{"collection":"chr","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn80.htm","path":"chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn80.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn80.htm","text":"245 The ms. and edd. read matris deae-\"of the mother goddess;\" for which Meursius proposed de\u00fbm-\"mother of the gods,\" the usual form of the title. Cf. cc. 7 and 16. [See Elucidation V. also note the reference to St. Augustine.]\n246 The name is wanting in the ms. Cf. c. 28.\n247 No Attic family of this name is mentioned anywhere; but in Cos the Nebridae were famous as descendants of Aesculapius through Nebros. In Attica, on the other hand, the initiated were robed in fawn-skins (nebri/dej), and were on this account spoken of as nebri/zontej. Salmasius has therefore suggested (ad Solinum, p. 864, E) that Arnobius, or the author on whom he relied, transferred the family to Attica on account of the similarity of sound.\n248 Lit., \"who have attached to themselves.\"\n249 Arnobius would seem to have beern partial to this phrase, which occurs in the middle of c. 38.\n251 Lit., \"with what shame and insult of the gods this is said to be done.\"\n255 Lit., \"strong in chastity.\"\n256 The ms., first three edd., Elm., and Oehler read commorantur-\"lingers,\" i.e., \"continues to be spoken of;\"the other edd. receive commemorantur, as above, from the errata in the 1st ed.\n257 The ms., first four edd., and Oehler read gravitas-seriousness; corrected pr. as above, in all edd. after Stewechius.\n258 So, perhaps, the unintelligible ms. dignorum should be emended digna rerum.\n259 So all edd. since Stewechius, adding s to the ms. voluisse.\n260 i.e., the mere fact that the stories were published, showed a wish to teach; but their being allegories, showed a reluctance to allow them to be understood.\n261 The edd. read this sentence interrogatively.\n262 i.e., \"if you said exactly what you mean.\" The reference is not to the immediately preceding words, but to the question on which the chapter is based-\"what prevented you from expressing,\" etc.\n265 Lit., \"is it clear to you.\"\n268 So most edd., reading occultatio for the ms. occupatio.\n269 So all edd., reading com-, except Hild. and Oehler, who retain the ms. reading, im-pressio-\"the assault of,\" i.e., \"on.\"\n270 Lit., \"waves\"-fluctibus, the reading of the ms., LB., Hild., and Oehler; the other edd. reading fustibus-\"stakes.\"\n271 So Meursius, changing the ms. o- into u-rigo.\n272 The first four edd. retain the ms., reading partis-\"brought forth;\" the others adopt a suggestion of Canterus, raptis, as above.\n274 Addere garo gerrem, a proverb ridiculing a worthless addition, which nullifies something in itself precious, garum being a highly esteemed sauce (or perhaps soup), which would be thrown away upon gerres, a worthless kind of salt fish. Arnobius merely means, however, that while such stories are wrong, what follows is unspeakably worse.\n275 Lit., \"with undubitable knowledge.\"\n276 Lit., \"it ought to have been so believed, and to be held fixed in thought just,\" etc.\n277 Lit., \"are in this part of censure.\"\n279 Lit., \"the warp,\" stamine.\n280 i.e., if things are spoken of under their proper names.\n281 The ms. reads ac unintelligibly.\n2 Lit., \"series which is,\" etc.\n3 Singular. [But costly churches were built about this time.]\n4 Non altaria, non aras, i.e., neither to the superior nor inferior deities. Cf. Virgil, Ecl., v. 66.\n5 [It is not with any aversion to incense that I note its absence, so frequently attested, from primitive rites of the Church.]\n6 The earlier edd. prefix d to the ms. eos-\"that the gods,\" etc.\n7 Lit., \"endowed with the eminence of this name.\"\n9 The ms. wants se which was supplied by Stewechius.\n10 i.e., not act impartially and benevolently, which may possibly be the meaning of contrariis agere, or, as Oehler suggests, \"to assail men with contrary, i.e., injurious things.\" All edd. read egere, except Oehler, who can see no meaning in it; but if translated, \"to wish for contrary things,\" it suits the next clause very well.\n11 Lit., \"whom passion touches, suffer.\"\n12 So the ms., Stewechius, Hild., and Oehler, while the first four edd. and Oberth\u00fcr merely add m to dolore, and join with the preceding pati-\"suffer pain, are weakened.\"\n13 [See note 5, book. vi. p. 506.]\n14 The ms. and most edd. read di-vina nobiscum-\"the divine things along with us;\" Heraldus rejects div. as a gloss, while Meursius, followed by Orelli, corrects dii una, and Oehler divi una, as above.\n15 Lit., \"are contained in vital substance.\"\n16 Arnobius here expressly denies that the Christians had any temples. There has been some controversy on the subject (Mosheim, book i. cent. 1, ch. 4, sec. 5, Soames' ed.), surely as needless as controversy could be; for as the Christians must at all times have had stated places of meeting (although in time of persecution these might be changed frequently), it is clear that, in speaking thus, the meaning must be only, that their buildings had no architectural pretensions, and their service no splendour of ritual. [Diocletian's mild beginning suffered Christians to build costly temples in many places. These he subsequently destroyed with great severity.]\n18 So the edd., reading constructa for the corrupt ms. conscripta-\"written.\"\n19 i.e., to suppose that temples are necessary to the gods, is to make them subject to human weakness.\n20 Lit. \"with fortifications of roofs.\"\n21 i.e., if you have regard merely to the weakness of men, a temple may be something wonderful.\n23 Lit., \"formed by contrivance of a poor heart.\"\n24 Institutor, wanting in all edd., except Hild. and Oehler.\n25 Arnobius here agrees with Clemens Alexandrinus, but Jos. Scaliger has pointed out that the name should be Cecrops. It is possible that Arnobius may have been misled by what was merely a slip of Clement's pen. [See the passage here referred to, vol. ii. p. 184, this series.]\n26 The preceding words, from \"this of Hercules,\" are omitted by the first four edd. and Elmenh., and were first restored from the ms. by Stewechius.\n28 So the edd., reading habere districtos for the ms. destructos.\n29 Lit., \"that the things be thought to be.\"\n30 Lit., \"knowledge being anticipated.\"\n31 These words, et tacitis, omitted by Oberth\u00fcr, are similarly omitted by Orelli without remark.\n32 So the edd., inserting quo- into the ms. reading ita-que-\"it is therefore fitting,\" which is absurd, as making the connection between the members of the sentence one not of analogy, but of logical sequence.\n33 Cf. the speech of Thetis, Iliad, i. 423-425.\n34 So the margin of Ursinus, Elm., LB., and Orelli, with Meursius, reading audiamini for the ms. audiamur-\"we are heard,\" which does not harmonize with the next clause.\n35 Lit., \"for the purpose of coming to know the thing.\"\n36 Lit., \"if there are any others.\"\n37 So the ms., reading c-ogitare, corrected r--\"to beg,\" in the margin of Ursinus and Elm. For the preceding words the ms. reads, poscantque de numine. The edd. omit que as above, except Oehler, who reads quae-\"what hope will there be, what, pray, to all,\" etc.\n38 So the ms., reading si uspiam poterit aliquando non esse, which may be understood in two senses, either not limited by space, or not in space, i.e., not existing; but the reading and meaning must be regarded as alike doubtful.\n39 A Syracusan historian. The rest of the chapter is almost literally translated from Clement, who is followed by Eusebius also (Praep. Evang., ii. 6). [See vol. ii. p. 184, this series.]\n41 In Thessaly, whither (acc. to Pausanias) he had fled in vain, to avoid the fulfillment of the oracle that he should be killed by his daughter's son.\n42 i.e., Athena Polias, or guardian of cities. Immediately below, the ms. reads Immarnachus, corrected in LB. and Orelli Immarus from Clem., who speaks of \"Immarus, son of Eumolpus and Daeira.\"\n43 So the unintelligible reading of the ms., humation-ibus officia, was emended by Heraldus, followed by LB. and Orelli, is habuisse.\n44 i.e., the temple near Didyma, sacred to Apollo, who was worshipped then under the name Didymus.\n45 i.e., \"lover of his father,\" the name given ironically to the fourth Ptolemy, because he murdered his father.","title":"chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn80.htm","type":"page"}