,
et succendam ignem in portis evus, et consumet rtinera Hieru-
salem et non extinquetur. sufficeret breuiter mandasse non 30

Hier xvii21 Operari sabbatis; ut quid Nolite wferre onera per portas
Hierusalem? aut si opus erat et operis speciem dicere, quid

iS 4)

1 hoc] id V 10 in] om V 13 efferre] ferre V 14 audierunt]
obaudierunt V 16,17 audieritis] quesieritis R 17 honera V- 21 equos

R; equus V* et qui] om et V 23 ciuitatibus 2°] pr de R; xuxd\ddev
LXX 25 olochausta V 26 domum domini] domum R; domodni
V 28 in die sabbatorum] om V 29, 30 hierusalem]+in die

sabbatoru: R 31 honera V 32 dicere quid] diceret id V

REGVLA QVINTA. Oe a5

RV Nolite inferre per portas? non enim aliqui per muros et
tecta infert onera in ciuitatem.
Hierusalem bipertita est, et portae eius bipertitae. per
portas inferorum exitur de Hierusalem sancta, et per easdem
5 intratur in maledicta. qui autem per portas intrant cael
intrant in aeternam Hierusalem, ut reges in curribus et IM cf Hier svii2s
equis sedentes in sede Dawd, sicut per Esaiam: Adducent Esai lsvi 20
fratres uestros ex omnibus gentibus donum Domino cum equis
et curribus in splendore mulorum cum umbraculis m sanctam
10 cluitatem. sanctae portae ciuitatis Hierusalem Christus est,
et uicarii elus custodes legis, iterficientes uero prophetas et ef Mt xxiii 37
lapidantes missos ad se. porta diabolus est, et uicari elus
pseudoapostoli praedicatores legis, clawes regni caelorwm of Mtxvils,
alto sensu abscondentes. ipsi sunt portue quae non wincunt
15 Licclesium, quae supra petram fundata est, quoniam firnwm Spay iis
fundamentum Dei stat, sicut scriptum est: Cognowt Dominus
que sunt evs. si quis autem per praecepta praesidentium cf Mtxxiiia®
cathedrae Most introut, per Christum intrat—ipsius enim
sunt praecepta, 1pse exponit onus peccatorum suorum—, et
20 sine illo intrat in requiem sabbati. si quis uero non per
praecepta sed per facta praesidentium cathedrae intrat, fiet
filius gehennae magis quam illi, et requiescentibus uniuersis 7 15
qui ante sabbatum manna collegerunt, ile cum onere suo ef Ex xvi2sf
inuenietur in die sabbati, in quo non est manna colligere
25 neque onus exponere. quia nolunt audire uocem filii Dei
clamantis in Ecclesia et dicentis: Venite ad me omnes quit mtxi2
onerate estis, et ego wos requeescere faciam.
Isti sunt fures qui non per lanuam ueram sed per portas efIon x1
suas intrant in suam Hierusalem, et succendet Deus ignemi Hier xvii 27

2 infert] inferre V honera V 5 autem] aut R 6 aeternam]
aeterna R; aeternt V 8 fratres uestros] ff V (sic) domino] do V
9 splendorem R mulorum] multorum R; multarum V
10 sanctae portae] tr V ciuitati V LL aiéari:. ¥*
12 diabolus] R*vid V; diaboli Reorr uicarius V 14 uincant V
15 supra p&ra R 16 dominus] ds V 17 praesidentium] prae-
sentiti V 18 moysi V 20 intrat] pr non V> 21 cathedrae]
cathedra R; cathedrae moysi V fiet] om V 22 illi] ipsi V
23 colligerunt V* onere] honore V* ; honere Vcorr 24 inue-

niatur V 29 succendit V

i 64 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIIL.

im portis Hierusalem, et conburet itinera eius et non extin- RV
guetur. ignis enim qui specialis Hierusalem portas exussit |
extinctus est; apostolus autem sabbatum et alia legis man-

Coliilé data figuram esse futuri sic ait: Memo ergo wos iudicet in
cibo et potu aut in parte diet festi aut neomeniae aut sabbato- ;
rum, quod est umbra futuri.

Multis in locis unius temporis diuersi euentus in speciem
separatim descripti duo tempora fecerunt, quasi ex ordine
se Insequentia; in genere autem uno tempore est uterque

Gexli26 euentus. sic XIIII anni sub Ioseph ubertatis et sterilitatis
VIL anni sunt tantum, id est omne tempus a passione
Tb 46 Domini, in cuius figura factus est Joseph dominus Aegypti
cum esset XXX annorum; qui sunt itaque nobis VII anni
ubertatis et saturitatis, id est ceteris VII sterilitatis et famis.
cfLe vi20 isto enim tempore minatur Dominus diuitibus famem, paupe- 15
ribus uero saturitatem promittit. haec bona et mala duplicis
temporis uno tempore futura testatur Scriptura Exodi, qua
efExx23 manifestum est omnium plagarum Aegypti inmunem fuisse
Israhel, et per tres dies tenebrarum lumen habuisse. quod
nunc spiritaliter geritur, sicut Deus eidem Faraoni postea 20

en

=

°

Eze xxxii8_ comminatus est dicens: Dabo tenebras super terram tuam.
Aliquotiens unum tempus in multas diuidet partes,
quarum singulae totum tempus sint. sic annus quo fuit
Noe in arca diuiditur inter omnes numeros. quotiens tamen
temporum mentio est, quaternarius numerus specialiter 25
tempus est a Domini passione usque in finem. quaternarius
est autem quotiens aut plenus est, aut post tertium pars
quarti ut CccL aut tres et dimidium. ceteri uero numeri
pro locis intellegendi sunt; signa sunt enim, non manifestae
Gevii4 definitiones. XL ergo dies diluuii tempus est. nam isti sunt 30

1 comburet V 4 uos]om V 8 descripti] describit V* vid;
describi Veorr ordixne V nunc 10 anni] annis V iosephx V*
11 a] om V 12 figuram R 14 id est] idem V ceteri V
septem sterelitatis R 16, 17 promittit. haec...futura testatur] sic
diuidit R; V iungit promittit et haec, et disiungit futura et testatur
17 qua] quia V 20 pharaoni R 22 aliquoties R unum] ‘1° R
24 archa R 24, 27 quoties R 27 est autem] om est R
28 cccu] ccu R; trecenti quadraginta V aut] aut’ R dimidio V
numeri] nam V 29, 30 manifeste definitionis R; manifeste de-

finitiones V 30 dies diluuii] tr V tempus] pr totum V

REGVLA QVINTA. 65

RV cccc anni in Aegypto, et XL anni in heremo, et xL dies

(M

T

)

on

tn

20

2

on

iejunii Domini et Moysi et Heliac, quibus in heremo ieiunat
Keclesia, id est abstinet a mortuorum uoluptatibus; id est
XL dies quibus manducat et bibit Ecclesia cum Domino post
resurrectionem, id est XL anni quibus erat Ecclesia manducans
et bibens sub Salomone, pace undique uersum profunda,
premente tamen eodem bipertito Salomone, sicut eadem
Ecclesia dicit: Pater tuus oppressit nos. Xt dies fuit aqua
statu suo et totidem defecit dies, et defectio aquae decimo
mense, id est perfecto tempore, conpletur. sed in genere
non ita est, ut quodam tempore inualescat et deinde deficiat :
quoniam quo tempore inualescit carnaliter eodem deficit
spiritaliter, ut ipsa elatio sit defectio usque dum perficiatur
tempus, sicut mundus regnans ponitur sub pedibus Ecclesiae,
id est filii hominis. qui sunt itaque XL dies, id est CL, in
Ezechiel ; namque Xt diebus exsoluit peccata Iuda, et Israhel
CL, quod est unum atque idem. et septimo mense sedit arca,
idem tempus; et defictebat aqua usque in decimum mensem,
idem tempus. exiuit de arca duodecimo mense; hic est
annus libertatis Domini acceptabilis, quo conpleto manifesta-
bitur Ecclesia mundi pertransisse diluuium.

Vnaquaeque pars huius anni idem annus est. quale si
diceret, Exiuit de arca quadragesimo die, aut, Mense septimo
aut decimo; sunt enim istae partes recapitulationis ab initio
usque in finem. sicut ab Adam usque Enoe, id est Ecclesiae
translationem, VII generationes, quod est omne tempus;

1 cccc] quadrigenti V 2 heliae] eccla V heremo] herimo R;
eccla V ieiunant V 3 id est 2°] idem V 4 dies] dieb.
y¥* 5 idest]om V anni] annis V*; annis Veorr (=anni sunt)
6 uersum] uessum R profunda] om R; profundi V* vid 7 praemente
R eodem] eo V 8 dick V 9 statu] pr in VM dies] ubis
V*; ut bis V> 9—12 decimo...quo tempore] R supr ras 10 com-
pleretur V 12 quo tempore] tempore V*; tempore quo Vcorr
defecit RV* 14 sicut] sic VM regnans] repugnans M 15 id
est 1°] V*; exp V* fil: ¥* id est 2°] idem V 16 hiezechiel R;
ezechihel V diebus] dies V 17 idem...arca] om R 20 completo V
22 idem] id est RM 23 exiuit] exiit V 24 decimo] add
EXPLICIT LIBER QVINTVS « || INCIPIT LIBER +« VI + DE RECAPI|TVLATIONE « V
sunt...recapitulationis] Recapitulationis sunt enim ista partes V (sic);
sunt autem partes istae recap. M 25 enoch RM

B. 5

cf Aci 3, 4

3 Regn ii 46a

3 Regn xii 24p
cf Ge vii 17
Ge viii 6

cf Ge vii 17, 24
cf Eze iv 4—6
Ge viii 4

Ibd

ef Ib 6

ef Le iv 19

66 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

rursum ab Adam usque ad Noe, id est mundi reparationem, X RV
generationes, quod est omne tempus; et a Noe usque ad (My.
Abraham X generationes. nam et C anni quibus arca fabri- 63
cata est omne tempus est quo Kcclesia fabricatur, et eo
tempore in diluuio pereuntibus uniuersis gubernatur. 5
Quod prudentibus plenius inuestigandum data uia re-
linquimus ; quoniam, ne copia Scripturae foret in interpre-
tando et ea quae hunc intellectum forte impediunt remouendo,

singula persequenda non putauimus alio properantes.

VI. DE RECAPITULATIONE. fe)

Inter regulas quibus Spiritus legem signauit quo luminis
wia custodiretur, non nihil custodit recapitulationis sigillum
ea subtilitate, ut continuatio magis narrationis quam re-
capitulatio uideatur.

Aliquotiens enim sic recapitulat: Tune, Ila hora, Ilo die, 15
Eo tempore; sicuti Dominus loquitur in Euangelio dicens:

Le xvii 2982 § Die quo exrt Loth a Sodomis pluit ignem de caelo et perdidit sEussis

omnes ; secundum haec erit dies filii hominis, quo reuelabitur.
alla hora qui erit in tecto et wasa eius in domo non descendat
tollere alla, et qu im agro sinuliter non reuertatur retro, 2°
memmertt uxoris Loth.. numquid illa hora qua Dominus 4 £w
reuelatus fuerit aduentu suo non debet quis conuerti ad ea
quae sua sunt et uxoris Loth meminisse, et non antequam
reueletur 2? Dominus autem illa hora qua reuelatus fuerit

7 nej]necR 7, 8 foret in interpretando] interpretando fore& V*
(for& Veorr) 8 remouenda V 9 singula persequenda] posuit V
ante et ea quae... alio] alibi V

properantes] add EXPLICIT REGVLA | DE TEMPORIBVS | INCIPIT REGVLA |
DE RECAPITVLATIONE R rubro (de sectionum diuisione codicis quo usus est Aug
non satis liquet)

11 spiritus] sps (s supr ras) R legem] lege VM 13 eal &R
15 aliquoties R 16 sicuti] sicut R 17 die qua VM (cf Introd
p XXXViil) exiit] exiuit V 18 erit dies] R Aug; erunt dies V, sed
supr ras; erunt omnes dies Hug fili V 19 illa hora] in illa hora

Eug descendat] Eug; discendat V; descendet R 23 uxori V

RV

REGVLA SEXTA., - 67

lussit ista obseruari, non solum ut abscondendo quaerentibus

gratiorem faceret ucritatem, sed etiam ut totum illud tempus

5

~
en

20

iS)
on

diem uel horam esse monstraret. eadem itaque hora, id est
tempore, ista obseruanda mandauit, sed antequam reueletur :
eadem quidem hora, sed in qua parte horae ratione cog-
noscitur.

Aliquotiens autem non sunt recapitulationes huius modi
sed futurae similitudines, sicut Dominus dicit: Cum wderitis
quod dictum est per Danihelem prophetam, tune qui in Tudaea
sunt fugiant in montes, et inducit finem. quod autem Danihel
dixit in Africa geritur, neque in eodem tempore finis. sed
quoniam, licet non in eo tempore finis, in eo tamen titulo
futurum est, propterea Zune dixit, id est cum similiter factum
fuerit per orbem, quod est discessio et reuelatio hominis
peccati. hoc genere locutionis dicit Spiritus in Psalmis:
Cum auerteret Dominus captiuitatem Sion fact? sumus uelut
consolate. tunc repletum est gaudio os nostrum et lingua
nostra exultatione. tunc dicent in gentibus: Magnificaut
Dominus facere cum ilis, magnificawt Dominus facere nobis-
cum, factt sumus laetantes. dicendum erat: Cum auerterit
Dominus captiuitatem Sion, tune dixerunt in gentibus; nune
autem: Cum auerteret inquit tunc dicent in gentibus. nos
enim gentes quorum captiuitatem auertit. sicut et illorum
in figuram tempus habemus dicentes: Magnificawit Dominus

facere cum eis, magnificamt Dominus facere nobiscum. de

similitudine itaque tempus suum et nostrum unum fecit et
runexit dicens: Tune dicent in gentibus, id est cum similiter
gentibus fecerit.

Nec illud praetereundum puto, quod Spiritus sine mysteriis
uel allegoria aliud sonare aliud intellegi uoluit, sicut per

Tohannem: Multi: pseudoprophetae prodierunt in hoc mundo.

2 faceret] faciat R 7 aliquoties R recapitulationis V
9 danihelt V 1i_ dixit]om R in 2°] om V 12 quoniam]
quo non iam R 15 loquutionis R 16 auerterit V 18.40
gentibus] inter gentes V 20 dicendum erat] dicendo uera V 21 in
gentibus] lugentibus V 23 et] om V 25 eis] illis V 25,26 de
similitudine] dissimilitudine R; per similitudinem M 27 iunxit V

30 alligoria R 31 multi] multa R hune mundum V

5—2

Mt xxiv 15, 16

ef 2 The 113

eS Ca 1

i toh iy. 1=3

68 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII,

im sto cognoscite Spiritum Dei: omnis spiritus qui soluit RV
Iesum et negat in carne uenisse de Deo non est, sed hic de (M)
antichristo est, quod audistis quoniam went, et nunc in rsto
mundo praesens est. numquid omnis qui non negat Tesum
in carne uenisse Spiritum Dei habet? sed hanc negationem 5
in opere non in woce esse, Tet unumquemque non ex pro- IM
fessione sed ex fructibus intellegi debere, in omni ipsa
epistula, qua non nisi de fratribus bonis et malis scripsit,
11onii3,4 subtiliter admonet eodem genere locutionis, sicut dicit: In
asto cognoscimus quoniam cognouimus eum, si praecepta eius

10
custodiamus. qui autem dicit quoniam cognowit eum, et
mandata evus non seruat, mendax est. numquid ex professione
dixit intellegi fratrem qui Deum nescit, et non ex operibus ?

1fohii9 et iterum: Qui dicit se in luce esse, et fratrem suum odit, in
1toniv20 tenebris est usque adhuc. et iterum: Qui dixerit quoniam rs

diligit Deum, et fratrem suum odit, mendax est. si enim ut
dicit diligit Deum, doceat operibus, adhaereat Deo, diligat
Deum in fratre. si credit Christum incarnatum, quiescat
effohi1s odisse membra Christi. si credit Verbum carnem factum, quid
persequitur Verbum in carne? si credit quod dixit Dominus: 20
Mt xxv 40; Quamdiu fecistis uni ex istis fratribus meis minimis in me
credentibus, mihi fecistis, non operetur malum Christo in
carne, id est in seruis eius, quoniam Dominus et Ecclesia
cf Ephv31,32 UNG caro est. in qua carne si credit esse hominem, cur non
diligit, aut—quod crudelius est—cur odit, sicut scriptum est: 25
1Tohii14,15 Qut non diligit fratrem suum permanet in morte, et: Qui
Sratrem swum odit homicida est? aliud maius et euidentius
signum agnoscendi antichristi non esse dixit, quam qui negat
Christum in carne, id est odit fratrem. tale est autem quod

1 in isto] isto R spiritum] sps V 4 omnes V*M negant R

5 uenisse] uenire R 7 ipsa] om V 8 epistola V de fratribus]
fratrib. R; de fructibus V ae 9 ammon& R; admonet V loquu-
tionis R 14 odit frem suai V 16 diligit deum] diligo dnm R

odit frem sui V 18 deum] dnm R fratrem RV 19 odisse] odire V
verbum carnem] pr uerbum carnem factum quid persequitur in carne V
carnem factum] carnefactum RV 20 si credit] om V 21 minixxmis V
24 non] om V* 26 suum] om V in mortem V* 27 et]
aut V 28 agnoscendi] cognoscendi V antichristi R plene
29 christum] om V id est] idé V quod dicit] om R

BECVLA SEX TA, 69

RV dicit: Quomam qui non negauerit Christum im carne de Deo ct r10niv 2
est, quale: Nemo potest dicere Dominum Tesum, nisi in ico xis
Spiritu Sancto, cum multi dicant Dominum Iesum, ipso
contestante: Von omnis qui mihi dicit Domine Donne im- Mt vii 21
troibit in regnum caelorum. sed hoc loco apostolus neminem

posse dicere Dominum Lesum nisi in Spiritu Sancto secundum
conscientiam dixit, secundum interiorem hominem non secun- Ro vii 22
dam solam professionem, ut ostenderet illis qui credunt
Dominum Tesum nihil minus habere ab his qui charismatum

ro generibus extolluntur, sed unum atque eundem Spiritum
possidere omnem qui Iesum Dominum corde crediderit, id

est operibus credidisse monstrauerit. Memo imquit potest 1 Co xii3—s
dicere Dominum Tesum nist in Spiritu Sancto, diuisiones

autem charismatum sunt, iden. autem Spiritus; diwisiones
mysteriorum, et idem Dominus.

Soluere autem ZLesum est non facere quod Iesum fecisse 1 ton iv 3
confitetur, sicut idem Dominus dicit: Que soluerit wnum mtvio
ex mandatis istis minimis, et sic docuerit homines, nunimus
uocabitur in regno caelorum. et quid sit Solwerit consequen-

20 tibus aperit dicens: Qui autem fecerit et sic docuerit. hance

ergo negationem operum esse non uocis et Paulus apostolus
confirmat dicens: Deum scire confitentur, factis autenr ne- Titi
gant. et iterum: Habentes deformationem pretatis, wirtutem 2 vim iis
autem eius neguntes.

Hoc sensu dicit quosdum fratres non sancte Christum pniirt
praedicare,—sed corde, nam uoce sancta praedicabant. con-
sentit denique praedicationi eorum et mandat audiri dicens:

on

—s
en

i>)
en

1 non]om V 2 est] RV*; pr non Veorr potest] poterit V*
dominum iesum] dno ihu V*; dns ihs Veorr nisi in] om V*
4 omnis] omnes V 5 in regno Rh 6 iesum]+xpm V
8 credunt] dicunt V 9 charismatum] chrismatum V* 11, 12° id
est] ide V 14 charismatum sunt] sunt carismatum V au-
tem] uero V diuisiones] pr et V 15 mysteriorum]+sunt V
17 qui solueris V* 19 in regnu V 19,20 ex consequentibus V
21 negationem] negotiationé R et] sed R* (corr Rb) 22 deum]
dnm V 23 et] xxet V deformationem] formam V 24 ne-
gantes] abnegantes V 25 hoe sensum V* non sce xpm R;
xpm non scae V 26 sancta] sce V praedicabant] praedi-

cabat R; praedicant V 27 audire R

Phil i 18

cf Mt xxiv 24,
26

1 Toh v 21

Esai xiv 12—
21

70 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Quid interest? omni modo siue per occasionem siue per weri- RY
tatem Christus adnuntietur. Dominum autem Christum ”™!
antichristus non uoto sed occasione praedicabat. alio ten-
dens per Christi nomen ingreditur, quo sibi uiam sternat,
quo sub Christi nomine uentri pareat, et his—quae turpe 5
est dicere—sanctitatis et simplicitatis nomen inponat, signis

et prodigiis cubiculorum opera Christum esse adseuerans.
quos salubri cautione uitare admonet apostolus dicens: F7-
lioli, abstinete wos a sitmulacris.

VII. DE DIABOLO ET CORPORE EIUS. 10

Diaboli et corporis eius ratio breuiter uideri potest, si id
quod de Domino et eius corpore dictum est in hoc quoque
obseruetur. transitus namque a capite ad corpus eadem
ratione dinoscitur, sicut per Esaiam de rege Babylonis : *Quo- } #9
modo cecidit de caelo lucifer mane orvens! contritus est wn 15
terra qu mittit ad omnes gentes!" tu autem dixisti in animo ¥ Eu
tuo: In caelum ascendam, super stellas Dev ponam sedem
meam, sedebo in monte alto super montes altos in Aquilonem,
ascendam super nubes, ero similis Altissimo. nunc autem ad
inferos descendes in fundamenta terrae, et qui wderint te 2
mirabuntur super te et dicent: Hic est homo qui concitat
terram, mouet reges; que pont orbem terrae totum desertwm,
ciurtates autem destruartt abductosque non soluit. ommes reges
gentium dormierunt in honore, homo in domu sua; tu autem
provectus es in montes uelut mortuus abominatus cum omnibus

nN
i i

2 autem] enim V 3 praedicat V 8 quos] quo R am-
monet R 8, 9 filioli] fili V 9 simulackris ‘V (sic)

simulacris] add EXPLICIT DE RECAPITVLA|TIONE REGVLA | INCIPIT DE
DIABVLI ET COR|PORE EIVS REGVLA R rubro; EXPLICIT « LIBER + SEXTVS ||
INCIPIT LIBER + VII * DE DIABOLO ET CORPO|RE EIVS V

11 corporis] scripsi; corpore R; corpori V ratio] om V
12 quod] quo R mox corr 14 esaiam] R*V*; iesaiam Reorr; isaiam
Vcorr 15 de caelo] ante cecidit Eug cod opt; post lucifer V
19 ero]eteroR similes V* 20 discendes RVcorr; diccendis V*
uiderint te] tr R 24 dormierant V in honoré R domo V
25 omnibus] hominibus R*; ominibus Reorr (sic) .

REGVLA SEPTIMA. TA

RV qua ceciderunt inserti gladio et descendunt ad iwferos. quo-
modo uestimentum sanguine consparsum non erit mundum,
ata nec tu erts mundus, quia terran meam perdidiste et ple-
bem mean occidisti. non eris in aeternum tempus semen
64 nequam ; para filios tuos interficc peccatis patris tur, ut non
resurgant. in rege Babylonis et omnes reges et omnis popu-
lus significatur, unum est enim corpus.
Quomodo inquit cecidit de caelo lucifer mane oriens ! con- Bsai xiv 12,13
Jractus est in terra qui mittit ad omnes gentes! tu autem
ro diaisti in animo tuo: In caelum ascendam, super stellas Dea
ponan sedem meam. diabolus hoc sibi non promittit; non enim
sperat renitendo posse in caelum ascendere, qui ne deiceretur
resistere non ualuit. multo magis ista homo sperare non
potest; tamen hominem esse sic dicit: Hic est homo qut Esai xiv 16
15 weitat terram. sed praeter hanc rationem qua neque dia-
bolus neque homo sperare potest se posse in caelum ascen-
dere et super stellas Dei sedens similem se Deo fieri, etiam
ipsa Scriptura aliud inquirendum admonet. nam si in caelo
et supra stellas Dei dicit sedem suam positurum, quomodo
20 in monte alto sedebit aut super montes in Aquilone uel in
nubibus, ut similis sit Altissimo? non enim Altissimus in
huius modi habet sedem.
Caelum Ecclesiam dicit, sicut procedente Scriptura uide-
bimus. de hoc caelo cadit lucifer matutinus ; lucifer enim
25 bipertitum est, culus pars sancta est, sicut Dominus dicit in
Apocalypsi de se et suo corpore: Ago sumradix et genus Da- Ap xxii 16,17
wid et stella splendida matutina, sponsus et sponsa. item illic:
Qui wincit, dabo ili stellam matutinam, 1d est ut sit stella ma- Ap ii 26, 28
tutina sicut Christus, quem accepimus. pars ergo luciferi, id

1 discendunt RV* 2 conspersum RVcorr 3 quia] quik
5 tuos] tuo R interfice V ut] om R 6 in regem V
7 significatur] significatus V 9 est] om V 12 qui] quod R*
deieceretur Kk 14 tamen] pr et V 15 qua] quam V
17 super] supra V 18 ammondé R in caelum V 19 supra]
sup V 20 aquilonem V 21 enim] om R 22 huius modi]
hui modi R* 25 cuius pars sancta est] om V 26 apoca-
lysi R de se et] Reorr; de sede & R*; de se & de se & V 26, 27
dauid & radix genus RK 27 sponsus] sps RV: sed cf p 3° 28 uin-

cit] uicerit R 29 luciferi] lucifer V

i2 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

est aduersum corpus quod est diabolus reges et populus, cadit RV
de caelo et confringitur in terra. his regibus dicit Sapientia :
sapvil-4 Audite ergo reges et intelleqite, discite iudices finum terrae,
praebete auwres qui continetis multitudinem et placetis wobis in
turbis nationum. quoniam data est uobis potestas a Donuno, 5
et wrtus ab Altissimo, qui interrogabit opera uestra, et cogi-
tationes scrutabitur ; quonvam cum essetis ministre regni illius
non recte wudicastis, neque custodistrs legem.
Rex ergo Babylonis totum corpus est, sed pro locis intel-
Esaixivi2 legemus in quam partem corporis conueniat. Cecidit de

10
1b 13 caelo lucifer in omne corpus potest conuenire; Jn caelum
ascendam, super stellas Det ponam sedem meam similiter in
caput et maiores qui stellarum Dei, id est sanctorum, domi-
nandum putant, cum ipsorum minores dominentur sicut
Gexxv23 scriptum est: Mazor serwiet minorr. huic Esau, id est fra- 15

tribus malis, sic dicit Dominus per Abdiam prophetam:
ava3,4 Eaxaltans habitationem swam, dicens in corde suo: Quis me
deducet ad terram? si exaltatus fueris sicut aquila, et inter
stellas ponas ndum tuum, inde detraham te, dicit Dominus.
Esaixivi3,14 Sedebo in monte alto super montes altos in Aquilonem, 20
ascendam super nubes, ero similis Altissimo. mons altus
populus est superbus ; montes alti singuli quique superbi, qui
adunati montem faciunt, id est corpus diaboli. multos enim
Psxlv3_ esse montes malos sic dicit Scriptura: Transferuntur montes
Psxvii8s %m cor mars. et iterum: Fundamenta montium conturbata
sunt et commota sunt, quoniam tratus est eis Deus. nam et si
corpus Domini id est Ecclesia mons dicitur, et singuli qui
Ps ii 6 Ecclesiam faciunt montes, sicut scriptum est: Hgo autem
constitutus sum rea ab eo super Sion montem sanctum evus
Esai xiv25 adnuntians imperia eius. et iterum: Perdam Assyrios in 30
Psixxi3 terra, mea et in montibus meis. et iterum: Susciprant montes

n
yy

1 populos V* 2 confrangitur R regibus] regulis V__‘6 interrogauit
af 9,10 intellegimus V 10 in quam] Veorr: om in R; om quam V*
12, 13 in caput et] et caput V 13 maiore V* 14 minores] ininores
R* mox corr 15 id est] om R 16 sic] sicut R 17 exultans R
18 terram] terras V 19 detraham te] t V 20 monte alto super] om R
aquilone RV* 22 superbi]omV 24 malos] V suprras transferuntur]
transferunt R; transferentur V 25 in corde V et] om V
26 eis] ei V 28 ecclesiam] eccta V* 31 tra mea V

REGVLA SEPTIMA. 73

RV pacen populo tuo et colles. et iterum: Montes exultubunt
uelut arietes, et colles uelut agni ouiwm. Deus in monte Sion
habet sedem et in montibus Israhel et in nubibus sanctis
suis, quod est Ecclesia, sicut scriptum est: Zimeat a facie

5 Donant omnis terra, quoniam exsurreat de nubibus sanctes.
et iterum: Nubibus mandabo ne pluant super eam vmbrem.
iterum : Nimbus et nubes in circuitu eius. et quod in monte
Sion habitet sic dicit: Cognoscetis quoniam ego sum Donunus
Deus uester, habitans in Sion monte sancto meo. et diabolus

10 in monte sedet, sed Seir qui est Esau, id est fratrum malo-
rum, quem montem Deus increpat per Ezechielem, et dicit
im laetitia uniuersae terrae desolaturum, quod aduersun
Iacob inimicitias exerceat. ipse est mons, 1psi montes Aqui-
lonis. in his diabolus sedet, et nubium caeli ueluti domina-

15 tur; hactenus se similem dicit Altissimo.

Duae sunt partes in Ecclesia, Austri et Aquilonis, id est
meridiana et septentrionalis. in parte meridiana Dominus
manet, sicut scriptum est: Vbi pascis, ubt manes in meri-
diano. diabolus uero in Aquilone, sicut dicit Dominus

20 populo suo: Llluwm ab Aquilone persequar a uobrs, et expellam
alum in terram sine aqua,—id est in suos,—et exrterminabo
faciem eius in mare primum, et postertora eius im mare nours-
stmum, quod est in populos primos et nouissimos. ad instar
Ecclesiae fabricatus est iste mundus, in quo sol oriens non

25 nisi per Austrum, id est meridianum, iter habet, et decursa
Australi parte inuisibilis uadit in locum suum rediens. — sic
Dominus noster Iesus Christus sol aeternus partem suam
percurrit, unde et meridianum uocat. Aquiloni uero, id est
aduersae parti, non oritur, sicut idem cum in 1udicium uene-

30 rint dicent: Lustitiae lumen non luxit nobis, et sol non ortus
est nobis; Timentibus autem Dominum oritur sol custitiae, et

1 tuo] om V 5 exsurrexit] exurgit V 6 et] om V nubi-
bus] nub, V 8 cognoscitis V 11 hiezechielem R; ezechihelt' V
12 in laetitiam R 15 actenus R 17 parté meridiana V* vid; par-
tem meridiana Vcorr 18 sicut] om V pasces R 19 aquilo-
nem V dicit dominus] ds dicit V 20 a uobis et] RV*; a uobis
& V» 21 terram] Vcorr; terra RV* suos et] suos sed R
27. dominus] xet dns ds V 28 et meridianum] meridianam R

30, 31 et sol...nobis] om V

Ds exiii 4

Zech ii 13

Esai v 6

Ps xcvi 2

Toel iii 17

Eze xxxv 14

Cant 17

Toel ii 20

Sap v 6
Mal iv 2

74 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIL

sanitas in pinnis evus, sicut scriptum est. malis uero meridie (R)V
Esai lix 9,10 NOX erit, sicut scriptum est: Dum sustinent tpst lumen factae
sunt ilis tenebrae, dum sustinent fulgorem obscura nocte
ambulauerunt ; palpabunt sicut caecus parvetem, et quasi cur
non sunt ocult palpabunt, et cadent meridie quast media nocte. 5
Amviig lterum: Occidet sol meridie et tenebricabit super terram dies (R
Micnitig lumenis, iterum: Propterea nox ert uobis de uisione, et tene-
brae uobis erunt ex diuinatione, et occidet sol super prophetas,
et obscurabit super eos dies luminis.
Huic populo ex Austro comminatur Deus, sicut per to
Eze xxvii26 Ezechielem Sor increpat dicens: Spiritus Austre contriwt te.
canivi6 Sl etiam confringere permittit, dicens: Hwurge Aquilo, et
uent Auster perfla hortum meum, et defluent unguenta mea,
exurgenti nequam spiritui resistit Spiritus Sanctus qui
Domini hortum perflat, et eliciluntur unguenta, id est odor 15
suauitatis offertur. et per Ezechielem iterum ex reliquiis
populi mali sic dicit Deus adducere super populum suum
Eze xxxix 1 partem elusdem populi, quod est mysterium facinoris: Ecce
ego super te Grog, principem Ltos Mesoc et Tobel. et congregabo
te et deducam te et ponam te a nourssimo Aquilone, et adducam 20
te super montes Israhel ; et perdam arcum tuum de manu tua
siustra, et sagittas tuas de manu tua deatera, et deiciam te
super montes Israhel. hoc autem geritur a passione Domini,
quoadusque de medio eiusdem mysterii facinoris discedat
Kcclesia quae detinet, ut in tempore suo detegatur impietas, 25
2Theiis—s Sicut apostolus dicit: Ht nunc quid detineat scitis, ut in suo
tempore detegatur. mysteriwum enum vam operatur facinoris,
tantum ut que detinet modo, quoad usque de medio fiat; et
tunc reuelabitur ille impius. et in Hieremia legimus pecca-

1 pinnis] pannis V*; pennis Vcorr 2 erit] est V 3 dum
sustinent] om V obscuram nocte R 4 quasi] V, sed
casu paene euanuit 6 occidit RV tenebricabit] tenebri-
scauit R super terram] add FINIT LIBER TycontI R rubro. his uerbis
desinit codex 11, 16 ezechiheli V 11,12 te. si] conieci:
theis V (sic) 13 hortum] orti V 14 exurgente...spm V*
15 domini] dm V* ortii V 16 iterum] idem V*; item Vcorr
reliquis V* 21 te super] scripsi: super tem V*; super te Vcorr
montes}] montem V 28 qui] quid V* detinet] scripsi: detinens

detinet V*; detinens é detineat Veorr: cf Introd p li

REGVLA SEPTIMA. is)

V tores Israhel in Aquilone conueniri, Domino dicente: Vade
et lege sermones istos ad Aquilonem et dic, Conuertere ad me
domus Israhel, dicit Dominus. meridianum uero pars est
Domini, sicut et in Iob scriptum est: A meridiana purte

s germinabit tibi wita; Aquilo diaboli: utraque autem pars in
toto mundo.

Ascendam inquit super nubes, ero similis Altissimo. nunc
autem ad inferos descendes in fundamenta terrae. qui wide-
rint te mirabuntur super te et dicent: Hic est homo qui con-

1o citat terram, commouet reges, qui pont orbem terrae totum
desertum. numquid in diabolum conuenit Que wderint te
mirabuntur super te, aut in regem nouissimum cum ad inferos
descenderit ?_ ipso enim ad inferos descendente non erit qui
miretur mundo finito. non enim dicent: Hic est homo qui

15 Incitauit terram, mouit reges et posuit orbem terrae totum
desertum, sed Incitat et Commouet et Pont. lhominem enim
totum corpus dicit tam in regibus quam in populis, cuius
hominis superbi partem cum Deus percutit et ad inferos
deicit dicimus: Hic est homo qut ineitat terram, convmouet

20 reyes, scilicet sanctos.

Que ponit orbem terrae totwm desertum. imridentium uox
est, non confirmantium, sicuti: Qua dissoluit tenvplum et in
triduo illud suscitat! <et:> Disit enim: Fortitudine faciam,
et sapientia intellectus auferam terminos nationum, et fortitu-

25 dinem illarwm uastabo, et comminuam ciuitates cum habitan-
tibus ; et totam orbem comprehendam manu uelut nudum, et
uelut oua derelicta auferam, et non erit que effugiat me aut
contradicat mihi. numaquid ista quae sibi promittit ualet

65 implere? Pont quidem orbem terrae totum desertum, sed

30 orbem suum; Ciwitates autem destruxit, utique sui orbis.
est enim bipertitus, mobilis et inmobilis, sicut <in> Para-
lipomenon: Commoueatur a facie Domini omnis terra, etenvm
fundawt orbem terrae qui non commouebitur.

14 miretur] meretur V* 20 sanctos] ses V* (=sanctus) 22 sicuti]
conieci: sicut ubi V*; sicut ibi Veorr 23 et]om V 23, 24 forti-
tudinem.,.sapientiam V 25 comminuxx x V* 31 in] addidi ;

om V 31, 32. paralypomenon V

Hier iii 12

lob xi 17

Esai xiv 14—
ily

Ksai xiv 17
Mt xxvii 40

sai x 13, 14

Esai xiv 17

1 Par xvi 30

Esai xiv 17

Zech i 15

Esai i 23

Ps liv 21
Esai lviii 3
Ps viii 3
Ro xii 19

Esai xiv 18

Ib 19

Pro xiv 28

Esai xiv 14
1b 16

76 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

Abductosque non solut. potest istud in speciem conue- V

nire, quod captiuos in nullo relaxasset, sed inmitis raptu
aestimans principari tota in eos uteretur potestate; quod
obiurgat Deus dicens: Ego quidem iratus sum modice, ipsi
autem advecerunt in mala, uerumtamen in figuram gene-
ralitatis facta et dicta sunt, et spiritaliter implentur dum hi
qui dominantur humilitatis subditos—aut temptationis causa
uel merito sibi subditos—sine respectu pietatis atque com-
munis conditionis affligunt, quibus non sufficit potestas, sed
ea inmoderatius uti contendunt, quod culpat dicens: Perse-
quentes retributionem, et iterum: Hatendit manum suam et in
retribuendo. parum est enim quod inimicus est; adhuc
gestit et in subditum uindicare, sicut scriptum est: Ommnes
subditos uobis conpungitis; dissimulans odisse Dominum
mimicum et windicatorem, quod per uindictam, quam soli
sibi Deus exceptauit, aliquid deitatis usurpet. Scriptwm est
enum: Mihi wndictam et ego retribuam, dicit Dominus.
Omnes reges terrae dormierunt in honore, homo in domo
sua. Reges sanctos dixit, nam non omnes reges uel priuati
in domo sua dormierunt, sicut sancti in domo quam delege-
runt, Zu autem provectus es m montes uelut mortuus aboni-
natus, cum omnibus qui ceciderunt inserte gladio et descendunt
ad inferos. diabolo dicit Provectus es in montes, in quibus
sedet. denique non dixit Mortuus, sed Velut mortuus abomi-
natus; adhuc enim uiuit, licet ipse in suis gladio perimatur
et ad inferos descendat. sicut enim Dominus quicquid sui
patiuntur se pati dixit, ita et diabolus ipse in suis inculcatur,
ipse abominatus confringitur, sicut scriptum est: Jn diminu-
tione popult comminutio principrs. diabolus ab homine suo

_

5

non separatur; nec homo in quo diabolus non est potest 30

dicere: “ro similis Altissimo, nec de diabolo dici: Hie homo
qut incitat terram, nisi in homine fuerit. sicut Dominus
homo non dici potest nisi in homine, nec homo Deus nisi in

1 abductoque V* istud] Vcorr; inquit V* (sic) 2 captiuis V
raptu] raptum V 7 temptationis] temptationib. V 10 culpatx
Ne 16 exceptabit V 17 uindicta V* vid 31 de diabolo]

Vcorr ; diaboli V*

REGVLA SEPTIMA. ree

V Christo. sed quid in quem conueniat pro locis obseruan-
dum est.
Iterum <in> corpus ipsius diaboli conuenit dicens: Sicut
uestimentum sanguine consparsum non est mundum, ita nec tu
seris mundus, quia terram meam perdidisti et plebem meaim
occidistt. non eris in aeternum tempus semen nequam ; para
filios tuos interficr peccatis patris tui, ut non resurgant. hic
ostendit non conuenire in speciem. rex enim Babylonis qui
terram Domini uastauit et populum occidit, id est Nabucho-
ro donosor, mundus obit, in aeternum uiuit; corpori dicit sui
culusque temporis parare quos genuerit interfici peccatis eius,
quo ipse qui conuenitur genitus est. nouissimis enim rex non
filios sed fratres habere potest, neque welut mortuus cum ad
inferos descenderit, sed mortuus.
1s Per Ezechielem sic Deus increpat regem Tym, id est
omne corpus aduersum: Quoniam exaltatum est cor tuum, et
diwisti: Deus sum ego, habitationem Dei habitaw in corde
marts. tw autem homo es et non Deus, et dedistt cor tuum
tamquam cor Dei. numqud sapientior es tu Danihele?
20 saplentes non arguerunt te sapientia sua? numquid saprentia
tua aut doctrina tua fecisti tibt wirtutem, et aurum et argentum
thesauris tus? numquid in multa doctrina tua et mercatu tuo
multiplicasti wirtutem tuam <, et exaltatum est cor tuum in
wirtute tua>? propterea haec dicit Dominus, Quoniam dedisti
a5 cor tuum sicut cor Dei, propter hoc ecce ego induco super te
alienos, pestes ex gentibus, et exinantent gladios suos super te et
super decorem doctrinae tuae, et wulnerabunt decorem tuum
in perditionem, et deponent te, et morieris morte wulneratorum
m corde maris. numgqud dicturus es in conspectu inter-
30 ficientium te: Deus sum ego? tu uero homo es et non Deus ; in
multitudine incircumcisorum peribis in manibus alienorum,
quia ego locutus sum, dicit Dominus. <et fuctus est sermo
Domini ad me dicens: Fili hominis, accipe lamentum super

3 inJomV diaboli] dicaboli V sicut] pr quomodo uenisti V ; constat
uenisti ex uesti(mentum) ortum esse, et cf p 71) 4 conspersum Vcorr
7 interfice V 9 uastabit V* 15 ezechihelii V 19 danihelo V
22 mercatu] Veorr; prin V* 23, 24 et exaltatum...tua] om V;
suppleui ex p 794 26 alienos] alienas V; cf infra p 79? 31 multi-
tudinem V 32 seq et factus est...dominus] om V; suppleui ex p 80" ff.

Esai xiv 20, 21

Eze xxviii 2—
19

Eze xxviii 2

cf Mt xxiv 5

Eze xxvii 25,
26

78 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONITI.

principem Tyri, et dic illi: haec dicit Dominus,> Tu es
signaculum similitudinis, et corona decoris in deliciis
paradisi Dei fuisti, omnem lapidem optimum habens in te
alligatum,—sardium <et> topazium <et> smaragdum et car-
bunculum et saffirum et iaspin et argentum et aurum et
ligyrium et achaten et amethystum <et> chrysolithum et
beryllum et onychinum,—et auro replesti thesauros tuos et
apothecas tuas <in te. ex qua die creatus es tu> cum cherubim
posut te in monte sancto Dei, fuistt in medio lapidum igneorum,
abisti sine macula <tu> in diebus tuis ex qua die creatus es
<tu>, donec inuenirentur miquitates tuae in te a multitudine
negotiationis tuae. implesti promptuaria tua iniquitate, et
peccasti et uulneratus es a monte Det, <et> abduxit te cherubim
de medio lapidum igneorum. exaltatum est cor tuum in decore
tuo, corrupta est doctrina tua cum decore tuo. propter multi-
tudinem peccatorum <tuorum in terram protect te, in conspectu
regum dedi te dehonestart. propter multitudinem peccatorum
tuorum> et iniquitatem negotiationis tuae contaminaut sancta
tua; educam ignem de medio tui, hic te deuorabit. et dabo te
in cinerem in terra tua in conspectu omnium uidentium te, et
omnes qui te nouerunt inter nationes contristabuntur super te:
perditio factus es, et non eris in aeternum.

Quoniam exaltatum est inquit cor tuum, et dixisti: Deus
sum ego, habitationem Dei habitaui in corde maris. et in
hominem conuenit Hyo sum Christus et in diabolum, qui in
corde maris, id est populi, habitat, sicut Deus in corde
sanctorum suorum sedet. populus in corde maris, id est in
uoluptate uel altitudine saeculi, habitat, sicut in alio loco
dicit Deus eidem ciuitati: Satiata et onerata es nimis in
corde maris. in aqua multa deduxerunt te remiges tui;
spiritus Austri contriutt te in corde maris uirtutis tuae.

3 paradysi V habens] V; habes p 813}, sed cf Arnob 4 et topa-
zium et] topadiii V tantum 6 ligorium V achatim V
6, 7 ametistum crisolitum et berillum et onichinum V 8 apotecas V
in te...es tu] om V; suppleui ex pp 818, 838 10 tu] om V 11 tu]
om V 12 prumptuaria V* 13 peccasti] peccatis V; uid p 83%
monte] morte V et abduxit] om et V 14 igneorum] inferorum V
16, 18 tuorum...tuorum] om V; suppleui ex p 843 18 contaminaui]

conieci ex p 8414; contaminata sunt V 20 in cinere V 23 inquid V*
24 habitatione V 29 onerata] coniecit Sabat.; honorata V, cf p 63%3

bs

om

_
tn

nN

Oo

Vv.

Io

IT

20

2

30

Ww
an

2

h)

5

REGVLA SEPTIMA. 79

Tu autem homo es, et non Deus. et diabolus in homine ke xxviii2
homo dictus est, sicut Dominus dixit in Euangelio: [mimics mt xiii 2s
homo hoc fecit, et interpretatus est dicens: Qui ea seminat 139
diabolus est. homo diaboli Deus esse non potest. propterea
in utrumque conuenit: Zw homo es et non Deus.

Dedisti cor tuum tamquam cor Det. numquid sapientior Bz xxviii 2.8
es tu Danthele? in Danihele totum corpus est Ecclesiae, quia
non potest esse homo peccati sapientior in negotiis uitae,
sicut ille sapientior est in suo quam filri lucis. potest etiam ef Le xvis
in speciem conuenire, quoniam Danihel specialiter confudit
regem Babylonis in figura, qui prophetico Spiritu. regem
superbum ad confessionem unius Dei Ecclesiae maiestate
prostrauit, qui confessione suarum uirtutum et caelesti
sapientia Babylonis superstitiones euertit.

Sapientes te non arguerunt sapientia sua? non solum Eze xxviii
enim Danihel sapiens, sed etiam tres pueri, qui regem et
omne regnum eius cum ipsis dis suis unum Dominum
asserendo eiusdem Dei praesente uirtute confuderunt. idem
nunc usque generaliter eiusdem tam externas quam intestinas
Babylonis tenebras Inmine ueritatis disrumpunt.

Numquid in scientia tua aut sapientia tua fecisti tubi Weexxviiis,s
uirtutem, et aurum et argentum thesauris tuis? numgqud in
multa scientia et mercatu tuo multiplicaste tbi wirtutem tuam,
et evaltatum est cor tuum in uirtute tua? putant enim superbi
et beneficiorum omnipotentis Dei ingrati sua uirtute aliquid
posse et sapientia ditari, nescientes scriptum esse: Non kectixu
leutbus cursus, non fortibus proelium, neque sapienti panis.
et iterum: Numquid magnificabitur securis sine concisore ? Fsai x 15
et non quidem prudentibus diuitiae, et non scientibus gratia.
haec enim non sunt in nostra potestate, sed a Deo con-
feruntur. Quid enim habes quod non accepisti? si autem 1coivi
accepistt, quid gloriaris tamquam non acceperis? et iterum:

Non glorietur sapiens in saprientia sua. Hier ix 23

Propterea haec dicit Dominus, Quoniam dedisti cor tuumr Exe xxviii 6,1
sicut cor Det, propterea ecce ego induco super te alvenos, pestes

7 danihelo V wtroque loco ecclesia V* 11 figuram V

12 ecclesiae] ecclesiastica V ; cf Appx 11 13 prostrabit V by ain
diis V 22 uirtute V 23 et mercatu] in mercatu V

80 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

ex gentibus, et exinanient gladios suos super te et super decorem
sctentiae tuae. etsi potest in speciem conuenire, quod reges
saeculi per suam superbiam dominos se appellari patiuntur,
tamen hoc quoque conuenit in genus. frequenter enim in-
ducit Deus in Ecclesiam alienigenas, et multos in mortem
uulnerant. sed etiam occulta persecutione multos inducit

cf Nuxxv1ffex gentibus, in quibus temptet populum suum, et occidat

Eze xxviii 7

1b8

Eze xxviii 9;
cf Ps xxi 23

1b 9, 10

1b 11-18

cf Gevl

Agg ii 22—24

nequam partem simul cum eis sicut Maziam.

Et wulnerabunt decorem tuum in perditionem. aliquos
enim non in perditionem sed cum spe sanitatis uulnerant. Ht
deponent te, id est humiliabunt, e¢ morterts morte wulneratorum
in corde maris. non diceret uulnerato Morterts morte
uulneratorum, nisi quia non aperte uulneratur et moritur;
sed ipse est, in quibus uulneratur.

Numquid narrabis in conspectu interficientium te: Deus
sum ego? id est numquid diuini generis titulis terrebis
eos quibus traditus fueris occidendus tam spiritaliter quam
carnaliter? Zu wero homo <es> et non Deus; in multi-
tudine incircumcisorum peribis in manibus alienorum, quia
ego locutus sum, dicit Dominus. nunc aperuit quo genere
se ille dicat Deum, dum minatur et in multitudine incireum-
cisorum periturum manibus alienorum, quod non conuenit
nisi in eum qui sibi circumcisus uidetur. rex enim Tyri
mortem solam potuit timere, non ne ab incircumcisis aut
cum eis moreretur.

Et factus est sermo Domini ad me dicens: Fili hominis,
accipe lamentum super principem Tyri, et dic illi: haec dicit
Dominus, Tu es signaculum similitudinis, et corona decoris
in paradiso Dei fuisti. numquid diabolo factus est paradisus,
ut ipse quod paradisum perdiderit increpetur? homo fuit
in delicits paradisi, ipse est signaculum similitudinis, qui ad
similitudinem Dei factus est. signaculum autem ad decorem
dixit, sicut per Aggeum dimicantibus huius aduersum se
fratribus promittit Deus Ecclesiae dicens: Hgo commouebo
caelum et terram, mare et aridam. et conuertam currus et

5 in morte V 7 occidat. Nequam V (sic) 8 partem simul cum

eis] conieci ; persimiles V 15 narrabis] uid Introd p li; pr narrans V
18 es]om V; cfp 77° 30 paradyso V, et sic infra 33 dimicanti V*

Vv

tn

66

25

30

on

REGVLA SEPTIMA. $1

V sessores, et descendent equi et sessores eorum unusguisque in
gladio ad fratrem suum, in illo die, dicit Dominus omnipo-
tens, accipram te Zorobabel filium Salathiel seruwm meum, et
ponane te signaculum, quonian te elegt, dicit Dominus omni-
potens. Zorobabel omne corpus est, etenim exinde nusquam
legimus commotis supra se <uniuersis> uenisse Zorobabel.
hic est autem ex tribus, qui sub Dario meruit aedificare

on

Hierusalem. ipse quoque in figura fundauit domum Dei et
perfecit, sicut idem Dominus dixit: Manus Zorobabel funda-
vuerunt domun hanc, et manus evus perficient eam. quod est
autem signaculun hoc et corona specter, sic Deus promittit
Ecclesiae dicens: Videbunt gentes custitiam tuam, et reges
claritatem tuam, et wocabunt nomen tuum nouum, quod Dominus
nominabit illud. <et> erts corona specier in manu Domint, et
diadema regu in manu Der tur. tu etiam non uocaberis Dere-
licta, et terra tua non uocabitur Deserta ; tibet enti nomen uo-
cabitur Voluntas mea, et terra tua Orbis terrarum. homo est
itaque signaculum similitudinis et corona specter, cuius pars in
ipso decore diuinae similitudinis et delicits paradisi, id est
20 Keclesiae, perseuerat. altera ucro pars, ne in aeternune wuat,
inter ipsam et arborem flammeus ensis cuoluitur. Adam nam-
que, sicut apostolus dicit, wmbra est futurt; sic et in fratres
diuisus est im Cain et Abel.

Omnen lapidem optimum habens in te alligatum,—sardium
et topazium et smaragdum et carbunculum et saffirum et vaspin
<et> argentum et aurum et ligyrium et achaten et amethys-
tum et chrysolithum et beryllum et onychinum,—et auro re-
plesti thesauros tuos et apothecas tuas in te. haec et in diabo-
lum conueniunt et in hominem. isti enim duodecim lapides
30 ct aurum et argentum omnesque thesauri diabolo adhaerent

delegati. denique habes in te alligatum, et iterum apothecas
twas vv te, sicut corpus Domini a sanctis ornatur, promittente

fe)

=
on

i)
ey

Deo et dicente: H.xctolle oculos tuos in circuttu et wide omnes _

3 salatihel V 6 uniuersis] addidi, cf 63°, 66°; om V 7 tribus]
scripst: tribu V 14 nominauit V et] addidi; om V 17 uoluntas]
uoluptas V 19 paradysi V 2a. laser ise, D1. 25 topadiu V
iaspin et] iaspen V 26, 27. lygiriti et achathen et ametistt et crisolitt
et berilli et onicint’ V 28 apotecas V 31 apotechas V

iB: 6

ef 3 Esdr iv
13 sey

Zech iv 9

Bsa iyie2

cf 12z xxviii
eb}

ef Gein 22, 24.

cf Ro v 14
(Col ii 17)

Eze xxviii 13

Esai xlix 18,
€

cf Ap xxi 19,
20

cf Ge i 25

cf Ro vi 16

Tob xli 21

cf 2 Tim ii 20

Ro ix 21

Ap xvii 4

ef Eze xxviii
14

cf Mt vi 21

82 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONII.

jilios tuos, collects sunt et wenerunt ad te. wiuo ego, dicit Do-
minus, quia omnibus illis indueris, et superinpones allos tibi
sicut ornamentum nouae nuptae; quia deserta tua et diruta et
quae ceciderunt nunc angustiabuntur ab inhabitantibus. et in
Apocalypsi eadem ciuitas duodecim lapidibus fundata con-
struitur. Omnen inquit lapidem optimum, et enumerauit
duodecim, ut ostenderet in duodenario numero perfectionem.
omnia enim quae fecit Deus bona sunt: horum diabolus usum
non naturam mutauit. et omnes homines excellentis sensus et
potentis ingenii aurum sunt et argentum et lapides pretiosi
secundum naturam, sed cius erunt in cuius obsequio <uolun-
tate non> natura suis fruuntur, quoniam cui se adsigna-
uerit quis in obedientiam, serwus est eius cui obaudit, siue
peccate siue iustitiae. ita fit ut et diabolus habeat aurum et
argentum et lapides pretiosos ; omnia quidem non sua secun-
dum originem, sed sua secundum uoluntatem. nam et in
Iob scriptum est de diabolo: Omne aurum maris sub eo est.
et apostolus wasa aurea et argentea dicit esse quaedam in
contumeliam. non enim sicut quidam putant omnia lignea et
fictilia reprobauit, cum ex eis sint aliqua in honorem, ipso
dicente figulum luti aliud quidem fingere in honorem aliud
uero in contumeliam, et ex ligno, aliud ad praeparationem
escae aliud in sacrilegium. ex auro et argento, id est ex
magnis <et> perspicuis, dixit inmundos. nam et in Apoca-
lypsi meretrix, id est corpus aduersum, purpura cocco et auro
et argento lapidibusque pretiosis ornatur, habens poculum
aureum im manu plenum execrationum et inmunditiarum
totius terrae. ista sunt ergo diaboli ornamenta, lapides pre-
tiosi quibus lapides agneos imitatur. et homo in se habet
thesauros tam facinorum quam perspicuos. ipse enim suorum
portator est, quem facultates suae uelut compedes ligauerunt.
praeter illa quae ab utroque sexu corporis diaboli ornanda
eduntur, etiam his quae defossa habent insitum est cor; ubi
erm ert thesaurus, illic erit et cor hominis. uetus enim

3 nuptiae V* 5 apocalypsin V 9 excellentisensu V
11,12 uoluntate non] addidi 13 in oboedientia V 18 uasa
aurea &c] cf Aug Retract ii 18 18, 19 in contumelia V 20,21 in
honore V utroque loco 22 in contumelia V 23 -escae] aesce V
24 et 1°] om V 24,25 in apocalypsin V

Vv

_

12)

n
en

REGVLA SEPTIMA. 83

Vhomo et terra eius unum corpus est, quoniam ipse quoque

ou

_
an

2

on

30

terra est. unde apostolus non solum ea, quae corpore admitti
possunt, sed et auaritiam membrum esse possidentis ita de-
finiuit dicens: Mortificute itaque membra uestra quae in terra
sunt,—fornicationem, tnmunditiam, passionem, concupiscen-
tam malam, et auaritiam, quae est tdolorum seruitus,—prop-
ter quae uenit ra Der.

Ka qua die creatus es tu cum cherubtin inposui te in monte
sancto Dev, id est in Christo uel in Ecclesia: in medio lapi-
dum igneorum fursti, id est hominum sanctorum, qui adunati
montem Dei faciunt. angeli enim alterius substantiae lapi-
des dici non possunt, quia corpus non habent. A bisti sine
macula tu in diebus tuis ea qua die creatus es tu, donec inue-
nirentur iniquitates tuae in te a multitudine negotiationis tuae.
lapides Keclesiam dicit Petrus: £t wos fratres tamquam lapi-
des uiur coaedificamint domus spiritalis, qaam domum igneam
esse et hanc in malos fratres ardere sic dicit Deus: Hrit domus
Lacob ignis, domus autem Loseph flamma, domus uero Esau
stipula; et exardescent in illos et comedent eos, et non erit
ignifer am domo Hsau, quoniam Dominus locutus est. cum
enim peceat homo, deicitur de monte Dei, et non erit ignifer
amisso Spiritu, et succenditur in cinerem.

Peccasti et uulneratus es a monte Dei, et abduait te cheru-
bim de medio lapidum igneorum. cherubim ministerium Dei
est, quod exclusit uniuersos malos de Keclesia, sed spiritaliter.
qui enim westitum nuptialem non habet, hic in saeculo exclu-
ditur de medio recuwmbentiwim. denique in tenebras, id est in
obdurationem, mttitur, donee in ignem aeternum descendat.
futuro enim sacculo nemo miscebitur choro sanctorum qui
postea excludatur.

Hwaltatum est cor tuum in decore tuo, corrupta est scientia
tua im decore tuo. corrupta est enim scientia clus qui sclens
prudensque errat, et studio affectatae sapientiae asscrit dis-
simulata ueritate mendacium, sicut Spiritus dicit: Cum

1 et terra] inter & et terra spatium trium Litterarum in V 3 anaritia
V 8, 24 (2°) cherubin V 15 ecclesia V 16 domus spiritales V
igneum V* 17 in malos] om in V 28 discendat V 29 choro] coro V

6—2

Col iii 5, 6

Ize xxviii 14

Ib 15, 16

1 Pet ii 5

Abd 18

ef Eze xxviii
18

Ib 16

ef Mt xxii
TT Aar

Eze xxviii 17

Ro i 21, 22

Eze xxviii 17

Thren ii 1

Eze xxviii 18

Mt xiii 45

Mt vi 20
Mt xxv 14

84 LIBER REGVLARVM TYCONIIL.

cognourissent Deum, non ut Deum magnificauerunt aut gratias
egerunt, sed nugate sunt in cogitationibus sus, dicentes se esse
saprentes. corrupta est scientia eius qui alios docet, se ipsum
non docet. corruptus est decor <eius> qui generi suo operum
similitudine non respondet.

Propter multitudinem peccatorum tuorum in terram pro-
vect te, in conspectu reqgum dedi te dehonestarr. et diabolus
proiectus est in terram, id est in hominem, et homo de sub-
limitate Ecclesiae in conculcationem, sicut Hieremias dicit:
Devecit de caelo in terram gloriam TIsrahel. In conspectu
regum: Christianorum dixit, quorum pedibus conculcatur
diabolus et homo eius.

Propter multitudinem peccatorum tuorum et imaquitatem
negotiationis tuae contaminauit sancta tua. uidetur ueluti
principalem titulum exprobrasse corpori diaboli negotia-
tiones—magis dicit et thesauros—spiritalis nequitiae. sicut
enim spiritalis iustitiae negotiatio est thesaurus, ut Dominus
dicit: Simile est regnum caelorum homini negotiatori, et
iterum: Thesaurizate wobis thesauros in caelo, iterum Dedit

of Bze xxxviii seruis suis substantiam suam ut negotiarentur, iterum Nego-

Esai xxiii 18

1 Tim vi 6

Mt xii 35
Ro ii 5

Eze xxviii 18

Esai i 13, 14

Eze xxviii 18

cf 2 The ii 7

tuationes Carthaginenses resistent tibi, iterum Negotiatio evus
et merces sancta Domino, et apostolus Lst inquit negotiatio
magna pretas ; ita spiritalis nequitia negotiatio est, thesaurus
peccatorum, sicut Dominus dicit: Homo malus de thesauro
cordis emittit mala, et apostolus: Thesaurizas tubi tram in die
wae.

Propter iniquitatem inquit negotrationis tuae contaminetur
sancta tua. qui enim non recte sanctitate Dei utitur, suam
efficit, sicut Deus dicit de sabbatis suis: Sabbata uestra odit
anima med.

Educam ignem de medio tur, hic te deuorabit. ignis Ec-
clesia est, quae cum discesserit e medio mysterw facinoris

1 deum] dnm V utroque loco 3 eius] eorum V 4 eius]
addidi ; om V 5 similitudinem V* mox corr 6 in terra V
10 deiecit] V* vid; deieci V corr 14 negationis V 15 exprobasse V
15,16 negotiationes] conieci; negotiationis V 16, 17, 23 spiritales V
21 chartaginienses V* ; chartaginenses V corr resistent] V; épotow Lxx

27 inquid V* 28 scitatem V suam] sua V 32 mysteriis

Vv

on

67

=
Cr

30

REGVLA SEPTIMA. 85

V tune pluet ignem Dominus a Domino de Ecclesia, sicut serip-
tum est: Sol exortus est super terram, et Loth intraurt on
Segor. et pluit Dominus super Sodomam et Gomorram sulphur
et gnem « Domino de caelo. hic est ignis quem supra dixit:
Domus Lucob ignis, domus autem Esau stipula; et exardes-
cent in eos et comedent rllos, et non erit ignifer in domo Hsau.
in Genesi iterum scriptum est: Cum contereret Deus omnes
ciuitates in circuitu, commemoratus est Deus Abrahae, et
enisit Loth e medio subuersionis, cum subuerteret Deus cru-
ro tates in quibus habitat in eis Loth. numquid Loth non
merebatur propria iustitia liberari, ut diceret Scriptura:
Commemoratus est Deus Abrahae, et emisit Loth e medio sub-
uersionis ? aut in ciuitatibus habitabat, et non in ciuitate, ut
diceret: Ciwitates in quibus Loth habitabat? sed prophetia
est futurae discessionis. memor enim Deus promissionis ad
Abraham eiecit Loth de omnibus ciuitatibus Sodomorum,
quibus ueniet ignis ex igni Ecclesiae, quae de medio eorum

Sa)

—
on

educetur.

Kt dabo te in cinerem in terra tua, id est in hominibus,
uel ipsos homines in terra sua, qui in terra Dei esse nolue-
runt. Zn conspectu omnium widentiunr te, id est intellegen-
tium, numquid diabolus uideri potest nisi in homine ?

Et omnes qui te nouerunt inter nationes contristabuntur
super te. cum enim Dominus percutit aut detegit malos,
contristantur qui corum auxilio fulciri solent, corporis sui

ie)
e}

nN
qn

parte debilitata.

Perditio fucta es, et non eris in aeternum. * * *

19 in, cimere Y* 21 omnium] hominum V 23 te nouerunt|
tenuerunt V 27 in aeternu V* vid

Subscriptio. EXPLICIT DE DIAGOLO ET CORPORE EIvs | LIEBER SEPTIMVS V

Ge xix 23, 24

Abd 18

Ge xix 29

Eze xxviii 18

16-19

MEMORIA TECHNICA

for the Rules of Tyconius, from a 13th cent ms at Laon (Depart-
mental Catalogue of 1849, vol i, 88). See Zntrod p xxi.

Regula prima caput nostrum cum corpore iungit.
corpore de uero loquitur mixtoque secunda.
tertia describit quid lex quid gratia possit.
quarta genus speciem totum partemque rependit.
tempora disiungit maiora minoraque quinta.
sexta refert iterum que primo facta fuerunt.

septima serpentis sibi membra caputque resoluit.

Variants of the Roman mss Pal 841 (14th cent) and Vat 4296 (15th cent).

2 corpore...secunda] nomine iustorum notat altera facta malorum Vat
3 describit] distinguit Pal

4 rependit] reuoluit Pal; resoluit Vat

5 disiungit] distinguit Pal; commutat Vat

7 sibi] tibi Vat resoluit] reflectit Pal

poe EIN DOES.

. 7
Ei ee

ae

THE MONZA EPITOME.

: : c—2
(Codeu Modoetianus, saec. ix—x, n°. =)

Note. The spelling and punctuation is that of the ms, but the con-

tractions have been expanded throughout. Words in brackets are written
above the line in the ms. The numbers at the side refer to the pages of this
book. The sections not taken from the Book of Rules but from S. Augustine
are printed in italics. See /ntrod. pp xxvii, xxxvi—xxxix.

]

(f. 206 v.) Explicit tract. in epistolu Pauli ad Hebreos. +. vtt. tICONTI
REGVLAE : Necessarium dixi ante omnia quae mihi uidentur libellum
regularem scribere et secretorum legis ueluti claues et luminaria fabricare :
Sunt enim quaedam regulae mysticae quae uniuerse legis recessus obtinent.
et ueritatis thesauros aliquibus inuisibiles faciunt; Quarum si ratio regu-
larum sine inuidia ut communicamus accepta fuerit. clausa quaeque
patefient. et obscura dilucidabuntur. ut quis prophetiae inmensam siluam
perambulans his regulis quodammodo lucis tramitibus deductus ab errore
hberetur; Sunt autem regulae istae: de domino et corpore eius. de
domini corpore bipertito. de promissis et lege. de specie et genere. de
temporibus. de recapitulatione. de diabolo et eius corpore. Ecce esaias
dicit. peccata nostra feret et pro nobis dolet et ipse uulneratus est propter
facinora nostra et deus tradidit eum pro peceatis nostris et cetera quae
domino conueniunt. Sequitur autem de eodem et deus uult purgare illum
a plaga et uult deus a dolore auferre animam eius. ostendere illi lucem et
formare illum p(rujdentia ; numquid ei quem tradidit pro peccatis nostris
uult ostendere lucem et eum formare prudentia cum ipse sit lux et
sapientia dei et non corpori cius? quare manifestum est sola ratione
uideri posse quando a capite ad corpus transitum facit ; Danihel quoque
lapidem de monte praecisum dominum dicit. et implesse uniuersam terram
corpus eius, non enim sunt audiendi qui potestate illum dicunt creuisse
quia dominus ante mundi constitutionem hanc habuit potestatem et cum
homo in illo dei filius fieret, non puatim ut lapis sed uno tempore accepit

3 potestatem in caelo et in terra +: (f. 207 7.) (Quod si potestate non corpore

90

APPENDIX I.

implesset terram, lapidi non compararetur quia potestas. res est inpal-
pabilis. lapis uero res est palpabilis ; Nec sola ratione manifestatur corpus
non caput crescere sed etiam apostolica auctoritate. confirmatur. Cre-
scimus inquid in eum qui est caput christus ex quo omne corpus con-
structum et conexum per omne tactum subministrationis in mensuram
uniuscuiusque partis incrementum corporis facit in eedificationem sui. et
iterum non tenens caput ex quo omne corpus per tactum et coniunctiones
constructum et subministratum crescit in incrementum dei. Non ergo
caput quod ex origine idem est. sed corpus crescit ex capite: Ad propositum
redeamus ; Scriptum est de domino et ecius corpore quid cui conueniat
ratione discernendum; Angelis suis mandauit de te et cetera usque

. ostendam illi salutare meum. numquid de cuius obsequio mandauit angelis

suis deus eidem ostendit salutare suum et non corpori eius? Item. sicut
sponso inposuit mihi mitram et sicut sponsam ornauit me ornamento ;
Vnum corpus dixit utriusque sensus sponsi et sponsae. Sed quid in
domino quid in ecclesia conueniat ratione cognoscitur. Idem dicit in
apocalypsi. ego sum sponsus et sponsa. et iterum. exierunt obuiam sponso
et sponsae. Iterum quid capitis quid corporis ratione discernendum sit,
per esaiam declaratur. Sic dicit dominus christo meo domino cuius ego
tenui dexteram ut exaudiant eum gentes. Sequitur et dicit quod non nisi
corpori conueniat ; et dabo tibi thesauros absconditos inuisibiles aperiam
tibi ut scias quoniam ego sum dominus qui uoco nomen tuum deus israhel
propter iacob puerum meum et israhel electum meum; propter testamenta
enim quae disposuit patribus.(ad)cognoscendum se deus aperit corpori
christi thesauros inuisibiles quod occul.us non uidit &c usque nec in cor
hominis ascendit id est obdurati hominis qui non est in corpore christi ;
Ecclesize autem reuelauit deus per spiritum suum; Sunt enim in quibus
haec ratio minus claret eo quod siue in dominum siue in corpus eius
minus conuenit dictum. quam ob rem sola et maiora dei gratia uideri
possunt ; A modo inquid uidebitis filiam hominis sedentem ad dexteram
uirtutis et uenientem in nubibus ceeli; Non uisuros uenientem in nubibus
celi nisi in nouissimo tantum die plangent se omnes tribus terrae ; et
tune uidebunt filium hominis uenientem in nubibus caeli; Vtrumque
autem fieri necesse est. Sed primo corporis est aduentus id est secclesiae
iugiter uenientis in eadem claritate; Si enim diceret modo uidebitis
uenientem, solius corporis intelligendus esset aduentus ; Si autem uidebitis
capitis aduentus, Nunc uero a modo inquit uidebitis uenientem quoniam
corpore suo iugiter uenit natiuitatem et similium passionum claritatem.
Si enim renati christi membra efficiuntur et membra corpus efficiunt,
christus est qui uenit. quoniam natiuitas aduentus est ut illud inluminat
&c. usque in hunc mundum. Item generatio uadit et generatio uenit.
Item. sicut audistis antichristus uenit. Item de eodem corpore: si enim
iste qui uenit alium iesum predicat. unde dominus cum de signo aduentus
sui interrogaretur! de illo aduentu suo cepit disputare qui ab i(ni)mico
corpore signis et prodigiis imitari potest. cauete inquid ne quis uos

en)

=

THE MONZA EPITOME. 91

seducat. multi enim uenient in nomine meo id est In nomine corporis mel.
Nouissimo autem aduentu domini id est consummationis et manifestationis
totius aduentus eius nemo ut aliqui putant mentietur; Nec illud erit
abssur+dum quod ex uno totum corpus uolumus intelligi ut filium hominis
ecclesiam. quoniam ecclesia id est filii dei redacti in unum corpus. dicti
unus homo dicti etiam deus. sicut per apostolum: super omne quod
dicitur deus aut quod colitur. quoniam ecclesia dicitur, summus adoratur
ut in templo dei sedeat ostendens se quod ipse sit deus id est ecclesia.
quale si diceret in templo dei sedeat ostendens se quod ipse sit templum.
aut in deum sedeat (f. 207 v.) ostendens se quod ipse sit deus. et dominus
totum populum sponsam dicit et sororem et apostolus uirginem castam et
aduersum corpus hominem peccati. et dauid totam ecclesiam christum
dicit : faciens misericordias christo suo dauid. et semini eius in aeternum.
et apostolus corpus christi christum uocat ; Sicut enim corpus unum est.
membra autem habet multa. omnia autem membra ex uno corpore cum
sint multa unum corpus est sic et christus. id est christi corpus quod
ecclesia. Item. subpleo quae desunt pressurarum christi id est ecclesiae.
nihil enim defuit christi passionibus quoniam sufficit discipulo ut sit sicut
magister eius. Sic ergo aduentum christi pro locis sentiemus. legimus in
exodo omnes filios dei unum filium. Israhel filus meus primogenitus.
Item ibi omnes promitiuos unum primitiuum. Kece ego occido filium
tuum primitiuum. Et david uineam domini unum filium, uineam de
egypto &e usque filium hominis quem confirmasti tibi. et apostolus filium
dicit qui filtum dei mixtus est paulus seruus christi iesu segregatus in
euangelio dei &e usque iesu christi domini nostri. si diceret de filio suo
ex resurrectione mortuorum unum ostenderet. nune autem de filio inquit
suo ex resurrectione mortuorum iesu christi domini nostri. Sed quis
factus sit filius dei ex resurrectione christi apertius ostendit dicens. de
filio suo qui factus est &c usque secundum carnem qui predestinatus est
filius dei. dominus enim noster non est predestinatus filius dei qui ex quo
natus est hoc est. sed ille cui secundum lucam dicit in baptismo. filius
meus es tu ego hodie genui te: Qui ex semine dauid mixtus est principali
spiritui et factus est ipse filius dei ex resurrectione domini nostri iesu
christi id est dum resurgit in christo semen dauid. non ile de quo ait
ipse dauid. Dicit dominus domino meo ; Itaque facti sunt duo una caro.
uerbum caro factum est et caro deus. qui non ex sanguine sed ex deo nati
sunt; Apostolus dicit. erunt duo in carne una quod interpretatur in
christo et ecclesia. Vnum namque semen promisit deus abrahae{ ut
quanticumque in christo miscerentur! unus esset in christo. unde
apostolus. omnes uos unum estis in christo iesu; si autem uos unum
estis in christo iesuf ergo abrahae semen estis. et secundum promissionem
heredes, Distat autem inter unum estis et unus estis. quotiescumque
alter alteri voluntate myscetur * ut illud ego et pater unum sumus unum
sunt. Quotiens autem et corporaliter myscentur et in unam carnem duo
solidantur unus sunt ; Corpus itaque in capite suo filius est dei. et deus

92

10

11

APPENDIX I.

in corpore suo filius est hominis qui cotidie nascendo uenit et crescit in
templum sancti dei. Templum enim dei bipertitum est cuius pars altera
quamuis lapidibus magnis extruatur destruitur ; neque in eo lapis super
lapidem relinquetur. Istius nobis iugis aduentus cauendus est donec de
medio eius discedat ecclesia : FINIT

Regula bipertiti corporis domini multo necessarior est et a nobis
diligentius perspicienda et per omnes scripturas ante oculos habenda est
sicut enim supradictum est. a capite ad corpus ratione sola uidetur. ita a
parte corporis ad partem. a dextera ad sinistram uel a sinistra ad dexteram
transitus reditusque ut in supradicto capite claret. Dum enim dicit uni
corpori. thesauros inuisibiles aperiam tibi ut scias quoniam ego sum
dominus et assumam te et adiecit. tu autem me non cognouisti et
nesciebas me. numquid licet unum corpus adloquatur in unam mentem
conuenit et thesaurorum dei apertio et dei ignorantia? non cognouisti
autem illi dicitur‘ qui licet ad hoc uocatus sit ut cognoscat et eiusdem
corporis sit uisibiliter et deo labiis appropinquet longe tamen corde
separatus est. Item. ducam cacos in uiam quam ignorauerunt. et semitas
quas non nouerunt calcabunt et faciam illis tenebras in lucem. Haec
verba faciam et non derelinquam eos. Ipsi autem conuersi sunt retro:
numquid quos dixit non derelinquam idem conuersi sunt et non pars
eorum : Item dicit dominus ad iacob. Ab oriente adducam semen tuum
et ab occidente colligam te. dicam aquiloni da et austro noli prohibere et
paulo post. in gloriam enim meam (f. 208 r.) paraui illum et finxi et feci
illum. et produxi plebem caecam et oculi eorum sunt similiter caeci et
surdas aures habent. numquid quos in gloriam suam parauit idem sunt
caeci et surdi; Item dedi perire iacob et israhel i(u) maledictum. nunc
audi me puer meus iacob et israhel quem elegi ; ostendit illum iacob et
israhel perire quem non elegit; Item scio quoniam reprobatus repro-
baberis. propter nomen meum ostendam tibi dignitatem meam. Numquid
reprobatio ostendit dignitatem suam? Item. breuiter bipertitum osten-
ditur christi corpus. fusca sum et decora. Absit enim ut ecclesia qui non
habet maculam aut rugam aliqua ex parte fusca sit nisi in parte sinistra
per quam nomen dei blasfematur in gentibus alias tota speciosa est sicut
dicit. tota speciosa es proxima mea et macula non est in te; quare fusca
sit et speciosa ostendit. ut tabernaculum cedar ut pellis salomonis. duo
tabernacula ostendit regium et seruile utrumque tamen semen abrahe.
cedar enim filius est ismahel. cuius serui abrahze cohabitationem sanctus
deplorat dicens. eu mihi quia incolatus meus prolongatus est. &c usque
inpugnabant me gratis ; Non possumus autem dicere tabernaculum cedar
praeter ecclesiam esse unde cedar et salomonis inde fusca et decora, non
est fusca ecclesia in his qui foris sunt. hoc mysterio dominus in apocalypsi
septem angelos dicit id est ecclesiam septiformem nunc sanctos et pre-
ceptorum custodes nune eosdem multorum criminum reos et peenitentia
dignos ostendit. Et in euangelio unum prepositorum corpus diuersi
meriti manifestat dicens ; Beatus ille seruus quem cum uenerit dominus

THE MONZA EPITOME. 93

inuenerit sic facientem. De eodem. si autem nequam fuerit diuidet eum
dominus et partem eius cum hypocritis ponet. non omnem sic diuidet aut
findet. denique non totum sed partem eius cum hypocritis ponet. In uno
enim corpus ostendit. Hoc itaque mysterio accipiendum est per omnes
scripturas sicubi deus dicit. ob merita. israhel periturum aut hereditatem
suam execrabilem. Apostolus enim copiose ita disputat maxime ad
romam in parte accipiendum quicquid de toto corpore dictum est ad
israhel inquid quid dicit. tota die expandi manus meas ad populum non
credentem. et ut ostenderet de parte dictum. dico inquid numquid
reppulit deus hereditatem suam? absit. nam et ego israhelita sum &c
usque presciuit: Et post quam ostendit quem ad modum. haec locutio
intetligenda esset’ ecodem genere locutionis ostendit unum corpus et

26) bonum et malum esse dicens. §non de omnibus uobis dico ; Magna breuitas
b} fs)

ostendentis unum corpus et separantis. si enim diceret non de uobis dico

(11) aut non de omnibus dico non ostenderet unum corpus. * Secundum euan-

lL

14

i
Or

gelium inquit inimici propter uos. secundum electionem autem dilecti
propter patres. Num«aquid idem dilecti. qui inimici? aut potest in caifan
utrumque conuenire? Ita dominus in omnibus scripturis unum corpus
semis abrahae omnibus gentibus crescere et florere atque perire testatur ;
DE CORPORE DOMINI BIPERTITO EXPLICIT. INCIPIT DE PROMISSIS ET LEGE :
Auctoritas est diuina nemine aliquando ex operibus legis iustificari
potuisse. eadem firmissimum est numquam defuisse qui legem facerent et
justificarentur. Scriptum est quaecuique lex loquitur his qui in lege
sunt loquitur ut omne os obstruatur et subditus fiat omnis mundus deo
quia non lustificabitur ex lege omnis caro in conspectu eius. Item. si
enim data esset lex quae posset iustificare et reliqua usque credentibus °.
Sed dicit quis. a christo et infra non iustificat lex. suo tamen tempore
iustificauit. Huic occurrit petrus. quid temptatis iugum imponere super
ceruices nostras &c usque ill, (f. 208 v.) Qui(s) uero tam peruersae
mentis est qui neget moysen uel reliquos sanctos legem fecisse? Sed
quomodo eos lex iustificauit qui ad hoc data est ut peccatum multi-
plicaretur. lex autem subintrauit ut habundaret delictum ; Illud autem
scire debemus et tenere numquam omnino interceptum esse semen
abrahae ab isaac usque nunc. semen autem abrehae non carnale sed spiri-
tale quod non ex lege sed ex promissione est ut illud quoniam qui ex fide
sunt hi sunt filii abrahae. si autem constat semen abrehae ante legem fuisse
et ex fide! constat et quia numquam fuit ex lege; Non enim potuit ex
lege esse et ex fide. lex enim et fides diuersa res est £ quia lex non est fidei
sed operum. ut illud lex non est ex fide sed qui fecerit ea uiuet in eis ;
uidemus legem ad promissionem non pertinere nec aliquando alteram in
alteram inpegisse. quia sicut lex numquam fidei obfuit‘ ita nec fides legem
destruxit. ut ilud legem ergo destruimus per fidem? absit. sed legem
statuimus id est firmamus. Inuicem namque se firmant. Non enim
potuit quisquam iustus in lege positus uiuere nisi opera legis fecisset et
omnia. Sin maledictus esset neque aliquando liberari potuit nisi sola

94

16

18

19

24

APPENDIX I.

eratia per fidem. est autem crimen magnum perfidiae non adtendisse
genus armorum quibus wiolentia peccatorum expugnaretur. e contra
magnificae fidei est inquisisse et uidisse bonum deum qui sciebat legem
non posse fieri alterum uitae aditum relinquisse. deus enim cum diceret
non concupisces‘ non nudauit quem ad modum id prouenire posset sed
seuere atque decise dixit non concupisces. quoniam id fide reperiendum
reliquid. Si enim mandaret a se prouentum postulari et legem destruxerat
et fidem. ut quid enim legem daret si se legem in omnibus factorum
polliceretur ? aut quid fidei relinqueret si fidem auxilium pollicendo pro-
ueniret ? nunc autem bono fidei legem ministram mortis ut amatores
uitae fide uitam uiderent et iusti fide uiuerent. qui opus legis non ex sua
uirtute sed ex dei dono fieri posse crederent: Dicit enim apostolus
propterea datam legem ut nos custodia sui concluderet in fidem quam
futurum erat reuelari in christum qui est finis legis qua uixerunt omnes
qui fide gratiam dei inquisierunt prius inquit quam ueniret fides sub lege
custodiebamur conclusi in eadem fidem. quam futurum erat reuelari ; lex
itaque pedagogus noster fuit in christo. lex fidei erat demonstratrix ; Sed
dicit quis si in utilitatem fidei data est lex cur non ab origine seminis
abrahae. si quidem iuge fuit. re uera iuge fuit iugis et fides ut genetrix
filiorum abrahae. Iugis et lex per dinoscentiam boni et mali. sed post
promissionem filiorum abrahae multiplicatis eis secundum carnem multi-
plicandum erat et semen abrahae quod non est nisi ex fide ; Quae multi-
plicatio euenire non posset sine adiutorio legis multiplicate ut multitudo
in fidem necdum reuelatum ut iam dictum est uel necessitate deduceretur.
prouidentia itaque dei factum augendo gubernandoque semini abrahae ut
seueritate et metu legis multi conpellerentur in fidem et semen fulciretur
usque ad fidei reuelationem. lex subintrauit ut abundaret delictum et
reliqua usque gratia. non dixit ut daretur sed ut abundaret gratia; ab
inicio enim data est per christum fugientibus legis molestias atque domi-
niam. Idem namque spiritus eadem fides et gratia per christum semper
data est quorum plenitudinem * ueniens remoto legis uelamine omni genti
largitus est. si quis absque fide iustificatus est, non fuit filius abrahae ;
quoniam filius abrahae non ex lege sed ex fide iustificatur : non
est bene et melius in lege‘ qui si iustificasset omnes iusti unius essent
meriti quia partem de omnibus exigit observationem ; Cogimus autem
loqui ea qui sine igne doloris (f. 209r.) fari non possumus. dicunt enim
quidam promis(is)se deum abrahae omnes gentes sed saluo libero arbitrio
si legem custodissent ; Non enim si futuri essent et non quia futuri erant
promisit. quia non propter fidem abrahae placuit deo saluas fore gentes
quas non ante fidem abrahae sed ante mundi constitutionem possedit. sed
quisiuit fidelem cui donaret ex quo esset quod futurum statuerat ;
Abraham ergo non id meruit ut essent sed ut per ipsum essent qui futuri
erant quos deus elegerat ; Quid enim iusto lex qui propitio deo legem sine
lege faciunt qui ad imaginem dei uiuunt. uoluntate enim boni sunt. Non
est misericors qui timet esse crudelis. non furtum odit sed penam timet ;

THE MONZA EPITOME. 95

qui autem amat bonum imago dei est ut iam non sit ancillae filius. quia

28 timor non est in dilectione: De eo quod iacob et esau in uno sunt
corpore et ex uno semine propter duos populos futuros in uno corpore.

29 De eo quod numquam iacob id est ecclesia uenit ab benedictionem non
comitante dolo id est falsis fratribus sed non simul innocentia et dolus
benedicantur.

31 De specie et genere loquimur non secundum retoricam humanae
sapientiae quam qui magis omnibus potuit locutus non est ne crucem
christi fecisset inanem. si auxilio atque ornamento sermonis ut falsitas
indiguisset. Sed loquimur secundum mysteria caelestis sapientiae magi-
sterio spiritus sancti: Qui cum ueritatis pretium fidem constitueret
mysterlis narrauit in specie genus abscondens. aut in ueterem hierusalem
totam qui nunc est per orbem. aut in unum membrum totum corpus ut
in salomone ; Si hoc non tam occultum est quam cetera quae non solum
specie breuitate sed etiam mortiformi ratione occultantur ; Quam ob rem
dei gratia in auxilio postulata elaborandum nobis est. Dum enim speciem
harrat ita in genus transit! ut transitus non statim liquide appereat. sed

32 talia transiens ponit uerba qui in utrumque conueniant. donec paulatim
speciel modum excedat et transitus dilucidetur. cumque ab specie
coeperant non hisi in genus conuenerint. et codem modo genus relinquid
in speciem rediens ; Aliquando autem ab specie in genus non supradicto
modo sed euidenter transit et supradicto modo reuertitur ; Aliquando
supradicto modo transit et euidenter reuertitur simili ordinis uarietate ut
ab speciae in genere. aut a genere in specie finit rationem. Aliquando
secedit ex hoc in illud non semel et omnis narratio nec speciem excedit
nec genus preterit in utrumque conucniens. haec uarietas translationis et
ordinis exigit fidem quae gratia dei quacrat deus per ezechielem egressui
eorum qui ab hicrusalem capti et dispersi fuerant gentium iungit aduen-
tui. et in terra quam patres nostri possiderunt exprimit mundumn ;
Septem enim gentes abrahae proimissae figura est omnium gentium ;
factus est inquit sermo domini ad me dicens. fili hominis domus israhel
habitauit in terra et polluerunt ilam in uia sua et in idolis suis. et post

3

w

aliqua incipit iungere genus: et sanctificabo nomen meum secundum
quod pollutum est inter gentes. et scient gentes quoniam ego sum
dominus dum sanctificor in uobis ante oculos corum. Adtingit speciem
non tamen relinquens genus. et uocabo triticum et multiplicabo illud ; In

figura uero terrae iudeae qui bellis uastata fuerat promittit inuocari
34 mundun qui a deo recesserat cum dicitur: Reaedificabuntur deserta et
terra quae exterminata fuerat coletur. Apostolus quoque in regressu
iacob promissum esse introitum gentium sic interpretatur. donec plenitudo
gentium intraret &c usque fict. sicut scriptum est. ueniet a sion qui
liberet et auferat impietates ab iacob. Et codem genere locutionis
redit in speciem dicens : Secundum euangelium inimici quid est propter
uos ; Item. in ezechelo (f. 209 v.) Incipit ab specie qui conueniat in genus
et finit in solo genere. ostendens terra patrum mundi esse possessionem.

96

36

37

38

39

50
51
53

55

59

APPENDIX If.

haec dicit dominus. ego accipiam omnem domum israhel de medio gentium.
et post aperte transit in genus: et seruus meus dauid princeps in medio
eorum. Item illic. ueluti in nouissima resurrectione prima significata est.
fili hominis ossa haec domus israhel est Ipsi dicunt arida facta sunt ossa
nostra et paulo post. ecce ego aperiam. monumenta uestra et scietis quia
ego dominus. numquid cum perspicue surrexerimus cognoscemus dominum
et non nunc cum per baptismum resurgimus. aut mortui possunt dicere.
Arida nostra sunt ossa? duas enim resurrectiones dominus ostendit
secundum iohannem. Item in uno homine totum corpus ostenditur
dicente deo ad dauid de salomone. suscitabo semen tuum post te et parabo
regnum eius. et excedit speciem dicendo. Et dirigam thronum eius in
aeternum. quae promissio ecclesiae congruit magis quam christo. Mani-
festum est salomonem sapientem et idolatrem figuram fuisse ecclesiae
bipertite cotidie disrumpit(ur) regnum salomonis in malis et cotidie
solidatur in bonis. In achan totum corpus malum intelligitur. Illud
etiam multo necessarium est scire omnes omnino ciuitates israhel uel
gentium uel prouintias quas scriptura adloquitur. aut (in) quibus aliquid
gestum refert figuram esse ecclesiae. aliquas quidem partis male aliquas
bonae. aliquas utriusque. Babilon inimica hierusalem totus est mundus.
Subtiliter inserit genus cum dicit. ecce excito uobis medos qui aurum non
quirint. quis enim hostis aurum non quaerit nisi ecclesia? ubicumque
autem idu(m)eam. theman. bosor. seir. nominat. malos significat. serras uero
ferreas homines durissimos qui secant parturientes ecclesias. temporum quan-
titas frequenter in scripturis mystica est tropo sinecdoc(h)e aut legitimis
numeris qui multis modis positi sunt et pro loco intellegendi. sinecdoc(h)e
uero aut parte totum est aut a toto pars. hoc tropo dictum est et adfligent eos
annis. CCCC qui post mortem ioseph coepit seruire populus ex CCCOXXX annis
deducemus LXXX annos regni ioseph. Regnauit autem a XXX annis usque
in .cx. et erunt reliqui seruitutis anni CccL quos dixit cccc. si autem omni
tempore peregrinationis suae israhel seruiuit plus est quam deus dixit. Si
autem ex morte ioseph secundum scripturae fidem minus. quo manifestum
est eum a toto parte esse nam post ccc annos pars aliorum annorum. C
propterea dixit cccc annos. Sic in omni summa temporis ut puta post
vit dies prima hora xmi. diei dies est et post VIIII menses primus dies
mensis. mensis est ut illud. x mensuum tempore coagalatus sum in
sanguine. Sicut autem in prima parte cuius temporis totum tempus est
ita et nouissima. ut nouissima hora totus dies sit aut reliquiae mille

annorum mille anni sint. sex dies sunt mundi aetas id est VI annorum in
reliquiis sexti die id est mille annorum natus est dominus passus resurrexit.
Itidem reliquiae mille annorum dictae sunt mille anni primae resurrec-
tionis. Sicut enim reliquiae vi feriae id est 111 hore totus dies est unus
ex tribus sepulturae domini‘ Ita reliquiae vi diei maioris quo resurrexit
ecclesia totus dies est id est mille anni. hoc tropo soluitur quod dominus
tertia die surrexit. Ex legitimis autem numeris. denarius. XII denarius
idem autem est numerus cum multiplicantur ut Lxx. bcc. Sed aut

60

62

ep)
on

66

THE MONZA EPITOME. 97

perfectionem significant aut a parte totum aut simplicem summam per-
fectionem. ut VII spiritus ecclesiae. aut ut dicit septies in die laudem dixit.
aut septies tantum recipies in hoc saeculo, similiter denarius ut centies
recipies in hoc saeculo. Et danihel decies milies dena milia. et dauid.
currus dei decies milies tantum. Item per duodenarium cxLimit milia
(f. 2107.) et xr mila tribus omnes gentes sicut iudicabitis xm tribus
israhel ap(ar)te totum est. quoniam certum tempus legitimis numeris
definitur ut in apocalypsi; habebitis pressuram x diebus cum significet
usque in finem, ponitur hora pro tempore ut illud nouissima hora est — di-
es ut illud ecce dies salutis annus ut illud. predicare annum domini.
aliquando hora dies et annos et mensis est. sicut in apocalypsi. parati in
horain et diem et mensem et annum quod est Ir anni et dimidius.
Ibidem menses pro annis. datum est ledere homines mensibus. v. aliquando
dies denario numero .c. dies sunt. sicut in apocalypsi dies co.tx. Nam

milli dies ducentes centeni et sexagies centeni CCXXII. dies sunt. qui fiunt
anni ccch, mensibus tricenorum dierum. Ibidem unus mensis denario
numero .c. menses sunt. ut ciuitatem sanctam caleabunt mensibus XL

duobus. centeni mt & CC menses sunt. qui sunt anni cccn. Sicut per v1
dies fecit mundum corporalem., ita per vi milium annos edificat spiritalem
id est ecclesiam sanctificaturus vit quem benedixit fecitque aeternum.
Ideoque precipitur ut pondus peccati non inferatur per portas hierusalem.
In genere autem uno in tempore est uterque euentus sic XTIT anni sub
ioseph ubertatis et steritalitatis. Isto enim tempore minatur dominus
diuitibus famem pauperibus uero saturitatem promittit. uno in tempore
egyptus percutitur israhel saluatur. De eo quod xu. dies diluuii. ccce
anni in egypto xi in deserto et xn dies ieiunii et xi quibus apparet
post resurrectionem manducans et xt diebus aqua in statuto suo
totidem defecit ; Nam in genere quo tempore inualescit carnaliter eo
deficit spiritaliter. quia elatio defectio est sic mundus repugnans ponitur
sub pedibus ecclesiae id est filii hominis; Qui sunt itaque xi dies idem
ci dies ; ezechihel namque xr diebus exsoluit peccata iudae et israhel cr
quod est unum atque idem tempus. et viImo mense sedit arca. Item
tempus est et deficiebat aqua usque in xmum mensem. Item tempus est
exiuit de arca. xtfmo mense. hic est annus libertatis domini acceptabilis ‘
quo conpleto manifestabitur ecclesia mundi pertransisse diluuium. Vna-
quaeque pars huius anni id est annus est. quale si diceret exiuit de arca,
xL(mo) die. Aut mense VIL.mo. aut X.mo sunt autem partes istae recapitu-
lationis. sicut ab adam usque enoch id est ecclesia. translationem vit
generationes quod est omne tempus. rursum ab adam usque ad noe quod
mundi reparatione. X generationes quod est tempus. et a noe usque
abraham X generationes. nam et .c. anni quibus arca fabricatur omne
tempus est quo ecclesia edificatur; Inter regulas quibus spiritus lege
signauit quo luminis uia custodiretur non nihil custodit recapitulationis
sigillus ea subtilitate ut continuatio magis narrationis quam recapitulatio
uideatur. Sic enim aliquoties recapitulat{ tun. illa hora. illo die. eo

B 7

98

67

68

APPENDIX I.

tempore. ut illud. die qua exiit loth &c!; Ht in genesi plantauit deus
paradisum in quo posuit et produxit adhuc de terra lignum. Ita dignum
uidetur ut postea factum sit quam posuit deus hominem dc. Item in eodem
libro cum commemorantur generationes filiorum noe hi filit cham in tribubus
suis secundum linguas suas; Hoc autem quod adiunctum est et erat omnes
terra labium unum. ita dictum uidetur ut eo tempore quo dispersi fuerunt
super terram una fuerit lingua omnibus quod omnino superioribus repugnat
ac per hoc recapitulando dictum est fit ista recapitulatio obscurius ut illud
die quo exwt loth a sodomis et paulo post secundum haec erunt dies filit
hominis quo reuelabitur in ula hora qui erit in tecto de. numquid cum
dominus fuerit reuelatus tunc ista seruanda sunt ne respiciat retro et non
potius isto tempore? recapitulatio est ; tempus ergo ipsum (f. 210v.) g(uo)
euangelium predicatur quousque dominus reueletur hora est in qua oportet
ista seruart quia et ipsa reuelatio ad eandem horam pertinet qui die tudicii
terminabitur ut ulud filioli nouissima hora est. Aliquoties autem non
sunt recapitulationes sed futurae similitudinis ut illud cum uideritis quod
dictum est per danihelum prophetam. tunc qui in iudea sunt fugiant in
mentes et inducit finem ; Quod dixit in africa geritur. neque in eo tempore
finis sed in eo tamen titulo futurum est propterea dixit tunc. id est cum
similiter factum fuerit per orbem. id est reualatio antichristi ; Et dauid
ipso genere locutionis cum auerteret dominus captiui &c usque tunc
repletum est gaudio os nostrum et usque laetante* per similitudinem
tempus suum et nostrum [u]num fecit. Nec illud pretereundum puto
quod spiritus sine mysteriis ali[u]d [sonare] aliud intelligi uoluit. Omnis
spiritus qui negat iesum in carne uenisse. &c usque in isto mundo est
numquid omnes qui non negat spiritum * *” ista negatio non in uoce sed
in opere est 33 7%mothei:

Omnes homines saluos fieri tamquam diceretur nullum hominem fieri
saluum nisi quem fieri ipse uoluerit. Non quod nullus sit hominum nisi
quem saluum fiert uelit sed quod nullus fiat nisi quem uelit et rdeo sit
rogandus ut uelit quia nece[sse| est fiert si uoluerit. De orando quippe deo
agebat apostolus cum hoc diceret ; Sic enim intelligimus quod dictum est qui
inluminat omnem. et reliqua. id est qui inluminantur siue de omnibus
gentibus ut wllud decimatis omne olus ;

Et illud obsecramus ut oretis pro scriptore ut deum omnipotentem
habeatis protectorem
et ego Liuthprandus scripsi hoc lbrum «.:

1 What follows in italies is from Aug de Doct Christ iii 36 (= Hug 873—875).
2 *habet’ is supplied by a later hand.
’ The passage in italics which follows is from Aug Enchirid 103.

eT

ORTHOGRAPHY.

THE aim of an editor should be to reproduce the text of his author, even
in matters of spelling, but in the case of a 4th cent. African writer like
Tyconius it is very difficult to say what that spelling was likely to have been.
I had therefore no other course than to be generally guided by the two Mss
Rand V. But it is improbable that 9th cent. Mss should have entirely
retained the spelling of a 4th cent. author; the first question therefore is
to try to isolate any pecuhar element in the mss themselves.

One of the most satisfactory methods of doing this is to compare the
spellings of our Mss with the mss of the Vulgate whose provenience is
known. There is every probability that a learned scholar like S. Jerome
would prefer correctness ; irregular spellings therefore in an Irish or Spanish
Ms probably represent the local usage.

In this section Bp. Wordsworth’s notation has been used for the Vulgate
Mss of Mt Me and Le, but with italic instead of roman capitals.

1. Spellings in cod. R.

Cod. R was given by Hincmar to the Cathedral Library at Reims. It can
hardly be earlier than the middle of the 9th century, but the ms bears no
external marks of its origin. The most noticeable peculiar spellings are those
generally classed as Irish.

SS for S osse R 28!
assac R® 1319, 29%, ete [== DL Mc xii 26, D having usually zssaac]

precissum R 21 [for caesum Me xv 15, DP (2) have cesswm]
cf. dissimilitudine R 67 for de similitudine.

S for SS promisis R 1™ [= Hpt kh (not D) Le xxiv 49]
presurarum R 68 [=D (FEpth H Y) Le xxi 23]

similarly qguatuor R 53? 4 Peedi ie Ett, LP iq te) ,)
querela R* 134 [=J (K)V dt Was well as (D) Apt).

IE for I in compounds of zacere.

subtecere R* 2674 La) Tex f|

deveceretur R 71!
similarly zesacam Reorr 70! [=f Mt viii 17, (Z) Mt xiii 14, @ Mci 2].

7—2

100 APPENDIX II.

O for U commone(m) R 26", 30" [= DEptLQ Mc vii 2, 5]
absordum R 5" [sordus D passim, Ept Me vii 32]
nobocodonosor R* 4376
salamon R*4/, 38 and 2/, 39 (also R* 39°) [=D LZ passim]
sophyr (Sovgeip) R 51”.

Traces of the hand of the archetype of R may be seen in the confusions of

SS for RS wessum for wersum R 65%,
RS for RR cursus for currus R 604.

Other spellings rather suggest the 9th cent. French schools, such as
quoties, loquutus, sequutus, etc (loguutionis R 341). Obstupuerunt (R 45") may
be either Irish or French, and the same is true of domu (R 70”), which occurs
in V*3/,, as well as in D®/,, Q'6/,, 215/,. Mt®/,,, the first-named ms being the
best representative of Alcuin’s recension. Hardly any other of Bp. Words-
worth’s Mss have domu but these. In Old Latin Mss domz is never found in the
Irish Ms 7, but it occurs in d Ac xvi 34, and in & Mt viii 6 cacet domu mea
stands for BéBAnrat ev 77H otkia (cf the Vulgate mss DZ but no other authority).

R has also a decided tendency to AMM- for ADM-. Thus we find con-
stantly guemammodum', ammonere; also ammodo R 416 for a modo, but
admisit R 161.

There is also a tendency to -ti- for -ci- and -si- in R. Thus besides con-
ditio (228, 247,914, etc), we find commertia 46 and ostentio 2871.

Other noteworthy spellings are actenus 73 (comp. ericit 421, and Le xii
20 d), alligoria 67 and herimo 657, antichristi (plene) 68%, archa 64%,
clusisset 15”, clussise 16* (but claudent 47), demitte(re) 6, insyle 4572, cuncaxit
6777, praeliabitur 498 (also supported by A Y and Z?), sterelitatis 64".

Many ancient forms have no doubt been corrected out of R. Thus pro-
fecta R* 421 (profeta R*) is good evidence for the spelling with f in R’s
ancestry, though propheta is the form in R elsewhere. Similarly fild for filii
(nom. pl.) occurs nowhere in R, though it is frequent in V. But the vocative
fili has also become fili7i in R 3218, possibly by the same process. A sswmpsit
(sic) R 10? points to the spelling asswmsit adopted by Bp. Wordsworth.

R shews here and there a tendency to drop syllables, as absolano 405 for
a subsolano, and illanineue or illamneue R 421° (there is often no difference

1 Prof. Sanday suggests in Studia Biblica 11 324 that quemanmmodum is a good
test word. The evidence in Mt Mc Le may therefore prove of interest.

Mt xxiii 37 Vode KV XZ? Z? is the contemporary corrector of
Mc iv 26 A Epos ae B. M. Harl 1775 (6th or 7th cent).
Le viii 47 AYO Gio Mt GE xn are

xiii 34 Y XZ Y the Lindisfarne Gospels.

xxi 14 iG it Z Misthe Ambrosian Gospels (6th cent),

xe hy H Ze apparently the best ms of the Vulgate.

xxiii 55 fa XZ

ORTHOGRAPHY. 101

between m and nz in the hand of the ms) for w/am nineue. This may explain
the curious reading cazn. R 11° for caifan}.

On the whole, from the aftinities of R with Irish and Alcuinian spellings
we may conjecture that it was written in northern France, and copied from a
MS in an Irish hand.

2. Spellings in cod. V.

The orthography of V does not afford so many indications of local use.
In spite however of the blunders of the scribe there is some reason to
believe that most of the peculiarities of orthography in V are derived from its
predecessor, not introduced into the text of Tyconius for the first time in our
ms. Thus the constantly recurring inguit is spelt inguid hy V*, but in 40°,
where inguit is wrongly inserted by V, the spelling is not irgued but inquit.
In other words, the spelling éxguid in V’s ancestry is older than the insertion
of ¢aguit in 40°,

Moreover many of the variations from the ordinary orthography are not
those common in 9th and 10th cent. Mss, but those which we find in the Mss
of the Old Latin. Thus

inquid V* (e.g. 321").

quodquod V¥* 49418, but guotquot V 14¥.

cf also numquit V* 54".

poe thus) ¥ 61,

Zaccharias V 13? (not 22°) is well supported both in the O. L. and vg.

dispargere V* 45°, 527! (not 47°).

‘Betacism’ is not uncommon, e.g. wiuere V* 538! for bebere ; uerbiante
V 31" for brewiante.

Cod. V is given to false aspiration. Thus
amoneo (for amo meo) V* 446 [amum Mt xvii 27 M*S CT H O° Q Fy]

arena V 26% 21 (not 39) [arenam Mt vii 26 J 7 V* kpt LW |

olochausta V 62”

ortus V 344, 7418: 1 fortum Le xiii 19 a b R W, see Ronsch 463]
but

humeris V 5248 [Mt xxiii 4, Le xv 5 codd. mult incl CTEO?/,|

honera V 62%", 63223 (but onera 62%) [=CT' OD Ept LK].
PT for BT occurs in
optinere V 528 [optentw (Mt xxiii 14 7,) Mc xii 40 6 OW]
suptile V 311% [suptus Le viii 16 J].

1 A more serious fault in R, which hardly concerns Orthography, is the occa-
sional substitution of an entirely different word. Instances are gentes KR 42" for
reges, ciwitas R 421 for pascua, siluas R 46° for insulas, and mitigare R 50'7 for
greg P i]
lenire.

102 APPENDIX II.

TI for CI or SI is not found in V, except in the well-known misspelling
conditio for condicio (so V*/,, but condicione V 2414),

MM for DM is not found in V, but the following instances seem to suggest
that this spelling may have occurred in its ancestry.

admonet V 68°, ammonet R
amisit V 47, admisit R
admiserunt V 58", amiserunt R.

Compare aiecta V* 24", atecto V 54! for adiecta, adiecto.

Spellings of a less ancient type are
dextra V 8° etc
intelligere V* 4 etc, but not e.g. 5!
epistola V 688 [=©?/, in ‘epistola’ ad Damasum|
vocunditas V 35%, 4719 24
spiritales, e.g. V 84 ter for spiritalis.

Possibly illum V 335 (for illud) may be only a blunder, yet see Rénsch 276;
mimicum V 41% 1 (for iriguum) may be a relic of the spelling ¢niewm [Le xvi
10, 11 d 7]; charismatum is spelt chrismatum V* 69°, but carismatumV 6914,

3. Spellings adopted in this Edition.

The rule of following the Mss in matters of spelling has been very generally
followed in this edition, even in such cases as idolatria, Matheus and conditio.
The spelling ¢dololatria is assured in Tertullian, but hardly in any later Latin
writer!. Matheus on the other hand is rarely met with earlier than the 9th
cent. Conditio is the spelling of R and of V°/,, and V has no general ten-
dency to confuse ‘ti’ and ‘ci’. Moreover Tyconius himself uses the word of
the Cosmos in a sense half way between ‘contract’ and ‘creation’. He says
(p. 58) the three hours of darkness at the Crucifixion were ‘praeter ordinem
conditionis Dei. quicquid enim signi est non turbat elementorum rationalem
cursum’. If the incorrect derivation of condicio from condere ‘to create’
were accepted by Tyconius, he would probably spell the word ‘ conditio’ as in
this edition.

With regard to the termination -i for -ii, I have adopted Aegypti 437 and
reliquis 586 on the authority of RV*, but to print fli for flit, which often
occurs in V*, seemed to be introducing needless confusion. /%d¢? occurs in
R 3238 for fila.

In questions of assimilation I have generally followed R.

The interchange of F and PH causes much difficulty. The best represen-
tative of the African text £ has always F for ¢, except in Capharnaum Mt iv
13, Mc ix 33. A good test word is profeta, which I have almost always spelt
thus in the text of Tyconius. It is true that both R and V have generally

1 See Koffmane, Gesch. d. Kirchenlateins 37. ‘Idolatria’ also occurs in Priscil-
lian 215,

ORTHOGRAPHY. 103

propheta, but each Ms independently testifies to the original presence of
profeta in their ancestry. Thus R*¥ has profecta 42", a mistake which would
only arise from the spelling profeta, and in 4276 V has prophetant for pro-
Janant, which points to an intermediate corrupt reading profetant. Fanuhel
is the spelling of RV in 225, and therefore I have adopted Yarao wherever V*
supports it. On the other hand scenophegiae R 49! (scinofegiae V*) has no
good support, neither from the O. L. nor the good Mss of the Vulgate.

With regard to the spelling of the names Jesus and Christus I have followed
the authority of Bp. Wordsworth, to whose exhaustive note on Mt 11 I must
refer the reader. Possibly however the form /vesus is the best attested for
African documents, and that is the spelling of R 39% in the name of Joshua.
Elsewhere both R and V use the ordinary contractions.

4. The name ‘ Tyconius’.

The name Tyconius appears to be quite unique. I have not been able to
find an instance of it in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, though the
names Tychon and Tyche occur in all sorts of spellings. Unfortunately the
treatises of S. Augustine against the Donatists and his book de Doctrina
Christiana, in which he mentions our author, have not yet appeared in the
Vienna Corpus Script. Eecl. Latt., so that the spellings in the ancient Mss of
these works are not easily ascertainable. The passages of de Doct Christ U1
required for this purpose are however found in Eugippius, of which the leading
Ms (Knoell’s V, swec. vil) appears to be very carefully written.

The following spellings occur. It will be seen at a glance that the oldest
of each of our three main sources for the name of our author—mss of the
Book of Rules itself, Mss of S. Augustine, and Mss of Primasius—confirm
the spelling with -YCO-. I have therefore uniformly printed Tyconius, not
T'ychonius or Ticonius.

1. mss of the Book of Rules.
Tyconius RK
Thiconius V and its copy P
Hieoniue >> Yi
Tichonius O and Editions,

2. mss of Augustine de Doct Christ ut and of Kugippius.
Tyconius Hug codd-opt (incl V saee. vii)
Tychonius Hug codd. Aug cod pal 188 saee. ix
Ticonius Aug cod B. M. addl 11873
Tichonius later Mss and edd of .lug.

3. Mss of Primasius’ commentary on the Apocalypse.
Thyconius Bodl. Douce 140 (the oldest Ms of Primasius)
Ticonius other Mss.

INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS.

In this list the Psalms and the chapters of Jeremiah are uniformly given according
to the Greek numeration.

GENESIS LEVITICVS
15 56% xxiii 32 572
i14 587
i 16 579 NVMERI
ee ah
es a
i - es yes IESVS NAVE
viii 4, 5 6517 vii 11 3920
xv 1 2323 Vii 25 3974
XV. is 557
xv 16 614 REGNORVM II
ie
mothe 6m
vii 14, 15 38%”
xix 29 857 :
1 3018
heey ie ae REGNORVM III
xxi 7 397 li 46a 65°
xxv 23 7215 iv 25 3831
£XViEo——) 238 viii 46 2074
xxvii 35 2828 xi 11—13 3gis
xi 11, 12 391
EXODVS xi 13 leg
xii 24p 658
i 13
: ee a xiii 2 4120
1V
‘ :
eee ne PARALIPOMENON I

xvi 28 2616 xvi 30 7532

INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS.

ESDRAE III

iv 13 817
IOB
mag. 754
xiv 4, 5 2070
rd AL 8217
PSALMI

li 6 7228
viii 3 7615
xvii 8 7225
Quah irag k 528
xxiii 4, 5 29!
my 7274
16 2074
114 7
liv 21 76u
lxiv 12 6022
lIxvii 18 604
Ixxi 3 723!
Ixxix 15, 16 o
xe 11-16 3u
xevi 2 VBL
cli 4 2029
civ 8 60°
cix 1 710
exiii 4 731
eCxvill 164 5975
rcp. OSes | 1074
Cexy 13 6716
CXXXvi 9 525
exlii 2 2021

PROVERBIA
xlv 28 7623
xx 9 2075

ECCLESIASTES
i 4 431
ree i 7926
CANTICA

a 1014.20

iy 7338

iv 7 1018
iv 16 7412
vr 56

SAP. SALOMONIS

v6 7320
eit eee 723
gb Ee) 569
vii 22, 23 3118
Vili 21 1930
SIRACIDAE
a 3119
OSEE
x4 2810
AMOS
Se a 53!
viii 9 746
MICHA
iii 6 74?
IOEL
ii 20 7320
iii 17 738
ABDIAS
3, 4 7217
18 8317, 85>
IONA
iii 3 4125
NAHVM

ni 3, 10; 19 423

SOPHONIAS
ii 13—11i 5 4911

AGGAEVS
li 22—24 80*4
ZECHARIAS
tes 764
ii 13 734
iv 9 819

Riv 11-16 4844

105

106

MALACHIAS

iv 2 7331
ESAIAS

i10 50?
i113, 14 8429
i119 247
£23 7610
v6 138
< 13,14 7573
x15 7978
x 16—19 48u
xiii 1 50!
xiii 2—18 5014
xiv 1221 7014
iy. 13,13 718, 721°
xiv 13, 14 7220
xiv 14—17 757
xiv 16 7114, 7519, 7631
xiv 17 7571.29, 761
xiv 18, 19 7618
xiv 20, 21 te
S1y 222-27 5212
xiv 25 7230
xix 1—3 431, 5
xix 19, 20 4314
<a foo 17 46144
xxiii 18 4674, 4715, 8421
xxiv 1—13 472
xxix 13 828
Xxxli 20 107
XXxili 23 1010
xr 16,47 Le
xliii 5—8 9?
xliii 27—-xliv 1 916
xliv 21, 22 g21
aly iit 331
xlv 3 ff gil
xlviii 8, 9 37
xlviii 18, 19 2619, 287
xlix 6 37%
xlix 18, 19 81%
liii 4, 5, 6 24
liii 10, 11 28
lviii 3 7618
lviii 10 572
lix 9, 10 742

INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS.

1xi 10 374
lxii 2—4 81!2
lxiii 9, 10 931
lxvi 20 637
HIEREMIAS
iii 12 75}
ix 23 7933
xvii 19—27 627
xvii 21 6231
Xvii 25 636
Xvii 27 6379

EX 30-39 4917
xxxii 15—29 5318
xxxii 18,26, 29 546

THRENI
tt 8410

BARVCH
vi 2 6119

EZECHIEL

1v 46 6516
96:6 Bi lees fe 3511
<< 45-— X21 0 4016
xx 46 418
xxi 2, 3, 4 4110

xxvi 15—18 4518
XXVH 20; 26 7829
Xxvli 26 74ll
Xxvil 27—36 4572
xxviii 2—19 (oie

XXvili 2 185;
SXVIMo, 3 ce
Xxvili 3 (hides
xxviii 4, 5 es
xxvili 6, 7 i i oe
xxvii 7, 8 80?

xxviii 9, 10 80
xxvili 11—13 80%
XXVlli 12, 13 8118

79}

Xxvili 13 8124
XV 416. S24
XXvlii 16 8373
Xxviii 17 83°1, 846

Xxviii 18

8418.27.81, g519

INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS.

xXxvili 19 see
EXX 2=—D 4319
XeXMeo 105 447
Axa 7.8 458
xxx 8 642!
xxx1l 10 452
REN Oo 448
xxxv 14 7312
xy Db -10 3578

Kxxyvil 16-36 3217
00.66 ge ee En eng: aa |
=a Ji 29 « B47

XxXxvili 13 8420
6.6.40. gs mame 8 7418
DANIEL
ioe, a0 Q15
1°35 2°9
vii 10 602
x1 31 524
RI OG, oo 522

MACHABAEORVM II

vii 29

212

SEC. MATTHAEVM

v 19

vi 10, 13
vi 20

vi OT

vii 21
vii 25
i135

x 25

x1 28

ma oe
x1i 40
Xili 28
xi 30
xlli 39
xiii 45
xvi 18, 19
meeel
mix 12
x1x 28
ech Lie

6917
174
841
8223

69!

6315

13°

67

6325
844
4190 5620, 57%, 598
792

2979

793

8418
6318

61°

29°

607

8326

Oe nte it 63!7
RMIT Oo 631!
KMAV 2 8}
Xxiv 4 5°
XXiv 5 785
KxIV Lo 54
xxiv 15, 16 678
xxiv 30 419
xxiv 46 ff 116
p. 9.6 ga 3°
xxv 14 8419
xxv 14 ff 6122
xxv 40 687!
xxvl 64 416) 43°
Xxvli 40 1
XXViii 1 Sy Gea

SEC. MARCVM

¥ 30
Xvi 2

5927
571i

SEC, LVCAN

i6

li 22

iv 19

xv1 8

avi 20.32
xvill 30
xin 138
xxiv 1

13°

76

6016.21, 65°20
KB ag

6617

59%

6123

5712

SEC, IOQHANNEM

19
11443

1 47

bige Wg

v 24—29
vii 39

x 30

mii 17 a8
xvi. 7c
xvii 5, 24
xix 42
> alt

430

9116
926 3727
5gi2
579

ACTA APOST.

Vil OL
xv 10

3075
1917

107

108 INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS.

PETRI I xi 4, 5 2731
5 g315 xi 25, 26 3410
xi 28 1124, 3413
IOHANNIS I xii 19 7615
i3, 4 age xiii 12, 13 573
ii 9 6814 :
epee s AD CORINTH. I
ii 18» 6015 DET 318
iii 14, 15 686 i 28—31 208
iv1—3 6731 131 19%
ao 69! ii 9, 10 48
iv 3 3028, 6916 v7 (hye
iv 18 2514 Bel 25"
iv 20 6815 xii Bs 69!2
v 21 708 xli 3 69?
xii 12 6?
xv 46 ay bees
AD ROMANOS Stile ae
pied 620
121, 22 83" AD CORINTH. II
ii 5 8425
a ae iii 6 2115
iii 19, 20 ie iii 18 19917, 219
iii 27 198 ao cs
iii 31 1410 ee ae
a ae vi2 601.19
iv 3 1915 “aN ie
iv 1315 137 ae oe
iv 15, 16 241
He Base AD GALATOS
v4 g121 i 18 56%
v 20 138, 154, 182 ii 4 3020
vi 14 127 ii 16 128
vi 16 gai iii 7 1316
vii 5 121, 1512, 172 iii 10 14
vii 7, 8 15” iii 11 1498, 152
vii 1423 15 iii 12 13
vii 22 697 iii 16 278
viii 7—9 1619 iii 17, 18 143
viii 15 Q5u iii 19 1426, 1718
viii 29 2:380 iii 21 146
ix 8 2714 iii 21, 22 12u
ix 6—8 2718 iii 23, 24 19°
ix 21 8221 iii 28, 29 7p
ix 27, 29 272 iv 23 1314
x4 18° iv 24 1313, 2821, 292
x 21 1116 iv 28—30 308

xi, 2 1118 iv 28 1318

INDEX OF BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS. 109

v 10 30° ios 746
v 18 174 ea 82, 3027, 52°, 84°
i118 311
AD EPHESIOS ii 9 3028
i 10 1827
ii 8—10 2014 AD TIMOTHEVM I
it 17 1877 i9 173, 242!
ii 21 ie vi 6 842
ayo. 16 34
9 14
se ey AD TIMOTHEVM II
v 31, 32 713 6874
vi 12 307, 5423 pia) 6315
ii 20 8218
AD PHILIPPENSES ili 5 6923
iW 69"
i1s 70! AD TITVM
li 6 12° ars 692
iii 18 3026
AD COLOSSENSES APOCALYPSIS
1 24 65 i4 5924
ii 16 644 ii 10 609
ii 19 38 ii 26, 28 7128
1 5, 6 834 ix 10 G026
ix 15 602°
AD THESSAL. I xi2 613
“2 4¢ - xi 3 6078
i 19 6 as oy
AD THESSAL. II iets 61
: : xil 14 61>
li 3 Be 30?7 ,314,5019,67'4 XVil 4 225

4 5M xxii 16,17 328 71.26

INDEX OF LATIN WORDS.

For the Latinity of the Biblical quotations in the Book of Rules see Introd.

lxix—ev.

Achar 39”

ad (=ob): ad merita 11!

adhaerere 81°

adiutorium 186

adsignari 588

adstringere 512°

aduersus (adj.): adu. corpus, pars 5°,
504, 721, 73°, 82%: ciuitas adu. Deo
41°, Meridiano 42!”

adunatus: adunati
7223, B310

~ aetas, see mundus

affectata sapientia 83°

affectus 2716

ait 6%, 719, 3974

alicubi 40°

alienigenae 40°.!?, 4122, 4916, 536, 80°

alio properantes 66°; a. tendens 70*

aliquotiens 611%.18,25, 64°?, 66%, 677

allegoria 67°°

Allophyli 40%

altitudo saeculi 7878

altus: a. sensu 6314

amatores uitae 16!

antichristus 6878, 70°

ars rhetorica 317

montem...faciunt

baptisma 36%, 43°; baptismo 7°
bellans 54”
bellum 3379

bipertitus: bip. corpus Christi 112, 8°,
1013, 2416; bip. templum 7”; bip.
Iacob, semen Abraham 29!%.; bi-
pertita Ecclesia 38°%!, 417°, Aegyptus
43!, Tyrus 461°, Aelam 491’, Hierusalem
63°; bip. Salomon 657, lucifer 71”,
orbis 75°!

blandiri 44°

breuiare 311°, 60!

Caifas 1176

Cain 428, 8123

capere 2%

captiuitas 3576

carnaliter 65!?

causa 257, 302°, 4671, 767

charismata 699

cherubin ministerium Dei 8374

chorus sanctorum 839

Christus, see Ecclesia
Christus quem accepimus 71”°

circumuentio 58°

clarere 4!°, 81°

clarificare 5”

claritas 47°2%,27, 162, 43%

clausula 52!°

coaequalis 7#

coheres 381°

commemoratio 267

communicare 1°

INDEX OF LATIN WORDS. BB |

compendium 59° ebdomadas 59°
conculeari 841! Ecclesia:
conculeatio 849 hilum homimis WH; 5). 7, 37°, Go:
conditio 228.76, 2319, 247,9,14,19 769; Dei qui dicitur Deus E, est 5'%; foun
conditio 5728, 5872 KE. Christum 5*5; mundum spiritalem
conformatio 26” qui est E. 61°!
conscientia: secundum ec, 697 edere: ornanda eduntur 82**
consequens 691% eicere 8516
consummare in aliquo 2814 elaborandum 31}8
consummatio 58 elatio 65)!
continuatio 66! elementorum cursus 58”
conuenire alicui 4°; elici 74%
quid cui conueniat 12, 3! eloquium 81!9

conuenire in Ecclesiam, genus, spe- esca 8278
ciem, etc. 27, 3°7, 414, 1196, 2415, 2524, est (‘it is permitted’) 6374
26°, 321.3,11, 3415, 3715, 401, 4124, 442, Huuangelia 61?!
469, 537, 7210, 11, 75, 761, 77503)8) euangelista 57}, 59°7

Te, 19°", 8024, 81— euldentius 6877
c. in unam mentem 8?°.19 euolui 817!
conueniri in aliqua (parte) 40:1", 50!*, — exceptare 761°
i ae excessus 37?"
copia Scripturae 667 excidium 43°, 52%
copiose 1114 excludere 19!7, 8325.30
corporaliter 777 execrabilis 11!4, 41%
corpus in capite 774 exercitium 25"!
cruciatus 48" exponere 63!%,
Dagon idolum 40!4, 411% fabricare 1°, 66°, 7374
debilitatus 8576 facile uideri 41°, 3121
definitio 64°° facinus 82°”
defossus 82°" facultates (ra Umrdapyovta) 82%; see sub-
delegatus 81°! stantia
delegere 76*° Fanuhel 22°
delitescere 29° feria: sexta f, 5617, 575, 5817, 594.10
demonstratrix 18° fortuitum 2319
dignari 12?” fulciri 182°, 8525
dilucidari 1’, 32?
dimicari 80** generalitas 76°
dinoscentia 18!" generaliter 41!*, 437
dispositio 27! gloria 19°°; gloriam habere 19°, 2018
distat 719
ditari 7976 habitator 52°
diuturna mansio 10? hactenus 73!
dominari alicuius 177, 72'4, 7314, 767 Helisabeth 22°
dominicus (dies) 58°12; fide dom, 259 heremus 35°, 651.2
dominium 18” humanitus 154

dum 1”, 79, 3109) 21, 517, 6123, 6518 (usque
dum), 76°, 8021 ibidem 6076, 612; see illic

112

idolatria 38}, 391,12

idolum 40"; idolorum cultores 3814.29

ignis doloris 22°

illic (never ibi) 2971.24, 357.26, 3612, 4115,
43°5, 446, 504, 5312, 5411, 7127

illicubi 5419

imperitia 22)

impunitas 38%

in: in nullo 76°, in omnibus 11°, in
Regnorum 37}2, 3818

incarnatus 6818

incaute 22°°

incrementum 274,29, 21°8

inculcari 7677

incurrere: nihil conditionis ine, 2276

indigere 311°

inducere 9°", 2725, 671°, 806

ingemescere 10?+

inlucescere 5717, 581%

inluminare 57}. 22

inminens 57°

inmoderatius 761°

innouari 33°?

inpalpabilis 3?

inpedimentum 257, 31°°

inpingere 14%

inportunus 58.18, 60"

inridentium uox 752!

insequi 30°; tempora se insequentia 64°

instar 73”

intellectus 31°°; (‘signification’) 5°, 668

intentari 177

interceptus 13°

introit...intrat 6318

inualescere 65112

iugis, -e 82, 1811, 396

iugiter 4°%.27, 13%, 141, 25%!, 3912, 434

legitimi numeri 553, 592°, 60812

liberum arbitrium 22!2,19, 262, 271, 28°;
calumnia lib. arbitrii 23°

liquido 3128

Lucas: secundum Lucan 7°

lucifer 7124, °9

ludificari 22”

luminaria 1°

magis dicere 8416

INDEX OF LATIN WORDS.

magisterium 31!

magnificus 152

magnitudo 19?7

maiestas: eccl. maiestate 79!”

mandare 16°, 627, 674, 69°7

manere: iugiter mansit 13°, 14!

manna 26), 635,24

mansio 1074

martyr 21!

Maziam 80°

merere 2314, 817; mereri 851!

Meridianum 42!%, 73?5.°8, 75%; pars me-
ridiana 73!”

metropolis 4176

militare 30!9

ministerium 8374

ministra: lex m. mortis 16). 1716

miscere 24”, 4318; filio Dei, Christo,
etc., misceri 619, 77. 16,22, 298, 9613, 387.9,
83”, alicui uoluntate m. 72°

miserans 219

miseratio 16°

mobilis et inmobilis 75?!

mos: more 32°, 43%

Moses 26!7, Mosen 1278, Mosi 5728, but
e.g. Moysi 261%

multiformis 31”

mundus 613.31, 6521, 7374; m. aetas 5614,
mundus regnans 65!4, m. reparationem
66!, mundo finito 7514

mundus (adj.): Nabuchodonosor mundus
obiit 771°

mysterium 111%, 313.1,18, 679

mysticus 28°, 55?

natiuitas aduentus 429; uenit natiuitate
427

-ne 1!9, 317!

necessarior 8°

necessarium 39”, n. duxi 11; necessario
308

necessitate 177, 1818, 24°7, 25°.21

necessitudo 2717

negatio 68°

negotiari 847°; negotiandi causa 467!

neomenia 5876

nequam 7414, 808

nescire and non cognoscere 8”

INDEX. OF LATIN

nudare 16°

obduratio 8375

obduratus 4°

obiurgare 76?

obsequium 8211

obseruare 5779, 622, 671.4, 708, 771

obseruatio 217

obstupescere: obstipuit 451!

obtinere 14, 30°, 52°

occultari 311”

operarius 237°

operatrix 25%!

oportunus 461

ordo 14°, 32%!" 5871; ordini relinquere
51°; ordine 417°, nouitatis 0. 59; ex
ordine 64°

ornamentum 311°, 82°8

palpabilis 3?

parabola 40)!

parturiens 53!°

parum 76; p. fuit.,.nisi 207°

passiones 4°7; passio Domini 45°

perambulare 15

peregrinatio 567, 61!

periocha 52!°

perseuerare 81°°

perspicue 287}.°3, §415

perspicuus 827499

plenitudo 21°. °9

populus solis 42?”

portator 82°!

post (conj.) 27°

post modum 28%, 2974

posteritas 42°

praedicator 63!

praepositus 11°

praescientia 24°, 2819

praesidentes cathedrae 631”; *1

primogenitus 619, 591%

principalis 84!

principari 76?

pro locis 6°, 65%, 04°"; 72°, 77

professio 68°.!*, 69°; sub p. ueteris Test.
9.930

promittere (‘to set forth’) 5814

prophetare 40°, 5417

B,

WORDS. 113

prophetatio 43?7

prophetia 1’, 41°°, 854

propositum 31°, 48°

proprietas 40°

prospicere: huic quaestioni prospiciens
1423

pseudoapostolus 63°

quale si diceret...aut 5!8, 657°
qualitas 2876, 296

quando 2}4, 4378

quantitas 287°, 55

quasi 58!’, 648

quiescere 681°

quo (‘in order that’) 51°, (31%,) 661
quoad usque 7474

rationalis cursus 587"
recapitulare 66%

recapitulatio 1, 6574, 6612.14; i. 677
recessus 1+

recordatio 48°

redigere 513

refert 3977

regularis 1°

relaxare 767

renati Christi 4°°

reniti 71"

reparatio: mundi r. 661
restaurari 40!

resurrectio 3612.77, 375, 561’, 65°
resurrectiones 3678

Poy

rex nouissimus 5”, 75, 77!

sacramentum 36°

sacrilega mens 152

saeculum (‘this world’) 411, 7875, 80°,
83°; futuro saeculo 839

saturitas 644, 16

scilicet 431°, 7520

separatim 64°

septiformis 11°

septum legis 17°!

sermo 22), 311%

sicubi 11!

sigillum: recapitulationis s, 66!"

significari 71‘

silua: prophetiae inmensam s. 1°

8

114

similitudo 67% °6

simplicitatis nomen 70°

solidari 773

soluere Iesum 6916

sonare 67°

Sor, see Tyrus

specialiter 40% 7, 647°, 79°

status 48°, 65°

strepere 23°

strictim 46"

sub (with acc., cf. 35%): sub promissa
3910

sublimitas 848

subornare 5”

substantia 83; (=7Td vmrdpxovra) 61”,
see facultates

subtiliter 51%4, 689

summa, 56’, 5974

superstitiones 7914

supputatio 5876

surgere 367, 561%, 61!*; but resurgere
occurs 7 times

INDEX OF LATIN WORDS.

synecdoche 55* 4
synonyma 5?!

titulus 672, 8016, 8415

tolerantia 1774

translatio 32; Ecclesiae transl. 657°
tropus 55° 6, 562°

tumore stuporis elatus 1275

Tyrus quae et Sor 401°

uetitum 26

uicarii Christi, diaboli 634! !°

undique uersum 15%, 17°, 656
uniuersus 835; (abl. abs.) 63°, 66°, (81°)
uotum: uoto 21, non uoto sed... 24°’, 70?
usque dum 651%

ut with inf. 541%; ut puta 567

utique 75%

utrimque concluditur 58°

Zorobabel 81°

CAMBRIDGE : PRINTED BY C. J, CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

ee
cb

oe

ate

it

aa

begany
ee

Ae
oo

‘olen

Pies AND StU Din

CONTRIBUTIONS TO
BIBLICAL AND PATRISTIC LITERATURE

EDITED BY

J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON B.D.

HON. PH.D. GOTTINGEN HON. D.D. HALLE
NORRISIAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY

VOL. HL

No. 3. EKUTHALIANA

CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1895

London: C. J. CLAY anv SONS,

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE.
Glasgow: 263 ARGYLE STREET.

Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
few Work: MACMILLAN AND CO.

BO aisision i ANA

STUDIES OF EUTHALIUS
CODEX Ho OF THE. PAULINE EPISTLES
AND THE ARMENIAN VERSION

WITH AN APPENDIX
CONTAINING A COLLATION OF THE ETON MS
OF THE PSEUDO-ATHANASIAN SYNOPSIS

BY

J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON B.D.

HON. PH.D. GOTTINGEN HON. D.D. HALLE

NORRISIAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY

CAMBRIDGE
See UNV Rol PRs
1895

[All Rights reserved}

Cambridge :
PRINTED, BY J.-AND. 0. KF... CLAY,

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

PREFACE.

HE problem of the classification of the cursive Mss of the
New Testament is one which promises to baffle the textual
critic for a long time to come. A vast amount of preliminary
work must be done in the collation of texts of which our
knowledge is at present lamentably defective. A mere list of
variants from a particular standard is not enough by itself to
illuminate the history of a Ms. We require to know—and we
are very seldom told—what subsidiary matter has found its way
into a codex, in the form either of prefatory notices or of
marginal apparatus. Mss of the Acts and the Epistles, for
example, are seldom without some of these embellishments. They
are to a large extent descended ultimately from an _ edition
of these books put out im ancient times by a modest scholar
who has not revealed his own personality, but to whom tradition
has ascribed the name of Euthalius. A knowledge of the history
of the Euthalian apparatus must furnish an important clue to
those who would undertake the task to which we have referred.
A laborious effort has recently been made by a German scholar to
reduce to order some portions of the chaos!. But he has attempted
to conjure with the name of Euthalius without a knowledge of the
risks he ran.
“We have only to mention the name of Euthalus,” says Dr
Zahn*, and his words have been more than once quoted of late,
“in order to call up a multitude of unanswered questions.” Some

1 Bousset, Textkritische Studien (Leipzig 1894). If I have spoken somewhat
severely of this book, it is not because I do not recognise the ability and zeal of its

author, but because the subject is one in which inaccurate statements are peculiarly
misleading.

2 Geschichte des NTlichen Kanons, 11. 384.

v1 PREFACE,

of these questions I have endeavoured to deal with in the present
Essay. The answers to several of them are still to seek: but I
trust that I have done something to clear away some general mis-
apprehensions both as to the date of Euthalius and as to the scope
of his work. I do not in the least pretend to an exhaustive treat-
ment. My object has rather been to pave the way for an edition
of the Euthalian materials, a task to which I hope some scholar
will address himself.

One of the collateral pleasures that belong to work upon a
topic like the present, which, however obscure it may be, lies in
the heart of the region of Textual Criticism, is that the study of
one problem often throws unsuspected light upon other problems,
or at any rate involves investigations which, though their results
may be only negative as regards the particular question which
called them forth, yet seldom fail to bring a reward of their own.

Thus it happens that on the present occasion I have some-
thing to say on several topics of first-rate interest to students of
the New Testament text.

(1) The birthplace and the early home of the two great
Uncials 8 and B is a matter of keen controversy. I believe
that I have called attention to a fact which will have to be
reckoned with in this connexion.

(2) My researches naturally led me to a fresh examination of
the fragments of Codex H of the Pauline Epistles, and I am fortu-
nately able to present to the Biblical critic almost the whole text
of sixteen pages which are still missing from that important
Uncial. Before their disappearance they had left their mark
upon their companion pages in a faint yellow stain which has
yielded up its precious secret to a patient effort at decipherment.
I cannot sufficiently express my gratitude to the Reverend H. 8.
Cronin, Dean of Trinity Hall, who has set aside important work of
his own to spend much time and eyesight upon the revision of my
transcript.

(3) In quite another direction Euthalius has challenged me
to speak, when otherwise I should have kept silence for the
present. My very inadequate knowledge of the Armenian
language would have prevented me from expressing a judgment
on so serious a question as the origin of the Armenian Version,

PREFACE. Vil

had not a theory which connected a portion of that Version with
the Edition of Euthalius claimed to be investigated in any discus-
sion of Euthalian problems. I believe that the result of this in-
vestigation reaches beyond its immediate purpose, and will be
found to have an important bearing on the textual criticism of
the Gospels as well.

(4) I have added in an Appendix a collation of the unique
Ms of the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis which has been missing
since the days of Montfaucon, and has recently been found again
by Dr James in the library of Eton College. As portions of this
Synopsis are frequently interpolated into the EKuthalian apparatus,
the present seemed a fitting opportunity for making known the
results of this discovery. I am indebted to the Provost and
Fellows of Eton College for allowing the Ms to lie at my disposal
in the Fitzwilliam Museum.

Among those to whom I am under a further obligation of
gratitude are Mr F. C. Burkitt and Mr E. J. Robson, Scholar of
this College, who have kindly assisted me in the correction of
my proof-sheets.

CHRIST’S COLLEGE,
July, 1895.

as
aoe,

eens

if

IL.

ELT.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

RECENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DISCUSSION OF
THE EUTHALIAN PROBLEM.

Summary of Zacagni’s Investigations .

Henri Omont’s edition of HP"

Albert Ehrhard .

Ernst von Dobschiitz .

J. Rendel Harris .

F, C. Conybeare .

THE WORK DONE BY EUTHALIUS
His own description of it
Examination of Zacagni’s Materials
The Tables of Lections
The Short Tables of Quotations .
The Full Tables of Quotations
The Pseudo-Athanasian Summaries
The Tables of Chapter Summaries
Further Interpolations
Critical Results of this Examination .

THE DATE OF EUTHALIUS, AND TRACES OF HIS
INFLUENCE. ;

The Martyrium Pauli .
Other indications of date
Athanasius or Meletius ?
The Library at Caesarea
Chapters of the Acts in & and B
The Locality of Euthalius .

NOTES ON CODEX H OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES
Recovery of the text of some pages now lost
Notes on M. Omont’s transcript of H .
The relation of H to the Euthalian Edition

28-47

48-71

x CONTENTS.

PAGES

V. THE ARMENIAN VERSION AND ITS SUPPOSED
RELATION TO EUTHALIUS . : , A . 72-98
The origin of the Armenian Version of the N. T. : : : 72
The Armenian Version of the Gospels : : ; 76
The Armenian Version of the Pauline Epistles . : ; : 83
The Armenian Version and the ‘Euthalian Text’. 92
VI. SUMMARY OF RESULTS . : : : : : . 99-104

APPENDIX

Collation of the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis. : : . 105-120

EKUTHALIANA.

CHAPTER LI.

RECENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE EUTHALIAN
PROBLEM.

THE personality and the date of Kuthalius have long been a
matter of controversy. The indispensable memoir on the subject
is that of Zacagni in his Collectanea Monumentorum Veterum,
published at Rome in 1698. This work was partially reprinted
by Galland (Ven. 1774, tom. x), and afterwards, yet more incom-
pletely, by Migne in the Patrologia Graeca, vol. 85: but no
student of the subject can afford to be without the original
memoir, which alone contains Zacagni’s important Introduction.

1. Zacagni edited in full for the first time a vast mass of pro-
logues, argumenta, programmata, lists of O. T. citations, lists of
chapters, colophons and scraps of all kinds, which he gathered
out of Kuthalian mss of the Acts and the Catholic and Pauline
Epistles. But he was somewhat indiscriminate in his method,
and was too ready to accept the fullest Ms as the best witness to
the Euthalian tradition. A critical edition of the Euthalian appa-
ratus is greatly needed. The present essay will, I hope, do some-
thing to clear the way for such an edition, and may perhaps
stimulate some scholar to undertake it.

Zacagnis conclusions with regard to Euthalius may be sum-
marised as follows. The first Masorete of the New Testament,
as he terms him (pref. liv), was a deacon of Alexandria, who at
the request of some unnamed Father put forth in A.D. 458 an

R. E. 1

2 EUTHALIANA.

edition of the Pauline Epistles, written, not continuously, but in
short sense-lines (oruyndov), as an aid to intelligible reading. He
prefixed a Prologue which contained an account of S. Paul’s life, a
brief sketch of the contents of his Epistles, and a discussion of the
chronology of S. Paul based on the works of Eusebius. To this he
added lists of the O. T. citations found in the Pauline Epistles,
and lists of chapter summaries derived from another unnamed
Father, whose date was probably A.D. 396. At a later period
Euthalius, now become bishop of Sulca, a place not to be identified
with certainty, followed up his work on the Pauline Epistles by a
similar edition of the Acts and Catholic Epistles, dedicating it to
his ‘brother Athanasius,’ that is to say, to the second archbishop
of Alexandria who bore that name.

These, in brief, are the results of Zacagni’s learned investiga-
tions, and they have been accepted almost without question until
the present day. Mill (proll. 907) added to them the suggestion
that the Father, from whom Euthalius borrowed the chapter sum-
maries of the Pauline Epistles, was no other than Theodore of
Mopsuestia; and this view has received the support of recent
critics.

2. A new impetus was given to the study of the Euthalian
question, when M. H. Omont? published a complete transcription,
together with two pages of facsumile, of the scanty remains of the
Greek Codex H of the Pauline Epistles, whose 41 leaves are
scattered in the libraries of Paris, Mt Athos, Moscow, S. Peters-
burg, Kieff and Turin. M. Omont refers the codex to the second
half of the fifth or to the sixth century, and connects it with the
Euthalian edition of these Epistles on the ground of the distribu-
tion of its text (oTrynddv or oteynpov). By a strange good fortune
the leaf which contains the colophon at the end of the Pauline
Epistles is preserved in the Bibliotheque Nationale, and of its
recto M. Omont has given us a photographic reproduction. ‘This
colophon is so important to our subject that I must give it in full,
only dividing the words and using minuscules for greater clearness.

1 Notice sur un trés ancien manuscrit grec en onciales des Epitres de Saint Paul
(Paris, 1889): separately reprinted from ‘ Notices et Extraits’ &c., xxxiil, 1.
2 The Bibliothéque Nationale at Paris contains 24 of these leaves, and with them

may be seen photographs of the leaves preserved in the other libraries, with the
exception of those still at Mt Athos,

EUTHALIANA. 33

The page begins with a line of writing now almost completely
obliterated, and then we read as follows:

éypawra kal €&eOéunv Ka
Ta SUVamLY oTELYNPOD -
Tobe TO TéUYOS TaUAOU

5 TOU aTroaTOAOU: Tpos &y
ypaumov Kal evKaTadnu
TTOV avayvwol+ TOV Ka
OP nuas adeXpov: trap ov
ATAVTWY TOALNS . TU

10 YVOUNY AITO. EvX) TH
UTép EL@V +> THY CuLTrE
pipopav Kopmromevos:
avTeBrnOn dé 7 BiBnros -
Tpos TO év Katcapla avTi

1s ypado”- THs BiBrALoOnKns
TOU aylou Tapudirov - yerpl

On the verso we have:

yeypappwévov
Tpoaharvnais'~

Kopwvis é€yi doypa
tov Oétov didacKaros:

5 av Tive me ypHans + ati
BiBrov AapwBave oi yap -
aTroéoTat KaKol’

’ h
avTippacis'~

Onoavpov éyxwv oe vi

10 KOV ayabdéy + Kal Tao
> , \
avOporots tobntov’
appoviats Te Kat TOLKL
Nats ypappmatls Kexoopn

UZ \ \ 6} fe -
fevov > vn Thy arnOesa -

15 OU OWoW GE TPOXElpws

/ »>Q? S VA n
Tivt- ovd av dOovécw Tis

4 EUTHALIANA.

The accents and breathings are due to the later hand which has
retraced the letters with a corrosive ink. The letters of mpoo-
hovnots and avtippacrs are in red ink, and are not retraced. The
accents of tévyos, mdvAov, perhaps point to a time when these
words were pronounced as in the present day, tevchos, pavlou. In
line 9 of the recto the facsimile shews that the original scribe
wrote ovv, not cvy (Omont'), which is from the later hand.

This colophon, then, tells us that the codex to which it applies
was compared with, that is, corrected by, a codex which was written
by Pamphilus, the famous friend of Eusebius, and was preserved
at the time in question in the library of Caesarea. It does not in
the least follow that Codex H itself was the manuscript so com-
pared and corrected. Colophons of this kind are frequently copied
by scribes from one manuscript into another. I have given an
example of this in my edition of the Philocalia of Origen (p. xxviii).
The Ms of Origen contra Celsum from which all other known Mss
are taken contains the following colophon: pweteBrAHOn Kai avte-
BrOn €E& avtiypadov Ttév avTod wpiyévous BiBriwv. But that
codex cannot be earlier than the 13th century. Moreover the
same words are reproduced in copies taken from it in the 14th
and 16th centuries.

It is possible that Codex H is copied line for line from the Ms
to which the colophon actually refers. In the curious appeal made
lower down by the book to its owner a complete line of writing
seems to have been dropped. The words look like the adaptation
of some earlier iambics. We may write them thus:

Kopevis eps Soypatov [Gevwv] duddoKaros:
dv tui we xpnons avtiBiBrov AapBave:
of yap <daBortes BiBrL'> aroddotat Kakoi.

Some supplement is needful in order to give an intelligible sense
to the last clause; and the letters which I have inserted might
form a line in Codex H, and, on our supposition, in the MS from
which it is copied. The evil practice which the warning implies
is probably not so modern as to be an anachronism.

We shall have to return to this colophon and its interesting
appendices later on.

1 M. Omont has himself made this correction in a note on p. 56.

EUTHALIANA. 5

3. In September 1891 Dr Albert Ehrhard, then at Strassburg
and now at Wiirtzburg, published an important essay on Codex H
and Kuthalius in the Centralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen (VIu. 9,
pp. 385—411). He pointed out that in Codex Neapolitan. 1. A. 7
(Ac 83. Gregory, Prolegomm. 2. 627) the same matter is found
which we have copied from Codex H. Between the words yeypap-
pévov and tpoadwvnats, however, comes the ‘Navigatio Pauli,’
which frequently occurs in MSS containing the Euthalian appa-
ratus. At the end of the piece is the word wdedelas, which com-
pletes the sense. There are other minor variations, but they are
not of a kind to make it improbable that the whole of this matter
is ultimately derived from Codex H_ itself. At the beginning,
however, there 1s an important variant: for we read Evaypuos
éypawa kat é&eOéunv x.t.r. (cf. Fabric.-Harless v 789). An
examination of the facsimile of H convinced Dr Ehrhard that, in
the almost obliterated line preceding the word éypawa, part of the
name Evaypsos could be traced; and M. Omont examined the
original at his request, and confirmed his view.

Zacagni’s date for Euthalius (A.D. 458) was derived from a
notice in the Martyriuwm Pauli, which follows the Prologue to the
Pauline Epistles (Zac. 535 ff). This is however the second of two
dates which this piece contains. For, first of all, we are told that
‘the whole time from S. Paul’s martyrdom is 330 years, wntil the
present consulship, Arcadius IV. and Honorius III” Then follows
an additional note, which says that ‘from that consulship to the
present consulship, Leo Augustus L., is 63 years.’ Zacagni explained
the first date (A.D. 396) as that of the Father from whom Euthalius
derived his chapter sumaries. He supposed that Euthalius had
also borrowed from him this little statement about S. Paul’s
martyrdom. ‘The later date he regarded as that of Euthalius
himself.

It is obvious to suggest that the second date is really that of a
copyist of some Euthalian Ms, who wished to bring the reckoning
down to his own times. Indeed Zacagni himself affords us in his
foot-note material confirmatory of this view: for he says that he
found the notice containing the second date in some only of his
Mss. It appears to be absent from most MSS, as well as from

' For the text of the Martyrium see below, p. 29 (cf. p. 47).

6 EUTHALIANA.

Oecumenius, who cites this Martyriwm. Thus the internal and
the external evidence combine to deprive it of authority.

Dr Ehrhard, while recognising the earlier date (A.D. 396) as
the true one, proposes to take a bold step and dispose of Euthalius
himself; substituting for him Evagrius Ponticus, who lived in
Egypt at the end of the fourth century. His argument in brief
is this. The colophon of H is clearly by the same hand as the
recognised ‘Euthalian’ apparatus. (His proof of this he works
out by a series of parallels.) But this colophon, as the Cod.
Neap. has helped us to see, began with the name of Evaypuos.
Euthalius has always been a mysterious person: now deacon, now
bishop; now of Alexandria, now of Sulca, wherever that may be:
his name, moreover, is wanting entirely in many Mss, while in
one codex at least Pamphilus takes his place. Evagrius Ponticus
died in 399: his claim to the authorship of the ‘ Euthalian’ edition
at least deserves a hearing.

I am surprised that Dr Ehrhard, who has gathered together
an immense collection of details illustrating the whole subject,
should have failed to notice that Fabricius-Harless (v. 789), to
which he refers for a description of the Neapolitan codex, tells us
that this codex has at the end of the Prologue to the Pauline
Epistles these words :

Evaypios Suek@v Tas avayveces Kai éxotiyicas Tacay THY
atoaToNKkny BiBrov axpiBas KaTa Vv. aTiyous Kal TA KEepadaLa
ExaoTns avayvwocews TapéOnka, Kat Tas év avTH PEepomévas pap-
Tupias, étt 6 Kal bowv 7 avayvwots oTixwy TUYXaVEL.

If now we turn to Zacagni’s edition (p. 541), we find the same
note at the close of the avaxeharaiwars avayvocewy x.t.r. for
all the Pauline Epistles. But its first words run thus: Aveidov
Tas avayvoces Kal éeotixica Tacav Thy K.T.r. It is evident at
once that dvetrov and éotiyica are the true readings. It is
further to be observed that the anonymous form of the note is
in harmony with similar notes on pp. 413 and 479. It is possible
of course that the name of Evagrius has been systematically sup-
pressed in all these places.

4. Whatever judgment we may pass on Dr Ehrhard’s view, of
which I have only given the merest outline, we must be grateful
to him for the many facts to which he has drawn our attention

EUTHALIANA. it

in the exposition of it. His essay soon called forth another of
perhaps equal importance in the same Journal (Centralblatt fiir
Bibliothekswesen, 1893, x. 2, pp. 49—70) by Ernst von Dobschiitz
of Berlin. Herr von Dobschiitz holds that Codex H, so far as
its mutilated condition allows us to judge of it, represents a com-
paratively late and incomplete form of the Euthalian edition, and
that the writer of its colophon borrowed its Euthalian phraseology
from the genuine Prologues. In this latter view he revives a
suggestion made long ago by Montfaucon (Bibliotheca Corsliniana,
p- 261). He gives us some interesting information derived from
an independent study of Euthalian Mss, and inclines to maintain
Zacagni’s view of the two dates in the Martyriwm Pauli, and to
assign the first part of it to Theodore of Mopsuestia, and the
second to Euthalius.

We pass on from these two important contributions to the
Euthalian problem, which appear hitherto to have escaped notice
in England, to speak of some interesting work which has lately
been published on the same subject in our own country.

5. In reprinting in 1893 his valuable Essay on Stichometry,
which summarises the researches of Graux and others and applies
their results to Biblical codices, Dr Rendel Harris added as an
appendix a Lecture on the origin of Codices & and B. In the
earlier part of his book he had discussed at some length the
stichometry found in Zacagni’s edition of Euthalius, and in this
appendix he endeavours to throw light upon some of the ob-
scurities which surround his personality and his work. The
Kuthalian Prologues to the Acts and the Catholic Epistles are
addressed to a certain Athanasius (adergé “AOavacre tpocdi-
rAéatate Z. 409; aderé "APavacre timidtate Z. 476). If, with
Zacagni, we accept A.D. 458 as the date of the Euthalian edition
of the Pauline Epistles, more than 30 years must elapse before
the edition of the Acts and Catholic Epistles could be dedicated
to the younger archbishop Athanasius. But this long interval is
inconsistent with the statements of the Prologue to the Acts.
Dr Harris observed that throughout this Prologue the writer is
perpetually playing with the word pedérn, illustrating from all
sources the importance of the study of the Scriptures. He be-
lieves that in one passage Euthalius distinctly refers to Medérn

8 EUTHALIANA.

as ‘the namesake’ of the Father to whom he dedicates his
edition!: and with great ingenuity he suggests that this Father’s
real name was Meletius; that he is to be identified with Meletius
of Mopsuestia; and that the name of Athanasius was afterwards
introduced by scribes, who wished to substitute an orthodox
Father for an exiled heretic. Meletius was a pupil of Theodore
of Mopsuestia, and thus we come round by a new route to the
suggestion of Mill that it was from Theodore that Euthalius
borrowed his chapter summaries for the Pauline Epistles.

Dr Harris further discusses the colophon of Cod. H, noting
the parallel between its phraseology and that of the Prologue to
the Acts. Huis object is to confirm the connection of Euthalius
with Caesarea; for this connection has become of importance,
since, as he had already pointed out, the second numeration of
the chapters of the Acts in Zacagni’s codex corresponds with the
earlier numeration in the margin of Cod. B.

As the title of the Prologue to the Acts has hitherto been
Ev@aniov...mpos “A@avacvor, it is curious to see that, while a
German scholar has disposed of Euthalius, an English scholar
has unseated Athanasius. If we were free to combine their
results, we should have as our new title Evaypiov...mpos
Medérvov. But I am afraid that neither of the critics could
consent to this juxtaposition.

6. In an article in the Journal of Philology (1895, vol. XXUL.,
no. 46, pp. 241—259) Mr F. C. Conybeare of Oxford makes an
interesting contribution to the Euthalian question. He points
out that an Armenian codex (c. A.D. 1270) of the Acts and
Epistles in the British Museum (Add. 19,730), which contains
the Euthalian Prologues, has likewise at the end of the Epistle
to Philemon the colophon and the quaint notices following it,
which we have been considering above. The same matter is
found, he tells us, in the same place in an entire Bible (.D.
1220) at S. Lazzaro, and in another belonging to Lord Zouche.
The Greek original of the colophon he rightly finds in Codex H:
but he is unaware that the ‘Address’ and ‘ Reply’ are also there’.

1 Zac, p. 406: Harris, Stichometry, p. 80.
? They are printed in Montfaucon’s Bibliotheca Coisliniana (Paris, 1715, p. 261),
but not in Dr Gregory’s description of Codex H.

EUTHALIANA. 9

This latter fact, however, greatly strengthens his argument for
the close connection between the Armenian MSS named above
and Codex H.

It should be noted, further, that part of the colophon is cited
at the end of Philemon by Zohrab, the learned editor of the
Venice Bible (1805, p. 824 n.), who referred it conjecturally to
the pen of Euthalius. The whole with its appendices is given
by Father Carekin (Cat. of Anc. Arm. Translations, p. 139) trom
the Venice Codex, where the text does not greatly differ from
that of the British Museum ms. The words, however, which in
the latter MS represented cata dvvau.v are wanting. Both texts
give at the close of the ‘Reply, after the words ‘nor again will
I grudge the benefit of any,’ the following addition: ‘but, when I
lend thee to my friends, I will take a goodly copy in exchange’.
There follows, likewise in both texts, the ‘ Navigatio Pauli.’

The mutilated condition of Codex H allows us little oppor-
tunity of judging of the extent of the apparatus which it origi-
nally contained; but enough is left before Galatians, 1 Timothy
and Titus, to prove that the spurious hypotheses prefixed to the
Epistles, which even Zacagni rejected, were not included in that
codex. Nor are they found in the Armenian ms, B. M. Add.
19,730. Here then we have a fresh point of connection between
these codices.

It is well to observe at this point that the Euthalian apparatus
is given in a fuller form in some Armenian Mss; as may be seen
by a reference to Zohrab’s edition, where, for example, the spurious
hypotheses are printed before the list of chapters of each Epistle.
This may suggest that there was a tendency from time to time to
supplement the Armenian Version by the addition of apparatus
taken over from Greek codices.

This variation between Armenian codices in the matter of
their subsidiary apparatus receives a further illustration from the
Martyrium Pauli, to which reference has already been made.

? The Greek for this is found in the Neapolitan Codex, which as von Dobschiitz
points out, in correction of a statement of Ehrhard, continues after dpedelas thus:
xpnow de Tots pirous, dfvomisTov avTiB.Brov NauBdvwv (Centralblatt fiir Bibl. x. 2, p. 59Ff.).
The Armenian translator has misunderstood dyvrifiBdov, which, as von Dobschiitz
(ibid.) shews, means a ‘receipt’ or ‘ quittance.’

10 EUTHALIANA.

Zohrab prints it, where Zacagni too has it, at the end of the
Prologue to the Pauline Epistles. Mr Conybeare says that it is in
Lord Zouche’s Bible, though he does not tell us at what place it
occurs. But B. M. Add. 19,730 and (apparently) the Venice Bible
of 1220 A.D. do not contain it.

Mr Conybeare rightly points out that, where the Martyriwm
does occur in Armenian Bibles, it is found in the shorter form:
that is to say, it does not contain the interpolated second date,
which, as Zacagni’s foot-note had shewn us, is not found in all the
Greek Mss.

To the theory which Mr Conybeare bases on the connection
between Cod. H and certain Armenian codices we shall come in a
later chapter. At present we must pass on with an expression of
our gratitude to him, as the first Western scholar who has directed
our attention to the existence of the colophon of H in an Armenian
form.

For the history of the colophon it is important to note that the
perplexing name of Evagrius does not occur in the Armenian copies.

CHAPTER {f
THE WORK DONE BY EUTHALIUS.

THE actual work done by Euthalius for his edition of the
Pauline Epistles and of the Acts and Catholic Epistles is a subject
which deserves a critical treatment. Even Zacagni was not
prepared to ascribe everything which he found in his Codex Regio-
Alexandrinus to the pen of Euthalius himself. Thus he took
objection to the Argumenta or ‘T7robécers prefixed to the several
Epistles, on the ground that their statements contradicted those of
the subscriptions of the Epistles which he regarded as Euthalian :
and he rejected also a series of Church lessons which he found in
the margin of his codex.

Our first duty must be to collect and examine the statements
which Euthalius makes in his Prologues with regard to the work
which he has undertaken. We may then go on to enquire what
portions of the existing apparatus tally with the author’s own
account of his enterprise.

EKuthalius’s own description of his work.

We begin with the earlier work, the edition of the Pauline
Epistles. The Prologue begins (Zac. 515) with a statement that
the work is undertaken in obedience to the command of one whom
Euthalius addresses as ‘most honoured Father’ (watep tiuiwtate).
May he steer the ship by his prayers that it may reach the desired
haven! Then follows (Z. 516 ff.) a life of S. Paul, closing with the
mention of the day on which his festival is kept in Rome. Next
comes (Z. 523) a series of brief summaries of his fourteen Epistles.
The Epistle to the Hebrews is placed after 2 Thessalonians. In
connection with the Epistle to Philemon we are told that Onesimus

12 EUTHALIANA.

was martyred at Rome under Tertullus by the breaking of his legs.
The sentences which follow must be given in full (Z. 528):

Ottas 7 Taca BiBXos meptéyes TavToioy Eidos TodLTELOY KATA
mpocavénow. Kai Ta péev Kat eriTomy Tap judy eipnobw rept
avuTov él TocovTo: Kal éxaotny Sé GuVTOMws erLaTONY ev TOFS
e&s mpotafopev THv TAY Keparaiwy execu, Evi TOV GopwTaTwY
Twi Kat piroxYpioTwY TaTépwv Huav TeTovnuevnv? ov piv adrda
Kal TV TOY avayvdcewy axpiBectaTny Tourn, THY TE TOV OEiwy
Baptuplov evarrodextov evpecw nueis Texvoroynaavtes avekeda-
Natwoaueba, érumopevdmevot TH THS VHS avayvwcer' exOnoopeba
& ody tavtnv evOvs peta Tovde Tov Tporoyov.

I have here followed mainly B. M. Add. 28,816". The only im-
portant variant is the reading of Vat. 363, Cryptoferrat. and Regio-
Alex., which Zacagni gives in a foot-note: thv dé tev Oetwr.
This would seem to make the list of quotations the only part of the
work claimed by Euthalius as original.

It is to be noted that there appears to be no reference here to
any work upon the text itself: only preliminary matter is spoken
of. The Prologue is to be immediately followed by a table for the
finding of quotations, and then before each Epistle separately we
may expect the é«@eois xepadraiwy. What is meant by thy tov
avayvdcewv axpiBectatny Tounv is not clear; as indeed it is uncer-
tain whether it should be taken with the preceding or the following
sentence: possibly it is to be interpreted by the later expression
(Z. 405), wetptats Tais THs ddLyomabods nuav avayvdcews Touats.

We now turn to the later work, the edition of the Acts and
Catholic Epistles. Here the Prologue opens by saying (Z. 403)
that those who seek immortality study the Scriptures night and
day. Their commands, when they ask our assistance, cannot be
disobeyed without peril.

IIpaérov 8) obv éywye THY atoatoNKiy BiBrov atiyndov?
avayvous Te Kal ypaas tp@nv SieTreuwaunv mpos Tia Tov év
Xpiot@ Tatépwv Hua@yv, petpiws teoinuévnv mol, old Tis TwAOS
aBadys 7 véos awabns épjunv oddov Kal arpiBy iévar Tpoatetay-

1 Written a.p. 1111 (Ac 205 P 477). It reads ev 7 ray pidocogordrwy x.7.r. I
have used it also from time to time in the following extracts.

2 So B. M. Add. 28,816. The mss perpetually vary between oriy7ddv, eee
and oroxnddv.

EUTHALIANA. i

bévos. ovdéva ydp trov Tay bcot Tov Oeiov emperBevoavTo Noyov
els Sedpo Sueyvwv rep todto THs ypadas TavTns eis arovdny
TeTOINLEVOY TO oXAMA. ovde yap avnp avOddns otTas ov6E
TOAMNPOS HV, @S Tots Etépots (Z. Tovs Etépous: fors. Tods ETEpoLs)
ED wdda TreTroLnwévous Tovous avTOS aheldas KaOuBpilerv peTplars
Tals THS OAyouabods Hudy avayvdcews Touals. evayxos Toivur,
as €pnv, THV Lavrov SiPXov aveyvwxus, avtixa 6) weTa TadTA Kal
THVSE THY TOV AToaTONLKOY TpaEewy Awa TH TOV KaDoALKaY érTL-
aTo\a@y EBdoudds Trovécas, aptiws cou TéTopda, cvyyvoOpnv Ye
TrEloTHY aiTav eT audolv TOAUNS OMOd Kal TpOTrETElas THS emis.

Later on (Z. 409) we read: ...é€vayyos euotye tTHy Te TOV
mpatewy BiBrov Gua Kal KaDorLKOY eTLOTONGY avayVOVal TE KATA
Tpoowdiay Kal TAS avaxeharardcacbat Kat Svedety TOUTwWY EKa-
OTNS TOV vodV ETTOMEpwS TpocéTakas, abeA Pe "APavacte Tpoc-
dpiréaTtate. Kal TOUTO aoKYwS eyo Kal TpoOvpws TeTrOLNKOSs,
attyndov Te avVOeEls TOVT@Y TO Udos KATA THY EwavTOD TUppETpiav
Tpos evonpov avayvwaty, dueTeuraunv év Bpayel Ta Exacta cot,
Kat akorovbiav éexOéwevos orALYooTHY avaKeharaiwolw, TPwTOV
mepi ov AovKas 0 evayyedtoTis cuvétake Tpooimliacdpevos.

A few lines about S. Luke and his work follow, and so the
Prologue closes.

From these notices we gain fresh light as to the earlier work
on the Pauline Epistles. We see that Euthalius felt that he was
there breaking new ground in one important particular. He was
contributing to an intelligent reading of the sacred text by dis-
tributing it into short sentences. This work is described by
various phrases: otiyndov avayvous Te Kal ypayras—wperpiars
Tals THs oAvyomabods NuaY avayvOcEwWsS TOMAais—avayVaVal KATA
Tpocwodiav—atiynoov avvbels ToUTwY TO Upos KaTAa THY éu“avTOD
TupmeTplav TpoOsS EVaNMOV avayvwoun.

In his new book he is to do this for the Acts and Catholic
Epistles, and at the same time to give a summary of the contents
of each Epistle arranged in chapters. He says nothing here of a
table of quotations.

To the Catholic Epistles a much briefer Prologue is prefixed.

“Even small ventures are perilous to small men. I am very
small, and my labours far too great for my safety. My little skiff
must inevitably go down in the storm, but that I plead obedience,

14 EUTHALIANA.

and claim indulgence and prayer on my behalf.” At the close
(Z. 477) we read: ’Eyo 8€ tor otiynddv tas KaboriKas KabeEns
émlaToNas avayveocopal, THY TOV Keharalor exec dua Kal Oeiwv
HapTuplav petpios évOévde Trovovpevos.

Here the three parts of his work are briefly enumerated: the
distribution of the text into sentences, the chapter summaries, and
the table of quotations.

Exanunation of Zacagni’s materials.

Bearing in mind the statement of Euthalius (Z. 529) that the
table of quotations will immediately follow the Prologue to the
Pauline Epistles, we turn to Zacagni’s edition to see what is
actually presented to us. Here (p. 535) the Prologue is succeeded
by

(1) Maprvpioyv Lavrov tod atroatoXov.

(2) “Avaxeparaiwars TOV avayvocewy Kai bv Eyovat Keparaiwvr
Kat waptuplav Kal’ ExaoTny émiacTOAnY Tov aTroaTOAOU, Kal bowY
éxaoTn TOUT@Y oTixvev Tuyyaver. (Z. 537.)

(3) IIpoypappa of 10 lines (Z. 542), explaining the use of
black and red numeration in what follows, viz.,

(4) ~Avaxedaraiwaors Oeiwy paptupiov—a brief summary.

(5) IIpéypaypa of 26 lines (Z. 548), explaining the use of
black and red numeration in what follows, viz.,

(6) “Avaxeharaiwors Oeiwy paptupidv—a full table in which
the words of the quotations are given.

(7) <A list of the Pauline Epistles, and a note on their number.

(8) ‘YaroGeous mpeTns pos “Pwpatous emiatonrys.

(9) "ExOeows xeharaiwv for the Epistle to the Romans.

The Tables of Lections.

It is obvious at a glance that we have here something more
than Euthalius had promised us. Reserving the paptipiov Ilavrov
for treatment later on, let us look first at (2), the avaxeda-
Nalwots TOV avayvdcewy. A similar table follows the Prologue to
the Acts, but Zacagni found it only in his Codex Regio-Alex. Of

EUTHALIANA. 15

the like table which follows the Prologue to the Catholic Epistles
he says that he found it in that codex and in Cryptoferratensis,
but in no other: and this seems to hold also for the Pauline
Epistles. These tables of dvayvdcers, then, are wanting in most
of the Euthalian Mss. Let us examine their contents.

The Epistle to the Romans has 5 avayvdces, 19 xeparaca,
48 paptupia, 920 otixor. The details we may abbreviate by
tabulation :

avayvucers. Kepadaa. peaprupiat. orixot.
I 4 (1—4) 9 (1-9) 249

I 06-18) 1 (10) 248
II 34 S16) 1 2641-36) 185
IV 1 (17) 6 (37—42) 125

V 2 (18, 19) 6 (43—48) 125

The oriyor when added up make 925 instead of 920: probably
the error has come in by assimilation of the numbers for lections
IV and V. Similar calculations are given for each of the other
Pauline Epistles, and for all of them taken together.

These avayveoers are not only very long, but also curiously
irregular in length, as a glance at the table for the Romans will
shew. Zacagni notes, as the beginnings of the five into which this
Epistle is divided, Ro i. 1, v. 1, ix. 1, xi. 1, xv. 1: that is to say,
the first and second lections each contain four of the chapters into
which our modern Bibles are divided; the third and fourth each
contain three of our chapters; and the fifth contains two. Similarly
i Connphians divides thus: 3, 4, -vii, 2, vin. 1, xit. 1, xv. ly. This
coincidence with the first verses of our chapters is not constant ;
there appear to be four exceptions, 2 Co iv. 7, Gal ii. 15,
Col in. 17, Heb vu. 11: the main breaks in an Epistle however
would naturally fall at places where one of our chapters closes and
another begins.

What is the origin of these long lections, or what purpose they
ever served, I cannot tell. They look like the divisions of a
commentator, rather than lections for reading in Church. At
first sight it might seem that we have here the axpiBeoratn tov
avayvooewv Touy, promised us by Euthalius in his Prologue
(Z. 529): but the absence of these tables from the great majority

16 EUTHALIANA.

of Euthalian codices! is against this: as is also the fact that they
do not appear in any form in the subsequent tables, not even in
that of the chapter summaries. It is possible that the words
of Kuthalius were interpreted in a wrong sense, and accordingly
led to the insertion of these tables of avayvwces to fill what
appeared to be a gap in the apparatus.

On the whole it will be wisest for the present to abstain from
attributing these tables to Euthalius himself.

Before we leave them, two points deserve our attention :

(1) The title of the Acts of the Apostles in Codex &, at the
beginning of the book and wherever it occurs as a headline, is
simply IIpafevs. The subscription? in & however speaks of it as
IIpa&ers atrootodwy, which is its title? in Band in D. All other
Mss seem to have a fuller title still) Origen seems to refer to
the book most frequently by the shortest title, [Ipa£evs.

Now it may be accidental, but it is certainly worth noting,
that Euthalius in referring to the book in his Prologue to the Acts
and in his undoubtedly genuine tables of quotations and chapter
summaries never uses the name IIpakeus adzrootéXwv. Thus we
have: Z. 403 [Iponroyos tév trpakewr, Z. 405 thy tev atroagTOALKOY
mpakewy (BiBrov), Z. 409 tHv tév mpakewr BiBrov, Z. 410 thy
Tepi THY aTrooTOALKeY Tpakewr (BiProv), Z. 415 dvareparaiwors
Ociwy paptupiav THs BiBXov Tov tpakewy, Z. 421 amacai ai
paptupias Tav Tpakewy da’, Z.428 xeparara tov mpak~ewv. In the
Prologue to the Pauline Epistles we have indeed (Z. 531) Aouxds
0 Tas Tpakers TOY aTOTTOAWY ypahy Tapadcovs, and in the next
sentence totopet Aovxas év tais mpdgeou TOY atroaToONwy: but
mpaées alone is found twice a little later on (Z. 534).

But the table of dvayvecers with which we have been dealing
has at the beginning and at the end the title 7» BiBros trav
mpakewv THY aToaToAwy. A similar title occurs elsewhere in the
materials published by Zacagni (pp. 414, 421 bis, 428, 443); but

1 The table for the Acts occurs in a somewhat shorter form in the Armenian
Codex, Brit. Mus. Add. 19,730: and in w*t (Trin. Coll, Camb. B. 10. 16) in the
case of the Pauline Epp. the number of dvayvwoes is recorded in the subscriptions
to the Epistles: so too in Neap. u. A. 7 (v. Dobschiitz).

2 The subscription is by the hand that wrote the text of the Acts; the titles and

headlines by the diorthotes (D): Tisch. N. T. Sin. (1863) p. xxii.
3 Also its subscription in B; but not its headline, which is rpdées.

EUTHALIANA. Ly

in every case there are strong reasons for rejecting the sections
or headings containing it.

(2) Each of the three tables of advayveces is closed with a
short note which repeats in part the language of its title. Thus,
for the Acts: dve?Aov Tas avayvecets THs BiBrov Tov tpakewv
TOV ATOTTOAWY, Kal TA KEPadala ExaoTNS avayvocews TrapéOnKa
Kal Tas év av7y depopévas paptuplas, ets 6€ Kai bowv ExaoTn
atiyov tuyxaver (Z. 413). The note for the Catholic Epistles is
exactly similar. Now we have no ground for attributing to
Euthalius any interest at all in stichometry proper; that is, in the
numeration of measured otiyou, as opposed to what is conveniently
called colometry, or the distribution of the text into sense-lines,
So that it is satisfactory to get rid of these two notes. The third
(Z. 541) must go with them: dvetAov Tas avayvocers Kai éotiyica
TACAV THY ATOTTONLKHY BiBXov aKpLBOs KATA TEVTNKOVTA OTLXOUS,
Kal Ta Keharala ExaoTysS avayvdcews x.T.r. This is the place
where, as we learnt from Fabricius, the name of Evagrius is found
in the Neapolitan codex. Moreover it is the passage which has
been used to accentuate the stichometrical zeal of Euthalius, who
is supposed to have made his own calculation of the oriyou, noting
in his margin every fiftieth occurrence. We shall probably not
esteem him the less, when he is stripped of his mathematical
honours.

The Short Tables of Quotations.

So much for the table of avayveces. The next to go is the
first and much more condensed table of quotations. Let us
begin by considering that prefixed to the Acts. We shall not
reject it on the ground that its heading speaks of wpafeus tov
aTvoaToAwy, though that may arouse our suspicion: nor because it
sayS ofov paptupias Xa’, whereas Euthalius says admdoas ai
paptupia tov mpakéewy Aa’. Our first ground of objection is that
it has no special use in a book which contains the fuller table,
though it is arranged according to the books of the O. T., and not
according to the sequence of the Acts. Our second ground is that
it is inconsistent with the fuller table. This short table contains
one quotation from Deuteronomy, the longer table contains none:

Ro: 2

18 EUTHALIANA.

for this particular quotation it ascribes, though wrongly, to
Exodus. Now the short table reckons it also among the quotations
from Exodus; so that it has it twice. How is it then that both
tables reckon 31 quotations for the whole of the Acts? If we
look at Zacagni’s edition (p. 420) we see that in the fuller list
No. 24 is altogether missing. This he explains on the ground that
it 1s in fact only a partial repetition of No. 4, and as such it seems
to be marked in the margin of the text where it occurs. But the
compiler of the short table has dropped it altogether, and so he is
able to present the same total as he found in the fuller table.

At the close of the first table of quotations in the Pauline
Epistles, we have a list of the places from which these Epistles
were written. They correspond with those mentioned in the
subscriptions to the Epistles. Another list follows in which the
Epistles are distributed according as to whether S. Paul writes in
his own name alone, or joins another with him in the opening
salutation, or remains anonymous as in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
None of this matter has any claim to a Euthalian origin.

With these short tables, which we may now dismiss, will go the
programmata which explain the use of black and red numeration
which is found in them.

The Full Tables of Quotations.

We pass on now to the fuller tables of quotations. There
seems no reason to doubt that these are the genuine work of
Euthalius in fulfilment of the pledge given in his Prologues. The
quotations in the Acts, for example (Z, 415—421), are copied out
in full, part of their New Testament context sometimes finding a
place with them. ‘To each is prefixed a number, which will be
found later on in the margin of the text itself. Beside O. T.
quotations, we find two (i. 5, xi. 25) from 8, Matthew, one (xvii.
28) from Aratus the Astronomer and Homer the Poet, and one
(xx. 85) from the Apostolic Constitutions. The table is perfectly
simple: it requires no programma, and has none.

The corresponding table of quotations in the Pauline Epistles
is provided with a double numeration. The first series of numerals
is red, and begins afresh with each Epistle: the second series is

EUTHALIANA. 19

black, and is continuous throughout the fourteen Epistles, shewing
how often, up to the point indicated, the same book has been
quoted by S. Paul. Thus for 1 Co i. 16 we have the following
numeration (Z. 556):

III. [v@']. "Hoatov rpogyrov ts’.

This means that the quotation is the fourth quotation in the
first Epistle to the Corinthians, and that the Apostle now quotes
for the sixteenth time from the Prophet Isaiah ; one such quotation
having already occurred in this Epistle and 14 in the Epistle to
the Romans. The number which I have bracketed is an insertion
of Zacagni’s, based on a misunderstanding of the preceding pro-
gramma. Two questions arise at this point: is this double
numeration original? and did Euthalius himself use red and
black to distinguish between the two series ?

The treatment of the Pauline Epistles as a single book, which
is implied in the second numeration, is attested by the ancient
chapter numbers in Cod. B, which form one series throughout the
fourteen Epistles. It is further attested for the Ms which gave
these numbers to B by the breaks in the series caused by the
change of the position of Hebrews, which must once have followed
Galatians, whereas in B it follows 2 Thessalonians.

But in Codex H, from which unhappily all the prefatory
matter is now lost, we find only the first series in the margin of
the text’. Thus against Heb 1. 13 we have;

i 1
HCAlOY HCALOY

These correspond to X. and XI. of Zacagni’s table (p. 563). In
later codices we should find underneath them kr and ka, as they are
the 23rd and 24th citations from Isaiah which occur in the book
of the Pauline Epistles. Either, then, we must say that Codex H
has given us the Kuthalian tradition at this point in an incomplete

1 In quotations from the Psalms we have a double numeration: but the lower
number is that of the Psalm itself. Thus at Heb ii. 12 we have:

8 fe)
parm
Ka
the quotation being no. IX in the Epistle, and from Ps xxi. (xxii.).

20 EUTHALIANA.

form: or we must say that the second numeration is one of the
many later elaborations of Euthalius’s more simple scheme. To
my mind the latter alternative is the more reasonable. If we
accept it, the distinction of black and red numeration falls of
course to a period subsequent to that of Euthalius himself.

The table for the Pauline Epistles is closed by two lists.
The first of these (Z. 568 f.) gives the numbers of the quotations
which occur more than once in the Epistles. There is no reason
to assign it to Euthalius: it is probably from the hand of the
compiler of the first table of quotations. The second (Z. 569)
is a mere list of titles of the Epistles. It begins: Taéde éveoruy,
IlavAov érictovai. 1 tTpds ‘Pwpaious, x7. It is somewhat
belated where it occurs, and is probably a subsequent addition.

The Pseudo-Athanasian Summaries.

The next instalment in the apparatus of the Pauline Epistles
is a short note (Z. 570) headed: Ava ri IlavXou émictoral dexa-
técoapes Néyovtar. The heading is absurd; for the note itself
does not attempt to answer the question: and both it and the
vTobecrs to the Epistle to the Romans which follows it are in-
terpolations into the Euthalian work. They come, as was pointed
out by Matthaei and also independently by von Dobschiitz, from
the Synopsis attributed to 8, Athanasius (see Appendix).

The Tables of Chapter Summaries.

1. Next we come to the summaries of the chapters of the
Romans (Z. 578). Here we find two headings. The second is
probably original: cepadara Tis pos ‘Pwpalous émuatoAns Lavrov
10’. The first is a general heading for all the Epistles, and is clearly
out of place. It is omitted in Zohrab’s edition of the Armenian
Bible, and is perhaps spurious. It runs as follows: "Ex@eous
Kkeharaiwy KaborrKov Kal” éexaotny éemiatodAnV TOU aTroaTOXoD,
éyovT@Y TOV Kal pepiKas UTodialpécets Tas bia TOD KUWYA-
Bapews: that is to say, some of the chapters have subdivisions
which are indicated by red letters. We must consider this in

EUTHALIANA. 21

connection with the first heading to the lst of chapters in the
Acts.

There (Z. 428) the list is headed xeparara tov rpakewr, but
we find a note before it to which is prefixed &«Oeous xeharaiov
Tov mpakgewy TOV aTroctToAwy. We observe, in passing, that the
heading of this note gives us the longer title of the Acts.

The note must be given in full.

"Ex tatépwv nets Kal SidacKarwv TOV TpOTOY Kal TOY TUTOV
wpernméevol eyxelpovmer peTpins THdE TOV Keharalwy éKbécen,
ALTODVTES TUYYVOmNY TpoTETElas, NmELs Ol VEOL YXpdveV Te Kal
paOnudtav Tap vuev éExdoToU THY avaylwwoKorTwV, EvYH TH
Umép nuav THY cuuTEpipopay Komtfopevot. exTLOéWEOa your av-
thv Kal’ iatopiav Aoved Tov evayyeXtoToD Kal cuyypadéws. ToL-
yapouy dia wey TOD péXavoS aUToTEAH Ta KeddAdaa, dia bé Tod
KivvaBapews Tas €v mépel TOUTWY eyomevas UTrOdtaLpécers eon-
pecmoapeba.

This note differs from other personal statements which we
have found reason to reject, inasmuch as the writer speaks not
in the first person singular, but in the first person plural. The
tone of it is quite in harmony with the Prologues, and the
flowing style and the distinctive phraseology (wertpiws, evyn TH
UTép Nuov, cuuTreptpopav) remind us of Euthalius. The only
serious doubt arises when we come to the last sentence. We
have refused to Euthalius the distinction of black and red in the
numeration of quotations. Is it genuine here ?

Now there is no reason why Euthalius, had he so desired,
should not have used a red pigment (xuvvaB8aps), as Eusebius
seems to have done in his Chronicon and in his table of
Canons. But we have a good ground for doubting whether he
actually did.

Montfaucon in his Bibliotheca Coisliniana (pp. 78 ff.) cites
from a tenth century Ms (Coislin. xxv.) the following matter
which is prefixed to a Catena on the Acts and Catholic Epistles,
stated in a colophon to have been compiled by a certain presbyter
named Andreas :

"ExOeows Keparaiwy tov mpakewy tod Lapdirov.

"Ex matépwv nels Kai didacKadwp K.T.r. as above.

iy EUTHALIANA.

The last sentence however runs thus: tovyapovv Sta pév Tod
arxda cal Bita avtotern Ta Keparasa, Sta bé Tov aoTe-
plokov tas év péper TovTwv éyouevas vrodiatpécers eonpero-
capuebu. Then follows without a fresh heading: a’. wept tis
€€ avactacews x.7T.Xr., the first of the chapter summaries. The
whole of the summaries Montfaucon prints in full, believing that
in them we have a genuine work of Pamphilus of Caesarea. The
last chapter number is X60’, the yw’ before the last summary having
been omitted and the summary made to run on with the pre-
ceding one. But the closing note says: cepddata pev Ta bra
pb, Ta Sێ TovToLW Erropeva AtTwa Tas onuevwoers Exovor Sta
TOU XS pn.

Now all this has an earlier look, when compared with the
material which Zacagni gives us. In the first place the words
TOV atTooToAwy are absent from the title. Originally no doubt
it ran: "Ex@eois tov Keharaiwv tov mpatewy. The addition
of rod Ilawditov may be due to the conjecture of Andreas,
who may have used a MS written in the Caesarean library.
Further, the use of the asterisk in Mss for various purposes is
well known from its employment by the Homeric critics and by
Origen in his Hexapla. Moreover, if we suppose that at first
the subdivisions were marked only by an asterisk’ and not by
letters, whether black or red, we get the explanation of the varia-
tion and confusion which we find in regard to these subdivisions
in many codices.

Thus in Codex H, where the main chapters are numbered in
black and the subdivisions in red, we have (in the chapter
summaries of the Epistle to the Hebrews) for chap. z, which has
two subdivisions: z in black, with a in red immediately under-
neath it; then the subdivisions are numbered in red as B and fF.
But in Zacagni’s edition the main chapter is not numbered twice,
and the subdivisions are numbered as a’ and §’. A similar plan
is followed in Zohrab’s edition of the Armenian Bible.

If the original work of Euthalius marked the subdivisions only

1 Montfaucon notes that the asterisks have entirely disappeared from the codex
in question. So too in Oecumenius (Morel’s edn. Paris, 1630) there are no sub-
divisions marked: though at the end we have EHisi ra pév adroredXn xepddara b., TA
dé TovTo.s émdpeva pn’.

EUTHALIANA. yn

by asterisks, it 1s easy to see that, when this primitive notation
was replaced by letters, either of the systems described above
might be adopted.

In the table prefixed to 1 Timothy in Codex H, chapters = and
z should each be divided, according to the scheme used in this
codex, into two parts numbered with a and B in red. For they
each contain one subdivision, beginning as usual with the words
év @, and duly marked in each case by Zacagni with the symbol a’.
But in Codex H there is no trace here of secondary numeration}.
The reason probably is that the original asterisks had fallen out,
or had been neglected by the scribe who substituted letters for
asterisks throughout the Codex.

The following systems of numeration are actually found in
mss. I have used minuscules for convenience to represent the
red capitals.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
A A A A A
% 8 a a B
ee ee
B IB B B A
x B a Y EK
ee
x ) Y € Z,
r iS Ly Tr H
% B a s 3)

(1) is that promised, though not given, in Coisl. XXv., as we
have seen above.

In the Cambridge University Library two Mss shew asterisks
occasionally: Kk vi 4 (saec. x1.) in the margin of the text of 2 Pe
and 1 Jo; and Ff i 30 (saec. xi.), where the summaries of the
last chapter and subdivision in Colossians are written thus :

1 Ta mpos Tovs oiKelous SpmovontiKas’ ev & TA pds TOUS GAXO

*% Tplovs + €uppovas + olKovopmiKas : ~
But in the text of Colossians the subdivision is marked with 4.

1 Von Dobschiitz is mistaken in saying that two strokes in the margin indicate

the place where a subdivision should have been: for these are the ornaments below
and above $ and Z respectively.

24 EUTHALIANA.

Again, in the case of Coisl. xXx. (saec. x1.), a Catena on the
Pauline Epistles, we have the following heading before the chapter
summaries of the Romans: kefaraiwy éxOeors nabortkav Kal
ExaoTHY ETLaTOAHY TOU aTOTTONOU: eXOVTMY TLV@VY Kal pEpLKAas
UTodtatpécers TAS OLA TOD onmElou TOD adaTepicKxov. The subsections
of chapter 16 are accordingly marked thus: * a’, * B’, and so on to
* =’, Here we have a combination of methods (1) and (8).

(2) is the method which is fouud in Codex H.

(3) is that given by Zacagni, and found in many Greek and
Armenian MSS.

(4) is found in Brit. Mus. Add. 28,816 (A.D. 1111) and in
Wake 12 at Christ Church, Oxford (saec. xi.); but in the latter
the red and black numerals are inverted, contrary to the express
statement of the heading of the list.

(5) is found in the Graeco-Armenian codex Paris B.N. Arm. 9
for the Romans, though in other parts of this codex method (3) is
employed.

So remarkable a variety in methods of numeration is perhaps
most easily explained if we regard the asterisks as the original
marks of the subdivisions: and this view is supported by the
frequent dropping of subdivisions altogether. It is true, as we
shall see hereafter, when we return to this subject in another
connection, that even the continuous numbering of the sub-
divisions was not a sufficient protection against the carelessness of
scribes: but it is obvious that an asterisk was far more likely to be
dropped, and far less likely to be afterwards replaced, than one of
the numbers of a series.

9. After the 40 chapter summaries of the Acts, we find (Z. 438)
the following statement: Kai obtou of dpiOpot ods evpyoers Ket-
pévous (Cod. Reg. Alex. edpyoesmévovs: emendauit Zac.) &v T@
Tevyer KATA TO Dhos THS advayvocews peTa pw Kepadala Kal rN
paptuptas: eioly O€ of TdvTEs AS.

I. Tov pev wpOtov Noyov «K.T.D.

Hereupon follows a wholly different system of chapters for the
Acts, 36 in number, the first words of each chapter being cited.
This system was found, it would appear, by Zacagni only in a
single codex. It is absent from most Greek codices and, so far as

EUTHALIANA. as

I am aware, from all codices of the Armenian Version. Dr Harris
and Dr Gregory have independently observed that the same
system is found in the margin of Cod. B, being the earlier of the
two numerations which that codex contains. There is no ground
at all for connecting it with the original Edition of Euthalius.
We shall return to its consideration later on, in discussing the
supposed connection of Euthalius with Caesarea.

3. A word or two must be said before we leave the Euthalian
chapter summaries upon a matter which is involved in much
obscurity.

Euthalius expressly informs us in his Prologue to the Pauline
Epistles (Z. 528; see above, p. 12) that the &ecis Keharaior,
which he prefixed to each Epistle, was the work of an earlier
Father. In his prefatory note to the chapter summaries of the
Acts he again recognises his obligations to “our fathers and
teachers ” (Z. 428; see above, p. 21), but in this case only for the
Tpotros and tu7ros, the method and model of his work.

It is somewhat puzzling to find, on a comparison of the chapter
summaries of the Pauline Epistles with those of the Catholic
Epistles (and in a less degree, on account of their historical
character, those of the Acts as well), so great a similarity of style
and phraseology as, apart from the statement of Euthalius himself,
would certainly force us to the conclusion that they are all from
beginning to end the work of one and the same writer. A few
examples may suffice to illustrate this affinity.

Ro vill. é€ravddnWis wept rns ev ydpire = Ac xy. 8’. emravadnis @v 6 ayyedos
Cans. Karod,
Xli, émavdAn is mept THs dmoxet- 2 Peiv. emavadnis rept Kakias av-

pévns wylous SdEns.

1 Cov. epi dvahopas eSeouatav Kat
amoxns Satpovixod oeBa-
oparos.

2 Co ad init. Kai mepi tans peradotixns

apeTns.

is \ A A
Vl. Kal THs TOU DapaTos aTo-

Gécews kai €rravadynwWeas.

Opareav aipetixav.
a , > Ce \ ». aA i.
1 Jo vil. a’. €v & mepi amoxns dat

povikov ceBacparos.

Jas il. kat mpakews ayabns peradori-
KS.

1 Joiv. kai dvabécews peradotikis.

1 Pe v. wept dmrodécews atAwv

mpagewv Kal emavadnWews

wn > oe a
T@V €V TVEUPLATL KapT@v.

26 EUTHALIANA.

Eph i. wept trys ev Xpior@ éexroyns 1 Pe viii. evyy tmép TeAe@oews TeV
Np@v Kat eicaywyns Kal TLOTEVOVT@V.
TEAELOTEWS. 3 Joi. evyn vrép reXct@oews k.T.A.
Phili. kat edy7 reActo@oews.
2 Thes i. xal edx7 trep redeooews
avuTa@v K.T.X.
1 Thes ili. epi api£ews rhs adrov. Ac xxiv. kat dadifews Tavdov els
Makedoviav.
3 Jo ill, sept adigews aitov mpods

avrous.
2 Pe iv. a’. év & dre aidvidios nEea

t

Vil. epi tod aidvidios A&ewv
Xptotov, Sorte Set evTpeTi- Xptoros... dare Seiy evtperi-

CeaOat orovdy k.T.A. ¢erOa maon ape.

It is worth while to note also the occurrence in the chapter
summaries of two somewhat striking words which Euthalius uses
of himself: ovpmepidopa, Ro c. v. a’ and #’ (cf. Z. 405, 428); and
ouppetpia, Jas c. i. (cf. Z. 409 ad fin.).

It would seem then either that Euthalius must have based his
later work most carefully upon the Pauline summaries which he
had previously borrowed, or that his indebtedness to his unnamed
predecessor cannot have been so great as his modesty would lead
us to suppose.

Further Interpolations.

Some further insertions into the Euthalian apparatus, as
found in Zacagni’s Edition, may conveniently be noticed at this
point.

On p. 425, after the ‘Tzrd@eors of the Acts, we find a piece
entitled *Azroénuiat IlavXov tod aroatonov. It commences
"Amo Aapackod ypEato and ends votepov évy aitn tH ‘“Pobun
éuaptupnoev. This is little more than a list of places visited by
S. Paul. In Oecumenius (Morel ut supra I. 193) the same piece
goes on further to speak of the Festival of S. Paul at Rome (ef.
Z. 522 f.). No one will, I think, be disposed to claim this piece
for Euthalius.

Again on pp. 513 f, at the close of the Catholic Epistles, we
have three supplementary sections:

(1) A series of stichometrical calculations and a colophon

EUTHALIANA. He

concerning the correction of the book in the Caesarean Library.
Of this we shall speak further below (see p. 34).
(2) ?Eniypappa rod év “AOnvats Bopod, with a note upon it.
This Inscription is cited by Oecumenius on the Acts ad loc.
(3) Il\ods Tavrov tod arootoXou él “Popnv. 12 lines.
This is the ‘ Navigatio Pauli,’ referred to already (pp. 5, 9). It
is found in various positions in MSS: sometimes at the end of the
Acts, and sometimes at the end of the Pauline Epistles. Here it
is peculiarly out of place.

Critical Results of this Hxanunation.

We have thus found reason to suspect the genuineness of a
large portion of the materials which Zacagni has collected under
the name of Euthahus. The Tables of avayvecers, to which are
appended the notes which are the sole ground for crediting
Euthalius with stichometrical labours; the Short Tables of Quota-
tions, with some minor lists attached to them; the Pseudo-
Athanasian argumenta; the second system of chapter numeration
for the Acts; and the further interpolations just mentioned :—all
these must be cleared away if we are to get a true conception of
the original Edition of Euthalius.

What remains deserves to be carefully edited: but no edition
will be complete which does not also give us the spurious matter,
which is of considerable importance for the history of the Euthalian
tradition and therefore, though indirectly, for the textual criticism
of the Acts and Epistles.

We may probably accept as genuine:

(1) The three Prologues (Paul. Act. Cath.).

(2) The Full Tables of Quotations.

(3) The Chapter Summaries, with the little prefatory note
prefixed to those of the Acts.

I have said nothing of the Martyriwm Pauli, for that will
require a separate consideration.

CHAPTER III.
THE DATE OF EUTHALIUS, AND TRACES OF HIS INFLUENCE.

The Martyrium Pauli.

THE Martyriwm Pault, which occurs in some Greek and some
Armenian codices immediately after the Euthalian Prologue to the
Pauline Epistles, plays so important a part in the controversy as
to the date of Euthalius that it is necessary to subject it to a
thorough examination. I am not aware that the genuineness of
this little section, which stands by itself with a title of its own,
Maprvpiov Iavdov tod amoacrtoXov, has ever been seriously dis-
cussed. The dust raised by the controversy as to whether
Euthalius is the author of the main portion of it which contains
the earlier date, or of the added part which contains the later date,
has blinded critics to the necessity of offering a reason for
attributing to him any share in its composition at all.

Yet when we have read steadily through the whole of the
Prologue, it is hard to understand why this little appendix should
be given us: for Euthalius has already discussed at some length the
chronology of S. Paul by the aid of the works of Eusebius. More-
over its absence from certain MSS, Greek and Armenian, is in itself
suspicious. Zacagni, too, tells us that in his Codex Urbinas
(=Ac 79 P 90 saec. xi.) it is found without the Euthalian Prologue,
and called “ Prologue to the fourteen Epistles of S. Paul.”

A slight comparison of its phraseology with that of the
Prologue disposes of Zacagni’s view that it is the work of the
‘early Father’ from whom Euthalius borrowed his chapter-divisions
for it is redolent of Euthalius: the only question is whether it is
not too redolent.

EUTHALIANA. 29

Let us set side by side certain sentences of the Prologue and
the whole of the Martyrium, excepting the added portion which

contains the later date.

PROLOGUE TO PAULINE EPISTLES.

Z. 522 Avr dO ody 6 paxdptos Tavdos
TOv KkadOv adya@va dyavicdpevos,
er > - i cal ¢€ ,
és now aitos, TO TOV lepovikwv

~ ¥: ,

Xpiorov paptupev atedayv@ KateKo-
, ¢ la , Bo]
opnOn. ‘Pwpator de repixaddA€ow oikos
kat Baotdelios TovTov heiYyava Kaeip-

> , oJ iid ‘A is ,
Eavtes emérevov ata prynuns nuépav
mavnyupiCovalt TH TPO TPL@v KaXav-
dav
L-nv os, TOUTOU TO papTUpLov EopTacovTes.
Z. 532 "Eva 67 cvvéByn tov Taddov

an », a ,
TPlLakKOOT® EKT@ €TEL TOU TOT pPlov
l t

> , ,
lovAi@y, wéurtyn Tavépov

m7 d0ovs Tpirxadekat@ dé Népwvos pap-
tupjoa, Eider tv Kearny aro-
TpnOévra.
Z. 533 Ilepi d€ rns devrépas (amo-
Aoyias), ev 7 Kat TeNELOUTAaL T@ KaT
> A , - ‘ i.
avuTov paptupla, pyc: k.T.X.
"EoTtiv ovv 6 Tas xXpovos TOU KN-

pvypatos Iavdov k.7.A.

( > ~

Z. 529 “Avayxatov d€ nynodpny ev
Bpaxyet kai TOV ypovoyv émLOnpPELo-
A , , Pd
cacOat Tov Knpvyparos IlavAou, ék
T@VY xXpovikav Kavovav EvoaeBiov rov
Tlappidtov tiv dvaxepadaiwow tro.ov-

pevos.

Mapripiov ILavXov rot aroardXov.
> A € ,
Emi Népwvos tov Kaicapos ‘Popaioy
> A b) , “A ¢ > ,
enaptupnoey avt oO IlavAos 6 amdato-
y 2 \
hos, Eiher thy kehadrny amorpnbeis
EV T@ TPLAKOTOT@ Kal EKT@ ETEL TOD
>
goTnpiov mabovs, Tov KaXdOv a-
a 2) >) €
yava aywvicdpevos ev Papun, Tép-
¢ a
a7Tn npépa Ilavéuov pnvos, res
<
Aéyotro av mapa “Pwpaiors 7 mpd
n A > > a
Tpt@v Kadavddayv “lovAl@y, Kad’ jy
> , coe Dy heii an >
eTeheL@On 6 Gyios amdaTo\OS TH KAT
> \ , ig ~ alae: 4,
avTov paptrupia, E€nkooT@ kal evvaT@
A a A e a > aA
€reL THS TOU GwTHPOS Hnuov “Incod
Xp.orov tapovaias.
a 7 € A“ , as a
Eotiv ovv 6 was xpovos e& ov
,
epapTupnoe Tpiakdgia TpidKovta €rn
‘i on , ,
péxpl THS TMapovaens TavTns vmareias,
pev

*Ovwpiov tev dvo0 adeAPav adtok patdpov

TeTAapTNS "Apkadiou. tpitns 6é

> # > , > cal aA
Avyovoteyv, evvatns ivduxti@vos tis
TEVTEKALOEKAETNPLKNS TEpLodov, pnvos
? a
lovviov eikootn éevvatn npépa.

> , > vad \ ,

Eonpet@odpuny axpiBas tov xpo-
~ , , 2 ,

vov TOU paptupiou ILavAov droarvAov.

[For the additional note, see p. 47.]

The passages which I have quoted from the Prologue do not

practically stand so far apart as the pages of Zacagni’s edition
suggest; for pp. 523—528 contain brief summaries of the Pauline
Kpistles, and pp. 529—532 a discussion of the chronology based
on Eusebius: to an epitomiser they would lie sufficiently near
together.

It is almost inconceivable that a writer who has so great a
wealth of expression as the author of the Prologue should repeat
his own language in this slavish manner. Nor on the other hand
does it seem in the least probable that the Martyriwm has been

30 EUTHALIANA.

used at considerable intervals (for the intervals are considerable on
this view) in the composition of the Prologue.

Beside these general considerations there are three distinct
points at which the Martyriwm shews itself to be the later docu-
ment.

1. At first where, ex hypothesi, the writer embodies a phrase
of the Prologue he gives the Roman date for June 29, viz. 7 po
Tptov Karavoav ‘lovAiwyv; but lower down we find pnvds “Iouvviov
ELKOOTH EVVATH NMEpa.

2. The phrase in the Martyrium 16 cat avtov paptupia is,
to say the least, extremely harsh; whether we refer adrov to S.
Paul, or to Nero, who has not been mentioned since the first line
of the piece. But in the Prologue, after quoting with reference
to the first amoXoyia, “I was delivered from the mouth of the
lion,” the writer continues: todtov tov Népwva civar Néywv. ‘Tept
dé THs Sevtépas (a7roAoyias), ev } Kal TeXeLodDTaL TO KAT aUTOV
Haptupio, pynoiv’ «.7.r.: so that avrdv here clearly refers to Nero.

3. But a more striking divergence remains to be noticed.
The author of the Martyrium places the martyrdom itself on
June 29. But this was a later deduction from the fact that the
Roman Church kept the festival of SS. Peter and Paul on that
day, which we know from the Liberian Catalogue (A.D. 354) to
have been simply the day of the Deposition in A.D, 258 (see Light-
foot, Clem. Rom. 1890, vol. 11. pp. 499 ff). The mistake was com-
mon, if not universal, in later times; but it is not made by the
writer of the Prologue.

The result of this investigation is somewhat surprising. Neither
458 nor 396 can any longer be considered the date of Euthalius.
We must take him back earlier still. We must allow time for the
recognition of the value of his work, and the modification of it by
an epitomiser who desired perhaps to produce an editio minor by
the abbreviation of the prefatory matter.

Other indications of date.

We thus start afresh to look for the date of Euthalius’s work
at some period anterior to A.D. 396. An upper limit is given us
by his reference to Eusebius (Z. 529). For he tells us that his

EUTHALIANA. hi

summary of the chronology of S. Paul’s life is based upon that
writer: €« Tov ypovixdv Kavovev EvaoeBiov tod Ilaudirov tv
avaxehadaiwow trovovpevos. In a later passage he embodies
verbatim the language of Eus. H. #. 11 24: cai @ynow tov Ilatrov
avetov dtatpiyas...doyos éxyet Stacteiiacbas x.7.r. (Z. 531 ff).
Accordingly the work of Euthalius must be subsequent to
A.D. 328.

The name of the Father (vatep timidrate, Z. 515) to whom
the Edition of the Pauline Epistles was dedicated is not given us:
but the Edition of the Acts and Catholic Epistles is dedicated to
an Athanasius, who is addressed as aderde ’AOavacte tpoapuré-
aotate (Z. 409) and aderdé ’APavacre tiuidtate (Z. 476). The
titles of the Prologues to the Acts and the Catholic Epistles vary
considerably in the MSS; so that I lay no stress on the words
mpos “A@avdcvov éricxoTov *AXeEavdpeias, which there occur.
The tradition, however, which they represent is quite likely to be
a true one; and now that the second Athanasius, to whom Zacagni
and others have assigned the reference, is out of the question, I
see no ground for denying that it was at the request of the great
Athanasius that this part of the work of Euthalius was under-
taken.

It is however due to the clever suggestion of Dr Rendel
Harris, to which allusion has been made above (pp. 7 f.), that the
grounds on which it is based should be seriously examined. It
will be remembered that the constant recurrence of the word
peréTy In the Prologue to the Acts led Dr Harris to conjecture
that the work was really dedicated to some one of the name of
Meletius, and that this name on account of its many heretical
associations was afterwards replaced by a name whose orthodoxy
was above suspicion. Dr Harris has himself observed that the
Prologue begins with words which might be used to weaken the
force of his argument: “Ooou ts dvt@s mavy Tas ayyiOéou Kal
Jeopirots abavacias eicly épactai, x.7.d....€i5 avTHY THY aba-
vaciav Brérovow (Z. 403 f.). This possible allusion to the name
of Athanasius is, however, to his mind entirely overshadowed by a
still clearer allusion to the name of Meletius in another passage
(Z. 406). But it will be best to give his own words (Stichometry,
pp. 80 f.):

32 EUTHALIANA.

“And now there follows in the prologue an address to the
person to whom the book is dedicated, which is so important for
the understanding of it, that I must transcribe a complete sen-
tence :

éyo O¢ Sixatdtata, Kal wara ye opOas avvtpopoy Te Kal hirnv
eridnuicay av col, Kal KataréEw THY EvTpooNHyopoy, THY Tavu
hepwvupor, THY TOV Ociwy Noyiwv Eupirocopoy hyus perétyv, vp’
Nv yeyovos (1. yeyovas) Piroxpiate, Kal elow yé Tor THY SixTVMD
AUTHS UTAPYXOP, Kal THY Epdaplov aVTHS Tpoonyoplay éyKaTaTpay-
parevomevos, TUXVAIS TE del KAL AKOLNTOLS YU“VYaTaLs aKOUOMEVOS
(1. doxovpevos) evOareatatTny KaTéaTHCASs.

“The sense of which passage is as follows, after some obvious
corrections have been made:

‘With great justice and accuracy I might assign her to thee as
thy foster-sister and darling, and I will describe her as the fairly-
entitled, the appropriately-named', the one skilled in the know-
ledge of the divine oracles, her, I mean, Mistress Study (wederm),
under whose power thou hast come, and verily she hath thee in
the net; while thou, busied in the acquisition of so delightful an
appellation, and trained ever in persistent and sleepless discipline,
hast rendered her flourishing indeed.’

“The key-word to the understanding of this passage is the
word perérn. If we had any doubt on the point the sentences
which succeed would settle the question; for the writer goes on to
remark that even the poets had sung her praises....

“Now it is clear from this that the writer is playing with the
word pedérn; and he has personified her and made her into a fair
bride for the good father to whom he writes. But why should he
say of her that she is his foster-sister, ay! and his namesake ?”

After discussing a passage from the Prologue to the Pauline
Epistles (Z. 529), where he proposes to read with Boecler’s codex
(but against the main tradition) ravu depovupor for avtofpepwvo-
pov, he goes on (p. 82):

“Tt is reasonable then to assume that in the previous passage
he is playing on the word pedértn.

1 Or possibly : the very namesake.

EUTHALIANA. 33

“ But this can hardly be the case unless the discourse were ad-
dressed not to Athanasius, but to some one of the name of Meletius.

“Make this supposition and all is clear: Melete (Study) is
your foster-sister, bride, and namesake; caught in her toils, you,
Meletius, have made her renowned.”

I know how difficult it is to do justice to an argument of this
kind by giving extracts only; but I hope that Dr Harris’s book
will be in the hands of most of my readers, and I must ask them
to consider his view as a whole before they give a judgment
upon it. Yet I cannot help feeling that the passage cited above
is capable of a different mterpretation.

His former book, he says, was drawn from him by the com-
mands of a father; this is the offspring of brotherly goodwill, and
it must meet with the indulgence of brotherly charity. After
some praise of charity, he continues :

‘And for me it is most just and right that I should dedicate
to thee a foster-sister and a friend of mine; and I will describe
her as the maiden well-entitled!, wholly true to name, Study
(ueréTn), I mean, that is devoted to the Scriptures: under
whose spell thou hast come, thou friend of Christ, and in whose
nets thou art already caught, and whose delightsome title thou
dost strive to make thine own; and training thyself m her ever
constant and sleepless exercises thou hast made her flourishing
indeed.’

The epithet ‘true to name’ plays upon the familiar sense of
pedéTy, Which is commonly used of ‘training’ or ‘ practice’ for the
games. ‘Study,’ indeed, is a derived sense of the word perern,
and the athletic metaphor is quite naturally worked out in the
final clause’,

1 This unusual sense of evrpocryopos (generally=‘easy of address,’ ‘affable ’)
seems to be justified by the context, and to be explained and reinforced in riv
mavu pepovuwov. Cf. Eus. H. LE. v. 24. 18 6 pév Elpnvatos pepwvupds tus dv TH
mpoonyopla alte Te TW Tpdw elpnvoroids. Otherwise we might render: ‘‘ the maid
of winsome converse...whose delightsome converse thou dost make the business of
thy life.”

2 I prefer this interpretation, as more simple, to another offered to me by a
friend who supposes a play upon pédrra, ‘the veritable Bee of industry.’ To the
same friend I am indebted for the suggestion that c¥vtpomdov must mean ‘one who

has been brought up with’ Euthalius, and not ‘thy foster-sister’: éyw and co: are
both in emphatic positions in the sentence.

Ren. 3

34 EUTHALIANA.

If we are to see a play upon names in evOanreotatny, as Dr
Harris has suggested, I think that the meaning must be: ‘Thou
hast made the foster-sister of Euthalius ev@aneoratn.’

As far as dates are concerned, Dr Harris may, if he accepts my
criticism of the Martyrium, choose Meletius of Antioch instead of
Meletius of Mopsuestia; but I cannot myself think that a case is
made out for any early deletion of the name Meletius at all.

If we allow the name Athanasius to stand, it is of course
possible that some other person of that name may be intended,
and not the great bishop of Alexandria. Yet it cannot be denied
that, if our view of the Martyriwm Pauli be correct, there is no
chronological difficulty to make us distrust the tradition contained
in the titles of the two Prologues in question. It is to the titles
alone that we are indebted for the preservation of the name of
Kuthalius himself, and the mystery which shrouds his episcopal
see—Evdantos éricxotros LovAKns—is an argument rather for the
genuineness of the description than the reverse. That Euthalius
should address him as adeAdos, and again with the exclamation
& dirn por xehadry (Z. 476), is natural enough if he were his
brother bishop?.

The Inbrary at Caesarea.

Zacagni, on p. lxv of his Introduction, declares that Euthalius
visited Caesarea in Palestine for the purpose of collating the text
of the Acts and Catholic Epistles with the famous codices of the
library of Eusebius and Pamphilus. This statement is based on
a colophon which follows some stichometrical calculations at the
end of the Epistle of S. Jude (Z. 513). These calculations, like
others which we have already seen reason to dismiss, have no
claim to be Euthalian. The scribe gives the number of the
sticht for the mpooiuca of the Acts and of the Catholic Epistles,

1 It is interesting to note that somewhere about the year 340 the Emperor
Constans had requested Athanasius to prepare for him certain copies of the Scrip-
tures : see the Apologia ad Constantium, 4: T@ ddeAXP@ cov ovK &ypawa, 7 udvov re...
kal Ore, muktia T&V Oceiwy ypapadv KedevoavTos a’rod mo KaTacKevdoa, Tatra mommoas
améorei\a,

EUTHALIANA. 35

and the stichi for the text of these as well, and then adds, before
giving the total for the codex,

\ x N 3 x if ’
Kal TO TTPOS ELAVTOV ATLVOL KC .
It is plain enough that éuavrov cannot here be referred to the

author of the mpooiuca.
After this follows:

"AvteBrANOn Se Tov mpakewv Kat KaBoriKev émicTOAGY TO
BiBdtov mpos Ta axpiBhH avtiypada tav év Kaicapeia BuBd10-
Onxns KiaeBiou tod Mapdinrov.

The most natural conclusion to draw from this is that a
Kuthalian text has in the first instance been copied from, and
that the codex thus produced has afterwards been corrected by
a MS in the Caesarean Library.

The colophon of the Pauline Epistles found in Cod. H and
in Cod. Neap., and also in some Armenian MSS (see above, pp. 3, 8),
gives us an exactly similar history for the remaining portion of
the Euthalian Edition. But there is no ground at all, so far as
these colophons are concerned, for taking Euthalius himself to
Caesarea.

The connection with Caesarea thus established for a later
stage of the Euthalian Edition makes it necessary to sound a
note of warning as regards what is sometimes spoken of as ‘the
Kuthalian text.’ Our knowledge of Euthalian Mss is not yet
sufficient to allow us to say, whether any existing codices pre-
serve the actual text upon which Euthalius worked; or whether
all of them are descended from copies which were corrected at
Caesarea, and accordingly present us with a ‘mixed text. In
the present state of criticism we must avoid speaking of ‘the
Kuthalian text’ at all. Tischendorf denotes in his apparatus by
Kuthal*"' the upper writing of the palimpsest Codex Porfirianus.
This, it is true, gives us a 14th century copy of the Euthalian
Edition; but exactly what stage of the Euthalian tradition is
represented in it, is not to be learnt from Tuischendorf’s scanty
description. In his Monuwmenta Sacra Inedita, vol. v. p. xii, he
tells us that the first leaf begins with cal adrdés peta BapvaBa.
These words we find in the middle of the to@ecus of the Acts
(Z. 423): so that clearly some non-Euthalian matter is in the

3—2

36 EUTHALIANA.

codex. He adds: ‘nec igitur nisi unum folium periit’: but appa-
rently he has forgotten the Prologue to the Acts. Of the text
of this codex he says: ‘quum et ipse tanta plerumque bonitate
utatur ut revera ex Euthalii opera fluxisse videatur’—it shall
be given in his next volume. This promise was never fulfilled,
and we can attach no importance at all to his guess that this
MS fairly represents the text of Euthalius himself. The date of
this upper writing is (f. 319 v) sw’, Le. 6809 = A.p, 1301.

A Euthalian codex, then, containing possibly an Alexandrian
text—if indeed Euthalius was a deacon of Alexandria before
he became bishop of Sulea—was brought to Caesarea, and there
corrected by MSS in the great library: the Ms used to correct
the Pauline Epistles being one written by the hand of Pam-
philus himself.

Of this Caesarean stage we shall find further traces presently.
Here we may note that Hesychius, the presbyter of Jerusalem,
who died about A.D. 438, in his Xreynpov tov 18’ mpodntey, says:
éoTe pev apyaiov TovTO Tois Deopdpors TO crovdacpa aTuyndov
@$ Ta TOANA TPOS THY TOV pEXeTOLEVWY TapHvEelay TAS Tpo-
dytetas éxtiPecGar'...... TAnV GXAa Kal THY aTroagTOALKnY BiBXrov
oUTw TLL cuyypadeicay Evpwv, ov pmaTny év Tals Svddexa BiBros
TOV TpodynTev Kal avTos HKoAOVOnca (Adriani Isagoge, Critici
Sacri tom. vi. p. 10). Thus we apparently find a knowledge of the
Euthalian Edition of the Pauline Epistles in Palestine in the early
part of the fifth century.

Chapters of the Acts in Codd. & and B.

If Caesarea be the ancestral home of the great Vatican
Codex (B), we have no reason to be surprised that a copy of
the Euthalian Edition of the Acts which was corrected in the
Caesarean library should add to the Euthalian system of chapters
the ancient chapter-numbers which an early hand, if not the
original scribe or the diorthotes, has written in the margin of that
codex (see above, p. 24), What if it shall prove to be the case
that the relation of the Caesarean library to the Euthalian
tradition is not that of giver only, but of receiver in its turn ?

There is a second system of chapter-numbers for the Acts in

EUTHALIANA. 37

Cod. B. It is by a later hand than the first, but still by a very
early hand. It reckons 69 chapters in all. The same system is
found in the margin of Cod. %; and here again it is the work
of a very early hand, Plate vul of the facsimile edition of &
. Shews us that this same extremely fine hand has also added brief
lemmata, e.g. ta wept tod Uérpov (in the upper margin): and in
the left-hand margin against Ac ii. 834 we have padmw pé, indi-
cating a quotation from Ps cix. (cx.). The numeration in & breaks
off after reaching mB (Ac xv. 40); and Tischendorf points out
that the next folio (110) of the Ms begins a new quaternion. Can
it be that the numbers were written in before the codex was
bound, and that for some reason the scribe became discon-
tented with his task and broke it off at the end of a gathering
of leaves ?

Where did this system of numbers, common to & and B, come
from? The two codices have got hold of it quite independently
of one another. It cannot have been copied from B into W&, for
& has one number (m) which is not found in B: nor can it have
been copied from & into B, for nearly a third of the numbers
(from mB onwards) are not found in & We must go back to a
common source—some MS which gave its numeration to them
both: and this seems to imply that the & and B were at an early
stage of their history lying side by side in the same library.

But still we have got no nearer to the origin of the system
itself. How did this division into 69 chapters originate ?

If we think of the Euthalian chapters, they are 40 in number.
If we add to them the subdivisions, these are 48; and so we have
a total of 88 sections in all, and we seem as far off from a solution
as before.

It will be remembered, however, that there seemed good
reason for supposing that the Euthalian subdivisions were in
the first instance denoted merely by asterisks, and that these
asterisks were very liable to drop out in the process of copying.

Let us suppose now that a scribe, with the Euthalian chapters
and subdivisions before him, chose to adopt a new method of
numeration, and to number continuously through chapters and
subdivisions ; reckoning, that is to say, the subdivisions as if they

1 See Tisch. Nov. Test. Sinait., Leipzig, 1863, p. xxiv.

38 EUTHALIANA.

were main divisions’. This process ought to yield for the Acts
a total of 88 divisions. But if the calculator, through his own
carelessness or owing to the neglect of some earlier scribe, missed
some of the asterisks (or, indeed, of the letters, if these be con-
sidered the earlier form of the notation) which marked the sub-
divisions, we should have as the result a system of divisions which
recognised all the Euthalian chapters, but not all the Euthalian
subdivisions, and ran in one continuous series from the beginning
to the end of the Acts.

Is it possible that this is the explanation of the numeration
common to & and B? In order to satisfy ourselves that it 1s, we
shall expect to find that all the main chapters of Euthalius are
duly represented, though several of the subdivisions have disap-
peared. The matter is of sufficient interest to justify a tabulation
of the two systems.

I take the Euthalian system from Zacagni (428 ff) and from
a MS in the British Museum (Add. 28,816: A.D, 1111), recording
all important variants. Neither of these authorities locates the
subdivisions with completeness. Several times Zacagni can only
conjecture the point at which the subdivision begins; presumably
because his codex had missed the number in its margin. The
British Museum codex only undertakes to give we (and this
is the number promised likewise in the MS at Christ Church,
Oxford, Wake 38, cent. xi.); and, as a matter of fact, although it
numbers the subdivisions continuously throughout the book in
red (as opposed to the numbers of the main chapters which are
in black), it yet drops by sheer carelessness no less than seven
of them, viz. B, y, ©, 66, xy, «n and AB. It has also dropped one
main chapter (1). So that a scribe, numbering chapters and sub-
divisions as one series from this MS, would only reach a total of
77. This will shew how easily, even in spite of the protection
afforded by continuous numeration by letters, subdivisions might
altogether disappear.

! We have seen an actual instance of this reckoning for the Epistle to the
Romans: see above, p. 24.

39

‘
e

EKUTHALIANA.

AN UL 9S UX ye
AN UT ET NIX ye

q WT 1x 32)
NUL SF xX 4RJ

AN Ul GT Xa

AN UL OT Xr ge
NUL FE THA 72

“UAL

XI

IA

ANU

aN Ul

GE IIA 4e

a®

aon Oe

ee hg

AN WEL At

ad.“ Ge re

Al Gir qu

me

Wy Wy © |qI wa
Le GG
, J 88
Ol Ol 0 IT Wa
HI HI H3
ZI Z| Z bok
SI S| FY | 8
S| AI Veh
Vi VI Ss
Jl JI D cA
gI gl 7 7a
VI VI Ge
| | (aes
6) 6) D [al
H H Ve) et
Va 3 oP
= Q ¢
3 oe
Sho All
V lea
J a eo
D sre
q q q CT
V V Yet Usloy.
N qd “YN

EUTHALIANA.

40

Th sntyod [oa

*6E 84L0J, °Z og G38 WN “A ot €¢ #8 “IN “A st G8 °IN “EA at 0G 48 “IN °@ or T 38 WN A et 9% 18 IN EA
T TAX 9B YN “EL et L448 °F ot OF 38 “IN EA tr PES 18° A or G18 IN “A 6 «1G 9}40J 5 °F g
OF #8 "N'A 2 LG 38 “IN *A 9 ©9E 910F , °F g 86 38 “WN A ¢ FZ 18 °F GT 38 Zz TP 38 °IN “A x
| OMe oc osx
Welt q Ul $Z XIX ye WN al Gr 6c
= OV | LT Wtaxx q Ul GT XIx 4 N D> | PL
= F lls OW | HY | T Xx
Date 4K | $Z
= HV | [ Axx HW g ZI
q Ul PG tAxx ye = Spas O18
= D |g. TAXX q Ul pg Wax 4e DWP | AX
V= ZV |G AXX SW bs), GG
{ Ul PZ Axx 4e = | SV) 1c IW | Sy serG TAX
= JV lak Axx q Ul Cg Tax ye Vw Q 8§
= D CG _JW h 1196
= VV | GT Ttxx Se 01.
q Ul qy mixx ye) ON elVe= 06 aw D | PT Ax
K | GZ AN UlLOF AxX9e | G“w | YW! OVY:s[al lh
HN G | GT xx 0S
q Ul T uxx4e | ZN D | OF VW W Doe eee
q Ul9g xx 9B) SN | QV | LZ W pede es
IN VV ixST OV OV gy jas
VN Veal OT q ul gg mix qe | HY HV yy iL As
IN v0) Toss g wpp Tx
g “UNG N rsh “YN

EUTHALIANA. 41

We may summarise the evidence of the preceding table thus:

Chapters of Euthalius exactly represented in Nor BB . 28
» ”» represented within a verse. ees

- , with further displacement. eas

38

Only two of the Euthalian chapters are thus unaccounted for,
viz. k9 and mM. But «9 is missing only through the carelessness of
the scribe who wrote the numbers into B: he has forgotten to
write NB between his na and his nr. And mis the last chapter of
all, and Bis not alone in this omission; it 1s dropped also as we
have seen (above, p. 22) in the interesting codex, Coislin. xxv.

As to the displaced numbers, those which vary only by a single
verse need give us no anxiety. A glance at any MS which con-
tains lection-marks will shew that often these fall where the
chapter-numbering should be, and cause it im consequence to be
written a verse too soon or a verse too late.

Of the more serious displacements 1t 1s worth noting that
two of them (viz. § and k) coincide with numbers belonging to
another system which is also common in Mss, being found in B. M.
Add. 28,816 and in w** (Trin. Coll. Camb. B 10 16) and many
others.

Passing to the subdivisions we find as follows:

Subdivisions of Euthalius exactly represented in X or B20

- e within a verse ; Piece
. Z with further displacement . 8
31

Of the 8 displaced subdivisions, two coincide with lection
numbers of another system. Of the 17 that are dropped—if we
take as our standard the 48 of Zacagni’s edition—6 are cases
where a chapter has but one subdivision; and 6 more either were
dropped by carelessness in B, M. Add. 28,816, or never were
intended to be given.

I find it accordingly hard to resist the conclusion that the
system of chapter-numbers in the Acts which is common to & and
B is derived from the system of Euthalius by numbering con-

42 EUTHALIANA.

tinuously through main chapters and subdivisions, allowance being
made for the accidental (or, conceivably, intentional) omission of a
certain number of the subdivisions. It may indeed be said that
all intelligent systems of division into chapters must coincide to -
a large extent, because there are many natural breaks which must
be recognised. I admit the force of this; but I feel that the
coincidence which we have traced is not sufficiently accounted for
in this way. There is another system, which I have already
referred to in passing, which is found in many MSs, and which
divides the Acts into 53 chapters: but at least 25 of these do not
correspond within a verse with any of the 88 Euthalian chapters
or subdivisions. And on the other hand it is to be noticed that
we find divisions in Euthalius and in the system of NB at curious
points, where we should perhaps scarcely have expected that a
break would be made. We may give as instances of these: vu. 11,
x. 80, xi. 18, xv. 23, xxu. 12 and xxii. 22. The strangeness of these
breaks is diminished when we observe that in Euthalius they
mark only subdivisions, and not main chapters.

If the identification be a true one it is not without importance
in connection with the history of & and B.

The system which we have been endeavouring to account for
occurs also, with some variations, in Codex Amiatinus and Codex
Fuldensis; and this fact was one of several indications which inclined
Dr Hort to look for the birthplace of & and B somewhere in the
West. For hitherto this numeration had seemed to be absolutely
unique in the Greek world. Dr Hort’s words are (Introd. p. 266):
“ Again it is remarkable that the principal Latin system of division
of the Acts, found in the Codex Amiatinus and, slightly modified,
in other Vulgate Mss, is indicated by Greek numerals both in &
(with large irregular omissions) and in B, but is otherwise unknown
in Greek Mss and literature. The numerals were apparently in-
serted in both MSs, certainly in &, by very ancient scribes, though
not by the writers of the text itself, B indeed having antecedently
a wholly different set of numerals. The differences in detail are
sufficient to shew that the two scribes followed different originals:
the differences of both from the existing Latin arrangement are
still greater, but too slight to allow any doubt as to identity of
ultimate origin. The coincidence suggests a presumption that the

EUTHALIANA. 43

early home, and therefore not improbably the birthplace, of both
MSS was in the West.”

Codex Amiatinus has 70 divisions and Codex Fuldensis 74.
This is sufficiently near to the 69 of Codex B. It is interesting
to note that in 3 places (vii. 55 [54], xvi. 16, xviii. 24) where num-
bers are wanting in NB, they are found in Am. Fu. Also in three
cases of displacement (ii. 1, ii. 87, vi. 8) Am. Fu. side with Eutha-
lius against NB. These facts are confirmatory of the view that
the system found in Euthalius is the ultimate source’.

Whether the occurrence in the most important Mss of the
Latin Vulgate of a chapter-numeration of the Acts which 1s
Euthalian in its ultimate origin can be made to throw any light
on the problem of Greek Mss used by 8. Jerome in this part of his
New Testament, isa question that I can only propose at this point,
in the hope that it may receive the attention of the Oxford editors,
who have promised us a dissertation ‘De codicibus graecis quibus
Hieronymus usus fuerit. Here again, at any rate, the moving
back of the date of Euthalius has opened up a fresh possibility.

Whether this Euthalian system was invented by Euthalius, or
only adopted by him, may possibly be questioned. But it is quite
clear that his system of chapters and subdivisions could not be
derived from a longer system of chapters only. And now that we
have pushed the date of Euthalius further back, there is no chrono-
logical difficulty in supposing him to have been the inventor of
the system which he employs.

The locality of Huthalius.

The locality to which Euthalius belonged is a further problem
which still resists solution. He is described as ésriaxomos LovrAKys,
but his see has not been identified. Sulci in Sardinia has seemed
to be out of the question, and the various suggestions of Zacagni
(pref. Ixiv) have but little to be urged in their favour. The fact
that he addresses himself to 8. Athanasius naturally inclines us
to look to the neighbourhood of Alexandria: but on so slight an
indication we cannot lay much stress,

1 Another series, of 63 cc., is given by Thomasius (Opp. i. 353 ff.). This also

seems Euthalian. Its last no. is at Ac xxviii. 17 (against B am fu corb,). See
further Berger, Hist. de la Vulg. p. 356.

44, EUTHALIANA.

There is a passage in the Prologue to the Pauline Epistles,
which, if we could be confident as to the true text, might be
taken as pointing to Syria—perhaps to Caesarea or to Antioch.
In speaking of the Roman festival of S. Paul’s martyrdom,
Kuthalius, according to the text of Zacagni (p. 523), equates
the Roman date a. d. 111. kal. Lul. with the fifth day of Panemus,
a Syro-macedonian month. But from some Mss this reference to
Panemus is absent, while in others Lous takes its place, and in
others again we have a combination of the two in a corrupt form.

I give here the evidence for the variants so far as I have
happened to come across it. Apart from our present purpose
it may be of service as a guide for the future classification of
Euthalian Mss.

Z. 523. ‘“Popaio...... emeTeLcov avT@ puns Nuépav tmavnyvpifovar, TH mpo
Tpiav Kkadavdav “lovAiwv, méumtn Tlavéuou pnvos, rovrou TO paptupioy €opta-
CovrTes.

1. wéumrrn Ilavépou pnvos.

Vat Reg Gr 179 (Zac.) s. XI
Par Coisl 224 s. xI
Par Arm 9 (gr et arm) 8. XI
2. om. wéurrn ILavépou pnvos.
Vat Gr 761 (Zac.) 8. XII (comm. Oecum.)
Chelt 1461 (Dob.) s. xtv/xv
Oecum ed Morel (Paris 1630) I p. 193
3. (a) &xt@ TO Ao@ pnvi.
Bas AN iv 2 (Dob.) s. x
Vat Gr 1761 (‘Lollinian,’ Zac.) s. x1
(b) &xr@ T@ Odor pyvi.
Bas AN iii 11 (Dob.) s. x1
Bas AN iv 4 (Dob.) s. x1
Par Gr 101 (Dob.) s. x1
aap YEG, nanan eisleny a ae i
‘which is the 6th day of the month Noomon, which is Mareri.’
Arm ed Zohrab p. 764
4. méurrtn Iavépou pnvos, ext@ TOV vopeov pnvi.
Vat Reg 29 (Boecler) s. x1
Par Gr 105 s, x (fragm.)
B M Add 28,816. a.p. 1111. (rot Tap.)

Oxf Ch Ch Wake 38 s. x1 (rod Hav.)
Ibid. Wake 12 s. XI (rod Tav....vover)

EUTHALIANA. 45

The evidence for (2), the shortest reading of all, is not strong
in itself: for Vat. Gr. 761 omits all the words from wéumrn to
éoptavovres: and though Oecumenius does not do this, yet it 1s
plain that he has been abbreviating in the immediate context.
Of Chelt. 1461 I can give no further information.

Such strength as it has is chiefly to be derived from the
rivalry of the variants. But on the other hand we may observe,
as against (2) and (3) and in favour of (1), that Panemus, and not
Lous, is found in the Martyriwm Pauli, which, as we have seen,
was compiled out of Euthalian phrases in the year 396.

It is possible that both Panemus and Lous have come in as
marginal glosses’. We shall see presently that the Egyptian
month Epiphi came in thus into the text of the Martyriwm
Pauli. If this be the true account, Panemus might point to
an early time when a copy of the Euthalian Edition lay in the
library of Caesarea.

The reading which gives us Lous has suffered badly at the
hands of ignorant copyists. Even in the form (8a) &kto To@
Ao@w pnvi, it is obviously corrupt. Lous was not spoken of as the
sixth month anywhere, so far as we know. But the 6th day of
Lous would be the equivalent in Asia Minor to the 5th day of
Panemus in Syria. This seems to be established by Cardinal
Noris quite independently of this passage, in which he knew
only the reading méuarrtn Lavéwou pnvos. In the first of his
Dissertations De Annis et Hpochis Syromacedonum (Florence,
1691), pp. 19, 36f,, he shews that the Syro-macedonians began
Panemus on the 25th of June, while the Asiatic Macedonians
began Lous on the 24th of June.

Lous then may be a correction of Panemus, which has some-
times supplanted it and sometimes crept in beside it. In any
case it points to Asia Minor as another resting-place of the
Euthalian Edition.

We may hope that, when Euthalius comes to be critically
edited, sufficient evidence may be forthcoming to tell us decis-
ively whether the reference to Panemus belongs to him or to his

1 This view is taken by v. Dobschiitz, Centr. f. Bibl. x. 67 £., who however
inclines to 458 as the date of Euthalius.

46 EUTHALIANA.

copyists. Meanwhile we cannot safely argue from the passage in

question as to the locality in which Euthalius lived and worked.
In the corresponding passage in the Martyrium Pauli (see

above, p. 29), there is likewise a considerable variety of reading :

1. wéumrn npépa Tavépou pnvos: 7ris héyour’ dv mapa ‘Popaiois 7 mpd TpLdv
kadavdav "lovAlov.

Vat Reg 29 (Boecler) s. x1 Bas AN iv 5 (Dob.) s. xv/xv1
Vat Pal 38 (Zac.) s. X1/XII Bas AN iii 11 (Dob.) s. x1
Par Arm 9 (gr et arm) Oxf Ch Ch Wake 38 s. xI

B M Add 28,816. a.p. 1111. Ibid. Wake 12 s. x1

Berol Gr quart. 57 (Dob.) s. x11 Par Coisl 28. A.D. 1056
Berol Gr quart. 43 (Dob.) s. XIV Par Coisl 30 s. xI

Neap 11 A 7 (Dob.) s. xII Oecum ed Morel 1 p. 195

[Of these the last seven end the Mart. with rapovcias: the last four also
read r7 for 7: the last reads Aéyera: for Aéyorr’ dv. ]
This form of reading has the support of Arm zohr, which however adds a
clause after IovA(wv introducing an Armenian month.
2. wéurtn npépa Uavéuou pnvos: Aris Aéyour’ dv mapa ‘Popaios, kat’ Al-
yumriovs Emi e', 7 mpd tpiav Kadavdér ‘lovAlav.
Vat Urbin 3 (Zac.) s. XI
Vat Gr 363 (Zac.) 8. XI
Vat Reg Gr 179 (Zac.) s. XI
Vat Gr 1650 (‘Cryptoferrat.’ Zac.) A.D. 1037
3. wéumtn nuépa kata Svpopakedovas Lavépov pynvds: Fris héyouro av
map Aiyumriots Encl, rapa dé ‘Popaios 7 mpd Tptav Kadavdav IovNiov.
Vat Gr 367 (Zac.) 8. XI
Vat Gr 1761 (‘Lollinian.’ Zac.) s. x1
Bas AN iv 4 (Dob.) s. x
Oecum ed Morel 1 pref (reading éo7is, and adding after “Iov-
Aioy the words pnvi “lovvio x6’).

Of these three readings (1) is clearly the earliest. Obviously
kat Avyurtiovs ‘Emigi e was placed in the margin as a gloss
upon vrapa ‘Pwpatous x.7.r. In (2) this gloss was unintelligently
inserted without any change of the context. In (3) it was worked
in more skilfully (though with the omission of the day of the
month) by a reviser who also inserted cata Yupouaxedovas, and
made the sentence run smoothly.

It may be noted that it was in the last three of the four Mss
which support (2), that Zacagni found the additional note at the
end of the Martyriwm, giving the second date A.D. 458. . It did

EUTHALIANA. 47

not directly concern us when we were discussing the origin of the
Martyriwm, and therefore I omitted it on p. 29. But for the sake
of completeness it may be added here. I have not myself met
with it in any MS, and so I simply reprint it from Zacagni (p. 537).

2 > \ “ ¢€ , , \ > J, , ea < ' & , “~
Kai aT0 THS Umatias TeTaptns pev “Apkadlov Tpitns de “Ova@piov, péxpe THs
tA , 7: vad
Tmapovons TavtTns Umratias, mpwtns A€ovtos Avyovotou, tvdikti@vos Swdexarns,
2: A , B) Ss ~ A ~
Emupi €, Avoxderiavovd pod’, érn Ey’. ws eivat Ta mavta ard THs Tod Swrhpos

¢ a 2 A , », a
NU@Y Tapovoias Méxpl TOD mpoKElmévou eTous etn TeTpakdota EENKovTa Svo.

It is to be observed that the scribe gives us only the Egyptian
month.

CHAPTER IV.

NoTES ON CoDEX H OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES.

Recovery of the text of some pages now lost.

A LATER hand has covered over the letters of Codex H with
a thick coating of dark ink which has completely hidden their
original form. This ink is of a corrosive nature, and has eaten its
way in places quite through the vellum of the codex. Indeed its
ravages are being still continued: for a comparison of M. Omont’s
first facsimile with its original shews that in the last six years
some of the holes have become perceptibly larger. It is much to
be hoped that the authorities of the Bibliotheque Nationale will
in the interest of scholarship cause the whole of their portion of
the codex to be photographed without further delay, as otherwise
there is danger lest many of the letters may be irreparably lost.

But this ink had another quality, more deserving of our grati-
tude. It has left a yellow stain on the opposite leaf, and in some
places the letters thus reproduced are easily legible. M. Omont,
on p. 56 of his edition, has given us a whole page of the text,
which he has read backwards on the photograph of a page now at
S. Petersburg. I had not observed this, when I myself began the
attempt to recover lost leaves in the same manner. It was some
satisfaction to find on comparing my transcript of this leaf with
M. Omont’s that we agreed in every letter and even in our
inability to decipher the seven letters which he has printed in
minuscules.

I give here sixteen pages, which I have thus been able to
recover with more or less completeness. Some fragmentary
portions of other pages may perhaps be capable of decipherment:
but in several cases the writing from the other side of the vellum

EUTHALIANA. 49

shews through so distinctly as to be exceedingly confusing.
' Moreover in some instances in which the yellow stain is legible
we actually possess the page from which it has come off: an
example of this is given by M. Omont’s first facsimile, where in
the blank space after éA@e@y in |. 12 the word erraspovtas (1 Tim.
i. 8) can be very distinctly read: and the whole of the page in
which this word occurs is still preserved and is transcribed on
p. 46 of M. Omont’s edition.

Through the kind courtesy of M. Omont I have since obtained
photographs of most of the leaves which I had deciphered. By
printing from the reverse side of the negative the task of decipher-
ment is somewhat facilitated; and in some cases letters can be
read from the photographs which I did not succeed in reading in
the faint yellow stain of the MS.

In order that in so delicate an undertaking I might not rely
on my own unaided eyesight and judgment, I have gladly availed
myself of the help of the Rev. H. 8S. Cronin, Dean of Trinity Hall,
who has checked my transcription partly by the photographs but
mainly by a fresh collation of the pages in the MS itself.

In my transcription minuscules supplied within brackets indi-
cate letters which are not traceable in the codex. Other minus-
cules represent letters which appear to be present but cannot be
read with complete certainty. All that is printed in uncials,
together with all accents, breathings and stops (excepting those
which belong to words within brackets) may, I believe, be
regarded as certain evidence of the text of Codex H as it left
the hands of the scribe who re-inked the letters. We cannot
of course by this process hope to get back behind his handiwork.

The recent criticism to which Codex H has been subjected
has made it desirable to note a few minor points connected
with it, which it did not fall within the scope of M. Omont’s
edition to indicate. Moreover in some instances I have been able
to distinguish between the original reading and a subsequent
correction. I have accordingly added some notes based on a
comparison of M. Omont’s edition with the leaves preserved at
Paris and with the photographs of some of the other leaves’.

1 See above, p. 2, 2. 2.
>

50 EUTHALIANA.

1 Co x 19—21
opposite Coislin 202 fol. 1 r

[6] Ti[e@_]JAWAOOBYTONTIE[orw]
HOTIEIAWAONTIECTI

GAAOTIAAYOYCIN [Se

MONIOICKAIOYO®

QA@YOYCIN

on

oYAEAWAEYMACKO!
NONOYCTMNAAI
MONWNTPINECOAI

OYAYNACOAITIOTHP [tor]

10 KYTTINEIN:

[kal] TOTHPIONAAIMONI®

OYAYNACOAITPATIEZHC
KYMETEYXEIN

[kai tparé(ns] AA 1M [oviov.]

10, 11 Mr Cronin notes: ‘‘I can see no traces of cal at the end of
1,10; but I can see traces of it at the beginning of 1. 11, including
the accent,”

EUTHALIANA. 51

1 Co x 30—32
opposite Coislin 202 fol. 1 v

MOYKPINETAI

VIS AARC CYNEIAN CE we
ElETWYAPITIMET Exo]
[r’)] BAACDHMOYMA I [vzep]

OYer Mey VoAplcruw,

en

elTEQYNEecOiert(e]
EITETINETE
> Lal
EITETITIOIEITAI
2 -
TANTAEICADZAN [Gu]
10 TOIEITAI
> ¢ \ ,
ATPOCKOTIOIKA!I [lov]
AAIOICTINEC Bali]
KAIEAA [now Kai]

TAE[kKAnoia rod Ou]

52

ite)

EUTHALIANA.

1 Co xi 6—8
opposite Coislin 202 fol. 2 r

[ee]ACAICXYPONTYNAI [Ki]
TOKEIPACOHAIH [Ei]
pacdal

[ka] TAKAAYTITECOW

ANHPMENTAPOYK [J]
DIANEIKATAKAAY

MTECOAITHNKE DAA]

[} y]NHAEAOZAANAP[Ss]
ecTi[y]°

[od ydp éore] NAN [7p]

EUTHALIANA.

1 Co xi 17--20

opposite Coislin 202 fol. 2 v

TOY[r]O AE TIA [payy] € A [Aor]
[od] KETTAING®

OTIOYKEICTOK PITT [or]

ANNEICTOHTTONCYNE[p]

a a og be

en

TP@TONMENLTAPCY[vep]
YOMENWNYM@N
> > !
ENEKKAHCIA
AKOYWCYICMATAEN
Lo YMEINYTIAPYEIN
KAIMEPOCTITIICTE [va]
AEITAPKAIALPECEIC
>
ENYMEIN EI yf ac]
wa KaOldoKi [wor avepoi]
15 yevovtar [ev vpiv]

auvepy| ouevwv otv tvuav
p B

14 Mr Cronin reads iNaoiAok[iuor], beginning at the inner line.
I thought that I could see inakai, beginning at the outer line.

54

10

EUTHALIANA.

Gal iv 27—30
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 1 r

4 >

HOYK@AINOYCA’

oe eI NO

>-

OTITOAA
TACEPHMOYMAAA [or]

HTACEYOYCHCTON
ANAPA*

YMEICAECAAECA GMO!
KAT AEGOOK CIA 6
NIACTEKNAOECTE:

AANOCTEPTOTEO
KATACAPKATENNH
delcéAIMKETO[r]
KATATING.

OY TWKAINYN'

AAAATIAEPEIHT PAH

EKBAAETHNTIEAICKHI[y]

EUTHALIANA.

Gal v 6—10
opposite Paris Suppl]. 1074 fol. 1 v

ENTAPYOIY
OYTETEPITOMHTIICYYE!
oyTEedKpoBycTia
AX AATHICTICAIAFATIHG
ENEPTOYMENHC'
ETPEYETEKA [Aas"]
TICYMACENEKOYENTH
AAHOEIAMHTIIBEC OA!
HTICMONHOYKEKTOY
KANOYNTOCYMAC’
MIKPAZYMHOAONTO OY
PAMAZYMOI"
ErFMMETOIOAEICYMAC

i OD

Me

OTIOYAENAAAO * PO [vetre]

Or

Or

on

To

EUTHALIANA.

Col 1 23—26
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 2 r

NYNYAIPMENTOICTIA
OHMACIMY TEPYM@N
KAIANATIAHP@TAYCTE
PHMATATWNOAL
YEWNTOYYYENTH
CAPKEIMOY
YTEpTOYCMMaTO[s]ay
TOY.O€CTINHEKKAHC da]
HCEPFENOMHNELOWAILAK ovos
KATATHNOIKONOMIAN
TOFOYTHNAOOEICA[?]
MOIEICYMAC
TTAHPWCAITONAOLONT [od]

OBYTOMYCTHPIONTO

an

EUTHALIANA.

Col ii 8—11
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 3 r

KAI KENHC [dadrns]
KATATHNTAPAAOCIN

T@MV [avev]
KATATACTOIXYIATOYKOCMODV
KAIOYKATAYN’
OTIENAYT@KATOIKI* TAN
TOTAHPWMATACOIEO

PHTE CE OMATIK OC.
KAIECTEENAYTO@TMETAH

PWMENOI'
OCECTINFKEDAAHTIACHC

APYHCKAIEZOYCIAC’
ENGOKAITIEPIETMHOHTE

TEPITOMHAYEIPOTIOIH [To]
EN THAT EKAY CEI TOY CO

MATOCTHCCAPKOC’

i)

EUTHALIANA.

Col ii 17—19
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 4 r

TOAECWMAYY*

MHAEICYMACKATABPA
BEYETW.OEAWNENTA
TINO@POCYNHKAI
OPHCKIATMNALLEAD®

AMHEOPAKENEMBATEYO®

EIKHDYCIOYMENOCYTIO

TOYNOOCTHCCAPKOC
AYTOY*KAIOYKPAT@N
THNKEMAAHN:

> a \ —--

EZOYTIAN'TOCWMAAIATW
ADWNKAICYNAECMO =
ETIYOPHFOYMENON
KAICYMBIBAZOMENO

AYZEITHNAYZHCINTOU Ob

10

—
eye

EUTHALIANA.

Heb ii 9—10
opposite Coislin 202 fol. 6 r

TAOQPHMATOY OANA TOU
AGZHKAITIMHECTEDA
NWMENONOMOCYA
PITIOYYTEPTTAN Tos’
rEYCHTEBANATOD
€TPETIENTAPAYTWAIO
TATIANTAKAIAIOY
TATIANTA
TMOAAOYCYIOYCEICAO
ZANALTALONTA

TONAPYHPON THs

60 EUTHALIANA.

Heb ii 17—18
opposite Coislin 202 fol. 6 v

INAEANEHMMNSFENHTAI
KAITICTOCAPYIEpeyc
TATIPOCTONON.

\ >
EICTOCIANACKECOAITAC

tn

AMAPTIACTOYAAOY
EN@PAPTIETIONOEN
[atros]mex PACOEICAY

[va]JTAITOICTIEIPAzO

15

ot

EUTHALIANA.

Heb xii 16—18

opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 5 v

MHTICTTIOPNOCH [e837] '
[Ao] CCK CAY’

[is]ANTIBpwcewc [pas]
ATTEAOTOTAT [paro]
TOKIAauTOY

ICTEPFAPOTIKAIM[eré]
TT ectad € A WN [kAnpo]
NOMHCAITHN e(vdoyi]
ANATTEAOKIM[acdn]

METANOIACLAPT[6rov]
OY KEYPENKA [izep]
METAAAKPYWI[py ek}
ZHTHCACAY [tH]

OY PAPTPOCEAH [AvOare]

mupe PHAA GQ W [péva]

1 About one third of the page is cut away.

62

10

EUTHALIANA.

Heb xiii 21—24
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 6 r

[evamcjov avrov d[ua w Xv]
[6 Sofa eis rovs [aid]
vas &OMHN
[mapaxard]® AE Y MAC
AASEADO!

[dv eyecOaltoyAoro[v]
THUCWADAKAG CE@C-
KAITAPAIABPAYEWN:€ x[éo]

TUN AY MeLNG
rINDCKETETONAAEA
DPONHM@NTIMO OE [or]
ATTOANEAYMENON'
MEDOY EANTAYXIONEPY nra
OPOMALYMAC
ACTTIACACOAITIANTACTOYC

HT OY ME vous

EUTHALIANA. 63

1 Tim i 4—7
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 7 r

[unde] TPOCEYEEN [pv]
POICKAIFENEAAOLI
alCATTEPANTOIC

AITINECZHTHCEICT [a]

em

U n
PEYOYCIMAAAONHOIKoO
‘ b)
NOMIANOYTHNENTICT [ec]
TOAETEAOCTACTIAPA[y]
FENPIAC eC TiN
ATATTHEKKADAP ACK AP dfias]
10 KATOCYWELATC EMC KAI"
TICTEWCANYTOKPITOY
WNTINECACTOYECAN
TECEZETPATIHCAN
EICMATEOAOLIAN
Ul 2
{5 BEAONTECEINAINOMO

AIAACKAAOI:

! There is no trace of any note to correspond to the cross in this
line. The word dya0jjs has been dropped,

64 EUTHALIANA.

1 Tim ii 14— iii 2
opposite Paris Suppl. 1074 fol. 10 v

HAELYNHEZH

METACOQMPOCYN [ns]
T1CTOCO[Aoyos]
10 eris ET 1 C KO TTH C [dpéyerar]
KAAOYEPLOY ET IG lupe. |
AEIOYNTONETICKOTO[y]

ANETTIAHMTTTON

EUTHALIANA. 65

2 Tim 4 27-11 1
opposite. Furin B. 1.:y.-fol..2 y

a

AAANATENOMENOC

EZHTHCEME [kal]
eye

10 AWHAY[rT]@O[k]CEYPEIN
EAEOCTIAPAKYENE
K€[ivy 7H Hpépal

KAIOCAEN EO [eco]

[dunxdvncer]

15 BEATIONCYTI[vackes]

CY Our

[This leaf was read from the photograph at Paris.]

66 EUTHALIANA.

Notes on M. Omont’s transcript of Cod. H.

p. 13, Coisl. 17,14 marg. For yadm read yay, that is yadpov.

16. Here é projects to the left of the outer line of writing.
A close examination shews that éidé is in part over an erasure:
and the base of the A is continued with an upward slant so as to
form the central bar of the following «. This points to the hand
of the re-inker; see p. 37, Coisl. 8v, 8 marg., where the same
peculiarity is found in the Ae of adseAdoil. We may safely assume
that the reading of H* was e1 Tic KaAel.

Coisl. 1v, 1. In the space left before amictwn can faintly be
read the letters twn, which have been erased.

The note at the foot of this page is in the hand of the re-inker.

p. 15, Kieff lr, 6. The first r, which stands to the left of the
inner line, is of a ruder character than the second, and was no
doubt originally placed there by the less firm hand of the re-inker.

p. 24, Coisl. (Petersb.) 4v, 9. ayta should begin with the
inner line.

p. 28, Par. S. 37, 2. There is now a hole in the Ms, so that
the three letters toc have entirely perished.

Par. 8. 3v, 12. te at the beginning of this line is out of place,
as the second part of a divided word would commence at the inner
line. Asa matter of fact under 6H of the previous line parts of
éute can be traced, the e being somewhat smaller than usual.

12,13. dy|TA-én is rendered suspicious by the position of TA,
which commences at the outer line. The words are the addition
of the re-inker. éyyapictia commences with the inner line, and not
as in Omont’s edition under the p of the line above.

p. 29, Par. S. 4v,13 marg. &deddor. is by the re-inker’s hand.
It seems to be an addition of a lectionary character (cf. p. 37,
Coisl. 8 v).

p. 38, Coisl. 57. The letters a, B, F are in red: as also is the 8
on the verso.

p. 34, Mose. M. R. rv, 2. There is space for one letter between
toy and A. The words ar éaytoy are not original.

5. ToY 6pons is in the re-inker’s hand, and ue his ten-
dency towards minuscule writing.

EUTHALIANA., 67

13. Read paar.

Mose. M. R. v, 1 marg. There is no trace of érw in the margin
of the photograph, but only above écomai.

11,15. Read pars.

p. 35, Coisl. 67, 4 marg. Read ya. The whole of these
references are here in red.

p. 37, Coisl. 8v, 8 marg. Cf. supra, on p. 13, Coisl. 17, 16 and
p. 29, Par. S. 4v, 13 marg.

13. There is nothing in the codex which explains the mis-
placement of ac.

p. 38, Mose. Syn. 17,7. There is something like a stroke over
the last a of this line: so that possibly the plural (8vvavtas) was
once read; but it is difficult to speak with certainty, as this
portion of the photograph is very black.

10. In the right-hand margin, where the photograph is very
black, appears to be: Okan.

I should expect that the left-hand bottom corner of this page
would contain the quire-number mA: but the photograph shews no
distinct trace of it.

Mose. Syn. Lv, 5 marg. In the left margin I read yam

A9

p. 39, Mose. Syn. 27, 2. one: possibly dna.

At the bottom, the note is in the re-inker’s hand.

p. 41, Par. 8.67. The subscription in red, and the border in
red and black.

Par. S.6v. The heading in red, and the letters marking the
chapter-numbers.

p. 42, Coisl. 10r. The chapter-numbers here, and on the
verso, in red.

In the left-hand bottom corner was the quire-number mz, of
which the m can still be traced.

p. 43, Par. S. 7v, 18. The n above the line is from the re-
inker.

p. 44, Par. S. 87,14. There are distinct traces of w under the
on Of Tp@ton: so that the original reading was mpwtw.

Par. S. 8v, 7 marg. coda is written over the same word, the
blacker ink of which still shews through.

15. For’n read en.

68 EUTHALIANA.

p. 45, Par. S. 97, 14. The first a of Aman is not certain. There
is a hole in the Ms, and the remains of a are perhaps traceable.

p. 47, Coisl. 9v. In the right-hand corner there are traces of
red flourishes such as elsewhere surround the quire-numbers.
Probably mz was formerly here, marking the end of the quire.
The whole of the quire mu is lost.

p. 48, Tur. 1, 5. The na of mpaytadeian has been altered to
Tita, so as to give the reading wpaitita Oeiav.

p. 49, Tur. 27, 9. cy is added by the re-inker in rougher
characters outside the outer line of the writing, and the original
cyn changed into oyn.

12. fF stands further to the left in the Ms, and the o begins at
the outer line.

Tur. 2v, 7. Awcei seems to have been the original reading. A
very large w now covers part of the old w and c.

8. There are distinct traces of n at the end of the line. tacin
must be taken as the original reading.

9. The Euthalian chapter-number A is traceable in the left
margin.

p. 50, Coisl. llr. The chapter-numbers were originally small
and red: they are now brown and large. ctiyoi- with its orna-
ments is in red. So too the title on the verso.

p- 51, Coisl. 127, 11. fF more to the left, so that mpecBytac
begins with the outer line. So do cemnoyc and cwdponac below.

p. 52, Coisl. 137. The flourish in the left corner is exaggerated
by Omont. It is not the sign of a vanished quire-number.

Coisl. 138v. This page is in red. A very fair idea of the
original red letters, which here remain untouched, is given by the
somewhat idealised reproduction of Silvestre.

p. 53, Coisl. 147, 9. The last letter was n, over which rf is
written in a darker hand. See Omont’s facsimile. He himself
makes the correction on p. 56.

Coisl. 14, ll. 2 and 8 are in red, with the exception of the
breathings, accents and points.

The following is a summary of the results of the above investi-
gation, so far as they are of importance for the text of H.
E-OO X 2 et Tis He, oe tee EL

EUTHALIANA. 69

Cole 7. om. ev aurn H*, ins. H**
Heiss om. 6s eavtov H*, ins. H**
He xl forsitan dvvavtar H
2 ov evravoavto H*, ove av eravoavto H** (vid.)

1Timil6 = wpetw H*, tpwrov H**
vill wpavrabeav H*, rpaitita Oecay H**
2Timu3 gcuveaxoradnaov H*, cv ovy caxorrabnaov H**

i Once Howe: H**

The relation of Codex H to the Euthalian edition.

The evidence which attests the connection between Codex H
and the Euthalian edition of the Pauline Epistles falls under
three heads: the colometrical arrangement, the remains of the
Kuthalian apparatus, and the colophon. The last of these deserves
a special consideration.

We have seen reason for believing that the work of Euthalius
underwent a series of modifications, the first intention of which
apparently was to reduce the bulk of his prolegomena and notes
without seriously impairing their usefulness. We have seen too
that one epitomiser of his work so far succeeded in retaining the
words of his original, as to produce the impression that his short
summary was actually written by Euthalius himself’. We must
now carefully examine the language of this colophon to see
whether we may not have in it an exactly similar phenomenon.

Let us first note its closing words: avte8rnOn &é 7 BiBXos
mpos TO €v Katcapia avtiypadov tis Bud LoOnKns Tov ayiou
Ilapdirov, yept yeypaupévoy <avtov>*. These words would
receive a perfectly natural interpretation, if we supposed that the
scribe of H, or more probably of the archetype of H, had checked
the copy, which he had written from a Euthalian codex, by the
famous MS written by Pamphilus himself. The reason why he did
not copy at once from the Codex of Pamphilus would doubtless be
that he desired to reproduce the Euthahan colometry. In this
part of the colophon then we shall not expect to find traces of

1 See above, pp. 29 ff.
* Montfaucon read the last letter of avrod, but it is no longer legible in the ms,
which is much injured at this point.

70 EUTHALIANA.

Euthalian phraseology. The similar colophon at the end of the
Catholic Epistles, given by Zacagni (p. 513), points to a like

process, as we have already seen.

The earlier part of the colophon we may now compare with
certain passages of the genuine Euthalian writings.

éypaya kai e&eOéuny xara Svvapw
aTetxnpov Toe TO Tedyos TlavAov Tov
amooroAov,

mpos €yypappov Kal evkatadnumroy
2 o: A > Ja “ > cal
avayvecw tev Kab’ nuas adedpar,

map av dmdvTav ToAuns cuVyvapmny

ata,

Z. 410 éxOéuevos ddvyoatny avake-
pakaiwou

Z. 428 eéxriOéyeOa yovv avrny (sc.
cepadraiwv €kbecw) kaO’ icropiav AovKka
Kt.

Z. 410 mpos evonpuoy avayvoow

Z. 405 cvyyvopny tre mrelorny airay

be ae o , ¢ “a \ ,
em apoiv, TOALNS 6pov Kal mporreTeEias

THS Euns
Z. 476 ef ois obv éywye TOApOa, TVY-
yyapunv ait@ x.T.d.
Z. 428 airotyres cuvyyvaunv mpore-
Teias...7ap tpav éxdoTov TOY avayl-
eVX7 TH UTep Euav THY CupTEpipopaY ywokdvTar, ebyh TH bmep huav rh
ocuptmepipopay KoptCopevot
Z. 477 evyn TH UTep nov
Z. 405 StopOotcOa Sێ por padrov

adedixa@s kata cuprepipopay k.T.X.

KopCouevos.

Here we may note several details which awaken suspicion.

(1) The colophon is written in the first person singular, as
are several short notices which we have already been obliged to
reject (see pp. 17, 34).

(2) Euthalius does not use the word é&eOéunv in speaking of
his edition as a whole. “Exri@eo@ar and éxOeous he employs in a
different sense, in reference to his lists of chapter-summaries.

(3) oreynpor (1. ottynpov) seems to be a confusion between
atixnpas and ottynddv, the latter being the word used by Eutha-
lus.

(4) In trav xa? nyds aderddv the writer passes from the
first person singular to the first person plural. This offers no
special difficulty; for 7ua@s need not be confined to the speaker
himself But lower down he embodies a Euthalian phrase: evyf
TH UTép NUOY THY TUETEpLpopary Komttduevor. Here he is obliged

EUTHALIANA. al

to change KourSouevor into Kouefouevos: and either he himself, or
more probably the scribe of H, felt it necessary to make the further
alteration of nudév into éuor, to avoid a grammatical inconsistency.

We may conclude then that this colophon is from the pen of
some one who had in some way adapted the work of Euthalius,
and wished to claim credit in Euthalian terms for the task which
he had accomplished. When we find the name of Evagrius as the
nominative to éypayva in the Cod. Neap. at this place, and also
apparently in the almost obliterated first lime of this page of
Codex H; and when we meet with it again in Cod. Neap. in con-
nection with a somewhat similar claim (see above, p. 6); we are
tempted to attribute definitely to this Evagrius an editio minor of
the work of Euthalius on these epistles’. If, further, he is the
author of the Martyriwn Pauli, which similarly embodies Eutha-
lian phrases, we can fix his date as A.D. 396, and may perhaps go
on to identify him with Evagrius Ponticus, to whom our attention

has been directed by Dr Ehrhard.

1 Tam glad to find that this view, which had occurred to me independently, is
also that of Herr von Dobschiitz, though we differ entirely on the subject of the
dates. (Cent. f. Bibl. x. 50 ff.)

CHAPTER V.

THE ARMENIAN VERSION AND ITS SUPPOSED RELATION
TO EUTHALIUS.

I HAVE referred above (p. 10) to a theory which Mr Conybeare
has endeavoured to base upon the coincidence that certain
Armenian MSs contain the same colophon as Codex H of the
Pauline Epistles. The theory would, if it were proved, have a
considerable importance for the textual criticism of a large part of
the New Testament. Although I cannot myself accept it—at
any rate, not in the form in which it has been stated—I am
grateful to Mr Conybeare for having put it forward. The
examination of it has confirmed me in an opinion, which has
been for some time growing in my mind, and which appears to
me to raise the Armenian Version to a position of importance
even higher than that which Mr Conybeare has claimed for it.
I shall therefore take this opportunity of calling attention to
certain phenomena presented by this Version, which I should
not otherwise have ventured to discuss until I had been able
to make my investigation more systematic and complete.

The origin of the Armenian Version of the New Testament.

The statements of early Armenian writers respecting the
origin of the Armenian Version of the Bible, though claiming
to come to us from the younger contemporaries of the great
translators S. Isaac and S. Mesrob, combine a certain conflict
of assertion with a suspicious family likeness. They have been
collected and discussed—but without the requisite historical
scepticism—by Father Carekin of the Mechitarist monastery of
S. Lazzaro in his valuable work entitled A Catalogue of ancient
Armenian translations (Venice, 1889, pp. 87 ff.). They are ac-

EUTHALIANA. Le

cessible to Western scholars generally in the collection of French
translations of Armenian historians published at Paris in 1886—9
by M. Victor Langlois’. They are conveniently summarised in
the short section on the Armenian Version which Mr F. C. Cony-
beare has contributed to the fourth edition (1894) of Scrivener’s
Introduction to N. T. Criticism”. I need not therefore cite them
here.

One fact which seems to stand out distinctly after the perusal
of these puzzling statements is that the earliest attempts at
translating the Scriptures into Armenian were based on Syriac
codices. This is confirmed by the tradition that up to the time in
question the Syriac language had been commonly used in the
services of the Armenian Church, which were in consequence, it 1s
said, unintelligible to the mass of the people. It receives a further
confirmation when we remember that much of the early Armenian
literature consists of translations from famous Syriac writers, such
as Ephraim and Aphrahat, and that even Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical
History was translated into Armenian from a Syriac manuscript.

Our authorities further tell us that S. Mesrob’s disciples
presently brought to their master certain trustworthy Greek
codices from Constantinople, and that by the aid of these either
the former translation was carefully revised, or a completely new
version was made. Between the two alternatives we cannot
decide on the ground of history alone. If any further light is to
be thrown on the subject, it must come from a study of the
Version itself as it 1s preserved to us to-day.

Mr Conybeare, who has laid students of early Christian litera-
ture under a great obligation by his researches in Etchmiadzin
and elsewhere, has endeavoured in his interesting article on ‘ the

1 They will be found in the second volume as follows: Goriun, Life of S. Mesrob,
pp. 10 ff.; Moses of Chorene (iii. 53) p. 162, (iii, 60f.) pp. 167f.; Lazar Pharbetzi,
p. 267.

2 This section is by far the most useful account hitherto given of the Version.
It is perhaps due to M. Emine (the translator of Goriun in Langlois’ series), who is
charged with ‘adding to and omitting from the Armenian text at random’ (loc.
cit. p. 148 n. 1) and condemned as ‘untrustworthy in all ways,’ to point out that in
a prefatory note (p. 4) it is stated that his translation was made not from the
Venice Edition of 1833, but from what was regarded as a better recension printed,
likewise in Venice, in 1854.

74 EUTHALIANA.

Codex Pamphili and the date of Euthalius’ (see above, pp. 8 ff.)
to find a solution of the problem so far as the Pauline Epistles are
concerned. He gives us, as we have seen, some noteworthy infor-
mation, derived in part from an Armenian Codex in the British
Museum (Add. 19,730), with regard to the form in which certain
portions of the Euthalian apparatus are found in Armenian
manuscripts of the New Testament.

We may I think consider it established that there is a close
link of connection between Codex H and a certain group of
Armenian codices, of which B. M. Add. 19,730 is perhaps at
present the best representative. Can we draw from this any
conclusion as to the origin of the Armenian Version itself?
Mr Conybeare thinks that we can. His explanation of the phe-
nomena is as follows: “The Armenian fathers translated the
Epistles of Paul early in the fifth century along with the rest of
the Bible. They selected for translation what we may call the new
edition by Euthalius, which comprised the text of Pamphilus.”

His argument is this: The colophon of H is found in certain
Armenian MSS. Therefore it is probable that there is a relation
between the text of H and the text from which the Armenian
Version was translated. But the text of H is the text of
Euthalius in what has hitherto been considered its purest form.
And that text as the colophon in question shews is copied from
the codex written by Pamphilus himself. Probably, therefore,
the Armenian Version, which is older than Codex H, is our best
witness to the text of Pamphilus. The detailed proof of the
actual coincidence of the text implied by the Armenian Version
and the text already known to be Euthalian is all that is required
to translate this conclusion from the region of probability to the
region of certainty.

It has been pointed out above (p. 9) that the Euthalian matter
occurs in different shapes in different Armenian Mss; so that it
is extremely precarious to assume that in any one of these shapes
it comes from the original translators of the Version. It must
further be noted that the colophon of H only declares that the
codex to which it originally applies was corrected by (dvreBrHOn
mpos...), not “copied from,” the Codex of Pamphilus. We do not
even know that the colophon is all composed by the same hand.

bot) |

EUTHALIANA. ‘i

Whoever may be the author of the first part of it, the second part
may well be the addition of a scribe who corrected a Euthalian
copy at a later time in the library of Caesarea.

In any case it is clear that the whole burden of the proof of
Mr Conybeare’s position must lie upon the actual relation of the
text of Codex H to the teat of the Armenian Version. The
subsidiary apparatus may be a useful finger-post; but that 1s all.
And finger-posts have sometimes been turned round so as to point
the traveller along the wrong road.

Mr Conybeare has therefore rightly devoted a considerable
part of his article to the comparison of the two texts; and he
has entered upon the perilous paths of New Testament textual
criticism under the guidance of a recent German writer, whose
judgment and accuracy are less praiseworthy than his industry’.
I do not propose at this point to follow him in his investigation ;
as I think that I can do better service in the first instance by
attempting to approach the problem from a wholly different side.

Our examination of the historical accounts of the origin of the
Armenian Version suggested the possibility that, when “the trust-
worthy Greek codices” were brought from Constantinople, the
earlier translation from Syriac codices was not altogether cast
aside, but was made the basis of a careful revision. The hint
thus offered to us is surely worthy of an attentive consideration.

Our knowledge of the Old Syriac Version of the Gospels, prior
to the revision known as the Peshito, has of late been largely
increased by the publication of the Sinai Palimpsest. If it should
prove that in the Gospels the Armenian text contains a consider-
able Old Syriac element, which escaped the revising hand which
corrected the first Armenian translation by the help of Greek
codices, then we have at least a presumption in favour of explain-
ing many of the peculiarities of the Armenian Version of the
Pauline Epistles as well by referring them to an Old Syriac base.

1 Bousset’s Textkritische Studien (in Harnack’s Texte und Untersuchungen,
1894). Ido not wish to disparage unnecessarily a most laborious piece of work in
a field which has of late been strangely neglected in Germany: but what are we to
say of a critic of Dr Hort, who interprets his symbol cu* (=2 cursives) as the
second hand of the Curetonian Syriac in S. Mark? See Bousset, p. 98,1. 1. I
should not call attention to this inaccuracy if it stood alone.

76 EUTHALIANA.

The Armenan Version of the Gospels.

We may begin by examining a few passages from the Gospels,
in which the Armenian Version offers us a rendering which is not
easily accounted for by supposing it to be a direct translation of
any known reading of the Greek text.

1. Mtv.18. “Ews av mapéXOn 6 ovpavos kai 4 yh, iota &v
i) pia Kepaia ov pn TapeNON atro TOU vopmou....

Arm. “Until heaven and earth pass away, one yot, which is
one letter (yan df np tywitmfulg dp £), shall not pass from
the law....”

Here we note (1) that the Semitic letter yot or jod has taken
the place of the Greek iota; (2) that xepaia is regarded as a
whole letter, and not as the little projection which differentiates
one letter from another; (3) that cepada is made to become a sort
of explanation of the yot, the disjunctive particle being replaced
by a relative pronoun.

When we turn to the Sinaitic Palimpsest (Syr*™), we find :

gash WN wae whan 3A;

that is to say, “One yodh letter shall not pass away.” Now
had’, a side form of Kar ‘a sign, is used to translate
xepaia in Le xvi. 17: so that we may be sure that it is meant to
represent the xepaia of the Greek text in the present passage.
Thus we see that Cureton’s text (Syr™) has suffered correction
from a later hand, when it reads:

as to ad haw chad 30,
i.e. “One yodh letter or one horn.”
The word in the Armenian which I have rendered ‘letter’
(igutiufulg) is derived from the ordinary word for ‘sign’ (tut),

and stands accordingly in the same sort of relationship to it as
does Chadkie’ to We It is used again in Le xvi. 17.

We see then that Syr*", which is clearly the original form of
the Old Syriac at this point, sufficiently explains the three points
of peculiarity which we have noted in the Armenian Version.

EUTHALIANA. ra

Before we leave this verse we may get still further confirma-
tion of the position that the Armenian has an important element
in common with the Old Syriac. For to the words “shall not
pass away from the law,” it adds “and from the prophets.” The
only Greek evidence for the addition cai tov rpopntey appears
to be the so-called Ferrar-group!, which again and again accom-
panies the Old Syriac and the Armenian in very remarkable
readings. It is not found in the Sinaitic, Curetonian or Peshito
Syriac. But it occurs in the Jerusalem Syriac, which not un-
frequently seems to preserve very ancient Syriac readings: and
Zahn (Forschungen, 1. 134) has cited two passages from Aphrahat’,
which have this addition, while at the same time they read in
the earlier part of the verse simply “One letter yodh.” The
whole of the evidence falls into line if we suppose that the Old
Syriac reading was that which the Armenian and Aphrahat
attest: that Syr®" shews us the first stage of correction to the
Greek by which “and the prophets” was struck out; and that
Syr* shews a yet further stage of correction when the words
“or one horn” were inserted. If this be a true account of the
matter, it is plain that the Armenian Version assumes a new
importance as a witness in certain cases to the earliest form of the
Syriac Version of the Gospels.

2. Mt x. 10, Mc vi. 8, Le ix. 3. In the accounts given by
S. Matthew and S. Luke of the Mission of the Twelve we read,
among other prohibitions, that they were forbidden to take a staff
(undé paBdov Mt, unte paBdov Le). But in S. Mark’s narrative
they are allowed to take “a staff only” (e¢ w7 paBdov povor).

In Syr™ this discrepancy is modified by the use of a different
Syriac word for ‘staff’ in S. Mark from that used in 8S. Matthew
and S. Luke. Not a rough ‘stick’ (rth crs), but only a light
‘ staff’ (ria), was permitted to the travellers. This indeed

1 The addition is found in 13-124-556: it is also found in the Latin version of
Irenaeus (Mass. p. 275).
2 Wright’s edition, p. 30, 1. 3,

gash rl asia whatan oo eae had sa.
and 1. 20,
mas a masa — whadd xa. gqandh W~\

78 EUTHALIANA.

is the solution of the difficulty which is found in Tatian’s Dia-
tessaron (Eph. Comm., Moes. p. 91): but whether Tatian invented
the distinction, or only adopted it from an existing Syriac Ver-
sion, is part of a large problem upon which we cannot enter
here.

Now can it be a mere coincidence that in the Armenian

Version we find a similar distinction of words; ‘no stick’ (df
grey) in S. Matthew, and ‘but only a staff’? (guyg df
puriuyut) in 8. Mark? It is true that in S. Luke the Ar-

menian has ‘no staff” so that there the distinction is ob-
literated: but this is no more than has happened in Syr“, which
is wanting for Mt and Le, and reads “staff” in Le’.

3. In Mt xxvii. 18, after the words “All power is given to
me in heaven and in earth,’ the Peshito adds, “and as my Father
sent me, I also send you.” There seems to be no Greek evidence
for this addition, which is clearly derived from Jo xx. 21. Many
Old Syriac readings survive in the Peshito, having escaped the
vigilance of the reviser. This may well be an example of such
survival. Indeed it is quite possible that it may be a relic of
Tatian’s Harmony, especially as the form in which Mt xxvii. 19
is quoted in Aphrahat makes it probable that the addition was
present in his text?» Unfortunately Syr*" and Syr™ are both
mutilated at the end of S. Matthew, so that we have no direct
evidence of the reading of the Old Syriac. But the same words,
with the sole exception of the introductory particle “and,” are
found in the Armenian Version. This was observed long ago by
Mill, though he suggested no theory to account for it.

We may now present in the briefest possible form a few more
instances in which it appears that the Armenian Version, in spite

1 Syrhier only gives us S. Luke’s account, and there it reads was (‘ stick ’).

2 Aphrahat (Wr. p. 12, 1. 7) says: ‘‘And again to the apostles when he sent
them, thus said he to them: Go out and make disciples of all nations....” The
fact that the words occur in the same position in the Arabic Harmony gives us no
fresh evidence, as the text there contained is throughout influenced by the Peshito.
No evidence on the point is offered by the Armenian of S. Ephraim’s Commentary
on the Diatessaron.

EUTHALIANA. 79

of the careful correction to which it has obviously been submitted,
still retains traces of its Syriac ancestry.

4. Mt vil. 6 un dete TO GyLoV Tots KUGLD.
Arm. quppal[d fit, ‘holiness’ = Sy pesh eysyan: Syra
vacat.

5. Mt vu. 3 éxadepicOn avtod 7 rémpa.
Arm. 'f ‘tudatbl, ‘from him’ =Syr™" orrsa: Tisch. cites
: 5 5) a ce ’
as supporting am’ auto only ‘S al pauc.

6. Mtx. 11 cane? weivate ws ay €EéXOnre.
Arm. hh. carly plufdt as and there be cape Syr™ pesh pana
aam: Syr™ vacat.

7. Me vit. 19 Ore ox elatropevetas adTod eis THY Kapdiav
p) > ’ \ , \ ’ \ 5) fal 5) v4
aXX els THV KoldLaV, Kal Els TOV AdPEedpwva EKTOPEVETAL—
Kkabapifwov Tavta Ta Bpwpmara.

Arm. “For it entereth not into his heart, but into his
belly, and goeth forth outside, and cleanseth all meats.” With &

wypnpu hyutth, ‘and goeth forth outside, cf. Syr™ (Syr™
vacat) zal crdxa, ‘and is cast outside.’

8. Mec vin. 4 UWd@ev rovtous Suvycetat tis bde yoptracat
K.T.X.

Arm. “ Whence canst thou satisfy these men,” &c.

The only evidence that I am aware of for ‘canst thou’
(Yuplu) is Syr™ (Syr" vacat), dar sarc.

9. Me vin. 27 Teva pe Néyouow of dvOpwrrot elvat;

Arm. qn neunkp wukt qgbukin thupy pyr [GFE fgil-

“Whom say men concerning me, that I am ?”
This is an exact rendering of Syr’®" (Syr™ vacat). Syr*™ only
differs by having ‘ What’ for ‘Whom.’

10. Me vii. 88 6rav €XOn ev tH S0En TOD TaTpos avTod weTAa
A ’
TOV AYYEXWY TOV ayiwp.

80 EUTHALIANA.

Arm. ‘and of the holy angels’ is supported only by Syr*™ (Syr™

vacat).

11. Le i. 61 Kai eirayv mpos avtny OTe Ovdels Eativ ex TIS
cuyyevelas oou Os KaNEtTAL TO OVOMATL TOUT.

Arm. “And they say to her, Because there is no one in thy
kindred to whom is called the name John.”

‘In thy kindred’ (yunqgf pou) = ashoyzs Syri pest
(Syr™ vacat): €v TH ovyyeveta cov is attested by CDI’, the Ferrar
group and the Latins. But the addition of ‘John’ is, so far as I
am aware, found only in Syr*” (Syr™ vacat), which has

rise Kin Marsa wiohmN8

12. Le xi. 17 Kat otxos éri otxov Times.

Arm. “and a house divided against itself falleth.” So exactly
SyrP Aas Aladhen cmain Asn dasa. Syr™" is
wanting: but Syr™ has “and every house, that against a house is
divided, falleth.” There seems to be no further evidence for the
insertion of ‘ divided’ in S. Luke.

13. Jo iv. 31 ‘Ev ro petaéd np@twv avtTov ot pa@nrat
Néyovtes PaBBei, pare.

Arm. Ba. piu sh Eh buy Eft Unpuy uur k fits quus ‘gi~
fi punpt h wul fir. (pezel guy lp: “And _ while they
were not yet come, the disciples were beseeching him and saying,
Rabbi, eat bread.”

Syr*"“ “And his disciples were asking (‘from him,’ Syr™) that
he would eat bread with them ” (sash -_am=s. Naartsy).

The Armenian seems to have been corrected by the Greek, a
paraphrase being introduced for the troublesome évy T@ meragu,

which the Syriac had dropped: but a trace of the Syriac remains
in the phrase, ‘ eat bread.’

14. Jo v. 22 addra thy Kpiow Tacay dédxev TO VIO.

Arm. “to his Son,” with Syr"" Tat", The insertion of the
possessive pronoun is a marked feature of the Syriac language:
but there is no ground for saying this of the Armenian. A parallel

EUTHALIANA, 81

instance is Jo xv. 16, “ whatsoever ye ask my Father 1 in my name,”
Syren ret (Syr™@ vacat) Arm.

15. Jo vi. 7 Ataxociwy Snvapiwv dptot ovK apKodow avrtois
iva éxaatos Bpaxv AaB7.
Arm, “although ((#4:yjf£m h) each should take a little.” The

Syriac %& might be rendered either as ‘when’ or as ‘although.’

16. Jo xvii. 24 mpd KcataBorjs Kocpov.
Arm. “before that the world came to be,” with Syr*™ (Syr™
vacat).

These examples may suffice, though they might easily be
added to, especially if we were to include the very numerous
cases in which the Armenian and the Old Syriac are together and
are supported in Greek only by the Ferrar group. But the
relation of the Ferrar group to the Syriac offers a difficult
problem in itself, and critics are by no means agreed upon a
solution of it. I would only now hazard the opinion that the
connecting link between the Armenian and the Ferrar group
will be found in the Old Syriac base which I believe underlies the
Armenian Version.

The points of resemblance which we have traced are in many
instances very minute: but it is just this minuteness which has
enabled them to escape the careful revision by which, according to
our hypothesis, the first efforts of the Armenian translators were
brought into a closer correspondence with the Greek codices.

It may be of interest, before we leave the Gospels, to examine
in the light of what has been said above the very remarkable
reading of the Armenian Version in Mt i. 16, a passage to which
much attention has been devoted since the publication of the
Sinaitic Syriac Palimpsest.

The Greek text of this verse runs: “Iaxk@B 6é éyévynoev Tov
"Twond tov avdpa Mapias, && is éyevvnOn “Incods 6 Neydopevos
Xpictos.

Arm. < Jurhade Suit. qynfuksh quypu hip lehisy npn”

Re: 6

82 EUTHALIANA.

funulgluy qdiup ful fnyu. pnpee Shut 04, np wineuhe
fqusn. “Pa.

The Armenian may be rendered literally thus: “Jacob begat
Joseph the husband of Mary, to whom having been betrothed Mary
the Virgin, from whom was born Jesus who was named Christ.”
So difficult was it to make an intelligible meaning of the sentence
as it stands, that some later Armenian MSS inserted the substantive

verb after the participle ‘having been betrothed’ (funukghuy 6).

When we turn to Syr we read: “Jacob (note the omission
here too of dé) begat Joseph, to whom was betrothed Mary the
Virgin, who bare Jesus Christ.” The motive. of this reading is
obviously a desire to avoid the expression ‘the husband of Mary,’
which was open to misinterpretation.

The reading of Syr*” is as follows: “Jacob begat Joseph:
Joseph to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin begat Jesus who was
called Christ.” Whatever the origin of this reading may be—and
I forbear to enter upon the controversy regarding the orthodoxy
or unorthodoxy of its intention—it betrays the same unwillingness
to speak of Joseph as ‘the husband of Mary’: so that no doubt
remains that the Old Syriac Version contained the words which I
have italicised in my rendering of the Armenian. The Armenian
Version is fully accounted for on the supposition that the words
were first translated from the Syriac. and then corrected by the
Greek, the italicised phrase being perhaps allowed to remain as a
safeguard against wrong deductions which might have been made
from the words immediately preceding it.

Codices 346 and 556 of the Ferrar group, which once more
appears in combination with Old Syr. and Arm., read “Ilax@B8

dé éyévynoey tov “lwond @© pvnotevOeica (-Onca) trapbévos

Mapidp éeyévvncev “Inoody Tov rNeyopevov Xpiordv. Accordingly
I do not use this passage in support of the Old Syriac base of the
Armenian Version, as it might be argued that in this case we had
simply a conflation of two Greek readings. Yet I cannot but
think that the explanation which I am able to offer is a more
reasonable one; and in so far as this is so the passage 1s confirma-
tory of my position.

EUTHALIANA. 83

The Armenian Version of the Pauline Epistles.

It is time now to come to the examination of the Pauline
Kpistles in the Armenian Version. Here our enquiry is hampered
by a difficulty which at first sight might seem insuperable. No
MS, or fragment of a MS, so far as we know, contains what
might, in contrast to the Peshito, be called an Old Syriac Version
of these Epistles. Yet the case is not so hopeless as it appears.

For, in the first place, the analogy of the Gospels suggests the
possibility that such an Old Syriac Version once existed, and that
the Peshito is the result of its revision by the aid of Greek mss.
If this be the case, we may assume that much of the Old Syriac
still remains in the Peshito, either because it was felt to be a
sufficiently accurate rendering of the Greek, or because its aberra-
tions were not recognised and so escaped the hand of the corrector.

Again, the Homilies of Aphrahat contain many quotations
from these Epistles. They often differ widely from the Peshito
Version, and so support the suggestion that an earlier Syriac
Version lay before the writer.

But, further, the existence of an Old Syriac Version is no
longer a matter of conjecture: for the recent publication (Venice,
1893) by the Mechitarists of S. Lazzaro of a Latin translation of
S. Ephraim’s Commentary on the Pauline Epistles has enabled
Western scholars to see that the Syriac text on which S. Ephraim
commented differed considerably from that of the Peshito. This
Commentary, which is preserved only in an Armenian translation,
was printed at Venice in 1836, but it has had to wait until now to
take its place among the materials of N.T. criticism.

I shall make use of the evidence of S. Ephraim’s Commentary,
as occasion may serve, in the following pages. But I must utter
two words of warning in regard to it. In the first place, but little
reliance can be placed upon the Latin translation: for not only
does 1t shew a constant tendency to paraphrase, but also the Latin
Vulgate has throughout been in the hands of the translator, and
he has again and again accommodated his translation to it, so that
a completely erroneous idea is given in many places of the text
which 8. Ephraim used. And, again, an exactly similar method of

6—2

84 EUTHALIANA.

translation has vitiated the Armenian itself: for the Armenian
translator of the Syriac frequently reproduced the tpsissima verba
of his own Armenian Vulgate: and therefore we must constantly
be on our guard against the danger of assigning to S. Ephraim
what is nothing else than the text of the Armenian Version. We
shall escape from this peril only if we refuse to found an argument
on any reading, the Armenian words of which correspond exactly
with the language of the Armenian Version. If, however, we use
the Commentary with due caution, we may extract from it evi-
dence of high importance for the study of the text of the Pauline
Epistles’.

Let us commence our examination with some passages in the
Epistle to the Romans, where the Armenian Version challenges
our attention. The first which we shall notice will serve to shew
the kind of help which sometimes comes indirectly from S. Eph-
raim’s Commentary.

1, Ro ill. 2 rp@rov pev [yap] ote erruatevOncay Ta oyLa TOD
Oeod.

Arm. “First because the oracles of God became trustworthy ”
(Gucunmupfrl ght). This is obviously a mistranslation of the
Greek: but it would seem that the Armenian translator was not
the first to perpetrate it. In the Commentary of S. Ephraim we
read as follows: “If God requireth the circumcision of the heart,
much every way was established, that is, became trustworthy, the
word of God.” It is not possible from this to reconstruct
S. Ephraim’s text with certainty: but we can see that he rendered
émtoTevOnoay in a similar manner, taking Ta Aoya as its subject.
The explanatory comment ‘that is, became trustworthy’ is pro-
bably added by his Armenian translator from a reminiscence of his
own Bible,

It is possible that the Armenian rendering is directly derived
from the Greek; but if we have ground for supposing that the

1 Three important articles of Dr Zahn, dealing with S. Ephraim’s text as evi-
denced by this Commentary, appeared in the Theologisches Literaturblatt (Leipzig,
Sept. 6, Oct. 6 and 13, 1893). Dr J. H. Bernard, of Dublin, also published an
interesting discussion of it in the Guardian (May 9, 1894). Unfortunately both

these scholars had access only to the Latin translation ; so that in several instances
they have been led astray in points of detail.

EUTHALIANA. 85

Armenian Version of these Epistles rests ultimately on a Syriac
base, it is not unreasonable to think that the first translator was
led astray by the Syriac at this point. In Gal ii. 7 ériorevOn is
rendered quite correctly bys meunnug ly , ‘was entrusted.’

2, Ro v. 8 cuvicrnaowy &8& thy éavtod ayarny els Huds 6
eos.

Arm. “God manifested (yuyutiburg) his love to (or in) us.”

In Eph°™™ we read: “Jn this above all he shewed his love, which
was towards us.’ The word for ‘shewed’ (gryg) proves that we
are not here dealing with a mere reminiscence of his own Bible
on the part of 8. Ephraim’s Armenian translator. The Peshito
helps us to regain the Old Syriac; for it reads: asm KAtm
talks moas coal, “Here God manifesteth (or sheweth)
his love, which was towards us.”

3. Ro vil. 21 Etdpicxcw dpa tov vouov td OérovTs ewot trovety
TO KANOY OTL Ewol TO KAKOV TapdKeELTat,

Arm. “So then I find the law of him who wisheth (aytnp/t*
np Gadfgfu) to do in me the good, and to me the evil is
present.”

This is not very intelligible: I believe that it is the result
of an attempt to bring into nearer correspondence with the Greek
what was originally a translation from the Syriac.

The Armenian of Eph®™™ is at this point sufficiently different
from the Armenian Vulgate to be of unassailable worth as a wit-
ness to S. Ephraim’s own text. It reads: “J see then a law, which
wisheth to perfect in me something good, that which is hard to my
will, because it is in readiness to do the evil.”

The Peshito reading is strange, but it helps to explain some
of the difficulties in Eph°™™,

MBN aco wlan aly rmasul linc ac wax
wal am Sasto whrass A\=a iwhal, FAAIN

“T find then the law, that it agrees with my mind which
wisheth to do good; because evil is nigh to me.”

86 EUTHALIANA.

The Armenian is not quite like the Syriac, according to either
testimony: but it is difficult to believe that it could have come
into existence quite independently of it.

4. Ro xi. 35 7 tis mpoédmxey ailt@ Kal avtatobobnceTat
avuT@;
Arm. 6° 4.6 6 h wenn gn. finfuuphi fh taihuth.
« ,..and should receive in return from him.”

This is at once explained by the Peshito: misao mm) ,sa,
“and so received from him.” Eph®™™ gives us no help here.

We pass on to consider some passages in the First Epistle to
the Corinthians.

5. 1Coi. 10 tva 70 adto Aéynte aves.
There is no difficulty whatever in translating this quite
literally into Armenian: and yet the Armenian Version reads,

“that ye all have the same word” (94 qgtnjt putt nefgfp
udbukphu),

Now 8S. Ephraim gives us gh gdh put fujShp yop
wdbukpkwih, “that ye all have the one word.” This cannot
be due to a reminiscence on the part of the Armenian translator
of his Commentary; for, besides other differences, there is a
different word used for ‘ have.’

All is clear when we see the reading of the Peshito:

—aalal hiss cae wamds, “that there be one word

to all of you.”

6. 1 Coi. 12 dre &eaotos tuay réyeu “Eyo pév eis Tavdovu:
"Ey® 6¢’AmoArAd: "Eyo 5é Kya: *Eyo b€ Xpsorod.

Arm. “that each of you saith: I am of Paul; and another, I
of Apollos; and another, I of Kephas; and another, I of Christ.”

Here there is plainly some confusion: ‘each of you’ is inappro-
priate when followed by ‘and another. The explanation is clear
when we read in the Peshito: “that there is of you that saith,
I am of Paul; and there is that saith, 1 am of Apollos; and there
is that saith, I am of Kephas; and there is that saith, I am

EUTHALIANA. 87

of Christ.” §. Ephraim only gives the passage paraphrastically,
weaving it into his Commentary: but yet the occurrence of the
words ‘some of you say’ and ‘others say’ is sufficient to shew
that he had some such reading as we find in the Peshito. May
we not assume that this Syriac expansion lay before the first
Armenian translator, and that subsequently his work was cor-
rected by the Greek only so far as the substitution of ‘each of
you saith’ for the opening words ‘there is of you that saith’ (or
‘some of you say’); and that the remaining clauses were left, as
helpful to the interpretation of the passage, the logical confusion
newly introduced not being felt by the corrector? Indeed, I cannot
think of any other possible explauation of the phenomena.

7. 1 Co iv. 3 éuwol &€ eis CAdyiotov éotw wa vd dpov
avaxploe 7 bd avOpwTivns nmépas.

Arm. +++ Gaunt pun ful 'fp dhupyhatl, “...or at all
indeed by man.”

This strange rendering is explained by the Syriac of the
Peshito: zare to As (3 ars, “or by any son of man.”
Ephraim attests this reading by the words, “or at all by a son
of man” (& ful pels. ulbiles fir SUPE thuppry), where
two words for ‘at all’ are found, the first of which is that used
in the Armenian Version},

8. 1 Co iv. 12f cal xomidpev épyafouevoe Tats dias Yep-
alv: NoLdopovpevor evAoyodpEV, SuwKopevor aveyoueba, dSvadnpov-
pevol TapaKkaXovpev.

Arm. “And we laboured with our hands: they reviled us,
we blessed; they persecuted, we endured; they blasphemed, we
besought.”

Note, first, that there is one verb only for comidpev épyalope-
vot. Secondly, édcars is expressed less emphatically—‘our’ instead
of ‘our own. Thirdly, the passive participles have disappeared.

With regard to the first point, we find two verbs in the
Peshito; but there is only one in Ephraim, ‘we worked’

(qnpsfgup), and this is not the same as ‘we laboured’

1 The Aethiopic Version has ‘apud hominem mortalem.’

88 EUTHALIANA,

(asfuunntgup) of the Armenian Version. The second point is

what we should expect from a rendering of pNaré> (Pesh.).
But the third point is still more interesting. To find its explana-
tion we need only to compare the text of the Peshito:

pbtarmsa pa Art patasma = pit
+e Cra 20 pas 4 a Cro
“They revile us, and we bless: they persecute us, and we
endure: they blaspheme us, and we beseech from them.”

Dr Zahn* has called attention to a number of passages in which
Aphrahat in his citations from the Pauline Epistles differs con-
‘siderably from the text of the Peshito. I here give three instances
in which the Old Syriac, as represented by Aphrahat, explains
peculiarities of the Armenian Version which the Peshito explains
only in part or not at all. They suggest that if we had the whole
of the Old Syriac text many other difficulties of the Armenian
Version would be accounted for.

9. Ro xv. 1 ta acOevj pata Tév advvatov.

Arm, qufupaf[Pfectr npg, ‘the infirmity of the infirm.’
The Peshito like the Greek has words from different roots here:
rlissax résoias. But Aphrahat who cites this passage
(Wr. p. 141) gives us ons tan euoMtad, ‘the infirmity of the
infirm,’ exactly as the Armenian. The Syriac word Mamtaa
might be read, according to the points (which are often omitted in
early MSS), either as singular or as plural. Here then we have
also the explanation of the singular of the Armenian Version.

10. 1 Co vill. 8 Bpdpa Sé nuas ov trapioryas (Vv. |. mapacty-
aeL) TO Dew.

Arm. “But meat maketh us not to stand before God”
(un 9ls Geandsyy ng qurgneguitl).

Aphr. (Wr. p. 308) reads:

oa yb t=) whlintsa a Aso va\ wis

1 Geschichte des NTlichen Kanons, 11. 556 ff.

EUTHALIANA. 89

“that meats make us not to stand before God.” This, except for
the plural, is identical with the Armenian: but the Peshito is
quite different.

11. 2 Co v. 10 tods yap mavtas nuas havepwOnvar det
eumporbev tod Bypatos Tod yploTod, iva Kopicntar e&xacTos
Ta Ola Tod cdpatos pds a émpaker, elite ayabov eite hadrov.

Arm. “For to all of us to present ourselves (or to come to
be face to face) it remains before the judgment-seat of Christ:
that there-may-receive each one in his body, whatsoever he

wrought before, whether good or bad.” (puttg undkthgnct dkg

pun fuliuts pbuty Gun units unnbif «f? 7 uunufr. qth
puyayof fepreuputishep feprd. dinpiti nd qay frus. gapStusry
puny ooe +)

The Peshito offers us some help here. It has maoz\ pleted,
‘we are to stand,’ in place of davepwOnvar Sez: and it has ‘in his
body’ in close connection with the preceding verb. But Aphrahat
takes us further still, and explains the insertion of ‘before. He
cites the passage twice in the same words (Wr. pp. 156, 447):

are STAduN owaxry sD sonD a ol rlals
a ml wom sans sos35 AI ADI mt AS zn

Mat era ae

“that to all of us (t remains) to stand before the judgment-seat
of Christ; that there-may-receive each one in his body, whatso-
ever before he did, whether good or bad.”

It would be quite easy to go on multiplying instances; but
for our present purpose I do not think that it is at all necessary.
I merely add a literal translation of some other passages of the
Armenian Version, italicising the words to which I would direct
attention, so that any one with a knowledge of Syriac may be
able to satisfy himself further on the point.

Ro iv. 8 “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord doth not
impute his sin.”

Ro iv. 17 “In whom he believed, that he maketh alive the dead.”

90 EUTHALIANA.

Ro vi. 18 “And prepare not your members...,” and so below
several times. | |

Ro vu. 28 “But we know that, to them that love God, zn
every thing he cooperates for good.”

Ro xi. 26 “All Israel shall live.” This rendering of cw6n-
cetae is fairly frequent, though not by any means universal, and
not at all necessitated (as in Syriac) by the vocabulary of the
language. Cf. 1 Co ii. 15.

Ro xii. 11 “And know this concerning the time.”

1 Co v. 11 “ With such an one not even to eat bread.”

1 Co vi. 18 “is outside his body.”

1 Co ix. 13 “Know ye not that they which work in the
Temple, eat from the Temple.”

1 Co ix. 15 “It is good for me rather to die, and not that any
one should make my boasting void.”

1 Co xii. 3 “And if I give-to-eat (yapiow) all my goods to
the poor’.”

1 Co xiii. 8f. “ Whether tongues, they shall be silent...for we
know little from much, and little from much we prophesy...”

2 Co x. 11 “Such as we are by words of the letters...”

I think that I may claim as the result of the foregoing investi-
gation to have established at least a strong presumption in favour
of an Old Syriac base underlying the Armenian Version both in
the Gospels and in the Pauline Epistles. We have had warnings
enough of the peril of hasty assertion in the region of N. T.
textual criticism to make me unwilling to say more than this,
until others have had an opportunity of testing the process by
which this result has been reached, and until I myself may find
time to carry the investigation further. If in the issue the
view here propounded should be accepted as the true one, the
Armenian Version will demand far more attention than it has
hitherto received. For it will be recognised as a not unimportant
witness to Old Syriac readings, where at present the direct testi-
mony of Old Syriac Mss is altogether wanting.

In what I have written above, I have limited the range of my
examples to the Gospels and the three longest Pauline Epistles.

1 Cf. Aphr. Wr. 38.

EUTHALIANA., 91

But the enquiry will deserve to be pushed much further. I have
reason for thinking that the Acts of the Apostles may prove a not
unfruitful field of investigation, but it would be beside my present
purpose to enter upon it here’.

Moreover it is possible that by such an enquiry some side
light may be thrown on the early Syriac Canon. For example,
Dr Zahn’ has directed our attention to the fact that S. Ephraim
does not comment at all on the Epistle to Philemon. This, as he
truly says, is more noteworthy than the absence of any quotation
from this Epistle in Aphrahat. Now in reading this Epistle
through in the Armenian Version I have not been able to observe
any clear instance in which the Syriac of the Peshito explains a
peculiar phrase of the translation. The Epistle is indeed but short,
so that a negative argument of this kind has but little weight in
itself. But the absence of a commentary on it in S. Ephraim makes
it worth while to point out any corresponding phenomenon’.

Again, I cannot find in the Second Epistle of 8. Peter any
trace of a Syriac strain in the ancestry of the Armenian Version.
Of other books of the New Testament, and of the Armenian Version
of the Old Testament, I am not at present prepared to speak.

It will still remain a matter of interest to enquire whether
the particular form of the Greek text by which the Armenian
Version was revised and brought into its present state is capable
of identification. Can it be shewn, for example,—to take up
Mr Conybeare’s theory in a modified form—that the Greek codex

- 1 Dr Rendel Harris has called attention to an Armenian Commentary on the
Acts, which contains extracts from a Commentary by 8. Ephraim and clearly shews
that he employed an Old Syriac Version of that Book. See Four Lectures on the
Western Text (Camb. 1894), pp. 18 ff.

2 Geschichte des NTlichen Kanons, 11. 564n.

3 Mr Burkitt has suggested to me that the omission of the Epistle to Philemon
by S. Ephraim should be taken together with his acceptance of the Third Epistle
to the Corinthians, on which he gives a full commentary. It is quite possible that
the latter had in early times displaced the former, the recognised number of
fourteen Epistles of S. Paul being thus maintained.

If this was the case in the Old Syriac Version which the earliest Armenian
translators employed, we can thus explain the occurrence of 3 Corinthians in the
Armenian Version: the replacement of Philemon would then date from the time of
the revision by Greek codices. This would fully harmonise with the phenomenon
of which I have spoken above.

92 EUTHALIANA.

used for the revision of the Pauline Epistles was a near relative

of Codex H ?

This question leads us on to make some enquiry as to the
actual relation of the text of Codex H to that which is implied

by the Armenian Version.

The Armenian Version and the ‘Euthalian tect.

We may now turn to the first leaf of M. Omont’s transcript
of Codex H, and compare the seven verses which it contains

with the rendering of them in the Armenian Version.

I have

tried to preserve the order of the words, as far as possible, in my
English translation of the Armenian, and have italicised such
words as I have supplied to complete the sense.

CopEx H (1 Co x. 23 ff.)1,

23. Tlavra po eEeoriv: add’ ov
, , oP. »~
mavTa oupdéepe. mwavra pou e&eoriv:

GAN’ od mavra oixodopet.

24, pndels rd éavrov (nreirw, adda
TO TOU ETEpou.

25. mav Td év pakéAX@ Te@dovpevov
> , ‘ > , X A
ecOiere pndév avaxpivovtres Sia thy
ouveidnow:

26. rov xupiov yap 7 yn Kal ro
wAnpopa avTns.

27. et tis Kael bpas Tov ariorav
kat Oédere mopeverOa, wav Td mapatt-
Oépevov tpiv eobiere pndev avaxpivovtes
dia thy cuveldnow:

28. av d€ tis bpiv elrn Todro iepo-

, > A s) , b eee | “ 4
Ourdv €or, py eobiere St exeivov Tov
pnvvcayta kal thy cuveldnaoty:

29. ocuveidnow Sé Aéyw ovxt tH
> Lol et A ‘ mele 4 sad 2
€u“auTou aA THY TOU ETEPOV...

Tur ARMENIAN VERSION 2,

23. All things to me are possible,
but not all ¢hings are profitable. All
things to me are possible, but not all
things edify.

24, Let no one the things of him-
self only seek, but also the things of
his neighbour.

25. All that is sold in the shambles
eat, and distinguish not because of
conscience.

26. For the earth is the Lord’s
with its fulness.

27. If any one call you of the
unbelievers, and ye wish to go; all
that is set before you eat, and dis-
tinguish not because of conscience.

28. But if any one shall say to
you, This is sacrificed meat, eat not,
on account of him who informed you
and on account of conscience.

29. But conscience, I say, not his
but the neighbour's...

1 J have not reproduced the peculiarities of spelling. In v. 27 ei rs, not ef dé 71s,
is the reading of the first hand (see above, p. 66).
2 The few variants recorded by Zohrab are quite unimportant, except that in

v. 24 one ms at least omits ‘ also.’

EUTHALIANA., 93

Let us first look for readings in which H and the Armenian
both vary from the text of the better Mss as represented by
Drs Westcott and Hort. Of these there is but one: viz. the
insertion of poe after tavta twice in vy. 23.

This reading is supported by N°C°HKL al pler vg“? syr* arm,
as well as by some patristic authorities. Ephraim’s Commentary
does not attest it; but he only paraphrases at this point.

The coincidence of Arm. with H is of no help to us here, as ex
hypothest the reading, being attested by the Peshito, may have
come into the Armenian originally from the Old Syriac.

Next let us examine the readings in which the Armenian
varies both from H and from the text of Westcott and Hort.

(1) In v, 24 the Armenian inserts ‘only’ and ‘also, thus
toning down the apparent severity of the precept.

How are we to account for these insertions? A few Greek
cursives insert «at after adda, and the Peshito inserts Ar, ‘also.’
But no Greek codex is cited for wovov. It may however have
stood at one time in Greek codices, for Clement of Alexandria
(Strom. iv. 7. 54), in citing this verse, gives us ...6voy GAXa Kal...

Eph°™™ runs as follows: “but not that we should seek the
advantage of ourselves alone, but also that of our neighbours.”
This is of course a paraphrase; but it is to be noted that the word
which I have translated ‘alone’ (fuuj%) is not the same as the
‘only’ (& 4/7) of the Armenian Version. It is quite possible,
then, that ‘only’ and ‘also’ were both in the Old Syriac’, and
that the Ar of the Peshito is the relic of this reading.

It is not impossible that there is some connection between
Clement, who often represents a ‘Western’ text, and the Old
Syriac: but what the link may be is beyond our present purpose
to enquire. It must suffice us now to say that our hypothesis of
a Syriac base for the Armenian offers us a possible explanation
of the variant which we have been considering.

(2) In v. 26 for cal To TAHNpwpa avTHs the Armenian reads
“with (or in) its fulness” Gafe fey). No Greek Ms has any
variant to correspond to this. Eph°™™ quotes the verse in exactly

1 « Only’ is read by the Arabic Version (Erp. and Polygl.).

94 EUTHALIANA.

the same words as the Armenian Version: so that we cannot be
sure that we have independent testimony here. But the Peshito
explains the variant by its reading coréisas, ‘in its fulness.’

If this instance of correspondence between the Armenian and
the Syriac stood alone, it might be taken to be a mere repetition
of the Armenian Version of Ps xxiil. (xxiv.) 1, where the words
are the same as here. But, after what we have already seen, it is
more probable that it is a remnant of the old translation from the
Syriac.

Lastly, we notice that there is one variant of H which is not
recognised either by the Armenian or by Westcott and Hort.

In v. 29 H reads €uavtod (for éavtod), and Tischendorf cites in
support of it only three cursives (31, 37, 73). “Eauvtod was un-
doubtedly a difficult reading to a scribe or a translator who did
not understand the indefinite use of the word which enabled it to
be employed of the first, second or third person. The Armenian
rendering ‘his’ is shewn by the context to be wrong. We find

several other readings or renderings. The Peshito has «_AA\ss
‘your (pl.)’; Cod. Clar. (D,) has ceavtod with syr?™!* latt sah cop.
But the Old Syriac, as attested by Ephraim’s Commentary, had
‘my, which may imply the éuavtod which we find in H: but it
might also be a rendering of éavrod, as interpreted by the words
which immediately follow: “for why should my liberty,” Wc.

It is quite possible that the Armenian Version at first had
‘my’ from the Old Syriac; and that this was altered into ‘his’
with a view to a closer correspondence to a Greek MS which
had (as the majority of Greek Mss have) éavrod. But in
any case this reading of the Armenian Version cannot have
come from H or from any Greek Ms which agreed at this point
with H.

Our examination, then, of the first seven verses which
M. Omont has given us from Codex H does not point us to
any closer connection of the Armenian Version with H than
with other trustworthy Greek codices of the Pauline Epistles.
On the contrary, we have seen one clear example which points in
the opposite direction.

EUTHALIANA. 95

Another interesting passage for comparison is afforded by some
of the newly recovered verses of Cod. H (1 Co xi. 17—19).

CopEx H.

17. rovro S€ mapayyéAX(ov) ovk
> A a > >) AY a“ bs >
ematv(@), OTe ovK eis TO KpEiTTov GAA

eis TO NTTOv cuvépyede.

18. mpérov pev yap cuvepxopéevav
Upay €v ekxAnoia dkovw ocxiopata é€v

rn vd
Upiv Umdpyev, Kal pépos TL TidTEVa.

ARMENIAN VERSION.

17. But this I command, not as
though I should praise: for not to the
better, but to the worse (or base), do
ye advance.

18. First, when in one place ye
assemb!e in the church, I hear that
divisions exist among you; and a

little have I believed 7¢.

19. det yap kai aipéoers ev vpiy 19. But even divisions are about
elvat, iva Kat of SdKipor pavepot yévwv- to be among you, that they which are
approved among you may be mani-
fested.

id r
Tal ev Upiv.

Here we observe several peculiarities in the Armenian Version
of which Cod. H gives us no explanation.

(1) In v. 17 it is possible that H had ézrawéyv. But, if so,
there would be no difficulty in rendering this in Armenian by a
participle, and ‘as though’ seems to call for further explanation.

The Peshito has: ‘not as though I praise you’ (wer rl

asl Mir sar), where as corresponds to the nyuyhu
[#4, ‘as though,’ of the Armenian.

(2) <A more striking difference is found in the word ‘advance’
in the same verse. The Aethiopic Version seems to contain Old
Syriac elements in many places. It is interesting to note Bode’s
translation of this clause?: ‘quia non proceditis in id quod melius
est, sed potius in id quod uilius est.’

The Peshito is strange, but contains the same idea of ‘advance’:

Ar. adude’ . aan wan eis \\m
se Ahh aco whats ak

“ Because ye went not forwards, but to littleness ye descended.”

1 For the exact text of H, see above p. 53. I have indicated by the brackets in
v. 17 that we cannot be certain that H had not the alternative reading rapayyéA\w
ovK émawar,

2 N. T. Aethiopici interpretis...in Latinum transtulit C. K. Bodius, Brunsuigae,
1753.

96 EUTHALIANA.

The Armenian of Ephraim’s Commentary is instructive here:
“For not to the better forwards did ye advance therein, but to the
base (or little) ye descended and were brought down by those
things.” Here the phrase ‘to the better’ is exactly in the words
of the Armenian Version (’f sus utp), and probably is intro-
duced from that source. When it is eliminated, we see that
Ephraim’s text was probably the same as that of the Peshito.

It would seem then that the Armenian Vulgate here represents
a correction of the earliest Armenian translation from the Syriac
so as to bring in the phrase ‘to the better’ from the Greek: and
that the word ‘advance’ has a Syriac origin. The Syriac
a c.sx0\ probably represented the Greek eds to Kpetrrov.
The Syriac phrase a_adwar’ eo Aassosal was rendered by

the Armenian ‘advance’ (@4pmfp), so that, when ‘to the better’
was afterwards inserted, ets To xpetrtov obtained a double repre-
sentation.

(3) In v. 18 ‘in one place’ has no attestation, except that
Theodoret has éwi +d avro here: but this seems to be introduced
from v. 20. The Arm. has the same word for ‘divisions’ (or
‘heresies’) in this and the following verse.

(4) A further peculiarity in the Armenian Version is the
rendering ‘are about to be’ (or ‘to arise, sulyng &£u) in the
place of Se7...etvas.

The Peshito again offers an exact parallel: ein pens
900235 mists Ar—the fully expressed future, ‘about are

even contentions that they should be.’

In these verses, then, I think that there can be no doubt that
the main element which differentiates the Armenian Version from
the text of the ordinary Greek codices is a Syriac element. Nor
is there any point which links the Armenian to Codex H rather
than to any other Greek Codex.

It is now time that we should consider some of the arguments
presented by Mr Conybeare in support of his own view.

Mr Conybeare himself was struck at the outset of his textual
enquiry with “the paradoxical fact that two texts, each claiming

EUTHALIANA. ; 97

to be transcribed from the copy made by Pamphilus which lay at
Caesarea, are quite different texts, so that, if one is the text of
Pamphilus, then the other cannot be.” Any but a courageous
investigator would have been deterred by these untoward appear-
ances. But Mr Conybeare found, by the aid of Bousset’s tables of
readings, (1) that there was a distinct Euthalian element in the
Armenian Version, and (2) that the Armenian was more true than
Codex H itself to the Euthalian text, and accordingly ex hypothesi
to the Codex of Pamphilus.

Accepting, provisionally, for the sake of our argument,
Bousset’s theory that the Codex of Pamphilus is represented
in the main by Codex H, the corrector of Codex Sinaiticus (N°),
and the upper writing of Codex rescriptus Porfirianus Chiovensis
(Euthal*’), let us look at the chief points of the proof which Mr
Conybeare offers us.

1. Out of 33 agreements between H and N°, 14, he tells us,
cannot be tested by the Armenian. In 12 of the 19 which remain
the Armenian supports their witness. After examining these
Mr Conybeare says (p. 256): “Thus we have 12 cases of well
marked and highly characteristic readings in which the Arm. =
H®&*.” But on examining these readings I find 9 of the 12 in the
Peshito. This does not prove that they are Old Syriac readings,
though this may quite possibly be the case: but it does make us
hesitate to speak of them as “highly characteristic” of the Codex
of Pamphilus. Of the remaining 3, one is the reading of the great
majority of Greek codices (Aapafas 2 Co iv. 6); another is éote
doxtpmos for d0xiuos éotw (2 Co x. 18), again with nearly all Greek
codices—a variant moreover where the order of the words in a
version is of little weight; while in the case of the third, Xpsor@
"Incod as against Xpiot@ alone (Col i. 28), we have a considerable
Greek attestation, and, while the Peshito gives us (practically
alone) ‘Incod Xpror®@, the Philoxenian Syriac has Xpict@ “Inaod.

Thus the main proof of a common base for Arm. and HX*
breaks down entirely.

Nor does the theory fare better when we examine the “ five
test cases” (p. 257) in which “the Arm. adheres to the Pamphilian
hand of &, whereas H forsakes it.” For of these the first three

1 Journal of Philology, loc. cit. p. 252.

98 EUTHALIANA.,

are Peshito readings and are found in most Greek codices. The
fourth is disqualified as a witness; for the Armenian could not
represent the distinction between iva cwdpovifovew and iva
codpovitwow (Tit ii. 4). The fifth, rod dopdrov Oeod (2 Co iv.
4) is apparently not an Old Syriac reading; for both Ephraim in
his Commentary and the Peshito omit doparov. It is found in
NLP and 23 cursives (Tisch.). This combination is worthy of
attention; but it is by itself a slender foundation for the theory
which we are now discussing.

I do not think that I need follow Mr Conybeare further. I
have examined the readings which he has himself put forward as
“highly characteristic” and as “test cases,” and I have found them
wholly insufficient to support his position. I do not deny that
there may be a connection between the Greek codices by which
the Armenian Version was corrected and Codex H or the Codex
Pamphili. What I assert is that a connection has not yet been
proved, and that, in any future endeavours to prove it, all readings
of the Armenian Version which have Syriac attestation—which
may conceivably be Old Syriac attestation—must be rigidly
excluded. |

I cannot leave this discussion, which has necessarily involved
some adverse criticism, without expressing my sincere gratitude to
Mr Conybeare for his discovery of fresh materials and for the
stimulus which is given by all that he writes. He will, I trust,
pardon me, if I sometimes welcome his facts without accepting
the conclusions which he draws from them.

CHAPTER VI.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

WE may now attempt to bring together the chief results of
the foregoing investigations, so far as they throw any light upon
Kuthalius and his work; and at the same time we may indicate
certain directions in which further research is greatly needed.

Certain Greek codices of the Pauline Epistles and of the
Acts and the Catholic Epistles are furnished with Prologues,
with Tables of Old Testament quotations, and with Tables of
chapter summaries prefixed to individual books. In the margin
of the text of these codices we find references to the quotations
and a numeration which corresponds to the Tables of chapter
summaries,

The bulk of this apparatus varies greatly in different codices.
Few MSS are altogether lacking in such adornments. Few, again,
present us with what we have enumerated in its completeness:
the Tables of quotations, for example, are but seldom met with.
On the other hand, many Mss have added the Pseudo-Athanasian
summaries, and some are loaded with still heavier additions.

The Prologue to the Pauline Epistles and those to the
Acts and the Catholic Epistles are quite plainly all from the
hand of the same writer. But this writer does not tell us his
name: and in many of the mss the titles prefixed to the Pro-
logues are vague and give us no further light. Many codices
however prefix the name of Euthalius. Some of them describe
him simply as ‘Deacon’: others call him ‘Bishop of Sulca.’
Moreover some MSS in the titles of the Prologues to the Acts

1 These titles are carefully discussed by von Dobschiitz, who has gathered
together a good deal of ms evidence regarding them: Centr. f. Bibl. x. 63 f.

7—2

100 EUTHALIANA.

and Catholic Epistles give the name of the recipient of this por-
tion of his work as ‘Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria.’

In harmony with this we find that in these Prologues the
writer addresses himself to one whom he calls his ‘brother
Athanasius’; whereas in his Prologue to the Pauline Epistles,
which he had previously edited, he had dedicated his work to
a ‘most honoured Father’ who is not further described.

Now it is not possible to explain the statements contained in
these titles as a mere deduction from the contents of the Pro-
logues themselves. ‘Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria’ might
indeed be so accounted for; and the designation of the writer
himself as a bishop might be held to follow from his addressing
Athanasius as his ‘most beloved’ and ‘most honoured brother.’
But the name of Euthalius admits of no such easy explanation ;
nor can we thus account for the mysterious designation of his
see. The very fact that an unknown man, described as the
bishop of an unknown place, should be offered to us by the
Mss as the author of the work is in favour of the trustworthi-
ness of the tradition which they preserve. For it is not often
that works, originally anonymous, come to be assigned to writers
of whom nothing whatever is known. Eminent persons, as a rule,
are chosen to act as sponsors to the waifs and strays of literature.

Accordingly we accept the tradition that Euthalius Bishop
of Sulca was the author of the work in question: and we may
reasonably follow Zacagni in explaining the title ‘Deacon, which
some MSS apply to him, by supposing that he still held that sub-
ordinate office when he dedicated the earlier portion of his work
to the unnamed person whom he addresses as ‘most honoured
Father.’ |

As regards the much canvassed question of the date of
Euthalius, our enquiries have enabled us to remove certain
historical difficulties which have hitherto encompassed it. We
have seen reason for believing that in the year 396 A.D. his
work was subjected to some kind of revision, apparently with
the view of reducing it to a more serviceable compass. This new
edition appears to belong to Caesarea and to be the workmanship
of a writer named Evagrius.

It is therefore not unreasonable to go back at least twenty-

EUTHALIANA. 101

five years from this point for the date of the original edition.
Thus we are brought within the lifetime of S. Athanasius, who
died in 372: and, of course, so far as this consideration is con-
cerned, we are at liberty to go back earlier still, An upper limit
is provided by the fact that Euthalius makes citations from works
of Eusebius which were written c. 323. We have no clear evi-
dence to enable us to fix the date more precisely in the half-
century which is thus marked out for us.

There is, however, one indication which would seem to point
us to an earlier rather than a later date within this period. We
found it exceedingly probable that a system of chapter numbering
in the Acts, which has been introduced quite independently by
very early hands into Codices & and B, and appears also in a
slightly altered form in the best Mss of S. Jerome’s Vulgate, is
ultimately based on the Euthalian chapters and subdivisions.
It is not the Euthalian system in its integrity, but a modifi-
cation (whether accidental or intentional) of that system. It
probably stood in the margin of some Greek codex at Caesarea,
anterior in date to NS and B: and it is just possible—though
at present we need to speak with caution on this point—that
S. Jerome himself is responsible for our finding it in the Vulgate
MSS.

This consideration inclines us to push back the date of
Euthalius, in order to allow time for the extended use at so
early a period of his chapter numbers in a modified form; and
thus we are led to place him provisionally not later than 350 A.D."

It has hitherto been customary to attribute to Euthalius an
elaborate system of stichometrical calculations, giving the exact
compass in measured lines (otiyor) not only of the text of the
Books which he edited, but also of his own Prologues and
Tables. But we have seen one clear instance in which it is
impossible to assign certain of these calculations to Euthalius

' J have not thought it necessary to reproduce the statements of Armenian
chronologers with regard to Euthalius, which are collected by Father Carekin (Cat.
of Anc. Arm. Translations, p. 174) and are translated by Mr Conybeare (Journ. of
Phil. ut supra, p. 251). They occur as notes on the reign of Arcadius and Honorius,
and are obviously based on the Prologues and on the Martyriwm Pauli which were
found in the Armenian Bibles.

102 EUTHALIANA.

himself (p. 35); and in another case the credit for having made
them is expressly claimed by a later writer of the name of
Evagrius. Moreover there is nothing whatever in the descrip-
tions which Euthalius gives us of the scope of his own work to sug-
gest that he took any interest at all in this kind of stichometry.

The true Euthalian stichometry, or colometry, as it is now
more conveniently termed, is his division of the text into cola,
or short sentences, as an aid to intelligent reading. It was this
colometrical arrangement which he regarded as so novel and so
important a feature in his edition. I have not entered upon the
subject of colometry in this Essay. It is a topic which needs a
full investigation. It has been suggested by several critics—and
their view is almost certainly correct—that there is a connection
of a close kind between the colometry of Codex H and that repre-
sented, less perfectly and in different ways, by Codices Claro-
montanus and Boernerianus. The only contribution which I am
here able to offer to this subject consists in the additional evi-
dence given by the restored pages of Codex H, which is our only
direct witness to the Euthalian arrangement of the text.

While it is reasonable to think that Codex H preserves to us
the cola of Euthalius more faithfully than we can hope to find
them preserved anywhere else, yet we may be allowed to question
whether it gives us an exact representation of the external ap-
pearance of his edition. Its enormous letters involve the con-
stant turning of a line in order to complete the colon. It seems
more likely that in the original codex each colon would, as a rule,
occupy a single line. If this were so, the general aspect of the
page might rather resemble a page of Codex B in the Psalms,
where the size of the letters permits of two columns of about
twenty-six letters each, so that the cola are not very frequently
broken. But it is possible that the Codex of Euthalius contained
but one column to the page, and was of far less splendid a cha-
racter than either Codex H or Codex B.

We have been led by reasons of quite a different kind to regard
Codex H as only giving us a much modified form of the Euthalian
edition: and in spite of the Euthalian colouring of its interesting
colophon, we cannot doubt its own explicit testimony which con-
nects it with the Evagrian and Caesarean line of tradition.

EUTHALIANA. 1038

This conclusion is of great importance when we come to en-
quire as to the character of the text which Euthalius used. Had
we, indeed, been able to discover the locality in which he lived
and worked, we should have had some presumptive evidence as
to his text. But, as it is, we are at present left wholly in the
dark. We know that Codex H and certain other Euthalian codices
offer us a text which has undergone revision in the Library of
Caesarea. But how great a measure of correction was needed in
order to bring the original text of Euthalius into harmony with
the Codex of Pamphilus, or with what care the revision was
actually made, we have not at present the means of judging.
Nor can we say whether any existing Euthalian codex contains a
text which is independent of this Caesarean revision.

It is possible that some light may hereafter be thrown upon
the question by the citations made by Euthalius in his Prologues
and Tables of quotations, where the reviser’s hand may perhaps
have failed to interfere. Thus, to take a single example, in the
Table prefixed to the Pauline Epistles (Z. 553) we read :

AAII. xe’. Naovw cat "Hoaiov tév mpodpntar a’.
€ ¢€ lal e / lal ’ / \ ’ 4
Qs wpatos ot modes TOV evayyedtGopévwy Ta ayaa.

Zacagni does not tell us what reading the Reg.-Alex. has at
this point in its continuous text: but Tischendorf cites from his
“Kuthal” the insertion of tév evayyercCouévwy eipnvnv after
mooes. This insertion is supported by N°D,KLP vg syrr arm
Chrys. But it is absent from N*ABC sah cop Clem Or. Again,
Ta 1s supported by N*D}°KL Clem Chrys Euthal*: but it is
omitted by NCABCD#P Or.

In other cases the citations in this Table have quite a different
kind of attestation, and several times they are on the side of &° as
against X*.

But it would be a waste of labour to attempt to argue from
examples of this kind until we get a more satisfactory recension
of the Euthalian apparatus than is to be found in Zacagni’s
edition.

Mr Conybeare’s interesting suggestion that the text of Ku-
thalius is preserved for us in its purest form by the Armenian
Version we have been obliged to reject. Our enquiry into the

104 EUTHALIANA.

origin of this Version has shewn us that there are Syriac elements
of great antiquity contained in it, and that it is worthy of a most
careful study. But until these Syriac elements have been noted
and set aside, it can give us no trustworthy evidence as to the
character of the Greek codices which have had so large a share in
making it what it now is. There still remains a possibility that
the Euthalian apparatus—perhaps in its modified Caesarean shape
—was introduced into the Armenian Version by the great fifth
century translators: and, if this were so, we might expect to find
in the text of the Version traces of the later form of Euthalian
text which is represented by Codex H. But at present this can
be no more than a guess, and even if it proved true it would be
of more interest as a contribution to the history of the Armenian
Version than for any fresh aid which it could afford for the recon-
struction of that particular stage of the Euthalian text.

But while we may not speak of the “Euthalian Text” as if it
were a known quantity available for the purposes of textual criti-
cism, yet it is to be noted that the presence or absence of portions
of the Euthalian apparatus in Greek Mss must form an important
clue in the hitherto almost unattempted task of the classification
of the later codices of the Acts and Epistles. Accordingly we
may assert with confidence that one of the next steps to be taken
in the textual criticism of this portion of the New Testament
must be a critical edition of the work of Euthalius himself, and of
the multitudinous supplements with which it has been adorned or
disfigured by his successors.

APPENDIX.

COLLATION OF THE PSEUDO-ATHANASIAN SYNOPSIS.

APPENDIX.
COLLATION OF THE PSEUDO-ATHANASIAN SYNOPSIS.

THis Synopsis has attracted a good deal of attention of late.
In order to shew this I need only give the following references:
Zahn, Geschichte des NTlichen Kanons, ii. 8302—318 ; Lagarde, Sep-
tuaginta-Studien, ii. 59 ff.; Klostermann, Analecta zur Septuaginta,
79—112. It is unnecessary for me to enter into the history of its
text, except so far as to cite the words of Montfaucon with regard
to the codex from which the editio princeps (1600, Ea Officina
Commeliniana) was printed :

Ne omittamus ea quae de codice, unde haec Synopsis prodiit, habet
Felckmannus. Usae sunt operae, inquit, textu huius Synopseos G'raece descripto
ex uetusto et miris ductibus constante codice, quem ex Bibliotheca uiri clarissimi
Petri Neuelett Doschii curaut uir Ampliss. D. Bongarsius, quem cum non in
omnibus descriptor assequutus sit, quidquid erit discrepantiae notandum duxi.
Quamquam essent non pauca, quae de interpretatione monert poterant: imd
locorum quoque nonnullorum in tpso ueteri codice coniecturae possent afferrt,
quae tamen omnia breuitatis causa, et quod docti per se ipsi in hoc longe optimt
moniores sib erunt omitto. Quorsum autem euaserit codex ille memoratus

a Felkmanno ignoratur. Codicem Synopseos aliquem nec uidi, nec alicubi
exstare didici!,

To this I need only add that Dr James announced in 1892 that
he had found a Ms of this Synopsis in the Library of Eton College :
Testament of Abraham (Texts and Studies, 1. 2), p. 7 note.

As portions of the Synopsis constantly find their way into
Euthalian codices, I have thought it worth while to give here a
collation of this MS. The weariness of this somewhat unprofitable

1 Athanas. ed. Ben. 1698, p. viii: Migne, P. G. xxviii. 15, Felckmann’s words,
together with a few variants from the ms, will be found on p. 84 of the Appendix to
the Commelinian edition.

APPENDIX. 107

task has been relieved by the thought that my work may be of
some service to Herr von Dobschiitz, who has promised to give us
a study of the book.

It appeared to me that it would be most convenient to scholars
that I should collate the Ms with Migne’s text, reprinted from
Montfaucon in the fourth volume of S. Athanasius’s works (Patrol.
Graeca, xxviil. 283—438). It can thus be used also by those who
have Montfaucon’s edition, the pages of which I have given:
whereas, had I based the collation on Montfaucon’s or: the Com-
melinian text, it would have been useless to the many who have
Migne’s reprint.

An examination of the collation will shew that this is the Ms
from which the book was originally printed. Its marginal correc-
tions have been taken into the text; and obvious blunders have
frequently been eliminated, though some have been allowed to
remain},

The MS is a stout quarto, written by hands of the end of the
14th or beginning of the 15th century. Portions of it were written
by Ducas the Notary for John of Ragusa. Of him a 16th cen-
tury hand has written in the margin of p. 145: ‘ Hic fuit Episcopus
Argensis, theologus ordinis Dominicanorum, quem Felix V pp ob
singularem eruditionem spectatamque uitae sanctimoniam tituli
S. Sixti Cardinalem creauit. Dominicanorum Basiliensium biblio-
thecam Graecis codicibus locupletauit.’

Compare the notice of him in De Mas Latrie, T’résor de Chrono-
logie, 1204: ‘Jean Dominici, Florentin, frere précheur, archev. de
Raguse, pr. card. de 8. Sixte, légat en Hongrie et en Bohéme; m.
1420, ou plutdt 1419,’

The MS was presented to Mr Huggett, the Librarian of Eton
College, in the 18th century, by Dr John Henry Mauclere. It
had been in the possession of the Mauclercs of Vitry since 1665.

1 The word wénovOev (Mg. 421 C=Montf. 196 D) has a vertical stroke after the
first syllable ze: this has been cancelled and another has been placed after the
syllable zrov. A line is also drawn in the margin at this place. On referring to the
Commelinian edition we find that p. 128 ends with rerov. It is probable that the
codex was actually sent to the printer: but even if these marks were put in by

Felckmann after the text had been printed, they would still go to prove the identity
of our codex with that from which the editio princeps was made,

108 APPENDIX.

The following description will illustrate these statements and
give the contents of the MS.

Codex Etonensis B. 1. 5. 13.

On a fly-leaf: Codex hic Ms. quem ex Victoriaco Campagniae
asportavit Daniel Avus meus in Bataviam, & hine in Angliam
Patruus, Jacobus, hereditario jure venit ad me Joannem Henricum
Mauclere.

On p. 1, in the bottom margin, are the names of several former
owners, partly erased :

Ioannis X X X X X X beneficio d. I. x x x x x 1550
F. N. Neueleti x xX xX XX¥XXXXXXXXXXX

ex Libris Danielis Mauclere Doctoris
medici Victoriacensis 1665

ex libris Jacobi Mauclere M.D. 1700
ex Libris Joannis Henrici Mauclere. M.D. 1748.

The Synopsis runs from p. 1 to p. 99, 1. 2: ending with the
words els dsadvrAa kw :—

Then a red title follows: “Iwanou: é« tod brouvynctiKod. Ked.
pn. Twa éoTl TA pyNmovevomeva ev TH ypahn BiBrLa ws dvTa ovy
evptoKxopeva Oé.

Inc. Nd@ay cai adde (19 lines): expl. dwedre/as aroXovTo.

Then follows: (red title) Awpo@éov émicKérrov tipou: avdpos
mvopcpou Kal waptupos...2Uvowis eis Tods Blovs Kal Ta TéXN TOY
aATOOTOAWY Kal TOV TPOPNTOv.

Inc. Odros 6 mpodeyGels.... Expl. p. 129. ...éradn rode
arroBavwv, with a red subscr. téXos tev TpodynTtav: Hyouvv THs
yevérews avTav’ Kal THS BvoTHs, Kal THS TeXeuTHS. Then under
a red and black border: dovKas votapsos, apparently in the same
hand as the preceding. |

The Book has been broken up, apparently with a view to the
convenience of the printers. At the bottom of p. 98 the two lines
of p. 99 which are required to close the treatise are written afresh,
and underneath them the note: |

‘Sequitur in MS. “Iwonov éx Tod vropyynotexod...sequitur
deinde Awpo@eod...’

pp. 125—128 are left blank.

APPENDIX. 109

p. 129. Zvvo wus ypovixn dro adapy thy apxynv AaBodca...
Ews TOV xYpovwv THS Bacirelas adeElov TOD Komvnvod.
Inc. “Addu 6 rp@tos vd Ocotd TAacOeEis...

Expl. (p. 144). ...wéxpe kal viv ody O00 Stapxovon.
8
Then in the same hand: Ka@ortxod didacKadov THs cuvo”

dpa w , vrapyet aitn 7 BiBdos eypadn yodv Sid yeupos ewod
dovKa voTapiov.

The next section of the Book is in a different hand: but the
watermark of the paper—a pair of scales—remains the same, and
Ducas the Notary has written in the upper margin of p. 145 the
following words:

6 20U
A A A aA ’ \ a
Atéackanrov Kai KabortKod THs cuvo’’ mpc ppd tw , 06 amo THS

payovtias vrrapyet n BiBros. SovKas votaptos.

p- 145. Title (red): cuvodicov év éritoph amacas...éyov
TvVoboUS MEXpPL THS GYSOHS OLKOUMEVLKHS MEYAANS Kal ayias OvTwS
ovV0oov.

Inc. Xvvodos Peta Kai lepa...

Expl. (p. 183, 1. 9). e&emaudevOnuev dtravtes. The Book has
been again broken at this point. The last nine lines have been
copied on to p. 182; and are there followed by ‘Explicit. Sequi-
tur in MS. ’Ezruatondy...To Hovyvov; etc.

The next piece begins on the same page (183) with a red title:

émiaTon) cuvodik?) Tod ev ayiows Tps TuoV Gwdpoviov apyLeTt-
OKOTTOV lEepoToAUpOV EV 7) KATA TANS ETTLY AlpeTEws.

Inc. BaBai BaBai raupaxapiotor, Tas pot pirov viv TO
NovKLOV. Pee

Expl. p. 219. 1) vroypady’ éppwpévos év Kw’ vmrepevyou pov’
dywotate Tep ev yo Ww. apy.

p. 219, 1 3 (red): rod év dylous rps hudv dvactaciov mp.dp-
you OeouTrohews. TEpt TLIO TEWS'

Inc. “Ioréov cat pr) ayvonréor....

At the beginning of p. 225 the hand again changes, and we
have once more the writing of Ducas the Notary.

Expl. 239. ...réyw 87 és yévous wavtos, pire XU.

p. 240 is blank.

p. 241 begins, in a fresh hand, civtayua tov Kata THY év

110 APPENDIX.

vikaia cuvodov mpayOévtwy. Inc. Ta kata thy dyiay Kai peya-
Anv.... Expl. dyamnré dderpé. TédAOs TOY TpaKTLKOVY THS
TpwTns suvddov. TH Oem yapts.

p. 337. Another hand begins the Acts of the Council of
Ephesus.

A new numbering begins at this page. The MS is henceforth
foliated, not paginated, and is to the end in the hand of Ducas.

p. 257 v. Colophon: rédo0s adv O66 THs BiBdov TavTns TOV
TPAKTLKOY THS OLKOUMEVLKHS TpiTNS TUVOOOL.

éreherdOn yovv Sid yetpos eu“od Tod Tamnvod votapiov THs
aytwrarns Tod Oeod peyarns éxxrAnaolas’ Sia cuvdpopns Kat é&ddou
ToU ayiwratov Kal Kabor.Kod THs auvddov lepwpovayov Ppa
iwavvov' (then added) azo tis payoufias. (later) Ioannis hermyn
benefitio I. Leon. Gastii.

COLLATION WITH MIGNE’S ATHANASIUS, VOL. IV, 283 FF.

[The figures in brackets are those printed in thick type by Migne. They give
the pages of the later Benedictine edition (Patavii, 1777, tom. 2).

The references to the right are to Montfaucon’s edition: where he retains the
reading of the Ms (apart from differences of accent or breathing) I have
put an asterisk instead of a reference. ]

Tit. Xdvois émitouos ths Ocias ypadhhs maratas Kal véas
diaOnKns Tod ayiov Kal peydrou ’AOavaciov.

284 A (96) Xpiotiavar] pr tov? 126 A
285 B é& ’Appabaipy] pr jv Cc
C (97) Tod pév mp@Tov] + 7) Ibe (et
éEnyeipe Kuvptos] om Kupuos *

D AaBerixov] Savetixov B

nr’ ’
év “Iopanr] év Anu (sic pr man)

1 The Books of the O.T. are lettered in the margin, from a (Gen) to xB (Dan).
The a however is placed against the first line of the treatise. The Twelve Prophets
are one Book (cn) : so are 1, 2 Kings; 3, 4 Kings; 1, 2 Chron; 1, 2 Esdr. The
Gospels are similarly numbered a——é.

288

289

292

293

296
297

300

301

cone]

D
A

B

APPENDIX,

Adaéride] TH avoir.
apéutrros| pr adnOuvos
év 'EXkecat] eve}
Xovs] youss:
"Ayyatou] + rod

(98) 2upay] onpay

Nevoay] veroa

Beviapiv| Beviapip

NaBovyosovdcwp] vaBovyodovocop
"Avavinnr]| avvavinr

"Acenr] aainr

viod ‘ABpadp] viod 6a6 viod aBpady
TeTANpopopnuévarv| TeTANpwmopnuevav
xat 0 Aoyos| bis scriptum

(99) 8&0Sexa] v8

D (100) cupdoviar] cupdovetar

Q

o

Geopopwr] pr Kal
nuroyncer] evrAOynoev

(101) Mau 8pjs] iapBpis

Kal otkAoL ,arypoe’| om arpoe’
\ t \ 14
AovTrov voptpa| ouTrAa voutma

oupTrepaivetat| cup7repaivete sed corr in marg
(102) AeveTvns 2°] sic marg: txt AevcKTS

AveiAnrrar| dunrevrrat

" xXpliats| + Tod

peyarys vynoteias| + i év TH
oUTw| OUTwS

npukatat] wapvxarar: et sic infra
Ta Opota TOUTM] Ta OpMot TOUTW
UBis| tBns

aTTayas| attayes

Velwappots] YEetwapors

(6 (v4 . Py
év te] &v Ti Ti

(103) Yovpicadai] covpicadé

Lwryap] coyap

xinades 00 Kat éEaxdorot] add in marg évvéa
Kal TEVTHKOVTA YLALAOES KAL TPLAKOG LOL
yirvades 8’ Kat Tevtaxdatot] add in marg Tec-

111

128

129

131

132
133

134

135

Be Oo x

112

304 A

o

305 A

308 A

2 alles,

309 A

ts

31 bse

Bio A

APPENDIX.

capakovTa yidiabes Kal TEVTAKOG LOL
Padaccovp| padacovp
Tptaxooto.| marg dsaxéovot
"Autcadat] durcadé
0 apLOuos 1°] sic marg: txt opsBos

Nedéarelu] yea

éEaxootat| per contract script

(104) ets tv ynv] thy supra lin e pr man

o Pivens avétpwce] o huveés avétpynoe
KataXanrnoas] sic marg: txt catadnoas
éEaxoovat| éEaxoorar¢ (sic)

émauptov| pr TH

Lovo, aro YoxoO| coyoO aro coxywO
Leip] onp

’EraBala] érayabad tantum secundo loco
éotl Kades] éoti Kaédns

(105) advatpeBévtos] sic corr: txt avepeBévtos

Ouyatépes] Ouvyatépats
‘Icaxyap] iccayap
Taddcdovdinr] yaddsovdinr
BuBrtov] pr To

avay.wwoeaKeo Oar] € in at corr man rec

(106) trapaBawovow] + avtov

aro ‘PovBip] da povBipu

"Incody] v supra lin man rec

ov TavtTa] ov TaVTwS

EXAOTOUS KaLpovs| ExdaTou KaLpovs

diadeEduevos| SarEdmevos: at in € corr man rec

ToTrov] Sic marg: txt toTapov
TpoT@anTal| TpoTWMCETAL

‘lodyap| icodyap "Aaonp] acaonp
kal év Képacip] cat éyéveto Spacip

(107) T'afep] yakép "A@adovO| atagovd

Mau Spo6] papSpod
Xapper] yepper

Tapeyap] cayeyap

Expivev Tov °I.] éxpuve Tov 2.

136

137

138

139

140

wo Gat oo fo

> yw

~
a

516

317

320

321

By

ee)

yD)

= Ss

es)

Q

APPENDIX.

ryéyove meta] yéryove Kata
nEiwaoev| nEtwoay: a in e corr man rec

(108) adwrre&t] aXomnée

ovtw' Boot] ovtws' Boot
MepudiSoceO] peudiBoobe

THv wev] pr Kal

eratakev Tov L€p| ématake Tov céh
> / aD > / NX >
overdicavta T@ 'I.] dvetdicavta Tov i.

(109) adrovs wév avyper] avTos per avnper

Tats Wuyais] pr év

eratake| ératacce

Tptaxovta 1°] tpraxocious TH (sign contract

male interpretatus est editor)

Tptaxovta 2°| tpraxociwy (similis error)

TOV oikoy] TO TELYoS
\ ’ ¢€ iA ’ A \ ’ ¢ 4 ’ lal

To Kab npépav avta@v] TO KAO 7WEpav avTOv
td ‘ \

Boes dé] om 6é

déka wev pura] post hoc lacuna (9 litt.)

év ‘Jovdaia] om év

(110) wpoepytevce] erpopytevaee

BiBros 6’, BaciXerov] om

"HXtocaios| édtcaatos

Lovvamitidos| coupavitidos

edtwyOnaav Kai] + avnpéOnoav

’ UL 2 /

Oxyoctou] oyofiouv

’ £: > if

Iwayal| twayas

Pd Aer: \ ’ A‘ ’ x

emt Oone] ert aané
N la e/ ’ x 2 2 \ \

peta TavUTAa Uwoev avTov TOV lwaxelu| Kat pM.
T. U. GUTOV O yLwaKeElp

7 bs) A ” > lal

EOwKE aVTO@| EOwKEY AVTA

‘Eqctoun tpakewy Tav Baciiéwv Ths lovdaias
kat Iopand] om

; a ; ; :

lovéaiwy| tov (quod infra éovda sine dubio
significat)

x 2 / iZ ’ lf
Ta ovopata| Ta TE OvowaTta

(111) Mera dé 7d] om &é

vids M88] vids [lacuna (3 litt.)] &8)8

142

143

144

145

yO OQ *

>

ee Seo So

* Q

114

324 A

ep Bae ©,

328

b>

329

>

Q

332

>

Q

D
300 A

APPENDIX.

Avan] avapi

‘locapat] iwcapad

ere vINpye| ETH UTHPYKE

[Zayapias]] om

Oupidoas €v| Ovatdoas ev

Ov aol, ‘Ofia, Oupidcat TS Kupio, ad2ra Tots
iepedow] sic marg: txt ov aol dfla Ka’, Ov’.
arn’ 7 Tots lepedau

mpoepntevaev | erpoprtrevaev

(112) €Bacirevcer] sic marg: txt om

Evdpdrou] € in ev corr marg

"OXSA] OrSA

"Iwdyal] sic marg: txt ayal

NaBovyodovocwp] vaBovyodovdcop

MEeT@VOMaTE| METWVYOMaCcEV

Baovreis ‘Iopanr.| om

viod Adep] tovddep

(113) ov« atéotn yap] pr Kal

Toayal] idyaf

Yaddovxaio] cadoveator

év péper| €x pépous

Ta mept lepoBoap, Sapaias Kat Addo, oi Tpo-
gjtat| bis scriptum (caBaias bis)

(114) “Ijod] ivod

lovéa xal “Iopand] sic: ubi tamen (de Amasia)
Montf. Iovéa ‘lopann.

lovda cat “Iopannd] om cat (ter)

dveTeivato] duereivavTo

"ABias] ““Bias] sic pr man
"Acertious]| sic marg: txt afwriovs
emroinae| Errevae
é&éBanre] €&éBa sic: fors é&éBarov legendum est
éavtod. ‘lotopettar] avtod. iatopntat
(115) toravat] éoravar
Kiwvpats| oxivvdpass (vid)
év vaBrats| évadBrats

146 A

&

147

a Se

148

149 A

150

eo ee

rot x

336

337

348

@y sos

Sy ics,

@

o

ee)

APPENDIX.

’Eudavaias, cat Maxaial évdavaias Kai pa-
Kavia
Ki pats | KevvUpals
prey’, pHO | pr puB
(116) 06’, KB’) + Ky
Warmot wos, «0, Ey] Waruos wédys KO EC.
idem sign contract pro yadpos usurpatur
quod supra (Wrarpos @Sis 8)
unre TH AaBis] pr pajre Tob bad
Kolvol Oé TAaVTwS} KoLVol b€ TaVTwY
(117) ped] + pte
0 pRB | 0, PLS
0 €,| oe
on lon
tots viots Kopé eis avveowy 'Q5n] sic marg: txt
lacuna (8 litt.)
BepoaBeé] BnpoaBeé
év th hapayyt Tov ‘AX@v] sic marg: txt THYy
pdarayya TOV ad@v
cadaai we Kipiov] odcai pe KE
[IwvadaB8]|] om: sed in marg scriptum est
“alias twvadaB”
Ste KaTo@KiaTtae 7 yn Sy] 0 SY OTe K. 7 YF
éEwOev| &Eo0ev
(118) 76 KaXovpevov Laporpiac] 70 K. Tapoipias
hacw avT@| paci | avTa
opmovota| ouovna (vid)
aipeTiK@v] aipéoewy
(119) déeavos] in marg “forte dtcacov”
Soxypatn| doxipafer
(120) amaro@vrtes,| avatarte:
aic@now] sic marg: txt alornow
vetKos | viKos
vetKos | vtKos
irepes] Pir«pers
mroeta0ar| mrocia Fe
TETOMEVOU | TET@[LEVOU
(121) éxrAnOn] exxrOn

152

153

oo il <> a

156

Ana ve

158 c

116

349

352

353

356

357
360

361
364

368

369
372

oo a?)

APPENDIX.

hpoviwos| Poviwos
yeveOrraroryias vonoww | yeveO\aroyiav Tronow
éxdotou] éxadotov —
cuvetots [Suvvatots| | cuvetots cuvetots
é£ovotdcaito| éEovcracato
emruynpnots] émruxeipnats
apyetv] apyetv: sed corr pr man
(122) drAXar] airArar
Secxvuvtos] Secxvvovtos (Montf. decvvévtos)
mavTov] + TOV
(123) écwréparv] éowtepixnv (Montf. éowrépnv)
éEovdernaoval pe] é&. wor
roivuy | +
éTaipwr| éTépwv
é€eAOe] + ov
(124) Sovvapitid.] covpavitis.
Kicayayé] eicaydryeré
iaxvat]| iayvaeot
Els xnrov] @s KnTrov
év yevynuate| ev yevnpate
TOD YEluappov]| TOD Yelwapou
"Amivabaf] auwadap
(125) ’Aveun] avepi
mpoepntevaay | érpopytevaav
avaywv avtTnv| a. éavtnv: sed corr
Kata Tov Ilopair] + Kai
(126) wpoedrtevae] érpodytevace

petevinaar] weTavonoay: sic pr man
(127) Apes] aupos
TpoelTromev | TroeiTrwjLev
(128) AvaAjs] avyjs: sed corr pr man
(129) rrayyevel] mayyevn
TpooKUVOUVTOS avToV | TpoaKUVOvYTavov (Vid)
oNoppifous] dropifous
(130) éppakev] Eppakay
"Acavptor] acvpvor
év TH atyp.] €Tn aiyu.: v Supra T e man rec
Kkou.acbar| Kowaa be

159

160

161

162

163

164

165
166

167

168

170

Hawx* &- TK * *

es” ae a

* ye OO *

ae et Oe ee es OO ee ee

APPENDIX. 117

C (131) Tiypev] tiypnv *

D [rovrov]] om *

373 A ta Tod cod] om ra *
mevOepovs| mevOepers (vid) jal lea 9

B _ BiBdtov Xodias] B. copia *

C epi TO] eri To 172 B

pérer] méeArEL

D (132) rapabeots] trapabeow D
376 A émréuhOn] erédbOn E
Moicéws] pocéws *
B KaTeaKevoacpévwr | KaTAaCK. 173 A
C yevynuatov] yevnuatwv *
D xKviOapifovte] KiOapivwvTe D
(133) “Inaods obtos] “lv obros
377 A Kadal+ «at
0a “Inaooda] 6 a vids E
OxnTo] FxnTO
B &rrevta] + rept boBov ku’: ita 174 A
D = x«Tnpator] KTnHT@V D
380 c (134) dwpacews]| hopacews *
D wTAnMpmEAELas] TANLMENLAS *
381 D (135) éreipacOnoar] ére:pabnoav *
384 A Motcéws| poacéws *
eOavpatovpyet| COavpatoupyn 176 E
oxlopatoTooy| oxnm.: sed marg “forte cyto.” 177 A
C €vdd£ous |] + 6Tt twond év Tois évdoEats *
D (136) rapedoOn] mrapedober E
oupTedetas| pr TS
385 A 0 mais| + Tov F
Nafapéd] vafapeér *
GC Kawdds] kopos Ea e
D 6 6yXos] om o D
Nuwvevitat] vivevite E
388 A (137) wéprrec] rréurrn F
C 70 diépaypa] ta btdpaypata *
éxatov | p 1796
D Elita 1°]+7 D
389 A Tov voy] THY dvoy *

118

392

395

396

397

400

401

404

405

se)

Pot ee a ee Ce pe

APPENDIX.

Epwta avtovs] é. avTots
(138) werrovt@y] pr tev
[éxovee]] om
ayomev | dyomev
nryayov | + TOV
éxpivav | éxpivov
EvayyéXvov] om
Nalape@] valapér
[éyvovra]] om
poytNarov] woyy:AaAov: sed corr
TpwrTeiwy| mpotetwy: sed corr man rec
(139) pocetyerac] sic marg: txt -ere
ovd\dNauBaveras| sic marg: txt -ere
Kpnuvicat] Kpnuvncar
xveipa] vetpav
(140) xa® iparv, iwép tudr] KaW nudv Hrrép
OV
‘Tyets 70] jets ro: sed corr in marg
aToKTelvovT@Y| amoxtevavtwv (Montf. dzo-
KTEVOVTOV)
(141) tpwtoxrducias| tpwronAnolas
ayopacat| ayopace éavT@
peta TOV ‘lovdaiwy] Tots tovdaiots
Banravriov] BadrXdvtiov
TUTTETAL| TUTTETO
nriatovy| nmctous: sed corr man rec
tov Pidurmov 6 ’Avdpéas mpos adtov. TH
emTavpLov Karel | om
(142) ot waOnral] eis waOnrai
Lapapeitns] capapiris
appéBarov] nudéBarov
(143) KXeorrd] nrora
huTpa éExaTov.] AVE p,
e’, Ipakeus] & rpakus
ovyKaTnplOu.| cvyxatapOu.
(144) II v@ovos] rU@wvos
exabdpice] éxabépice
TpoadokavtTwy| mpocdoKxovTwy

180

181

182

183

185

186

187

188

mw Kee Kk KX * woke *

*

ry

HK ae DUD Pp

oO ee, aN Pe od

405

409

412

417

420

4.21
4.24

425

@:

o

Ce oO ew ro

APPENDIX.

éxtd’ toltav mpdtn] €: tovtwr a,
Tapayyérret (bis)] rapayyeret
ryevomevors | yevnmévoss
of aroOavovtes| of rpo | atobavovtes
dStapévwct] sic marg: txt dvapévo
(145) trapayyérrex (bis)] mapayyéere
oUTws Kal év| OUTM Kal EV
aTavyacpa| pr ws

4 id x a € / \ My
evyecOat| + vTép THY auapTavovTMY Kal TeEpL

molas ov det evyer Pau
(146) cécpou| pr Tod
TapayyéAner| Tapayyéenet
BiBriov E'] BuBriov &

(147) trav évtvyxavovtwy] Tov évT.: corr marg
2g lA x / Vd ae, /
ENEYVEL KAL ouyKnrEler] TUYKNELEL KAL ENEYKEL

6 yap “ABpadp] o yap 4Bpap
KadnTar| KadelTat
Tiod] + Tod Ov
yiver Oe] yiver Oar
(148) efdmretous] Ecd@Aors
adivapopwr] sic marg: txt duadopwv
éypavrav| sic marg: txt éypayrev
moAtTevwvTat| sic marg: txt -wyTe
elowmr1@ | eldwrEiw
TapayyédreL] Tapayyeret
dvtuypages| avtiypadn
(149) cacy] Kev
TapayyéerreEr] Tapayyedret
KkaTaBorns| pr mpo
(150) aveXoyycato] sic marg : txt -avTo
Hryodpac] Hynpat
amroaTéXNet| €rre- Corr 1n a7ro- pr man
wévTot avTous| -ovs corr in -ots pr man
(151) adcxovvtwr] pr avtovs
Avtixptatos] avtiypnatos
vevédpevos| éTevEamEVOS
aiwatos 1°] sic marg: txt aipevos
(152) éreyelpour] érreyetpove
émiTipav| sic marg: txt émepepav

a
> yf *

—
my * O

Lot

192

193

arxvdbawrwt * BKB

194

QWas* wD

195

HP

120

428

429

432

433
436

437

APPENDIX.

pavOavey 4] sic marg: txt pw. Kal

Tas vewTEpas] sic marg: txt Tovs vewTépous (vid)
D wTapayyédXer] Tapayyénet
A (153) ota] ob tws
B
A

fun
wo)
Co

vrotacaeaOar| vrotaces Oar
nppnvevOncarv| épunvevOncav 200
odppayioas| pr érra
(154) 0&0] 6&dv
Barrovta] Barovra
KAelovTa] KNvoVTa 201

Ca Gs

>

Lupayx] onpay "Tovdid| fovd 8
"EGex unr] eSexur
(155) mavrws| ravta (rab sic) 202
"TeSeyinr] ieCexunr
npunvevOn] EppnvevOn
IIpa&ess] pr tas
(156) Koppodouv] coucdov
"Axtiov| apxtioss 203
Tiva éori] pr (minio script) "lwonmov' éx tod

Ore

Cl Ber pe

UTOMVNOTLKOU. Ke. pY7n 204
Tais ypapais] 7) ypady
, /
LeAwvitov] cndwvitou
Tlapanrevrop.| mapaderrop. (et sic infra).
A Loropavtos] pr Tod
emuyéyparrrat| + adda Kal wbai jHoav TH coNdo-
POVTL TevTaKLoXIAlaL’ Kal EhadnoeE TreEpl
a ij > x a , a > tal
Tav EVNwY ato THS Kédpou THS ev TO XRL-
Bavo’ Kat ws THs VawTOU THS ExTrOpEvO-
! \ egy, ee ST, ear,
pévns Sua TOD Tolyou" Kal éhaANGE TrEpl TOV
KTNVOV" Kal TOV TETELVOV' KAL TOV EpTETOV'
kal Tov txOvov' Kal Tadta vodv ovdapmod
év EBpatkois ovyypaypaci evptoKovTat.
yeypapbar]| yeypadhévat
eT uytv@oKopeEv] PY Hpets
bees e / / @ e
eupiaker Oat] evpioxopevov. mpodnrov odv Ott
TavTa TavTa é€K THS TOV aceBav iovdaiwv
atrovolas Kal awereias aToedovTo. Sequitur
titulus minio script: dwpoOéou «.7.X.

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

* WwW

Boe ek Se Ow SM ee Se eS

University of Toronto
‘Library
DO NOT
REMOVE
THE
CARD
FROM
"THIS.
POCKET

Acme Library Card Pocket
Under Pat. ‘‘Ref. Index File’’
Made by LIBRARY BUREAU

tar ae

ieee:
petit

+ 4
rhsecens
9

tats

ea

hs ee State

he nes Me ne
eH aesrettane
fararente

het
ft Serine

ceo tthe

eden is

bAblss ots
Wis eeath ea al
Wee's 208 ph t &
2 ery 1h

BE hee h by A
: itaer a
oy

ohh Fe

Mick

aeabakt gts 7 ath tne

Me
meee,
ate ie: ae

ie Resend A tits i sie

tit
eerie

ite a

ce nbd eutt
we

ah pe
1
a:
fete
eg

+816 6
eet,
cavity ee

is
4 La eyes a rabitpitae ne
met

: tts

=

es
rind
£5

¥
==35.>°
3

a
ce
cited Hy
brat ree

syste ap ot
ee raat
it A ‘ fs hes raalat
y ihe ei retire ;
aeteeents ahh.

eM Ae a

Athe

ne ah
heel
Reinet nytt

¥
y Tete) Sy

ai etiey ke
f Gast

Bits ie

Lis
Masts
pee:

$e a irene
ie ve rae
Suni We oie 6
ee thet adi

eet Bite

En)
ie + Heth t

nee

EGstad
rot

Lt ee
mh herits Witetat rae
tree eet

“

{ 4
' Abas

i Sets

yet

£ qh iy. a8

ie fit: Fb PAIK
git)

Fr
sng at ot
ee

if :

Hn i) ‘

ay 4 Ait We wate
site i

4 of

paaprnngi a sft
Rites, i
t

H ‘tt
Tp eerlte had ot }
ld

r
Bat OP, bets

pie
Wee ead Che ae
step uee, Ps

fst)

i 4b)

if Beasts

tte

bay bs t
ies decid age bev euta
bf é

venareoty! Mad ‘

hin’: mr

A heresy
ie ie :

ary oh
Aen hARyS

’
ber

Hee

IP
t