2. Quomodo ... eius: Tert. is alluding to the baptismal oath, cf. spect. 4,

2. Quomodo ... eius: Tert. is alluding to the baptismal oath, cf. spect. 4,

b, REMARKS-b,l 6,1-6,2

equivalent to baptisma, cf. e.g. an. 1, 4: cui spiritus sanctus accommodatus sinefidei sacramento?; Marc. 1,28, 1-2: 0 deum (sc. Marcionis) usquequaque perversum ... ! (2) Cuius non statum, non condicionem ... video consistere, maker is a worshipper, since he makes worship possible. He is even more a worshipper of the gods than the others are, because he spends his skill, sweat and intelligence on them. He is for them more than a priest, because he is the reason that they have a priest. To his diligence they owe their name, i.e. their being. ("Your diligence is (the cause of) their name"). You may deny that you iam nec ipsum fidei eius sacramentum. Cui enim rei baptisma quoque apud eum exigitur? Here sacramentum has special reference to the oath taken in baptism, as in mart. 3, 1: cum in sacramenti verba respondimus; cor. 13, 7: omnes (sc. causae coronarum) alienae, profanae, illicitae, semel iam in sacramenti testatione eieratae; cf. also 19,2. About the meaning of sacramentum in Tert. the literature is extensive. From the older literature the most important publications are: J. de Ghellinck, Pour l'histoire du mot sacramentum, 66 seqq.; E. de Backer, Sacramentum. Le mot et l'idee ... dans l'reuvre de Tert.; for the further literature up to 1947 see Waszink's note on an. 1, 4

(pp. 90-1); moreover, cf. especially A. Kolping, Sacramentum Tertullianeum.

Erster Teil (Munster i.W. 1948); Chr. Mohrmann, 'Sacramentum dans les plus anciens textes chretiens latins', Harv. Theol. Rev., 47 (1954), 141-52;

Refoule, Bapt., 48-53. fidei: for the Christianism fides = 'faith', see TLL VI, 1: 689, 43 seqq.; Teeuwen, 30. worship, the demons will not do so, because they get from you the best you have, the life of your soul, from the morning until the evening. '

Remarks a. The way of arguing. In the first part of this chapter Tertullian emphasizes that the renunciation of the devil and his angels at baptism is in itself a sufficient argument against these idol-makers. In the second part he refuses their thesis that one can make idols without worshipping them.

In the first part Tertullian shows that the making of idols is incompatible with the statement 'I renounce the devil and his angels (demons)', in the second part that the making of idols is incompatible with the statement 'I do not worship them'. In a way characteristic of him, Tertullian shows that the maker of idols is even the greatest worshipper.

2. Quomodo ... eius: Tert. is alluding to the baptismal oath, cf. spect. 4, 1: cum aquam ingressi Christianam fidem in legis suae verba profitemur, renuntiasse nos diabolo et pompae et angelis eius de ore nostro contestamur; an. 35,3: pactus es ... renuntiasse ipsi (sc. diabolo) et pompae et angelis eius.

For a collection of such baptismal formulas, see Waszink, 'Pompa Diaboli', b. Tota die. The Agobardinus and the early editions put this adjunct at the beginning of the next sentence, that means, after the division in chapters by Pamelius, at the beginning of a new chapter. Iunius was the first scholar who suggested to put it at the end of ch. 6. He was followed i.a. by Reifferscheid.

Van der Nat rejected this alteration, mainly because of the spoiled clausula.

However, tota die (whether it means 'the whole day', or, as Van der Nat thinks, 'every day') does not suit very wellperorabit ingemiscens; on the other hand it makes a very good opposition between the man who at a certain moment perpetrates an idolatrous act and the artist who works the whole day on the making of idols. The adjunct tota die may not give a first class clausula; by its position it stresses a point which to Tertullian is very important. One should read it emphatically after salutem tuam, almost as an argument in addition, as a final blow.

13, n. 2, and the literature mentioned there; see also Dblger, Sonne, 1 seqq. renuntiare (&1to't<Xcrcrt.cr60tL) has received a permanent place in the idiom of ascetes: the ascetes have abandoned all their earthly possessions, their homes and their families; cf. Schlier, 146 (on Ignat. ad Philem. 11); Reitzenstein,

Hist. monach., 104. 125. 258. For the liturgy of baptism, see Dekkers, 163216 (especially .180-5); Refoule, Bapt., 36 seqq. renuntiavimus: renuntiare with a dative ('to part with, to break away from, to abandon') is postclassical, see e.g. Krebs-Schmalz s.v.; Rbnsch, Sem., 3, 72 and ft., 379-80;

Goelzer, Jer., 316. Like the other verbs in this passage renuntiavimus is a pluralis inclusivus: the speaker includes himself (cf. 12, 1. 5; 13, 1). diabolo et angelis eius: this expression is taken from the baptismal formula and indicates the powers of evil in their totality. Sometimes Tert. discerns demons and fallen angels (cf. the note on 4, 2) but here the demons are included in angeli eius, just as in spect. 8, 9: ceterum et plateae et forum et balneae et stabula et ipsae domus nostrae sine idolis omnino non sunt: totum saeculum satan as et angeli eius repleverunt. si eos facimus: Tert. points, of course, to the making of idols. But by saying 'if we make them', i.e. the devil and his angels, he is not just using a forced way of speaking. By making idols man can be said to 'make' the evil spirits themselves in so far as he makes them

1. Si ... comminaretur: this is a recapitulation of chapter 4. de ipso sacramento nostro interpretaretur: cf. 9, 4: ut ... nemo ... nativitatem alicuius de caelo interpretaretur. Here de has the meaning 'starting from', which is mostly expressed by means of ex, e.g. Cic. inv. 1, 68 (cf. TLL VII, 1: 2250,

69-71). The accus. c. inf. after interpretari is found for the first time in Cicero, e.g. dom. 128: quae ... interpretaris de nostris aedibus ... scripta esse (and still five times in Cic.); from Tert. one more instance can be quoted, viz., Marc.

3,3,3; see TLL VII, 1: 2260, 55-71. sacramento nostro: this is equivalent to fidei sacramentum (cf. here adversas esse fidei), which in its turn is

6,2 0,L-o,3 U/

visible; hence manus, quae daemoniis corpora confert (7, 1); one can also say that by making idols man gives the evil spirit a name (= being); hence diligentia tua nomen Worum est (6,2), and ibi nomen inveniunt, ubi pignus (15,6).repudium diximus: repudium is actually 'divorce', cf. apol. 6, 6: per annos ferme sexcentos ab urbe condita nulla repudium domus scripsit (see

3. praedicare: in Tert. either 'to proclaim' (XTJpucrcrew) or 'to predict' (= praedicere), cf. Waltz., Et., 478, and Comm., 125; Hoppe, Synt., 136; Hartel,

ALL, 3,28; Goelzer, Jer., 241. tantos: cf. 8, 4 quantae. For tanti, quanti = tot, quot see Hofm., Synt., 490-1; Hofm.-Szant., Synt., 136; LOfst., Per.,

147, and Synt., 2, 43; Svennung, Oras., 75-6; Hoppe, Synt., 106; Waltz., Et., 188, and Comm., 20; Waszink, 174; Bohm, 99. Verum de urn ... falsos: for this contrast, cf. 1, 2 and 1, 5. About the making of the other gods (= demons), see the note on 6, 2 si eos facimus. Facio ... et non colo: it is not clear why the editors read sed non here with Mesnart, for the use of et non is by no means extraordinary, if the emphasis is on the negation (especially in corrections), see Hofm., Synt., 659 (with Iit.); TLL V, 2: 905, 65 seqq.;

Salonius, Vito Patr., 334 seqq.; Tidner, Part. cop., 62 seqq. (with more literature). Quasi: used to introduce the refutation, cf. 4, 5. ob aliquam causam: aliquam = aliam quam, see Waszink, 286-7 (with more literature).debeat: the lectio tradita (it was not Mesnart who first wrote debebat, as Reifferscheid and Kroymann think, but Oehler, cf. the apparatus) is certainly correct. The subjunctive can easily be explained from the assimilation of the mood to the preceding quasi ... audeat, which governs the whole sentence (see about this LOfst., Synt., 2,119-21; Hofm., Synt., 700 and 708). Besides, we should not forget that in later Latin debeat often occurs instead of debet

Waltzing's comm. ad loc.); mono 10, 3; likewise e.g. Tac. ann. 3, 22, 3: post dictum repudium (the most usual expression seems to have been repudium mittere). It is possible that this meaning should be still present here, considering the following cum quibus ... vivimus (however, cf. apol. 42, 3, quoted below); in that case this passage would be an argument in favour of Waszink's supposition (note on an. 41,4, p. 458-9) that the expression renuntiare diabolo is related to a view regarding idolatry as adultery (cf. 1, 3 with the comm.): renuntiare is often equivalent to repudium dicere (see Kohne, 22; compare in this connection also apol. 27, 4: We ... spiritus daemonicae et angelicae paraturae ... noster ob divortium aemulus et ob dei gratiam invidus

(Waltzing's interpretation of ob divortium: 'a cause de sa n!volte contre dieu' is incorrect». For repudium and divortium as terms of divorce, see SohmMitteis-Wenger, 524-5; M. Kaser, Rom. Privatrecht (2Mtinchen and Berlin

1962), 58. cum quibus ... vivimus: cf. apol. 42, 3: Quomodo infructuosi videmur negotiis vestris, cum quibus et de quibus vivimus, non scio; Marc. 1,

18, 1: nam et mathematici plurimum Marcionitae, nec hoc erubescentes, de ipsis etiam stellis vivere creatoris; ib. 1, 23, 7: de ipsius adhuc horreis vivens.

exhibitionis: 'maintenance, subsistence'; also in 8, 2 and 12, 1; cor. 8, 1; mono 16, 2; cf. e.g. Vip. dig. 27, 2, 3: quod exhibitioni frugaliter suJjicit, modum alimentjs dabit. It is a juridical term, occurring (apart from jurists and Tert.) only in Vetus Latina 1 Tim. 6, 8 (= Cypr. test. 3, 61; hom. orat.

'durch formale Angleichung an den vorschwebenden Jussiv' (Hofm., Synt., 572); cf. also Hofm.-Szant., Synt., 335 (with lit.); LOfst., Festschr. Wackernagel, 336 seqq., and Synt., 2, 129-31. An instance in Tert. which is found in all mss. is praescr. 40, 8: et ideo neque a diabolo inmissa esse spiritalia nequitiae ... dubitare quis debeat (all editors with Gelenius read debet).

19; eleem. 10): habentes ... exhibitionem (Vulg.: alimenta) et vestitum, his contenti sumus; Priscill. can. 37 (126, 1 Schepss); see TLL V, 2: 1435, 19-35;

Oehler's note on cor. 8 (p. 435 c). Exhibere as an equivalent of alere, victum praebere (ieiun. 6, 1) has also been borrowed from juridical language, see

3. qui facis: the relative clause has causal force; numerous instances of this practice are given by Thorn., 2, 67 seqq.; cf. also LOfst., Krit. Apol. 69;

Waszink, 164. 37l. coli possit: this reading of the Agob. (possint B Gel) deserves to be preferred, since throughout this passage colere and facere are used absolutely. For the idea, cf. 4, 2; more generally nat. 2, 5, 12: certum

... est, quodcumquefit, ei adscribendum, non per quodfit, sed a quo fit, quia is est caput facti, qui et ut fiat et per quod fiat, instituit, etc. (see Borleffs' adnot. crit.). Colis ... tuo proprio: Tert. is here playing upon two different meanings of spiritus, viz., a) 'exhalation, smell' (e.g. an. 17, 13: unguenti ... spiritum; Lucr. 3, 222: spiritus unguenti suavis) and b) 'breath of life, soul, life' (for the identification with regard to the function of spiritus and anima in Tert., see an. 10-1 with Waszink's comm.). These puns, in which Tert. often indulges, are called &\I't<X\lcXxAcxcrt~ (Quint. inst. 9, 3, 68, who defines: eiusdem verbi contraria signijicatio, 'where the same word is used in two different meanings' (trans!. H. E. Butler) or &\I'ttf.l.E'tcXeEcrt~, in Latin ambiguum

(Cic. de orat. 2, 253). More instances are given by Hoppe, Synt., 171; cf. also TLL ib. 1432, 72 seqq.; Ronsch, It., 364. negasse: a perfect infinitive instead of a present infinitive after posse occurs once in Plautus (Aul. 828: non potes probasse nugas), after him in the poets of the Augustan period (frequently for the sake of the metre), e.g. Verg. Aen. 6, 78: magnum si pectore possit excussisse deum. From Tert. cf. e.g. Marc. 2,29, 1: possum antithesis

(sc. Marcionis) retudisse; ib. 5, 11, 10: possum ... contentionem hanc praeterisse; 4, 14, 9: Possem ... transmisisse. After the perfect and pluperfect both of auxiliaries (e.g. posse, velie, nolle, malle) and of other verbs Tert. often has a perfect infinitive instead of a present infinitive. See Oehler's note on scorp. 5 (p. 508 c); Hoppe, Synt., 52-4, and Beitr., 40; Thierry, 178-9;

Waszink, 414; Hofm., Synt., 591-2; Hofm.-Szant., 351 seq. confiteris: for the meanings of this word in Tert., see Teeuwen, 38-9 and 74-87; Thierry, 162-

131:S 6,3

I, SURVEY, REMARK-I ,1

1':>:7

nomen has a tendency to become an indication of the thing or person of that name, and Tert. makes a frequent use of it (cf. idol. 2, 1; tam inimicum deo nomen). For further particulars see Waszink on an. 40, 2; Chr. Mohrmann, e.g. an. 28, 1 (divinus = both 'divine' and 'prophesying', Waszink, 355). 32,

1-2 (thamnus, id., 386). 55,4 (Endymiones, id., 560). A similar case is found in ieiun. 16, 8: deus ... tibi venter est et pulmo templum et aqualiculus altare et sacerdos cocus et sanctus spiritus nidor et condimenta charismata et ructus prophetia. By colis ... tuo proprio (sc. spiritu) TerL means: 'you worship at the cost of your life', i.e., 'you kill yourself by your idolatry'. peeudis: for the meanings of pecus, -udis andpecus, -oris in Tert., see Hoppe, Beitr., 78-9.

anima tua: cf. apol. 24,5: alius suam animam deo suo voveat, alius hirci; Lact. d.i. 5, 20, 1: the heathens animas suas cum ture ipso cremandas aris detestabilibus imponunt. TerL is again alluding to the death of the sinner:

'you are not sacrifying to them the life of an animal but your own'. Schtimmer, 22, mentions this passage in order to prove that Tert. regards blood as the seat of the soul (he also refers, 23, n. 62, to an. 53, 2 but see Waszink,

541). It is true that Tert. is here alluding to bloody sacrifices; however, it is incorrect to draw such a far-reaching conclusion from an artificial passage like the present one. Moreover, Tert. 's terminology is too vague for this: he does not say that, as Schtimmer asserts, 'den Heideng6ttern die Seele des

Tieres geopfert wird' but: 'you worship the gods anima pecudis impensa', which, in connection with the corresponding anima tua (sc. impensa), can only mean: 'by killing an animal' . ingenium ... immolas: the first of three metaphors derived from the practice of sacrifice. Tert. is the first to use immolare metaphorically, and quite frequently at that, see TLL VII, 1: 489,

77 seqq.; Hoppe, Synt., 188. So, for example, he regards prayer and penitence as sacrifices to God, cf. paen. 12, 7: paenitentiam domino immolaret; ieiun.

10, 13; apol. 30, 5; orat. 27: saturatam orationem velut opimam hostiam admovere (sc. deo). Cf. Waltz., Comm. 214; Waszink, 400; Diercks, 139.

Applied more loosely, as in the present passage, apol. 6, 10: licet Baccho ... furias vestras immoletis; pat. 13, 4; spect. 10, 8. sudorem ... Iibas: Tert. also uses libare metaphorically in pat. 13, 2: sordes cum angustia victus domino libat. prudentiam ... aeeendis: accendere is used of the lighting of torches and lanterns (cf. TLL I: 273, 55 seqq.), of the thing which is burned

Vig. Chr. 8 (1954) 167-73. We think that Tert. would not be willing to ascribe numen (in the sense of 'divine power') to the demons. iIIi non negant: illi are the demons, who are honoured in the images. saginatiorem et auratiorem et maiorem: as maiorem follows the other two comparatives, it is not likely that we should have here the technical term hostia maior (opposite: hostia minor); it is preferable that all three comparatives have an augmentative meaning 'extra-fat and extra-gilded and extra-large' (cf. e.g. 5, 1 impensius). The comparative of the participle saginatus is also found in ieiun. 17,

9; auratior occurs only here (TLL II: 1520, 18); cf. orat. 17,2 iustificatior with Diercks' note; an. 13, 2 nominatior (see Waszink, 207); Prax. 2, 1 instructiores; Marc. 3, 24, 8 praelatioris populi. More instances are given by Kellner, Spr. Tert., 232. For the comparative of the participle of a deponent, see Waszink, 580, on an. 57, 6 operatior. tota die: see Remark above.

Ch. 7. The complaint of the zealous believer 'It is a source of irritation to zealous Christians when they see makers of idols coming into the church, raising hands that make idols in prayer to God, even receiving with those very hands the body of Christ (§ I). However, the worst thing of all is that manufacturers of idols become members of the clergy, and so at the Eucharist pass on to others what their hands have before polluted

(§§ 2-3a). These people do not lay hands on Christ only once, as the Jews did, but every day. It may be that Matt. 18, 8 was meant figuratively; it applies particularly to these people (7, 3b).'

Remark With this chapter Tertullian's plea against the makers of idols comes to an end. The last argument is the testimony of the zealous Christian (zelus fidei is an abstractum pro concreto). The verb perorabit in the first sentence is not used without purpose: this chapter is a kind of 'peroration' of the argument against makers of idols. One could say that this peroration is put in the mouth of the zealous Christians: hence zelus fidei perorabit.

(e.g. Liv. 29, 14,33: accenso ture; cf. TLL, ib. 273, 76 seqq.), and of the fire itself (e.g. Ovid met. 12, 12: accensis incanduit ignibus ara, cf. TLL, ib., 277,

17 seqq.). Here it is used metaphorically as a synonym of sacrificare. diligentia tua nomen ilIorum est: we prefer the reading nomen of A to numen of B because of Tert.' s statement in idol. 15, 6. Dealing with the Roman gods

(numina) like Carna, Forculus etc., and after saying that these are in fact nomina inania atque conficta, which, however, are objects of superstition, he states: Alioquin daemonia nullum habent nomen singillatim, sed ibi nomen inveniunt ubi et pignus. In those numina the demons get a pied-a-terre, and therewith a name. In the same manner they get a pied-a-terre in the images made by the idol-makers, and therewith a name, a personality. The noun

1. Ad hane partem: 'at this part' of the argument, i.e., the argument against the makers of idols. Thelwall: 'at this quarter'; Kellner: 'hier' . Van der Nat's 'about the following point' is incorrect. zelus fidei: zelus WiAO~) with the meaning of 'zeal, fervour' does not occur before Tert. (with the meaning 'jealousy' it is found in Vitruvius and Hyginus). Cf. the excellent article '~7jAo~, etc.' by A. Strumpff in Kittel 2, 879-90 (especially 882-4: '~7jAo~

) ,1- / ,1. l'tl 14U 7 , I

' pray to god with the very hands which'. quae ... adorantur: cf. res. 6, 6:

Phidiae manus lovem Olympium ex ebore molitae adorantur. The use of im NT). perorabit: according to Van der Nat, perorare means here, as elsewhere in TerL, 'to set forth in detail' (cf. apol. 12,6) and 'to argue, to speak'

(apol. 18, 6). We think that Tert. wants to say that by their complaints the zealous Christians 'bring the argument to an end (by way of a peroration)'.

ecclesiam: it is evident from the context that ecclesia here denotes the locality used for religious worship. Tert. is the first to use ecclesia (which does not occur in profane Latin) in this sense. See H. Janssen, 7-34 (especially 29 seqq.; to the passages collected by him spect. 25, 5 may be added) and the literature given there; Dekkers, 105-8. domum dei: = ecclesiam, the locality, here not the community of Christians, as in S, 1. venire ... venire:

Tert. is fond of repeating a word in corresponding sentences or parts of sentences in order to stress either an antithesis or an identity, cf. e.g. 15, 5;

19,3. Countless instances have been collected by Thorn., 2, 3-10. attollere ... manus: this expression describes the usual attitude of prayer of both Christians and pagans, cf. orat. 14: nos .. . non attollimus (sc. manus) tantum, sed etiam expandimus et, dominica passione modulata, tum et orantes confitemur

Christo (cf. Diercks ad loc.); Marc. 1,23,9; apol. 30,4 (for the similarity with carm. Sibyll. 3, 59, cf. Lortz, 2, 65, n. 26). So this attitude was interpreted as a signum of the cross; cf. in this context also nat. 1, 12, 7; orat. 29, 4; Min.

Fe!. 29, 8; Od. Salom. 42, 1-2a = 27 (Hennecke, p. 623. 608); Ambros., sacr.

6,4.8; Aug. serm. 342, 1 (P.L. 39, 1501): in extensione manuum agnoscimus crucem; enarr. in ps. 62, 13. Also Moses' attitude of prayer with extended arms (Exod. 17, 9-12) was regarded as a figura of the crucified Christ, cf.

Marc. 3, 18,6 (= Iud. 10, 10); Just. dial. 90,4 and 111, 1 (see Archambault's comm., 2, 84, n. 2); Barn. 12,2-3 (see Windisch's note in HdbNT, Erg. Bd.,

369-70, where more instances are mentioned). For further particulars, see DACL s.v. 'Orante', XII, 2291 seqq.; Waltz., Comm., 212-3; Dekkers, 82-7; manus with the meaning 'work (of art)' is probably found already in Cic. leg. 2, 28: bene vero, quod Mens ... consecratur manu; cf. for this passage

Bulhart's note in TLL VIII: 357, 51-4. To the passages quoted in TLL (ib., 54-64) we may add Stat. silv. 1, 3, 47: vidi artes veterumque manus; from Tert. cf. scorp. 6, 8: quibus (sc. carne et anima) in homine carius nihil est, alterum manus dei, alterum flatus (cf. Stat. Theb. 8, 305: Prometheas ... manus = homines Promethei manibus factos; Tert. calls God verus

Prometheus in apol. 18, 2 and Marc. 1, 1, 4). Likewise Athenag. leg. 17: ~ o~ ill ~cX.fL~ "Hpllt xlltl ill "Apy~\ ~fL\A(OO~ Xdp~~. Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 195, n. 3, observes that he knows only one more passage in Greek where Xdp~~ = opus, viz., Planudes XVI 262, 3. More than once the idols are designated emphatically as no more than the work of human hands, cf. from Tert. pat .

2, 3: God is osten dens patientiae exemplum: sustinens ingratissimas nationes ludibria artium et opera manuum suarum adorantes; nat. 1, 4, 15; Cypr. ad

Demetr. 12; Lact. d.i. 2,1,19; 4,1,2; 5, 22, 21 ; 7,19,9; 7, 22,12; Just. apol.

1,53,6; Theoph. ad Autol. 1, 1; 2 Clem. 1,6; likewise already Deut. 4, 28; Is. 2, 8; Sap. 13, 10; ep. Ier. 50. 52; Sib. 3, 722; see Strack - B., 3, 55-6. We find the same idea in Pluto tranq. an. 20, 477 c: man is not meant to be

X~\POxfLij'tWII and cXx\II1]'tWII &yIltAfLcX.'tWII 9~1lt't1]~ (see Geffcken, Bilderstreit, 295);

Just. apol. 1, 20 refers to Menander and others who had the same opinion.

_ manus ... domini: by corpus domini (we also find corpus dominicum, corpus Christi) Tert. means the Eucharist, cf. res. 8, 3; Marc. 4, 40, 4; pud.

9, 16: opimitate dominici corporis vescitur, eucharistia scilicet; orat. 19, 1 and 4: accepto corpore domini (cf. idol. 7, 2: accipiant). The Eucharist was handed out by the person who conducted the liturgy (cf. cor. 3, 3:

Eucharistiae sacramentum ... nec de aliorum manu quam praesidentium sum im us) , and it was manually received by the communicant (the words manus admovere corpori domini allude to this; cf. 7, 2: si ab aliis manibus accipiant). The consecrated bread was partaken either on the spot or later at home. See DACL S.v. 'Communion'; Schrijnen, Collectanea, 309 seqq.;

Dekkers, 49 seqq. (especially 61-6); Diercks, 196-8; Stephan, 139; Bohm, 103.

_ quae ... conferunt: cf. 6, 1; Aug. c.d. 8,26 (1, 365,24-5 Domb.): ut pro anima sit daemon, pro corpore simulacrum. Although the false adoration ultimately concerns the demons, here Tert. says that the images are adored; he can do so because the images are as it were the bodies of the demons. See about Tert.'s opinion of the idola as intermediate entities the Remarks at Dolger, Sol sal., 313; Dibelius' note on 1 Tim. 2, 8 (HdbNT 13, 36-7), G.

Appel, De Romanorum precationibus (RVV 7,2, Giessen 1902), 194-7; Herzog, Prudentius, 90, n. 125. manus matres idolorum: of course the wording has been influenced by the wish to establish a contrast to deum patrem. Tert. also uses this image in an. 4: nam et factor ipse parens facti potest dici; sic et Plato utitur (sc., in Tim. 28 c); cf. also Prax. 8, 5; Lact. d.i.

2, 2, 12: homo ... illorum (sc. simulacrorum) quasi parens putandus est, per cuius manus nata sunt, per quem figuram speciem pulchritudinem habere coeperunt; for the use of this passage in patristic literature in general see

Waszink's note on an. 4 (124-5). his manibus ... quae: hic as an antecedent is either emphatic or equivalent to hic talis or identical with is see Waszink

379-80. Tert. 's works contain numerous instances of all these thre; possibilities, e.g. nat. 2, 5, 8 (emphatic), apol. 36, 2 (= hic talis), bapt. 2, 3

(= is). In the present passage we have the first case; also in the corresponding eas manus ... quae the adjectival eas has been added for the sake of emphasis: ch. 1.

2. Parum sit, si: for this and similar expressions, which are frequent in Tert., see Thorn., 1, 63-7; Oehler's note on apol. 6 (p. 134 g). ab aliis

7,4-8, SURVEY

7,27,3

to the behaviour of those people (isti) which has been described just now, i.e. in the church at the Eucharist. For lacessunt cf. Cypr. laps. 15: a diaboli aris revertentes ad sanctum domini sordidis et infectis nidore manibus accedunt,

... domini corpus invadunt; ib., 16: vis infertur corpori eius (sc. domini) et sanguini et plus modo in dominum manibus atque ore delinquunt quam cum dominum negaverunt. manus praecidendae: we find the same expression with regard to the heretics in Marc. 5, 18, 1: de manibus haereticis praecidendis non miror, si syllabas subtrahit, cum paginas totas plerumque subducit.

Thornell, 2, 64-5, compares Suet. Claud. 15, 5: proc/amante quodam praecidendasfalsario manus. For another meaning of praecidere in Tert., see manibus ... contaminant: cf. supra; accipiant should not be supplied with ore but with manu. For the idea behind contaminant, cf. orat. 13, 1. etiam ipsae ... aliis: sc. manus ... manibus. The pleonastic etiam ipse is frequent in Tert., e.g. orat. 16,6; exh. cast. 2,2; Marc. 4, 12, 7; see Thorn., 3, 16. 18.22.

3. alleguntur ... ecclesiasticum: allegere, allectio are technical terms for the admission into a college, especially into the senate. Tert. uses them for the admission into the clergy (mon. 12, 1; exh. cast. 7, 2. 6) or into the ordo viduarum (ux. 1, 7, 4), for the choice of the apostles (bapt. 12, 8), and for the election of the heathens (res. 22, 4; pud. 12, 3; apol. 21, 6); see Teeuwen,

70; Hoppe, Beitr., 90-1; Stephan, 105; Trankle, 50; TLL I: 1666,28 seqq. isti quotidie ... lacessunt: the adverb quotidie has raised a question. Tert. asserts that these idol-makers do every day what the Jews perpetrated once, viz., to ill-treat the body of Christ. This seems to point to a daily participation in the eucharistic synaxis. However, in Tert.'s time this synaxis was only held on Sundays, and the days of the statio, viz., Wednesday and Friday (see

Dekkers, 66 seqq.). How could Tert. say quotidie? Several authors, i.a. Van der Nat, think that this quotidie can be explained by the fact that the consecrated bread was not always consumed in church but could be taken home and eaten there. (See Teeuwen, 115 seqq.; Schiimmer, 105 seqq.; Diercks,

109-10. 191; Dekkers, 66-7). So the house-communion must fill up the gaps in order to make those people come in contact with the holy bread daily. We think that this is an over-interpretation of quotidie. It may be true that normally the Eucharist was held three times a week, but, as Dekkers (167) observes, it could also take place at the burial of a Christian and on memorial days, that is to say, in principle on every day. Why, then, could Tert. not say:

'what the Jews did once, they do every day'? In fact quotidie stands here for 'very often'. It has been chosen as a strong opposition to semel. One should also notice that frequence of the house-communion is not clear from the sources. The holy bread was taken home for the ill people. In orat. 19,4 Tert. also advises those who are afraid to break their fasting (statio) by eating the holy bread to take it home and eat it there after the ninth hour (the end of the statio). So there was a practice of house-communion for different situations. But is there any testimony for a daily communion at home? We think there is not, although it may have taken place rather frequently (cf. E.

Dekkers, 'De reservatie der Eucharistie in de oudheid', in Pro regno, pro sanctuario, Festschr. G. van der Leeuw, Nijkerk 1951). Decisive, however, is the fact that the whole present chapter points to the eucharistic synaxis: the zealous Christian is offended by the fact that the idol-maker is admitted into the church, that he receives the body of Christ on his polluted hands, that he is even ordained and gives the holy bread to others. Then Tert. says: 'They do daily what the Jews did once' . In our view this statement cannot but point

Waszink, 235. Viderit ... an ... dictum: the correct reading is viderit (not viderint); the right interpretation was given by Oehler: 'ipsum dictum viderit'.

This expression, which is very frequent in Tert., means 'does not matter, is immaterial to me', cf. e.g. cor. 13, 12: viderint et publici equi cum coronis suis; an. 10, 1: viderint disciplinae et artes, viderint et effigies. For an instead of num, see the note on 3, 3. Videri(n)t is often followed by an indirect question, mostly introduced by si, cf. 11, 2; paen. 2, 10: viderit ingratia hominum, si etiam bonis factis paenitentiam cogit; test. an. 1, 4: viderint, si qui de unico et solo deo pronuntiaverunt; see Oehler's note on cor. 13 (p. 450 f); Hartel,

1, 15; Ronsch, N. T. Tert., 598; Gerio, 2, 37; Waszink, 112; Stephan, 71.

Dictum, the reading of the Agob., is certainly preferable to dictum sit (Mesnart), because the former furnishes a better clausula (1 0); besides, Tert. often leaves out forms of esse (see, however, the note on 1, 3) both in main sentences and in clauses; also the present subjunct. and the imperfect subjunct. in indirect questions may be left out, e.g. mono 3, 1: an onerosa monogamia, viderit adhuc impudens infirmitas carnis, an autem nova, de hoc interim constet, see Hoppe, Synt., 144; Hartel, 1, 9. scandalizat ... scandalizatur: this verb and the noun scandalum only occur in Christian Latin

(since the Vetus Latina); from Tert., cf. e.g. res. 30,9; Marc. 4,43, 5; ieiun.

5, 2; praescr. 1, 2; 2, 5. An elaborate study of the occurrence and the semitic development of the Greek word is given by G. Stahlin, Skandalon (Giitersloh

1930; cf. especially 367 seqq. and 424 seqq., and for the present passage 26570. 450. 455), and his art. 'crXcXVO<XAOV' in Kittel 7, 338-58 (the most important literature ib., 338-9, note, and Kittel 10/2, 1265). Concerning the Latin loanword, cf. Ronsch, It., 245. 249; Mohrm., Aug., 148-50; Etudes, 2, 17.

Ch. 8. The arts of making other objects 'Besides the arts that make idols, there are also those which furnish the necessary attributes of the idols; these are even more guilty of idolatry, since the former only lend an image to the idols, the latter give them authority (§ 1).

If the necessity of securing maintenance is adduced as an excuse, this is not valid, because these craftsmen always have other arts at their disposal, by

IS, SURVEY, REMARKS

!S,I I"tJ

which they can earn their livelihoods. There are as many arts as there are ramifications of the human desires (§§ 2-3a).

Remarkably Tertullian does not speak of the possibility that an imagemaker applies his art to a non-idolatrous object, so that he makes an image, not of a god, but of a human being, e.g. of Cicero. Perhaps he considered the art of making images as being a too dangerous occupation, since the demand of images of gods must have been much greater than that of profane images.

The making of an idolatrous attribute may be very remunerative, but a livelihood gotten by other things is easier. The smaller reward fetched by the latter individual products is compensated for by one's work being performed more frequently. Luxuria and ambitio have always been more frequent than superstitio (§§ 3b-5a).

Our interpretation of Tertullian's concept of art in ch. 8, viz., that one craft embraces a number of arts, is confirmed by the opening sentence of chapter 9.

There Tertullian states that "among the arts there are also professions", that is to say: there are also arts which coincide with a profession. In other words: there are cases in which a profession consists of one art. Tertullian discusses two of these professions: that of astrologer and that of teacher. These are automatically forbidden. In this case there is no possibility of switching to another art within the profession, as in the cases of chapter 8.

Thus we must avoid those arts which have something to do with idolatry.

But even if we do so, we should bear in mind that many things are common to men and idols. If we should be aware that products from our hands in fact are asked for an idolatrous purpose, we have to refuse. Otherwise we are still guilty of idolatry (§ 5b). '

Remarks a. This chapter, in particular the first paragraph, illustrates again Tertullian's tendency to attach exaggerated importance to the subject under discussion.

After declaring, in chapter 4, the makers of idols more guilty of idolatry than the worshippers, he now designates the artisans who make the attributes of idols as even more grievous sinners, because they give the idols authority, while the former give them an image only.

1. complurium artium species = comp/ures artium species. For a similar hypallage of adjectives belonging in sense to genus, see TLL VI, 2: 1906, 3053; LOfst., Synt., 2,109-11; Waszink, 477-8. sine quibus ... non possunt: all editors have nil possunt. However, this reading of Gelenius is evidently incorrect, as nil is never found in Tert.'s works (in A the relevant part of the leaf has been damaged, so that it is no longer possible to ascertain the reading;

Mesnart omits the word). On the other hand, (non) posse sine is a very common expression in Tert., cf. e.g. test. an. 5, 5; apo/. 13,2; cult. fem. 1,5,

3; 2, 12, 2. In this expression posse means esse posse; see Hartel, 2, 46; 4, 60;

Hoppe, Synt., 144, and Beitr., 46; LOfst., Krit. Apol., 89-91, Synt., 2, 269-72, and Yermo Stud., 92; Thierry, 127; Waszink 263 (with more lit.). eodem crimine: this modal ablative has the function of an apposition: 'they make things that idols cannot do without-which is the same sin (as the fabricatio id%rum)'. Certain instances of this ablative also are cult. fem. 2, 7, 1: aliae

(sc. crines gestiunt), ut vagi et vo/ucres e/abantur, non bona simplicitate; ieiun. 10, 4: hinc itaque et Petrum dicam ex vetere potius usu nonam observasse tertio orantem supremae orationis munere. A similar appositional ablative occurs fairly often in Pliny, see Koch, Rhein. Mus. N.F. 78 (1929),

427-32, e.g. n.h. 11, 197: dracones emicuisse de extis /aeto prodigio. Isolated instances, however, are also found in other authors, e.g. Liv. 21, 11, 8: caementa non calce durata erant, sed inter/ita /uto structurae antiquo genere;

43, 1, 4: per Illyricum ducere /egiones in Macedoniam vano incepto est conatus; Tac. ann. 14, 14, 2: clausumque valle Vaticana spatium, in quo equos regeret, haud promiscuo spectacu/o; 12,65, 3; more instances are given by Waszink, 274-5. Cyprian, too, uses the modal ablative loosely; in his writings, however, this ablative mostly does not have the function of an apposition, as is supposed by Koch; it rather indicates usually the result of the b. In paragraphs 2 and 3 Tertullian argues that the artisans under discussion need not abandon their crafts, but can always find other ways to win their livelihoods. The way in which he formulates this view is remarkable. In paragraph 3 he states by way of example: "He who carves a Mars from limewood, how much more quickly does he put together a chest?" And he continues: "There is no art which is not the mother or the relative of another one; there is nothing (= no art) which is not accompanied by a second one".

Obviously this is an explanation of the previous statements about the different possibilities the artisans have to apply their crafts.

Thus Tertullian considers the different aspects of these crafts as different arts: there is an art of making an image; there is another art which enables the same artisan to make a chest. So this artisan disposes of a number of arts, and that is why Tertullian can say: you can always switch to another art. If he considered the craft of, e.g., a painter as one art, he could not say: 'no art is not the mother or the relative of another', in other words, 'who possesses one art always has a second'. This would mean that a painter possesses always another craft, e.g. that of image-m:tking, which is obviously not true. Thus i~ the domain of the crafts under discussion in this chapter, one artisan always dIsposes of several arts; if the art of image-making is forbidden to him, he may win his livelihood by practising the art of making chests, etc.

, tv 0, I 15,l-15,L 1'+ I

action of the predicate, see Schrijn.-Mohrm., Cypr. 1, 123-140; Merkx, 65-71.

For the development of this use see Waszink, ib.; cf. also Kok, 167-8. Nec enim explains eodem crimine. differt, an ... vel: an impersonal differt followed by an indirect question occurs since Cicero (Caec. 39; top. 16; fat.

32; see TLL V, I: 1079, 8-20). The combination an ... vel instead of utrum ... an (or an ... an, which is found since Verg. Aen. 10, 680-3) is not dealt with by Hofmann (Synt., 651. 676. 699; for an ... aut see Hofm.-Szant., 546). first contains temp/um, aram and aedicu/am, the second bratteam and insignia, after which domum fits in badly, as it would properly belong to the first group. Moreover, aut etiam ('or even') favours the assumption that the following object is less important than bratteam and insignia, which domum certainly is not. Therefore, we do best to adopt Hartel's conjecture donum; for donum used to denote a gift to a god, cf. e.g. Verg. Aen. 3, 439; 4, 453;

7,86; Liv. 21, 62; Lact. d.i. 5, 13,8. auctoritatem: cf. Min. Fel. 24, 5: quis ergo dubitat horum imagines consecratas vulgus orare et publice co/ere, dum opinio et mens imperitorum artis concinnitate decipitur, auri fulgore praestringitur, argenti nitore et candore eboris hebetatur? Lact. d.i. 2, 6, 6 (cf. ib.

2-3); Amob. 6, 16 (327, 11 March.): (dei) quos exterior /evitas lenocinio fulgoris augustat, 'those gods to whom the artificial sheen of a smooth

TLL II: 9, 58-61 gives six instances, four of which are derived from juridical texts, viz., Iulian. dig. 24, 2, 6; Scaev. dig. 12,6,61; Vip. dig. 12,2,3,3 and 36, 4, 3, 2 (the other two are Terent. Maur. 106, 2; Physiognom. 34 = 2, 52,

7-9 Foerster). We may, therefore, assume that Tert. has borrowed this combination from the idiom of lawyers. exstruas ... exornes: the interpretation of exstruas presents difficulties. According to TLL V, 1: 1078, 20, temp/um should be supplied as the object, a view which is shared by Oehler and Kellner.

However, an unforced interpretation requires that we regard the words nec enim differt as an explanation of the preceding sentence, and especially of the words eodem crimine, and so once more juxtapose the fabrication of the idols themselves and that of their necessary attributes in the indirect question, i.e., that we connect exstruas with id%rum fabricationem, and exornes with ea, sine quibus ido/a nonpossunt, ... expediunt. Moreover, Tert. is definitely not opposing the builders of temples: in 8, 2 he only mentions those whose work is of a decorative nature; to describe their activity he uses the verb instruere, which does not mean 'to build'; besides, if those whom Tert. is combating would build the temples themselves, it is surprising that in 8, 4 quot temp/a ... aedificantur he should use a passive form instead of an active one. On the other hand, the relation of the last-mentioned sentence to the preceding one points to the fact that, just as these artisans provide the signa for the parietes made by others, they in the same manner decorate temples built by others. For these reasons we have to assume (as was already expressly done by De la

Cerda) that exstruere is here equivalent to fabricare. In fact, the usual meaning of exstruere is 'to build' (TLL V, 2: 1939, 38 seqq.). aram: for the denomination of the heathen altar by heathens and Christians, and for the denomination of the Christian altar, see Diercks, 195-6; Stephan, 106. _ aediculam may here mean 'chapel' (sacellum) or 'niche' (in which a statue is placed), see TLL I: 916, 19 seqq. The first meaning is the more likely one here, cf. 8, 4: quot temp/a et aedes idolis aedificantur? eius: sc. idoli. In connection with temp/um the singular was necessary, but still the transition from plural (id%rum ... idola) to singular remains remarkable, cf. e.g. apol. 23,

8, and see Thorn., 1, 11-2; Bohm, 104. instruxeris: 'to furnish, to decorate'

('embellish' Thellwall). donum: the end of the word is illegible in A. exterior lends majesty' (transl. McCracken, ACW, 8, p. 468); augustare is a hapax, cf. TLL II: 1380, 34; cf. ib. 6, 24 (338, 2-13). More generally Tert. bapt. 2, 2: mentior si non idolorum sol/emnia vel arcana de suggestu et apparatu deque sumptu fidem et auctoritatem sibi exstruunt.

2. Si ... extenditur: Tert. returns to the excuse which he has already rejected in 5, 2 and which he is going to discuss again in detail in chapter 12. Here, however, the matter is given not only a negative, but also a positive treatment.

For exhibitio, cf. 6, 2; for extendere, cf. 2, 3 and 11, 3; cult. fem. 2, 3, 1. habent: sc. artes. exorbitatione: 'transgression, aberration' (also 14, 2;

Marc. 1,29,4) does not occur before Tert., see TLL V, 2: 1552,83 seqq.; cf.

Oehler's note on apol. 20 (p. 194 h); Hoppe, Beitr., 136. The verb exorbitare also occurs since Tert., see TLL, ib., 1553,27. disciplinae: sc. christianae; cf. the note on 2, 4. sine idoli confictura: the substantive confictura is not found elsewhere (TLL IV: 205, 24-6; Hoppe, Beitr., 134). The verb confingere is used by Arnobius 6, 12 and Lactantius (d. i. 1, 11, 29) to denote the fabrication of images (TLL, ib., 214, 70) but not by Tert. (with another meaning e.g.

15,5; an. 56,2; pud. 8, 12; nat. 1,7,14). By ido/i confictura we should not, as is evident from the following sentences, understand the fabrication of a cult-image but the representation of a god or a mythological scene as a decoration (reliefs, murals; for the latter, cf. e.g. Prud. c. Symm. 2, 39. 56). Tert. chooses the term that enables him to combat the practice ,most sharply. In doing so he leaves out of consideration whether these images are made in temples or elsewhere, since they are to be found everywhere, cf. e.g. spect. 8,

9: ceterum et plateae et forum et balneae et stabu/a et ipsae domus nostrae sine idolis omnino non sunt: totum saeculum satanas et angeli eius repleverunt. The decoration of temples and of the statues of gods is again dealt with in 8, 4. albarius tector: 'worker in stucco, plasterer'. In this combination these words do not occur elsewhere (TLL I: 1487, 84 seqq.); we find either a/barius (Cod. Theod. 13,4,2; CIL VI: 9139) or tector (Varro r.r. 3,

~esnart and Gelenius have domum. Hartell, 42-3 points out that this reading IS open to objection; the things mentioned are divided into two groups: the

0,':'

o,,,,-o,~ 1~7 latitudines: Oehler correctly interprets: 'opera suae artis quam latissime diffusa'. The word faciliores shows that latitudines must perforce be concrete:

'extensions', i.e., 'activities extending the scope of their trade'. To our knowledge, this meaning does not occur elsewhere. See also the note on 2, 1 idololatriae latitudo.

2, 9; Vitro 7, 3, 10). Bohm, 106: 'Diese Worte bezeichnen den Beruf eines Wandmalers beziehungsweise eines Stukkateurs, der die Wanden mit weisser

Farbe tiberdeckt'. Tector refers to the activity, albarius to the material (cf.

Nicole Blanc, 'Les stucateurs romains: temoignages litteraires, epigraphiques et juridiques', MEFRA 95 (1985), 868. Their work is called (opus) albarium, by which according to Bltimner (Technologie, 2, 147) is understood 'jedwede

Oberttinchung von Steinoder Ziegelmauern, mag diesel be nun in einfacher, glatter Obermortelung bestehen, mag ein kunstvoller complicirterer Stuck zur

Anbringung von Wandgemalden aufgetragen, oder mag endlich der aufgetragene Stuck plastisch verziert sein'. We also find the term (opus) tectorium used to denote the same (e.g. Varro r.r. 1, 57, 1; 3, 2, 9; Cic. div.

2, 58; Vitro 5, 10, 3; Inferior ... pars (sc. camararum) ... opere albario sive tectorio poliatur); cf. also Schollgen, 92, with notes 458-9. cisternam liare: cisterna is a subterranean reservoir for liquids, especially drinking-water; it was given a smooth coating of plaster with rounded corners, see Puchstein, art. 'cisterna', RE III: 2606-7, and Schollgen, 92, n. 463. Tert. has the word also in bapt. 5, 4; Valent. 15, 4. Liare (AELOUV) must mean 'to polish', 'to plaster' (cf. Ronsch, It. , 256); in this sense it does not occur elsewhere; Vitruv.

2, 4, 3 and 7, 3, 7, however, mentions a polishing tool called liaculum (= 3. signum describit: signum means imaginem, simulacrum. Tert. has the pictor in mind here, cf. e.g. Plaut. Asin. 402: non potuit pictor rectius describere eius formam. For this meaning of describere, see TLL V, 1: 656,

69 seqq. abacum linit: The word abacus may denote several things, cf.

Mau, art. 'Abacus'; RE I: 5-6. According to TLL I: 42, 22-5, Tert. is here thinking of a table on which earthenware was put. These, however, were show-tables, often made of costly wood or stone (Bltimner, Privataitertiimer,

126), so that it is not very likely that they were also painted. It is preferable to interpret abacus as the marble slab imitated in stucco, which was used as a wall-decoration (see Mau, RE I: 4, nr. 7; Fiechter, art. 'Abacus', RE Supp!.

III: 3-4). The real marble slabs (which, when quadrangular, were called abaci, when round, orbes) were made by the marmorarii, who are also mentioned here by Tert. (Bliimner, Technologie, 3, 185); the stucco imitations were executed by plasterers and painters, cf. Vitr. 7, 3, 10, who, after observing that the Graecorum tectores produce excellent work, says: Itaque veteribus parietibus nonnulli crustas excidentes pro abacis utuntur, ipsaque tectoria

AcIXV·tilP /ALIXV"t~p). Apic. 5, 1, 1 uses liare of the stirring of sauces in order to prevent lumpiness. cymatia: a technical term of architecture (TLL IV:

1587,40-50) for an ogee with leaf-decoration. For the name, cf. Hesych. s.v. abacorum et speculorum divisionibus circa se prominentes habent expressiones ('therefore some cut out panels from old walls and use them like easel pictures. For the plasterwork itself being divided into panels and mirrors furnishes images which seem to stand out from it', Granger); Pliny n.h. 33,

159; 35, 3 (cf. Vitr. 7, 3, 5). Linere is the general term for 'to plaster' , cf. TLL

VII, 2: 1457,26-47. -

tilia: the lime-tree was frequently used for the production of furniture, see Bliimner, Technologie, 2, 277-8. For use in sculpture, too, this wood had some attractive qualities, cf. Vitr. 2, 9, 9: Populus alba et nigra, item salix tilia vitex ... , cum non sint dura terreni mixtione, propter raritatem sunt candida et in sculpturis commodam praestant tractabilitatem.

Pliny n.h. 16, 209 (about this and a few other kinds of wood): habent et candorem, rigorem et in sculpturisfacilitatem; cf. also Verg. georg. 2,449-50. Qui ... compingit: here Tert. comes near to an old argument of apologetic literature, viz., that the material of the images of gods can be used for a variety of other purposes, and that, therefore, it depends on the will of the artisan whether a 'god' is produced or an object of utility; cf. already Sap.

XUflcX'tLlX, "teX XdA1j, OLeX "to XUfllXLVELV Tj IXL umpoXlX11tlXpeX "ttX"tOCJL xIX1 ALe01tOLOL~. There were three types, a Doric (Vitruy. 4, 6, 2), a Ionic (id., 3, 5, 10-1) and a Lesbian one (id., 4, 6, 2). For further particulars, see Ebert, art. 'Kymation',

RE XI: 2462-74; Schollgen, 92, n. 464; Bohm, 106. incrispare: the only other instance of this verb is found in Marcel!. medicam. 7 titulus: capillo ni~rando et incrispando (TLL VII, 1: 1059, 14-7, where incrispare is wrongly saId to be 'falso trad.' in the present passage). The conjectures by Pamelius

(incrustare) and Reifferscheid (ingypsare) are superfluous: the correct interpretation was already given by Iunius: 'opus crispans indere'. Oehler

~araphrases: 'incrispare parietes dicit marmore varii coloris picturis crispo mcrustare.' Pliny (n.h. 36, 55) does indeed mention a kind of marble which is undatim crispum; likewise he uses crispus to indicate the veining of wood

(n.h. 13, 62; see TLL IV: 1208, 76-83). In that case we should have to think of stucco imitations of marble slabs. However, such imitations are not ment~oned until the following sentence; here we are concerned with plastic decoratIOns (cymatia, simulacra). Besides, it is improbable that the words ornamenta incrispare could be used to indicate the fitting of stucco imitations of marble slabs (for this we invariably find the verb incrustare used). Incrispare must

15, 7; ep. Ierem. 45 (= Baruch 6). Is 44,9 (quoted in 4, 3) also alludes to this.

On the pagan side this idea is expressed in Horace's well-known lines (sat. 1, 8, 1-3): olim truncus eram ficu/nus, inutile lignum, I cum faber, incertus,

Scamnum faceretne Priapum, I ma/uit esse deum (see Heinze's note). Horace re~er to the curling forms of the ornaments; cf. also Schollgen, 92, n. 465;

Bohm, 107. pictor '" caelator: for these artisans, see Schollgen, 92-3. _

/:l,3-/:l,4

was inspired by a Greek saying, occurring in Epicharmus (fr. 13, Kaibel): EX Szant., 78 and 107) and after related verbs and adjectives, such as egere, indigere, egenus, carere (e.g. Terent. Heaut. 400; Plin. n.h. 32, 59; see TLL

III: 455, 11-14), nudus (e.g. SaIl. lug. 79, 6; also in Ovid, Quintilian, and Apuleius), and liber (in Horace, Valerius Maximus, Plin. minor, Apuleius).

_ Sed: for the purpose of introducing an occupatio, sed is already used a few times by Cicero; it is especially used by Seneca to replace the classical at or atenim, see Hofm., Synt., 666. The occupatio plays an important part in Tert.'s writings: it is a characteristic feature of his way of arguing to introduce a speaking opponent (in idol. e.g. 6, 2; 9, 4; 12, 2). See Norden, Kunstpr.,

1t<Xv'to~ ~AOU XAOLO~ YEVO('t' iXv X<XL eE6~. An adaptation of it is also found in Herodotus' story about the gold 1too<xvm'tTjp of King Amasis, in which the Egyptians used to EVEfdm 'tE X<XL EvoupEm X<XL 1t6o<x~ EV<X1tOv(~Ecre<x(, and of which the material was worked up into the image of a god (2, 172). Herodotus' story has been eagerly used (but only in general terms) by Jewish and Christian apologetics from Philo (vit. con tempi. 7) onwards; cf. e.g. Just. apol. 1, 9,

2; Athenag. leg. 26; Theophil. ad Autol. 1, 10; ep. ad Diogn. 2, 2, 4; Tert. apol. 12, 2; Min. Fel. 24, 7; Act. Apoll. 17; Arnob. 6, 14; Prud. perist. 10,

296-300. Lactantius, d.i. 2,4, 1, uses and quotes the above-mentioned passage from Horace. See Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., XXI, n. 1; XXIII; XXVI-VII;

102; 188, n. 3; id., Bilderstreit, 288-9; Clerc, 130. Nulla ars ... est: a similar thought but expressed with completely different intentions, is found in Cicero, De oratore 3,21: est etiam ilia Platonis vera ... vox omnem doctrinam harum ingenuarum et humanarum artium uno quodam societatis vinculo contineri (cf. Plato Epin. 992 a); cf. also Cic. Arch. 2: omnes artes, quae ad humanitatem pertinent, habent quoddam commune vinculum et quasi cognatione quadam inter se continentur. Cicero says that all arts are generally connected with each other on account of a certain relationship, whereas Tert. states that every sin g I e art is connected e s p e cia 11 y with 0 n e other, so that to every artist several ways are open to apply his skill. About the idea of art behind his argument, see the Remarks at this chapter. quot hominum coneupiseentiae: man's desires are the main source of income for the artists, even a more important one than idolatry, for, as Tert. says in idol. 8, 4,frequentior est omni superstitione luxuria et ambitio. artium venae: in Tert. vena usually means 'that which flows away from something', and so becomes equivalent to 'ramification': cf. from the present treatise 2, 1: tam locuples substantia criminis, quae tot ramos porrigit, tot venas defundit, and further pat. 5, 18: (inpatientia) defundens de suo fonte vadas criminum venas, and, in accordance with this passage, ib. 12, 2: iram dolorem duritiam amaritudinem, venas (Ew. Bruhn ap. Kroym.; venena PM X) scilicet inpatientiae. The meaning origo occurs in apol. 19, 2: Omnes itaque substantias omnesque materias, origines, ordines, venas veterani cuiusque stili vestri, and nat. 1, 16, 13: Unde adeo mimis et comoedis argumentorum venae fluunt

("C'est la pn!cisement la source ou mimes et comediens puisent la matiere de leurs spectacles", Paschoud in his edition, p. 103). See also Rambaux, 135, n. 61. alterius vaeat: cf. pall. 2, 6: (terra) cassa et vacans hominum; see

Hoppe, Synt., 25; Gerlo, 2, 60. Elsewhere in Tert. vacare governs an ablative with or without a (cf. with a in 8, 5). Hofmann, Synt., does not mention the present construction, nor does Hofm.-Szant. Probably the use of the genitive is due to an analogy of the genitive found both after vacuus (Terent. Heaut.

90; also in Sallust, Tacitus and Apuleius; see Hofm., Synt., 404; Hofm.- 1,129 and 2,611-2; Diercks, 227-8; Waszink, 557. The meaning of the present occupatio is: 'Yes' (the fictitious opponent says) 'but as to payment and wages for the handiwork there is a difference' (i.e.: 'for the statue of an idol you get considerably more money'). To which Tert. replies: 'Sure, but there is also a difference in labour: a smaller reward for 'everyday-work' is compensated by the fact that this work is done more frequently'. mereedibus: According to Rambaux, 85, n. 154, this word is used here and in the sentence after, as also in 13,4, in a pejorative sense. We see no reason not to assume a neutral sense.

4. Quot parietes ... quantae: The point is that there are much more profane buildings which have to be decorated than temples and chapels for which the same work has to be done (to parietes a genitive templorum is, of course, to be added). signa: = images of gods. praetoria: 'country-houses, residences', called by Ulpianus, dig. 50, 16, 198, voluptati tantum deservienlia. This meaning dates from the imperial period; the instance which is probably the earliest occurs in an edict of Claudius of A.D. 46 (elL 11, 1222). The explanation of the term is uncertain. According to Vollmer (note on Stat. silv.

1, 3, 25), this use is derived from the meaning 'official residence' of the praetor in the province. Mommsen (Hermes 4 (1870), 105; ib. 35 (1900), 43742, especially 437-8) thinks that there is a connection with the meaning 'headquarters'; he advances as an argument that in earlier times praetorium with the meaning 'country-house' is especially used with regard to the emperor: probably all the imperial villas in Italy were provided with quarters for the guard escorting the emperor, and from these the residence itself came to derive its name, which afterwards was also applied to big country-houses in general ('das von dem Gutsbesitzer nicht fur wirtschaftliche Zwecke angelegte, sondern fur personliche Benutzung reservirte Landhaus'). balnea: so these are innocent. Still they were not free from idols either, cf. spect. 8, 9: et plateae et forum et balneae et stabula et ipsae domus nostrae sine idolis omnino non sunt, and idolatry was practised there, too. Nevertheless, the Christians regularly made use of this hygienic institute, cf. e.g. apol. 42,2: non sine foro, non sine macello, non sine balneis tabernis officinis

~,4-~,:> J)j

stop after artificiorum. Gelenius was the first scholar who took offence at this interpunction, obviously because he could not accept sufficiat without either a pronoun or an infinitive as subject. Therefore, he put a semicolon after artificiorum, thereby creating the possibility of making the substantives luxuria et ambitio in the following sentence the subject of sufficiat, for which he substituted the plural sufficiant; further, he read frequentiores instead of frequentior est. Van der Nat regarded these drastic c~njectures ~s incorr~ct stabulis nundinis vestris ceterisque commerciis cohabitamus hoc saeculum.

The daily bath, which the vast majority certainly took in one of the public baths, was a habit only interrupted by penitents and during one week after baptism, cf. paen. 11, 1; cor. 3, 3: ex ... ea die (of baptism) lavacro quotidiano per totam ebdomadem abstinemus. So one of the most unpleasant matters reported by the Christians from Lugdunum and Vienna is the fact that they are excluded from the baths (Euseb. h.e. 5, 1, 5). Clement of Alexandria devotes an entire chapter to the use of the bath, paed. 3, 9: 't(vo~ ~VtXtv 'to but in his opinion Gelenius had come near to a correct mterpretatlOn. To him luxuria et ambitio are the subject of both sufficiat andfrequentior est. In our conviction one should not ascribe to Tert. such an awkward construction, unless it is evidently unavoidable. Which is the subject of sufficiat? If it cannot be found in what follows, it must be present in what precedes. One could think of the subject of the previous sentence, which in Tert.'s view should suffice, viz., soccus et baxa; but this is not so easy to understand, because the sentence contains still another subject, viz., Mercurius et Serapis.

In our view, one should recall to mind that sufficiat introduces the conclusion of a previous argument: 'Let that suffice'. What should suffice? Obviously the profane exercise of the arts, which is not so lucrative but which compensates the lower reward for a single activity by its more frequent use. In other words, the idea 'minor merces quae frequentiore actu compensatur', which dominates the entire passage, is the subject of sufficiat. After this conclusion

Tert. expands on thefrequentior actus, stating that luxuria et ambitio are the causes of the higher frequency; in the two following phrases he shows how ambitio and luxuria supply more work to the artists than the needs of pagan

AOU'tpOV 1t<xp<xArj1t'tEOV. For the use of the public baths by the early Christians and their opinion on them, cf. J. Zeilinger, Bad und Bader in der altchristlichen

Kirche (Munich 1928), 1-46; cf. also Dekkers, 138-9. quantae: = quot. Note the chiasm quot parietes ... quot templa domus ... quantae, and the variation. That Tert. here uses quantae must be explained from the fact that the sentence domus ... quantae! refers to a considerably greater number than quot parietes and quot templa, and that in the present sentence quantae has special stress and is, therefore, deliberately given final position. Because of this Tert. prefers the longer and, therefore, stronger quantae to the monosyllabic and toneless quot (for the tendency to avoid unduly short forms, which played an important part in the development of the Romance languages, see LOfst.,

Synt., 2, 35-62, especially 43). Moreover, we should take into account the desire to make a good clausula (1 8). Soccus: a light, low Greek shoe of which, however, the actual Greek name is unknown (cf. Ernout-Meillet, s.v.).

At Rome it was originally worn by women (Plin. n.h. 37, 17; Suet. Cal. 52), afterwards also by dandies (Sen. benej. 2, 12, 2); it was often richly decorated with gold and pearls (Sen.!.!.; Plin. n.h. 9,114 and 37,17; Apu!. met. 11,

8). See Hug, art. 'soccus', REXXVII: 771-2. baxa: this form is also found in pall. 4, 7 and in glossaries; elsewhere only baxea is found, see TLL II: 1792,

50-67. Cf. e.g. Gramm. Lat. V: 572, 21 Keil: baxeas calciamentafeminarum, ut Varro dicit. However, they are also mentioned as footwear of priests (Apu!. met. 2, 28) and philosophers (Apu!. met. 11, 8; cf. from Tert. pall. 4, 7: si philosophus in purpura, cur non et in baxa?). The bax(e)ae were a kind of religion. Frequentior ... erogat: The renewed argument consists of three sentences, of which the first contains the general statement, the second and third the argumentation in two parallel statements, of which the first has ambitio as its subject, the second luxuria. Moreover, superstitio corresponds with sollemnitas, andfacilius with magis. facilius: = saepius, citius, potius.

This meaning occurs only in Tert., see TLL VI: 68, 45 seqq., and, further, Hartel, 2, 49, n. 4; 4, 72-3; Waltz., Comm., 52; Oehler's index S.v.; Waszink,

91. sandals, made from palm-leaves (Apu!. met. 2, 28), papyrus, etc.; they have often been found in Egypt. From the present passage it may be inferred that they, too, were fancy footwear; this is also clear from pall. 4, 7, where the gilding is mentioned implicitly (see Gerlo's note). See Bliimner, Privataltertumer, 227; Mau, art. 'baxeae', RE III 176 and Supp!. I: 245. Mercurius

... non quotidie: sc. deauratur. The faces of the images of the gods were often gilded (cf. scho!. on Pers. 2, 55-6: auro sacras quod ovato I perdu cis facies).

In the case of Mercury one would rather think of a gilt shoe; that is perhaps why he is mentioned here first after the profane soccus et baxa. As far as our knowledge goes, no relevant detail from the cult of Serapis is known. Sufficiat '" ambitio: with Oehler and Reifferscheid we follow A and put a full

5. Coronas ... erogat: for a survey of the use of wreaths in the cult, see Baus, 2-33, for the profane use see ib., 34. It is remarkable that Tert. who strictly forbids the use of wreaths, and even devoted a whole treatise to the matter (De corona) in which he declares the wearing of wreaths at whatever occasion and for whatever reason to be unlawful for the Christians, is here seen to tolerate the trade of the coronarius. He merely urges caution: it is only permitted to make wreaths for profane (luxuria), not for religious purposes

(superstitio). In chapter 11, on the other hand, he condemns the trade of the turarius, and rejects the argument that incense is also used by people in

8,5

~, SURVEY

1)J

4: idololatria omnis circa omne idolumfamulatus et servitus. vel in honore et usu: this should be understood as a hendiadis in which usus has the meaning general, and even by Christians. Tert. is once more completely dominated by that with which he is immediately concerned. erogat: erogare is often synonymous with impendere (e.g. mart. 4, 9); here, however, it is equivalent with the simplex rogare; see TLL V, 2: 803, 58-61. Cum ... cohortemur, ... sunt: the reading sunt of the Agob. and Mesnart has been rightly defended by Thornell, 2, 13-4. To begin with, Tert. does not only use the subjunctive, but also the indicative after causal and concessive cum, see Hoppe, Synt., 80, and Beitr., 31; Waltz., Comm., 19; Hofm., Synt., 747 (cf. 2, 3; 9, 7). Besides, we more often find variatio modorum in Tert., both in relative causes (e.g. apol.

13, 1; 41, 1) and after conjunctions, e.g. ux. 1,7,4: cum digamos non sin it (sc. apostolus) praesidere, cum viduam adlegi in ordinem nisi univiram non concedat; apol. 6,4; without repetition of the conjunction e.g. carn. Chr. 18,

'intercourse', which is found rather frequently in Cicero, Nepos, Livy and Tacitus (cf. the Oxford Latin Dictionary s. v., par. 10). The (hands of the) idol-makers are said either to serve (in officio) the demons or to hold intercourse (usus) with them in a manner that betrays respect (honor). The really interested and favoured group according to Tert. are the demons who make use of the images; see Remarks at ch. 1.

Ch. 9. The profession of astrologer 'It seems self-evident that the profession of astrologer is forbidden to a Christian. However, the fact that recently somebody defended his persistence in astrology after his conversion causes me to devote afew words to this subject.

7: ita cum sit ipse de spiritu dei et spiritus deus est, ex deo natus ipse est (Kroymans alters the text, Evans the interpunction). haec: for hic as an antecedent (here equivalent to hic talis), see the note on 7, 1. de manibus

... postuletur: TLL V, I: 51, 20-2 is not correct in combining this de with postulare. Tert. does not speak of people 'who demand something from our hands', which would be equivalent to 'something from us'; if he meant this, the addition scientibus nobis would be superfluous. De should be combined with quid: 'something that is the product of our hands'. In his commentary

Van der Nat follows the TLL but his translation ('that ... anything of our manual work is asked from us') is correct. remediis tam usitatis: remedia are the means by which to escape the danger of idol-worship, cf. 18, 9: Ad evitandum remedia deesse nOn possunt. Hartel's interpretation (l, 43): remedia = 'Mittel des Erwerbs' and agere = vivere is incorrect. The addition

I shall not speak about the fact that the astrologer worships the idols (thus perpetrating idolatry) by giving their names to the stars and ascribing to them the power that belongs to God, thus making people believe that they are ruled by the stars and, in consequence, need not search God. The only argument which I adduce is the origin of this art: it stems from the fallen angels, who are, also for this reason, condemned by God (§ 1). This divine sentence has its earthly counterpart in the banishment of the astrologers from Rome and Italy (§ 2).

One may object with the words of Scripture: "Magi came from 'the East".

Indeed, they were astrologers and were the first to announce the birth of Christ and to give Him presents. Herewith they established a pious bond between themselves and Christ. But this does not protect the astrologers of today. Or would you assert that the latter are concerned with Christ and His star, and not with those of Saturn, Mars and other dead people? (§ 3). It was only until the coming of Christ that this science was permitted: the announcement of the birth of Christ by the magi was the last permitted act of this sort; the same holds true for their offerings (§ 4). The command given to the magi, to return home by another way than the one by which they had come, should be understood in this sense. It was not given to safeguard them against a persecution of Herodes, who did not even know the way by which they had

~f usitatis suggests that there were a number of methods current among ChristIans to avoid activities and situations which were incompatible with the faith.

Although Latinius' conjecture iam (instead of tam) is attractive the manuscript reading is certainly defendable. non puto = puto no~: the n~gation belongs to the infinitive (cf. Greek oux OLOflou). See Waszink, 189;

DI~rcks, 193; Wackernagel, Synt., 2, 262. a contagio ... vacare: vacare ab, WhICh does not occur often in other authors (see Kiihn.-Stegm. 1, 373), is rather frequent in Tert.; see the passages collected by Waszink, 483 (to these

~ay .be added idol. 15, 10). As to the thought, cf. pud. 7, 15: Perit igitur et flde~/s : .. , si in officium, in ministerium alienae idololatriae aliquas artes come. The other way indicates another way of life, i.e. another science, another discipline. adhlbult, etc. concesserimus ... egerimus, non puto ... vacare: for the variation of tenses, cf. e.g. pat. 8, 2: si manu quis temptaverit provocare, praesto est dominica monela; ux. 2, 5, 2: si sciverit panem, non ilium credit

Likewise that other kind of magic, viz., the one working with miracles, which also competed with Moses, was only tolerated until the gospel. This is proven by the punishments of the magi in Acts 8, 9-24 and 13, 6-11. Now

(~redet Kroymann) esse, qui dicitur?; an. 51, 8: si quid animae remanserit, vita est; scorp. 4, 5: par sum iIIis, nisi illis manus dedero. More instances in Hoppe, Synt., 66; see also Hofm., Synt., 564. in officio ... daemoniorum: cf. 11, 8, where idolatry is defined as a famulatus idolorum colendorum· 3

, , astrology is a species of the genus magic: when the genus is punished, the species is so too. Since the gospel, wefind the magi being punished everywhere

(§§ 5-7).

'::J, REMARKS

9,1 1)1

c. At the beginning Tertullian states that he will not adduce as an argument that the astrologer idola honorat, i.e. worships the idols. This seems to be a remarkablepraeteritio in a treatise De idololatria. It is, however, in line with his argument, since Tert. does not discuss here the open forms of idolatry.

Now astrology is an open form of idol-worship.

You, astrologer, if you know the future, you must have known that you would become a Christian. And if you knew this you should also have known that, as a Christian, you would have nothing to do with this profession of yours. By itself it would have instructed you of its own dangers. The hope for the kingdom of heaven cannot exist with the abuse of heaven (§ 8). '

Is the argument which he does adduce, viz., the fact that astrology stems from the fallen angels, a serious one? Yes, because the fallen angels are the source of idolatry; just as the demons do, they draw the worship of men from the one true God to themselves.

Remarks a. From its beginning Christianity had to do with astrology and magic. As to magic, see the stories of Simon Magus and the sorcerer Elymas in Acts 8, 9-24 and 13, 6-12. Astrology is not explicitly condemned in the New Testament. In several passages, however, astrological notions do playa part, thus proving the confrontation with this important factor in the civilisation of the time; see the passages collected by Gundel in RA C I: 825-7 (for a correction of his d. Tertullian distinguishes two species of the genus magic, viz., astrology and the working of miracles. Members of both groups may be called magi (the magi from the East and Simon Magus) .

1. professiones is used chiefly, though not exclusively, of scientific artes (Lewis-Short, S.V., II B 2). In the present treatise it is used to indicate the ars of the astrologus, the magus (ch. 9), and the professor litterarum (ch. 10). As was exposed in the Remarks at chapter 8, Tert. regards these three professions as containing one ars each, whereas in ch. 8 his entire argument is founded on the fact that usually a professio comprehends more than one ars, so that no artifex is obliged, for the sake of his living, to make idolatrous objects.

astrologis: 'astrologers', as in apol. 35, 12 and an. 25, 9. That in ancient civilisation no sharp distinction was made between astrology and astronomy is evident from the fact that the terms astrologus (&cr'tpoA6yo~) and astrologia views, cf. comm. ad loco in HdbNT; Dibelius, Geister welt; Festugiere, Ideal,

107, 110 n. 3).

Patristic literature shows a continuous polemic against the two practices.

Astrology and magic being closely related (cf. comm. on 9, 4), they are mostly combated together, as e.g. in Didache 3, 4 ·t€xvov flOU, fl~ y[vou olwvocrx61to~, l1t~LO~ oOTJyd d~ 't~v dOWAOA(X'tp[ot.V, flTJOE l1t(xOLOO~ flTJOE fl(XeTJfl(x'tLXO~ flTJOE 1t~pLX(Xe(X[pwv flTJOE e€A~ (xu'tOt ~A€mt.V flTJOE &xoum· lx yOtp 'tou'twv amxv'twv dOWAOA(X'tp[(X y~Wa't(xL . See further Leclercq, DCAL X: 1071 ff. The repeated opposition proves the obstinate vitality of those practices. St Augustin still repeatedly complains about those who consult mathematici; it is interesting to see how he, at the end of his sermon on Psalm 61, reintroduces into the community a Christian who had become an astrologer but had come to conversion now (Enarr. in Ps. 61, 23). From passages in other works of Tertullian too the important position of these pseudo-sciences is clear: in praescr. 43: 1 h; refers to the relation of heretics with astrologers, magi, etc. (cf. 33, 12; an.

34, 2; 35, 1; 50, 2; Marc. 1, 18, 1). In apol. 35, 12 he mentions the consulting of astrologers, magi and other charlatans with reference to the life of the emperor. (It is highly significant-also for his style of debating-that in ad

Scap. 3, 3 Tertullian himself quotes an astrological explanation in technical terms,. and that he uses the calculating-method of the horoscope as an argument III an. 25, 9.)

(&cr'tPOAOY[(X) were also used to denote the astronomer, resp. astronomy. The first time the word occurs in Latin astrologus has the meaning 'astronomer'

(Enn. scen. 242 V.2; Varro ling. 9,24; Lucr. 5, 728 with Bailey's note), and this meaning is still found in later Latin, e.g. Vitruv. 9, 8, 1; Min. Fel. 17,

6; Calc. in Tim. 124 (167, 22 Waszink-Jensen); Mart. Cap. 8, 858; Sidon.

Apollin. epist. ante carm. 22, 2. Side by side with this sense the meaning 'astrologer' occurs repeatedly since Cic. div. 1, 12. The same authors even use both meanings promiscuously, cf. e.g. Cic. Verr. 11,2, 129; div. 2, 146; Aug. c.d. 21, 8; pecc. orig. 23,27 ('astronomer') and Cic. div. 1, 12. 85. 132; 2,

88; fat. 12; Aug. c.d. 5, 5 ('astrologer'). Both astrologus and astronomus are used by Rier. ep. 53,6: taceo de ... musicis astronomis astrologis medicis. The date at which the semantic distinction became established cannot be ascertained from the available material. See TLL II: 966, 77 seqq. (the data require some correction), and the note on 9, 3 (the same holds good for Greek, see

Bouche-Leclercq, art. 'mathematici', DS 3, 1634-5 and Liddell-Scott, s.v.).

The reverse, viz., astronomia with the meaning 'astrology' is extremely rare:

Cassiod. los. c. Ap. 1, 129: de astronomia et de Chaldaeorum philosophia; cf. also Serv. ad Georg. 1, 229 (185, 11-2 G.): insertis tam astronomiae quam b. Tertullian's way of arguing has several rhetorical aspects. First he states that the matter, being self-evident, requires hardly any treatment, but because of a certain man who continued his profession after his conversion, he will devote a few words to it. In fact he devotes a long chapter to it. This is a wellknown rhetorical pattern. At the end he addresses himself directly to that certain man in a remarkably ad hominem argument.

':1,1 9,1

praesumentes; this harmonizes with the emotional nature of Tert. 's argument. geometriae partibus, and shortly after (13-4): Jrustra culpari a plerisque

deum requirendum: the conception of searching and, as a consequence, of finding God occurs already in the QT, e.g. Deut. 4, 29; Ps. 9,11; Is. 55, 6;

Amos 5, 6; Sap. 1, 1-2 (cf. Tert. praescr. 7, 10); 13,6. In the NT especially Acta l7, 26-7: l1to(Tj(Jl;v (6 01;0~) ... l~ ~VO~ <xtfJ.<X'to~ 1t<XV EOVO~ o:vOPW1t(UV ... ~TjnTv

'tov OI;OV, d &p<x ")'"1; <jJTjA<xq>Tj(JI;L<XV <Xlhov X<Xl dlpoLl;v, X<X( ")'"1; OU fJ.<xxpOtV 0:1t0 ~VO~ ~X1X(J'tOI.J

Vergilium quasi ignarum astrologiae. Astronomus is exceedingly rare (TLL II:

968, 37-44 mentions only six cases, the earliest being Hier. ep. 53, 6 which is quoted above). As was to be expected on account of this confusion in the terminology, in practice no sharp distinction was made between astronomy and astrology; they often went also together in reality; Ptolemaeus wrote a purely scientific astronomic work (Almagest) but also an astrological manual

(Tetrabiblos); we may refer here to the double activity of Kepler.

Characteristic of this lack of distinction is also the fact that in pall. 6, 2 among the students of the artes liberales are included: qui stellarem (sc. art em) et qui volaticam spectat; in this context the former can only be the astrologer (cf.

Gerlo 2, 205-6; for the expression, cf. 9, 7 coniectores with the note). See Cumont, Rei. or., 153 and 157; Marrou, Education, 251-2; Wendland,

Kultur, 133. In 9,3 Tert. calls the astrologer stellarum inter pres; cf. also cult.

Jem. 1, 2, 1: stellarum interpretationem. quidam must be a Christian astrologer. istis diebus: istis = his, cf. 2, 3 with the note. Such expressions, showing that Tert. is writing under the influence of actual cases and events, occur frequently, cf. e.g. l7, 2; bapt. 1,2; cor. 1, 1 seqq.; ux. 2,2, 1. provocavit is used here in an absolute sense: 'has uttered a provocation'. nomina ... inscripsit: cf. Manil. 1, 109: attribuitque suas Jormas, sua nomina sign is (sc. ratio humana); Macrob. somn. Scip. 1, 19, 18: nomina haec non esse inventa ex natura sed hominum commenta significationi distinction is accommoda; more relevant passages are quoted by Housman in the note on Manil. 1, 34. quibus ... addixit: in Tert. the verb addicere has usually one of two meanings: a) 'to assign', as in nat. 2, 7, 3: si addicenda mortuis divinitas erat; 1, 10, 22; 2, 14, 2; scorp. 3, 1; ieiun. 4, 2. b) 'to enslave, to subordinate', as in an. 40, 3 (caro) addicta ... animae ut supellex (cf. in 40,

2 the comparison with ministerium); orat. 22, 10; an. 43, 12 and 52, 2; ieiun.

10, 6. Both meanings are found side by side in an. 18, 10: cum ... sequitur et adducitur (sc. animae animus), perin de intellectus animae addicitur quam sequitur animus, cui addicitur intellectus. In TLL I: 576, 78 seqq. (' = tradere

1JfJ.wv U1t1XPX0\l't<X. Among the Apologists the conviction of having found the Truth plays an important part. More than once it is expressly stated that this is the result of searching and that the search for Truth was a factor in the conversion, cf. Aristides apol. 15, 3: 'Die Christen ... da sie umhergingen und suchten, haben die Wahrheit gefunden'; 16, 1; Just. dial. 2; Tat. orat. 29;

Theophil. ad Autol. 1, 14. See Lortz, 1, 224-30 and 248-9; Heinze, 373-4; Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 85-6; Norden, Agn. Th., 14-8; Bardy, Conversion,

121-34. stellarum ... agi: the Christians have fiercely combated the belief in fate, cf. Just. apol. 1,43; 2, 6 (7), especially directed against the Stoa; Tat. orat. 8-9, who considers the dfJ.<XpfJ.EVTj to be the work of the demons. Tert. wrote a treatise De Jato (quoted in Fulg. serm. ant. 16 (116, 18-20 Helm); he alludes to it in an. 20, 5; see Waszink, 287-9); likewise Min. Fel. (cf. Octavo

36; Hier. vir. ill. 58; Bardenhewer, Gesch., 315; Krtiger, 263-4). For more works and relevant passages, see Gundel, art. 'Heimarmene', RE VII: 2625 and 2644-5, and art. 'Astrologie II. Kirchenvater und Konzilien', RAC I: 8289; Cumont, Rei. or., 166-7; 289, n. 61; 291, n. 69; id., 'La polemique de l'Ambrosiaster contre les paiens', RHLR 8 (1903), 431-6; Wendland, Kultur,

176-7.399-400; Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 102-3.244; de Vreese, Aug., 23-70; Bouche-Leclercq, 6l7-23; Schtirer, ZNTW6 (1905),45-6; Lortz, 2, 59, n. 10.

All Christian authors argue that fatalism renders the belief in Christ's doctrine of salvation and in God's providence meaningless; they use the arguments of philosophers who combated astrology. By far the most important of these was

Carneades: his numerous acute arguments are repeated as 't01tOL by heathens and Christians alike. For these philosophical polemics, see Wendland, Philo

Vors., 24 seqq.; Bouche-Leclercq, 570-609; Cumont, Rei. or., 155-6; Gundel, art. 'Heimarmene', RE VII: 2643-5; Amand, 29 seqq.; Cramer, 50 seqq. desertores ... feminarum: apposition to angelos. For the story of the fallen angels who had had intercourse with women, see comm. on 4, 2. proditores: in spite of the homoeoteleuton, proditores cannot be on a level with desertores and amatores, since, together with damnatos, it constitutes the core of Tert.' s argument; moreover, if proditores is an apposition, the words propterea quoque, which only refer to proditores etiam huius curiositatis, are vel dedere') and 577, 45 seqq. (' = attribuere') the uses of this verb are distinguished too formally and, for Tert. at least, often incorrectly. In the present passage the first-mentioned interpretation ('to assign') is the correct one. The astrologer absolutely fails to recognize God's power, cf. the words homines

... non putant deum requirendum. quod propterea: this second quod, too, should be joined to allego. In both cases quod in this sentence means 'the fact that'. For the variatio modorum (quod ... honoret ... , quod ... putant) see the note on 8,5. For non putant = putant non, cf. 8, 5 with the note. It is possible to connect propterea with the immediately preceding addixit but since quod

... non putant has been put as an second argument after quod ... honoret, it seems preferable to interpret propterea as an emphatic announcement of disconnected from the sentence. Therefore, proditores should be joined to esse as a predicative noun. Nevertheless proditores is also closely connected with desertores and amatores by means of the homoeoteleuton. So we have here an incongruity between rhetorical form and meaning. A rather similar

lOU 9,1

case may be found in an. 50, 3, where of three clauses, which are similar in rhetorical form, the third is different in meaning from the first two: aut ebriosos reddit Lyncestarum vena vinosa aut Iymphaticos efficit Colophonis scaturigo daemonica aut Alexandrum occidit Nonacris Arcadiae venenata (see

Waszink's note (p. 522), who refers to Norden, De Minucii Felicis aetate et genere dicendi, Greifswald 1897, 18 seqq.). The meaning of proditores in this passage is not 'traitors' but 'teachers' (the OLD only mentions the meaning

'betrayer, traitor'); with this sense it is, of course, the nomen actoris of prodere in the sense of (OLD, sub 5): 'to hand down, transmit (tradition, custom, etc.)'; in Tert. this meaning is found in nat. 1, 7, 6 and res. 44, 7.

proditores etiam huius curiositatis: the fallen angels had taught men astrology, magic, the fabrication of weapons and cosmetics and many other things according to the book of Enoch 8, where i.a. it is said (3): ('EW)IX~EII

For the importance of the conception of curiositas in Tert. 's works, cf. especially A. Labhardt, 'Curiositas. Notes sur l'histoire d'un mot et d'une notion', Mus. Helvet. 17 (1960), 213-24; J.-C!. Fredouille, ch. 8 (411-42)

"Curiosite et Conversion", especially 417; L. F. Pizzolato, 'Tertulliano e la dialettica', in: Paradoxos politeia. Studi patristici in onore di Giuseppe Lazzati (Milano 1979), 145-77, especially 154 seqq. (with an excellent bibliography on p. 154, note 56). The notion curiositas has also been discussed frequently by Augustine; cf. H.-I. Marrou, Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique (Paris 1938), 148-57; 278-80; 350-52; P. Courcelle, Les Confessions de Saint Augustin dans la tradition litteraire (Paris 1963), 101-9; H.

Blumenberg, 'Augustins Anteil an der Geschichte des Begriffs der Geschichte des Begriffs der theoretischen Neugierde', Rev. Et. Aug. 7 (1961), 35-70; cf. also E. P . Meijering, Calvin wider die Neugierde. Ein Beitrag zum Vergleich zwischen reformatorischem und patristischem Denken (Nieuwkoop 1980). damnatos a deo: for God's judgment and punishment of the fallen angels

(banishment from heaven), see comm. on 9, 2: poena ... exilii.

-rou~ &1I9pw1tou~) 'PIXXL~A &cr-rpOAOj'(IX~ . From Tert. cf. apol. 35, 12: qui astrologos et haruspices et augures et magos de Caesarum capite consultant. Quas artes, ut ab angelis desertoribus proditas et a deo interdictas, ne suis quidem causis adhibent Christiani; in cult. fem . 1, 2, 1 Tert. mentions as gifts of the fallen angels: metal/orum opera, herbarum ingenia, incantationum vires, omnem curiositatem usque ad stel/arum interpretationem, instrumentum ... muliebris gloriae; ib. 2, 10, 3; an. 2, 3 (the apocryphal books). This story is also found in Just. apol. 2, 4 (5), 3 (i.a. fllXj'LXIXL j'PIXIflIXC); Tat. orat. 8 (8, 5 Schw.):

2. divina sententia refers to the immediately preceding words damnatos a deo. usque ad terram pertinax: the adjective pertinax is used instead of the participle pertinens, cf. res. 24, 8: maiestas spiritus sancti perspicax eiusmodi sensuum; Min. Fe!. 8, 5: pavorem fal/ax spes. The latter instance also shows that the adjective is regarded as equivalent to a present participle ( = fal/ens) and so may be joined to an accusative, just like the corresponding verb, cf.

Tert. scorp. 3,2: populus tam necessariam absentiam eius impatiens and res.

31, 1: populus ... dispositionis exitium querulus (= querens; an exceptional case, since mostly this verbal function of adjectives is limited to adjectives in -ax). Of course the use of an adjective instead of a participle and its construction with an accusative was promoted by the use of a substantive or an adjective with esse as the equivalent of a transitive verb; the earliest instance is Plaut. Most. 100: gnaruris vos vola esse hanc rem, on which see

Sonnenschein's note. See LOfst., Z. Spr. Tert., 11-2; Synt., 1, 255-7 and Eranos 8 (1908) 112-3; C. F. W. Muller, Synt. d. Nom. u. Akk., 158-9; W.

OLCXj'PlXflfllX ... lXu-ror~ (viz., men) &cr-rp09Ecr(lX~ &IIIXOtL~IXII-rE~ (viz., the demons); Iren. epideixis 18 (i.a. magic); Clem. Alex. eclog. prophet. 53, 3 (&cr-rPOIIOfl(1X1i XIXL fllXlI-rLX~1I XIXL Q(nlX~ -r€XIIIX~); [Clem.] hom. 8, 14: XIXL fllXj'tLlXli crUIIIX1t€OEL~1X1i XIXL

&cr-rPOIIOfl(1X1i lO(OIX~IXII; Lact. epit. 23, 5 (astrology, divination, magic; in d.i. 2,

16, 1 he mentions the demons as the inventors; however, this amounts to the same thing, since, according to Lactantius, the fallen angels have also become demons, cf. d.i. 2, 14, 3-6); Commod. instr. 1, 3. See Waszink, 106 (with more literature). curiositatis: in an. 58, 9 Tert. makes a distinction between iusta ac necessaria curiositas and enormis et otiosa curiositas; often, however, curiositas without an attribute is found with this latter sense: 'superfluous

(dangerous) curiosity', 1tEPLEPj'(1X (see TLL IV: 1490,81 seqq.; for instance it indicates philosophy in nat. 2, 4, 19: philosoph os ... eos, qui stupidam ex~r ceant curiositatem; praescr. 7, 12; 14, 1. 4; and heresy (which, according to !ert., is closely related to philosophy or even has sprung from it; see an. 3) m praescr. 30, 2 and Marc. 1, 2, 2; all three notions are combined in praescr.

43, 1: Notata sunt etiam commercia haereticorum cum magis quam pluribus, cum circulatoribus, cum astrologis, cum philosophis, curiositati scilicet et dedi!is: In the present passage curiositas is used with reference to astrology.

Agam mpraescr. 40, 6 curiositas is a synonym of superstitio (a meaning which does not Occur before Tert.), and it has a concrete meaning in apol. 5, 7:

Hadrianus ... omnium curiositatum explorator, and an. 28, 4 ('magic trick').

Heraeus, ALL 15, 560-4; Hofm. , Synt., 378; Hofm.-Szant., Synt., 34. For Tert. 's fairly frequent use of forms in -bundus as equivalents of a present participle, see Waszink's note on an. 39, 1 (p. 442). The meaning of the sentence is that God's verdict, which had banished the angels from heaven, also extended to ('pertinebat ad') the earth, where the pupils of these angels, viz., the astrologers, were banned from Rome and Italy by the Roman senate, which so, without knowing it (ignorantes), was in line with the divine sentence and confirmed it. We must punctuate: reddunt: expel/untur ... eorum; urbs

... eorum: eadem ... magistris. mathematici: 'astrologers', as in apol. 43, 1. This word, which in Latin is found for the first time in Cicero and

JU.J

J ,~ - 7,J

Vitruvius, occurs with reference to astrology as an adjective since Plin. n.h.

30, 2: artes mathematicas and 29, 9, as a substantive (synonym: Chaldaei) since Seneca (apocol. 3,2: patere mathematicos aliquando verum dicere) and Petronius (39, 6; 76, 10; 126, 3); cf. TLL VIII: 471, 34-40 and 81 seqq. This term was especially used in vulgar speech to denote the astrologers, cf. Gell.

1, 9, 6: vulgus ... quos gentilicio vocabulo 'Chaldaeos' dicere oportet, 'mathematicos' dicit (cf. Porphyr. Vito Pyth. 37; lamblich. Vito Pyth. 81-2);

Hier. in Dan. 2, 2: YE\lEeALc(A6yo\)~ .• . quos vUlgus mathematicos vocat; Aug. doctr. christ. 2, 21, 32 and div. quaest. 45, 1-2; Amm. Marc. 29, 2, 6. For this semantic development, see Bouche-Leclercq, op. cit., 5, n. 1; 64, n. 1;

566; 620, n. 4; 624, n. 2 and art. 'Mathematici' in DS 3, 1633-5; cf. also comm. on 9, 4. urbs ... interdicitur: for the construction of interdicere, see the note on 4, 1. poena ... exilii: Gelenius' conjecture exilii is, in our opinion, unavoidable. Van der Nat, who defends the reading exitii of A B, mentions as one of his objections against the reading exilii that it offers us "the same thing thrice in succession, which seems rather too much of a good thing" . However, the sentence eadem poena est exilii disci pulis (= astrologers) et magistris (= the fallen angels) is not a reiteration but a conclusion of the argument. In this conclusion the idea of banishment is essential.

Van der Nat's second argument runs as follows: "this reading (viz., exilii) sets forth in detail the testimonium ignorantium, but it does not give us an explanation of what the sententia dei itself means with respect to the astrologers who are surely the first to be aimed at by Tert.". Against this we must observe that in the two preceding propositions Tert. has argued that the divina sententia means banishment, both with regard to the fallen angels and, on earth (usque ad terram pertinax), to the astrologers. The sentence is indeed not' 'on a level with expelluntur ... eorum", being the conclusion of the entire argument. It is true that Tert. speaks elsewhere of the poena mortis for the fallen angels, cf. cult. fem. 1, 2, 1: Nam et illi, qui ea constituerunt, damnati in poenam mortis deputantur, illi scilicet angeli, qui ad filias hominum de caelo ruerunt, ut haec quoque ignominia feminae accedat (derived from Enoch, e.g. 10, 11-3). However, in the present context a transition from the punishment of exile to the punishment of death would require at least one sentence in which this transition would be announced. that Scripture speaking of magi includes the astrologer whom we are dealing with>. Those magi were, indeed, the first announcers of Christ's birth. So they have obliged Christ to themselves'. Until now Tert. 's answer follows up the line of argument of his opponent. But after this concession he reacts: 'but what of that?'.-The words et astrologi raise a problem. It is as if they intrude into the quotation of Scripture and therewith weaken the force of that quotation. Reifferscheid deleted them. In the second apparatus of the CC edition

Dekkers notes: non secludendum. Van der Nat adheres to the latter opinion and takes et as explicative: 'magi, i.e. astrologi', and refers to the following primi stellarum interpretes and 9, 7 sic et alia species magiae. The difference between the two opinions is the following: if one deletes et astrologi the identification of magi and astr%gi remains implicit in the occupatio. It is spoken out by Tertullian himself in his answer. See our paraphrase above. If one maintains et astr%gi, the words scimus magiae et astrologiae inter se societatem mean: 'I know <what you say, viz., > that magic and astrology belong together'. This interpretation makes sense and it has the advantage that the reading of A can be maintained. On the other hand Reifferscheid's proposal to delete et astr%gi is very attractive for the following reasons: a) without et astr%gi the text is much more pointed, much more Tertullianean.

He likes to make his readers think by saying things implicitly. See the difference in our paraphrases: 'I know what you mean' 'I know what you say'.

In the latter case he says things almost twice. b) the strength of the occupatio lies in the fact that a quotation of Scripture is afforded. If one maintains et astr%gi, one must assume that the imaginary opponent while quoting the Scripture text feels inclined to give an explanation and says: 'But magi (and astr%gi) came from the East" '. From a rhetorical point of view such an addition weakens the argument. c) In this addition et may, indeed, be considered as explicative. However, for the kind of explanation given here Tert. would rather have chosen qui et astr%gi, for magia is the larger concept, which includes astrology. d) et astr%gi can easily be explained as an insertion. Either it was inserted into the text by a scribe who thought that this was necessary because of the following scimus ... societatem, which he understood in the sense of 'we know what you say, viz., that magic and astrology belong together' (then astr%gi must have been mentioned before); or et astr%gi resulted from a marginal note i.e. astr%gi, which was inserted into the text in a somewhat different form (not a different meaning, if et is explicative).

For these reasons we decided to follow Reifferscheid. magi ab oriente venerunt: probably Matthew meant Babylonian astrologers (see Klostermann, ad loc., HdbNT, 4, 13). Often this vague indication is adopted without comment, since most Christian authors are not interested in the nature of the 'science' practised by the Magi nor in their land of origin, emphasis being laid on the fact that they were primitiae gentium. ab oriente: Tert. is quoting

3. Sed magi ... obligaverunt: the words sed magi ... venerunt are an occupatio, in which the words magi ab oriente venerunt are a quotation of Scripture, viz., Matth. 2, 1. This scriptural text seems to imply that the magical art cannot be rejected totally by a Christian. About et astrologi, see below.

Scimus, which is either the equivalent of scio or means 'we, Christians', is the beginning of Tert. 's answer. This could be paraphrased as follows: '< I know what you mean. > I know that magic and astrology belong together <, so

10,)

Matthew, so that ethnical associations are absent here. Elsewhere, in the elaborate exposition Marc. 3, 16 (= Iud. 9), where he associates Is. 8, 4 with Matth. 2, he identifies the Magi as Arabs. (In this discussion he also includes

Ps. 71, 10. 15 and uses this passage as an argument for making them kings, an identification which afterwards became generally accepted, see Klostermann's note on Matth. 2, 1, HdbNT, 4, 13-4; H. Leclercq, DACL X: 985.)

There Tert. 's source is Justin, dial. 77-8, who speaks of [lciyo\ a1to 'ApQ(~(Q(~.

Mostly, however, Persia is mentioned as their native country, cf. e.g. Prudentius, cathem. 12, 25-8: en, Persici ex orbis sinu ... cernunt periti interpretes

/ regale vexillum magi; Joh. Chrysost. hom. in Matth. 6, 3 (PG 57,65); Basil. hom. in s. Chr. gener. 5 (PG 31, 1469 A): Clem. Alex. strom. 1, 15, 71, 4.

On the monuments, too, they are by their dress represented as Persians. The identification as Chaldaeans (cf. Hieron. in Dan. 2 (PL 25, 498 C-99 A),

Calc., in Tim. 126 (170, 1-5 Wasz.-Jens.), Greg. Naz. carm. 1,5, 58-9 (PG 37, 428)) is much less frequent. A curious contamination is offered by Prudentius, apotheos. 611-8: quis ... nuntius Aurorae populos atque ultima Bactra

/ attigit ... ? ... diriguit trepidans Chaldaeo in vertice pernox / astrologus. For further literature see H. Leclercq, DACL X: 891; Bouche-Leclercq, 611, n. 2;

Dieterich, KI. Schr., 274-6; Bidez-Cumont, Mages, 1,51, n. 2; Messina, Magi, 22-6. magiae: magia is found from Apuleius onwards (TLL VIII: 51, 1-2).

magiae ... societatem: in Tert. 's time the magical practices concern especially the performance of miracles, the conjuring up of dead persons (cf.

9, 7; an. 57), and mischievous magic, which caused magus (this word is found in Latin since Cicero and Catullus; in Tert. it occurs 35 times, cf. TLL VIII:

150,9-12) gradually to become a synonym of maleficus (cf. e.g. Hier. in Dan.

2: consuetudo ... et sermo communis magos pro maleficis accipit; Lact. d.i.

2, 16,4; Cod. Theod. 9, 16, 4; Tert. apo/. 43, 1: sicarii, venenarii, magi; pud.

5, 11 (together with venenarii). See Mommsen, Strafrecht, 639-40; Abt, Apol., 16-7; Ronsch, It., 316-7. It was not the Persian magi (who constituted the priestly cast of Persia) but the [lQ(yotJo"Q(Tm, priests from Mazdaistic colonies spreading West over the whole of Asia minor, who practised magic, and also astrology under the influence of Babylon (on the origin of this name cf. BidezCumont, Mages, 1,35, n. 3). It is only in them that the connection magicianastrologer appears, which e.g. Basil, hom. in s. Chr. gener. 5, wrongly considers to be a characteristic of the Persian [lciym, and which is sometimes ascribed to the mythical 'first magician' Zoroaster, cf. e.g. Just. epit. 1, 1,9:

(Z.) qui primus dicitur artes magicas invenisse et mundi principia siderumque motus diligentissime spectavisse (cf. on this passage Bidez-Cumont, op. cit.,

2,41-2); see further the chapter concerning Zoroaster in this book. In practice this association of magic and astrology has remained in existence for a very long time: many magicians were at the same time astrologers. The Christians had another, special reason to associate magic and astrology: after their conviction both, as is discussed in the present chapter, were taught by the fallen angels. On this account they were also condemned and combated together (cf.

9, 2, p. 161-2). Literature: Bidez-Cumont, Mages, 1, VI seqq. 33-6. 57 seqq.

131-4. 143-50; index S.v. Mages, Magie (1, 271-2); Abt, Apol., 32 seqq.; Messina, Ursprung, passim; Clemen, art. 'Mciyo\', RE XIV: 509-18. stellarum interpretes: cf. cult. fem. 1,2, 1: stellarum interpretationem; inpall.

6, 2 Tert. calls the astrologer qui stellarem (stellariam Saflund, 25, n. 13, probably correct) coniectat (see Oehler, 955 h; Gerio, 2, 205); Cic. div. 2, 92 speaks of interpretes ... caeli (cf. 9, 4: ut ... nemo ... nativitatem alicuius de caelo interpretetur). annuntiaverunt: just as in 15, 7; bapt. 8,4; ieiun. 7,

3 synonymous with nuntiare (TLL I: 787, 81 seqq.). Tert. is the first to use annuntiare also in the sense of praenuntiare, prophetari, cf. fuga 1, 1; Marc.

2, 24, 2; 3, 4, 2, and see TLL ib. 788, 44 seqq.; Thierry, 108. It has the meaningpraedicareinfuga6, 4; nat. 1,19,5; cf. TLL, ib. 788, 83 seqq.Hoc nomine: as in the present passage, Tert. often uses nomine with a genitive or a pronoun with instrumental (= hac re) or causal (= hac de causa) meaning; see the numerous instances in Hoppe, Synt., 30-1; Thorn., 1,57-8; cf. also Thierry, 113. 222; Stephan, 56; for the classical period, see KrebsSchmalz, 2, 155. Tert. even uses this expression in a limitative sense, cf. e.g. an. 53, 3; Prax. 12,6; Marc. 2, 14,3, and see Thorn., 1,56-7. Quid tum?:

Tert. could not but acknowledge that astrologers knew by their science Christ's birth and offered gifts to Him, but he does not assent to the conclusions drawn by his opponents from these facts . Hence 'What at that?'. patrocinabitur: this verb, which is avoided by the authors of the classical period, is very frequent in the works of lawyers, see Beck, 89; Waszink, 109.

religio = religiositas, as already in Cic. Font. 40: hominem plenum religionis; Liv. 1, 18, 1; cf. apol. 33, 1; 25, 2 (in the Fuldensis). See Waltz.,

Bt., 278; LOfst., Krit. Apol., 65-6. mathesis: 'astrology' (COL 5, 422, 61 : doctrina astrologiae). Tert. is the first to use the word in this sense, see TLL

VIII: 473, 13 seqq. stellam Christi: the preceding words de Christo ... est mathesis and the antithesis Christi, non Saturni et Martis make the reading stellarum of A B impossible. Ursinus' conjecture stellam is by far to be preferred to Gelenius' stellas: only the one 'star of Bethlehem' is concerned, and the reading stellarum is best explained as a corruption of stellam. stellam

... Saturni et Martis: Tert. uses stella with the genitive of the name of the god and not simply Saturnum and Martem because of the parallelism with stellam

Christi, and also because he regards the gods as mortui. mortuorum: cf.

15,2: Recogitemus omnem idololatrian in homines esse culturam, cum ipsos deos nationum homines retro fuisse etiam apud suos constet; apol. 12, 1: quantum igitur de deis vestris, nomina solummodo video quorundam veterum mortuorum; apol. 10,3; 11, 1. 13; spect. 6,4: Sed de idololatria nihil differt apud nos, sub quo nomine et titulo, dum ad eosdem spiritus perveniat, quibus

9,4

TLL VI: 1825, 70 seqq.; on the Greek term Y€VEcr\C;, see Gundel, art.

'Heimarmene', RE VII: 2633). Besides, the Magi, too, did not only know that Christ had been born, but they also knew His dignity. Hence their question: noli ecr'tw 0 'tEXOdC; ~cxcr\AEUC; 'tWV 'Iou8cx(wv; (Matth. 2, 2). The knowledge and prediction of the future circumstances of a new-born person are the special province of astrology. Nam et: for this combination, cf. 3, 1. Tert. argues as follows: 'this science (viz., astrology) was allowed until the Gospel, but after the birth of Christ nobody is any longer permitted to calculate a nativitas with the help of the stars. <This episode of Christ and the Magi signified the termination of this practice, as the Magi marked a conclusion also in another field. > For their presents, too, marked an end, viz., that of the sacrijicatio et gloria saecularis, which also were to be abolished by Christ'. infanti tunc domino: cf. pat. 5, 18: inpatientiae tunc injantis. The offerings of presents by the Magi symbolizes the homage paid to the Messiah (domino) by the heathens. The conviction that by this the calling of the heathens and their subjection to the Truth was announced has been strongly felt; the Magi are primitiae gentium (Aug. serm. 200, 1),01 'tTjc; exxATjcr(CXC; 7tpoyOVO\ (Joh. Chrysost. renuntiamus. Licebit mortuis, licebit deis suis jaciant, perin de mortuis suis ut diis jaciunt; an. 57, 2. This is the well-known view of Euhemerus (who is mentioned by Min. Fel. 21, 1, Arnob. 4, 29 and Lact. d.i. 1, 11, 33) which was adopted by the Christian apologists, cf. Min. Fel. 21-4; Theophil. ad

A utolyc. 1, 9: xod 'ta fl~v OVOflCX'tCX WV cpTjc; cr€~EcrOCX\ OEWV OVOflCX'teX ecr'tw VEXPWV cXvOpC;>1tWV; Athenag. legat. 28-30; Arnob. 1, 36-7 and 4, 28-9; very sharply

Lact. d. i. 2, 1, 5: equidem ... admirari soleo ... homines ... ipsos ad tan tam caecitatem esse deductos, ut vero ac vivo deo mortuos praejerant, terrenos autem sepultosque in terra ei, qui jundator ipsius terrae juit (cf. also 1, 8, 3 seqq.; 1, 15; 2,17,6-7; for more passages, see Brandt's index, 301). See Lortz,

1,132 seqq.; Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 223 seqq.; cf. also comm. on 1, 5; 12, 5, and the note by Bbhm, 113-4. Against these dead people God is put as the deus vivus, cf. e.g. apol. 30, 1-2.

4. At enim sci entia ... interpretetur: after elaborating Quid tum? in the two negative sentences (Ideo nunc, etc., and De Christo scilicet, etc.) Tert. now pronounces his own thesis: 'Astrology was allowed until the coming of Christ and no longer'. There seems to be some tension between this concession and the unfavourable judgment about astrology elsewhere ('species of idolatry',

'work of the fallen angels'). In the present passage Tert. takes a legal standpoint. He has to admit that astrology, a knowledge coming from the fallen angels, can provide the truth, as in the case of the magi. One must assume that in that case God allowed to make use of this knowledge. But this was the last case: hence the statement about alia via, see below. Astrology is not lawful any more. Tert. dispatches the business in a quasi-juridical manner without entering thoroughly into the matter. At enim: a usual brachylogy:

'But < this is not true, > for ... '. usque ad evangelium: a formulation (repeated in 9, 6: ad evangelium usque) like the famous lex et prophetae usque ad Iohannem (Matth. 11, 13; Luc. 16, 16), which is rather frequently quoted by Tert.: ieiun. 2, 2. 11, 6; Marc. 3, 23, 3; Iud. 8, 14. 13, 26; pud. 6, 2. For the expression, cf. 9, 7 post evangelium with the note. fuit concessa: this is not an instance of a shifted passive perfect (see Hofm., Synt., 562-3): concessus, like here, often has the meaning and function of an adjective (found since Cicero, see TLL IV: 17, 68 seqq.). Christo edito ... exinde: exinde is superfluous after Christo edito, cf. in the next sentence: ideo ... quasi. It is striking that Tert. formulates pleonastically up to three times; this clearly demonstrates the emotional intensity of this argument, which is also evident from the elaborate way of reasoning in par. 5. nativitatem: 'birth', a meaning found since Tert. and Minucius Felix, and especially frequent in the legal idiom (from which, of course, Tert. has borrowed it). See Waszink, 199, and cf. 18, 9. As in the present passage astrology is discussed in general, nativitas probably has the connotation 'horoscope' (= genitura, cf. an. 25, 9, and see hom. in Matth. 7, 4); cf. Basil. hom. in S. Chr. gener. 5-6; Joh. Chrysost. ib.

6, 3; Ambr. expos. ev. sec. Luc. 2,47; Hilar. in Matth. 1, 5; Hier. in Matth.

1, 14; Aug. serm. 199, 1-2; 200, 3; 202, 1. 3; 203, 3; 204, 1; Fulg. serm. 4, 2; Leo Magn. serm. 31-33; 35-6; Maxim. Taur. hom. 18-28 (especially 28 =

287 C-288 C). In Marc. 3, 13, 8 Tert. connects Is. 8, 4 with the story of the Magi and interprets the gifts as virtus Damasci, and the Magi as spolia

Samariae, and continues (par. 8-9): qui cum ilium cognovissent et muneribus honorassent et genu posito adorassent quasi deum et regem sub testimonio indicis et ducis ste//ae, spolia sunt jacti Samariae, id est idololatriae, credentes videlicet in Christum. Idololatriam enim Samariae nomine notavit, ut ignominiosae ob idololatriam, qua desciverat tunc a deo sub rege

Hieroboam; in this passage his source is Justin, dial. 77-8; cf. Aug. serm. 202,

2. c1ausulam: in the sense of 'end' (of a certain thing) it occurs since Sen. ep. 66, 48: beatae vitae c1ausulam; 77, 20; from Tert. cf. apol. 32, 1: c1ausulam saeculi; Scorp. 8, 3: Ipse (sc. John the Baptist) c1ausula legis et prophetarum; res. 24, 5: sub omni c1ausula temporum; ieiun. 10, 2; juga 6,

6; an. 58, 1; Marc. 5,7, 14; 5, 14, 14. See TLL III: 1326,54 seqq.; Oehler's note on the present passage (p. 78 h). sacrificationis et gloriae saecularis: in the presents of the Magi, which were the normal offerings to the heathen gods (sacrijicatio refers to tus and myrra, gloria to aurum), these offerings are turned away from the heathen gods and given to Christ. Herewith they are the end of the worldly offering and glory.-The gold contrasts with the humility shown by Christ and required of the believers; cf. the discussion in 18, 6-7, esp.18, 7: qualeaurumdecapite(sc. Christi)radiaret, nisigloriam saeculi

lV7 alien am et sibi et suis iudicasset? Perhaps Tert. alludes to the golden wreath as a token of homage to Hellenistic princes and, afterwards, to the emperors.

This usage also influenced the way in which the three Magi were represented on monuments: on these we sometimes find one of them (or even all three) offering a wreath; see Cumont, L 'Adoration des Mages et l'art triomphal de

Rome (Atti della Pont. Accad. Rom. di Archeol., ser. III Memorie, vol. 3, Roma 1932-3, 81-105); Vermeulen, 117-8. The classification of the presents given here and alluded to in Marc. 3, 13, 8 (deum et regem) is also found, for instance, in Joh. Chrysost. hom. in Matth. 8, 1 (PG 57,83), and, though differently interpreted,in chapters 8-12 of a sermon of Optat. Milev. edited by Wilmart (Rev. Sc. ReI. 2 (1922), 271 seqq.), which is the oldest extant sermon for Christmas. Tert. does not yet know-or at least mention-the symbolic interpretation of each of the three gifts, although this was developed already at an early date, cf. Iren. Adv. haer.-a book well-known to Tert.-3, 10 (2,

32 Harvey): ... myrrham quidem, quod ipse erat, qui pro mortali humano genere moreretur et sepeliretur; aurum vero, quoniam rex (sc. erat), cuius regni finis non est; thus vero, quoniam deus, qui et notus in Iudaea factus est et manijestus eis, qui non quaerebant eum; Clem. Alex. paed. 2, 8, 63, 5;

Orig. c. Cels. 1,60 (111,20-4); for more passages, see O. Bardenhewer, 'Der Name Maria', Bibl. Stud. 1 (1895), 42-4 Anm.; Th. Mayr, Studien zu dem

Pasch ale Carmen des christl. Dichters Sedulius (thesis Munich-Augsburg 5. Quod igitur ... intellegere debemus: the overall meaning of this passage is clear. The advice given to the Magi in the dream to return home by another way has an allegorical meaning: 'way' means 'way of life'. The construction of the sentence, however, causes great difficulties. The question is: where do we find the main sentence? All interpreters agree in taking quod as a relative pronoun; the content of quod is given in ut irent ... (see Thelwall: 'What, then, the dream ... suggested ... , namely that they should go home'). But now the question arises: where does the main sentence begin? Some authors think that id est has this function (Thelwall: 'What the dream ... suggested ... is this: that they should .. .'). Hartel, too, adheres to this opinion. But nowhere else does Tert. use id est in this way. Here, too, id est seems to explain only the words alia via. So the search for the main sentence is still open. It cannot be found before ignorabat, and here the early editions have a semicolon.

Obviously in order to solve this problem, Reifferscheid put a comma after ignorabat, thus opening the way to find an appropriate main sentence. However, this main sentence, adeo viam sectam et disciplinam intellegere debemus, does not link up with the relative clause quod ... suggessit etc. Hence

Van der Nat, who adheres to Reifferscheid's interpunction, proposed to consider the sentence as an anacoluthon. The words adeo ... debemus have nothing to do with the subclause introduced by quod; they have to be connected with non, ne illos ... ignorabat as a conclusion. Here one should observe that, if adeo ... debemus 'has nothing to do with the quod-clause', why should we not maintain the interpunction of the Agobardinus and the other editions? One could indicate the anacoluthon by a stroke after ignorabat. However, one has then to ascribe to Tert. a rather awkward phrase. We think that there is a way to solve all problems, viz., by taking quod as a relative junction (quod = et id). In other words, quod is not explained in ut irent but refers to the contents of the previous sentence, where it was said that the old practices of the magi had come to an end (the astrology, the gifts).

Now Tert. says that therefore (igitur) the advice in the dream has to be interpreted in an allegorical way: 'And that it was, in consequence, what the dream advised (saying) that they should return by another way.' The allegorical interpretation is presented here as a confirmation of the previous argument.

somnium ... suggessit: in Tert.'s day there was a generally accepted division (definitely established by Posidonius) of prophetic dreams in three classes as to their origin: dreams sent by God, by the demons, and those originating from the activity of the soul itself. Among the Christians we find the same classification, in which, however, the demons are regarded as evil spirits (or the devil) and gradually all dreams, not only the prophetic ones, came to be included; we find this division already in Tert. (although he is doubtful about the third group), cf. an. 47 with Waszink's comm. (p. 500 seqq.). That the dream of the Magi was sent by God has certainly been a general Christian con1916), 59; c. Weyman, Beitr. zur Oesch. der christl. lat. Poesie (Munich

1926), 133; W. Theiler, Die chaldiiischen Drakel und die Hymnen des Synesios (Schrift. d. K6nigsb. Gel. Gesellschaft, Geisteswiss. Kl., 18. Jahr, Heft 1;

Halle 1942), 38; Kievits' note on Iuvenc. 1,250; Herzog, Prud., 86, n. 117.

Tert.' s interpretation of the gifts as a clausula sacrijicationis et gloria saecularis is only found in one other passage, viz., in Maxim. Taurin. hom.

21 (PL 57, 270 AB). After giving the just mentioned symbolical interpretation of the gifts Maximus proceeds as follows: non enim otiose factum est, quod magi ad dominum cum suis muneribus advenerunt. Invenientes enim curiositate superstitionis suae Christum omnibus regnaturum detulerunt ad eum cunctorum elementorum insignia: aurum, quo terrena vincuntur, thus, quo placari putantur caelestia, myrrh am qua condiuntur inferna, ostendentes utique a nativitate Christi horum nihil opus esse, quoniam per Christum constaret et victoria in terris et propitiatio in caelis et requies in infernis. Magi ergo curiositate sua repererunt a nativitate Christi curiosos esse ulterius non debere; et hoc illis magica ars profuit, ut scirent eam sibi ulterius non prodesse; cf. hom. 26 (283A-284A), especially: in thure ... et daemoniorum superstitio cessatura et futurus verae religion is cultus aperitur. Here the astrology (curiositas superstition is) and the gifts of the Magi are found together, as in Tert.

::1, .J viction, although this is not often explicitly stated; cf. Sedul. op. pasch. 2

101-2: caelitus per somnum moniti (sc. magi); Fulgent. serm. 4, 11: the drea~ was a divinum mandatum. Justin, dial. 78,2, speaks of a (btoX<XAU<jJt~. According to Origen, c. Cels. 1, 60, it was an angel who warned the Magi not to return by the same way; likewise Joh. Chrysostom, hom. in Matth. 6, 3 and 7, 5 (PG 37, 65. 78). St. Jerome gives the event the character of an ancient oracle, in Matth. I, 14-5 (PL 26, 26 c): qui munera obtulerant domino, consequenter responsum accipiunt. Responsum autem (quod Graece dicitur

Others do not discuss what the dream meant to the Magi themselves, but interpret the Magi who had to return by another way as a figura of those who are converted to Christianity (the Magi are primitiae gentium); cf. Hilar. in Matth. I, 5: quod vero repetere iter atque ad Herodem in Iudaeam redire prohibentur: nihil a Iudaea petere scientiae agnitionisque permittimur, sed in Christo salutem omnem et spem locantes admonemur prioris vitae itinere abstinere; Sedul. carm. pasch. 2, 201 seqq.; Op. pasch. 2, 9; Arnob. min. ex

Mat/h. 1 (PL 53, 471 D). Herod is a symbol of the devil (iniquus, huius mundi princeps, Sedul.; diabolifigura, Arnob. min.). Tert. is the first to assume that XP7)[1.oc7:t(J(}eIJ7:et;) non per angelum fit, sed per ipsum dominum, ut meritorum

Ioseph privilegium demonstraretur. suggessit: suggerere in the sense of memoriae suggerere, commemorare and suadere is post-classical, cf. in Tert. e.g. apol. 25, 17 and 47, 9 (= commemorare); apol. 27, 3 and 33, 4 (= suadere). In apol. 18, 5 we also find the substantive suggestus in a corresponding sense. See Engelbrecht, Neue Beitr., 156-7; Goelzer, Nr., 259; for the Magi themselves, too, the dream had a symbolical significance; likewise Ambr. expos. ev. sec. Luc. 2, 46: alia venerunt via magi, alia redeunt; qui enim Christum viderant, Christum intellexerant, meliores utique quam venerant revertuntur. Duae quippe sunt viae, una quae ducit ad interitum, alia quae ducit ad regnum. IlIa peccatorum est, quae ducit ad Herodem, haec via

Christus est, qua reditur ad patriam; hic enim temporalis est incolatus ....

Caveamus igitur Herodem mundanae ad tempus praesulem potestatis, ut patriae caelestis aeternum consequamur habitaculum. Hier. in Matth. I, 14-5: revertuntur autem per aliam viam, quia infidelitati miscendi non erant ethnicorum et Iudaeorum; Leo Magn. serm. 33 (= 14, 4 Leclercq-Dolle): magi ... secundum admonitionem somnii non eodem quo venerant itinere revertuntur. Oportebat enim ut iam in Christum credentes non per antiquae conversationis semitas ambularent, sed novam ingressi viam a relictis erroribus abstinerent. Tum ut etiam Herodis vacuarentur insidiae, qui in puerum Iesum impietatem doli per simulationem disponebat officii; cf. Aug. serm. 202, 3; Maxim. Taur. hom. 19 (PL 57, 264 B); 20 (266 AB); 21

(270 BC); 25 (280 D-281 A); 27 (285 C-286 A); Optat. Milev. 2; 12. ignorans ... digressos: for the omission of a pronoun in an accus. c. infin., which is particularly common in Tert., see LOfst., Z. Spr. Tert., 52-4; Hoppe,

Synt., 49-50; Wahlen, 25-8 (with more literature). viam sectam et disciplinam: it is necessary to adopt this emendation of Iunius, which palaeo graphically is only a minor correction. Less weighty objections against viam rectam et disciplinam are that we have to supply aliam viam to intellegere as an object-accusative (while the rest of the argument only deals with the interpretation of via), and that the combination of these words is surprising (why is disciplina not accompanied by an attribute?). The conclusive argument, however, is that, if we read viam rectam et disciplinam, Tert. would without warning use via recta figuratively as one conception in the very passage where he is trying to establish the right interpretation of via, which has already been explained as secta. Moreover, the next sentence becomes superfluous and aliter does not fit in with the foregoing (alia via = via recta, so alia via incedere = aliter incedere; one would expect: = via recta incedere).

In adopting Iunius' conjecture the argument proceeds satisfactorily. The con- ~altz . , Comm., 127. ut irent in sua, sed alia '" via: the words (ut irent)

In sua, sed seem to be superfluous, but Tert. is quoting here Matth. 2, l3:

(cXIJ&XWP1)crOC\l) d~ 7:~\I XWpOC\l OCU7:W\I. pristina secta incedere: incedere used in a metaphorical sense is very frequent in Christian authors (see TLL VII, 1:

854 seqq., and cf. infra the note on 9, 6 aliter incederent). It is unnecessary to follow Hartel in adding in; it is true that incedere in occurs frequently (cf.

17, 3), but cf. cult. fem . 2, 2, 2: sancte et tota fidei substantia incedere. For incedere with an accusative, see Waszink, 413, on an. 35, 2; for the Christian use of secta, see H. Janssen, II3; Teeuwen, 120; Waltz., Comm., 17. _ ne pristina sect a '" persequeretur: the interpretation of the dream which is rejected here is not given anywhere else; all authors follow Matth. 2, 12, where no persecution is mentioned but where it is said that the dream commanded the Magi not to return to Herod. This was intended to prevent Herod from receiving the message for which he was waiting, so that Joseph should be able to fly in the meantime, see Klostermann, on Matth. 2, 12 seqq., HdbNT 4,

17 (unless the return by another way, too, belongs to the legendary elements of the st~ry , see Klostermann, ib. 11. 17; Dietrich, KI. Schr., 279-83). Probabl~ we fmd here one more mistake of Tert. (cf. the note on 4, 3: cognoscite), for m Marc. ~, l3, 10, where he associates Is. 8, 4 with the story of the Magi, he does mentIOn the fact that they did not return to Herod: 'adversum regem' autem 'Assyriorum' adversus Herodem intellege, cui utique adversati sunt m.agi tunc non renuntiando de Christo, quem intercipere quaerebat (cf. Just. dial. ~8, 2. :; Justin also give reasons for the identification of the king of the ~ss:nans ~l~,h Herod, ib. 77,4: (Herod) 0\1 6 A6yo~ XOCA&( ~occrtAeOC 'Acrcrup[w\I ~ha

7:1)\1 oc9w\I XOCt OC\l0f.l0\l ocu7:oii yvWf.l1)\I). A non-symbolical interpretation, in which, however, the purpose of the dream is considered to be the protection of the Magi (and not of the child Jesus) against Herod, is given by Orig. c. Cels. I,

60 (Ill, 24-8); Iuvenc. 1,251-4; Joh. Chrysost. hom. in Mat/h. 8, I (83).

I I L.

~ , o nection secta-disciplina also Occurs in pall. 6, 2: divinae sectae et disciplinae.

For the image cf. Marc. 4, 24, 11: cum 'viam' fidem demonstret (scil. Is. 35, 8-9), per quam ad deum perveniemus; orat. 11, 2: alias ... via cognominatur disciplina nostratum; Act. apost. 9, 2; see also Michaelis' detailed article about by the demons; cf. an. 57, 2 (quoted above) and ib. §§ 4-5 (for details, see Waszink's commentary). Origen, who disputes that Moses was a magician

(c. Cels. 1, 26; 2, 50), also contrasts miracles brought about by the demons and by divine power; his distinctive criterium is the moral conduct and the character of the person performing the miracle, and the effect of the miracle itself (ib. 2, 51). This criterium also applies in his opinion to the miracles of Jesus, who was also regarded as a magician (ib. 2, 48 seqq.); similarly

Arnobius 1,43-4. As concerns Jesus' miracles, a different mark of distinction is given by Justin, apol. 1,30.31,7-8, and Lactantius, d.i. 5, 3 and especially

4, 15: his miracles have evidential force, because they have been prophesied; cf. also Aug. in Joh. ev. tract. 35, 8. The same is argued by Tert. in Marc.

3,3; an allusion to it is found in apol. 21, 17. See Bardy, Conversion, 184-5.

patientia dei is also found in res. 14, 10; Scap. 2, 10 and pud. 2, 7; on Tert. 's use of patientia and tolerantia cf. Fredouille, 407. traxit: all alterations of the text (aliam iIIam speciem, Pamelius; patientiam, Rigaltius) are unnecessary: trahere is used intransitively in the sense of 'to last, to remain in existence, to subsist', cf. e.g. FloT. 2,13, 13 (141, 2 Rossb.): decem annos traxit ista dominatio, and see LOfst., Synt., 2, 258-60. ad evangelium usque: for the expression, see the note on 9, 7: post evangelium; for the idea, cf. 9, 4. Simon magus ... alter magus: by alter magus Elymas is meant. The passages in the Acts about these two figures (8, 9-25 and 13, 6-12 resp.) are also mentioned together (likewise in connection with Moses) in an. 57, 7: multa utique et adversus apostolos Simon et Elymas magi; sed plaga caecitatis de praestigiis non fuit. The story of Simon Magus is also mentioned in an. 34,

2; fuga 12, 4; praescr. 33, 12; that of Elymas in pud. 21, 4. For the life and system of Simon Magus see L. Cerfaux, 'La gnose simonienne', Rev. Sc. Rei.

"OM~', Kittel 5, 43 seqq.

6. aliter incederent: for incedere in a metaphorical sense accompanied by an adverb (often = 1t~pma"tEIv, Vulg. ambulare), cf. cult. fem. 2, 1, 2: qualiter vos incedere oporteat; 2, 2, 2: sancte ... incedere; Marc. 5, 10, 11: volens nos sicut ipse incessit ita incedere; pud. 18, 11: ab otiose incedente fratre; mono

3, 7: Ioannes monens sic nos incedere debere quemadmodum et dominus, utique etiam secundum sanctitatem carnis admonuit incedere. With secundum, as in the last passage quoted, also orat. 4, 2; an. 40, 2; pud. 17, 11 (=

Rom. 8,4). See TLL VII, 2: 854, 71 seqq.; cf. also 17, 3. For incedere with an adj. cf. the note on 1, 2: conspurcatus et constupratus incedit. Sic et: cf. 1, 2 with the note. alia ... operatur: cf. an. 57, 6: sic et in ilia alia specie magiae, quae ... . By alia ilia species magiae is implied what is stated at the end of this section: magia ... , cuius est species astrologia, which goes further than: Scimus magiae et astrologiae inter se societatem (9, 3). adversus

Moysen aemulata: the only instance given by TLL I: 975, 45 seqq. of this construction of aemulari. The present passage refers to the miracles performed in Egypt by Moses and the sorcerers competing with him, cf. Just. dial. 79,

4: Kat lv Alyu1t't~ ChL f.lcXYOL l1tdPTJcrcxv l~LcroGcrecxL 'ttj 8lJVcXf.l~L 'ttj lv~pyolJf.l~V'!l 8LCt 'toG mcr'toG e~pcX1tOv'to~ Mwucr~w~ U1tO 'toG eWG, &yvwf.l~V; likewise, apol. 1,62,4. Jewish tradition knew the names of these Egyptian magicians, who, according to Jubil. 48, 1-3, were helped by Satan himself: cf. e.g. 2 Tim. 3, 8: ... ' Icxvv7j~

XCXt ' Icxf.l~p7j~ &:v't~cr'tTJcrcxv MwucrtI. Moses himself, too, because of this episode received the name of a magician (cf. e.g. ApuI. apol. 90 (100, 10-3 H.); Celsus in Orig. C. Cels. 1, 21. 26; 2, 50); in Plin. n.h. 30, 11 Moses and his competitors are even mentioned as the founders of a certain type of magic. For mO.re details and literature, see Abt, Apol., 247-9; Messina, Ursprung, 15-6;

HeInemann, art. 'Moses', RE XVI: 363-4. Cf. also the monograph by J. G.

Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (Nashville-New York 1972). Tert. also mentions this episode (likewise connected with the story of Simon Magus and ~lymas) ~n an. 57, 7: Corpora denique videbantur Pharaoni et Aegyptiis maglcarum vrrgarum dracones; sed Mosei veritas mendacium devorat. Tert.

15 (1925), 489 seqq.; ib. 16 (1926),5-28.265-85.481-503, and id., 'Simon Ie magicien a Samaria', ib. 27 (1937),615-7; G. Quispel, Gnosis als Weltreligion,

51-70; R. McWilson, Vig. Chr. 9 (1955), 193 seqq.; id., 'Simeon, Dositheos and the Dead Sea Scrolls', Ztschr. fur Religion und Geistesgeschichte 9

(1957), 21-40; A. D. Nock, 'Gnosticism', (Harvard Theol. Rev. 57 (1964), 255-79),277 (also in Essays on Religion and the Ancient World, ed. by Zeph

Stewart, 957); J. Danielou, L 'Eglise des premiers temps (Paris 1985), 26-7 and 70-2; cf. also the literature mentioned by H.

Conzelmann, Die Apostelgeschichte (HdbNT, 7, Ttibingen 1963), 53-4. aliquid ... de circulatoria secta: for circulatorius in connection with magic, cf. apol. 23, 1: si multa miracula circulatoriis praestigiis ludunt (sc. magi); cf. carn. Chr. 5, her~ contra~ts the miracles of the magicians and those of Moses as appearance agaInst reality; the serpents conjured by the magicians were only phantoms, those of Moses were real (cf. Waszink, 581). So Tert. denies the reality of the 10: Ergo iam Christum non de caelo deferre debueras, sed de aliquo circulatorio coetu, nec deum praeter hominem sed magum hominem; praescr.

43, 1: Notata sunt etiam commercia haereticorum cum magis quam pluribus, cum circulatoribus, cum astrologis, cum philosoph is, curiositati scilicet et deditis. professionis suae: i.e. magic; cf. an. 34, 2: (Simon) fultus etiam ph~nomena produced by the magicians, but not the existence of a phantom or Its perception. The same holds good for the spirits of dead people, even of prophets, conjured up by magicians; they are only phantoms brought

1 1'+

~,O - ~,I

':J , / 1 t:J

artis suae viribus. For magic as an ars, cf. 9, 1, and see TLL II: 665, 34-66; Abt, Apol., 30-1; Waszink, 406. enundinaret: this verb does not OCcur anywhere else, see TLL V, 2: 620, 39-42. The meaning is depreciatory: 'to barter away'. Tert. is thinking of Acts 8, 20: 'to &pYUPLO\l crOt) crU\I crot dTJ d~

Thierry, 167; Waszink, 339. qui: frequent in Tert. instead of quis after si and ne, cf. 14, 1; spect. 15,5; apol. 3,7; 18, 1. See the note on 3,3. magia

... cuius est species astrologia: cf. supra. species in genere damnatur: cf. bapt. 4, 2: quod autem generi adtributum est, etiam in species redundat; spect. 14, 2. The distinction between species and genus is found since Varro r.r. 1,8,1, see TLL VI, 2: 1902, 49seqq.; Waszink, 157. -Postevangelium:

Tert. often uses the preposition post accompanied by a substantive not expressing time instead of a clause introduced by postquam, cf. e.g. nat. 2,

&1tWhLCX\l, O'tL 't~\I owp&a\l 'toG 9wG E\lOfJ.LcrCX~ oLa XPTJfJ.1X-rW\l x'tlicr9cxL; cf. an. 34, 2.

For the idea that a gift of God cannot be sold or bought, cf. 2 Clem. 20, 4; Did. 12, 5 with Knopf's note (HdbNT, Erg. Bd., 34); Klostermann's note on Matth. 10, 9 (ib. 4, 87). To let oneself be paid is a mark of charlatanism, cf. negotiatio in apol. 23, 1 (quoted above); thus of false prophets and teachers in 2 Cor. 2, 17; 1 Tim. 6, 5; 1 Thess. 2, 5-6 with Dibelius' note (HdbNT, 11,

7-8); Jud. 11. 16 with Windisch's note (ib. 15,43); Did. 11,5-6.9.12; Herm. mand. 11, 12; cf. also Lucian, Peregr. 16. Likewise in philosophy, cf. e.g.

Sen. ep. 29, 7: circulatores, qui philosophiam honestius neglexissent quam 12, 27: post plurimas terras et Attica hospitia ltaliae ... consedit (Saturnus); bapt. 20, 4: dominus post aquam (= post baptismum) segregatus in deserta; scorp. 11, 3: in parabola seminis post cespitem are facti; apol. 2, 17: post tribunal vestrum. Although not frequent, this use does occur more than once in other authors, cf. already Cic. Verr. I, 46: vident adhuc post legem tribuniciam unum senatorem vel tenuissimum esse damnatum. A similar brachylogical use of the preposition ante is found e.g. in nat. 1, 4, 11: alii, quos retro ante hoc nomen vagos viles improbos norant; apol. 12, 4: ante plumbum et glutinum et gomphos sine capite sunt dei vestri; an. 24, 8: tanti vendunt; Just. dial. 3, 2; Philo Gig. 39; vito Mos. 2, 212; in a philosopher, for that matter, (apart from the contents of his doctrine) the accepting of money is regarded as undignified, cf. e.g. Plato Prot. 313 e; Soph. 223 d seqq.

See Windisch, Kcx1tTJA&u&LII, Kittel, 3, 606-9; Waszink's note on an. 3, 1: sapientiae .. . caupones. de fide eiectus est: Tert. often uses de in connection with compounds with prefix ex, cf. e.g. apol. 2, 18: de isto nomine excludamur; paen. 12, 6: de vulnere expellat; ux. 1, 7, 1: de saeculo educi; res. 13, 3; see ante corpus (,before the incorporation of the soul') aevi; Herm. 3, 4. In this connection the expression usque ad evangelium (9, 5 and 7) should also be mentioned. In these expressions the meaning of post sometimes develops into 'after the setting in, the beginning of a certain state of affairs', cf. pud. 18,

15: Porro cum in omnibus epistolis et post fidem talem prohibeat admitti ... , nostrae magis sententiae adsistit, eam paenitentiam ostendens dominum malle, quae ante fidem, quae ante baptisma morte peccatoris potior habeatur; cf. Sen. ep. 3,2: post amicitiam credendum est, ante amicitiam iudicandum.

Thus already Cicero Verr. II, 1, 18: post hunc statum rei publicae, quo nunc utimur; Sallust, Cat. 5,6 and lug. 5,4. Other instances of this preference for a substantival to a verbal expression are found in 5, 2 (1 Thess. 4, 11): ad victum and 5, 3: ad erogationem. sophistas ... magos: a similar enumeration is found in praescr. 43, 1: Notata sunt etiam commercia haereticorum cum magis quam pluribus, cum circulatoribus, cum astrologis, cum philosophis, curiositati scilicet et deditis. sophistas: used in the sense of 'student of occult sciences', just as ieiun. 7, 7, where it denotes the magicians of the king of Babylon. According to Waszink (note on an. 28, 2) it expresses contempt.

This is only true so far that Tert. regards all these people as impostors and sinners; the word sophista is not in itself depreciatory, as it is more or less a technical term or at least used more than once in this connection. Thus in LXX Exod. 7, 11 we find crOqM't~~ used of the sorcerers of Pharao, in Dan. also Henen's index, and Borleffs' index on nat. Instances of this use occur already at an early date, e.g. Cato agric. 42: eximito de dolio (see Krumbiegel's index S.V. de); Cic. off. 3, 89: eicere de navi. See LOfst., Per., 103;

Halm-Laubmann ad Cic. Verr. II, 5, 22.-According to TLL VI: 690, 26-32, fides here and in 11, 5 and 19, 2 is equivalent to secta, ecclesia. However, this is highly doubtful, as is justly argued by Thierry, 122-3. A better instance of this meaning is found in scorp. 15, 3: orientem fidem Romae primus Nero cruentavit, cf. apol. 5, 3: consulite commentarios vestros; illic reperietis primum Neronem in hanc sectam cum maxime Romae orientem Caesariano gladio ferocisse. qui cum Sergio Paulo: cf. praescr. 23, 1 and ieiun. 10, 2:

Petrus et qui cum eo; Valent. 9, 2: in illis aliis, qui circa Nun. isdem ... apostolis: this is incorrect: Simon Magus was punished by Petrus and John, whereas EIymas resisted Saul/Paul and Barnabas. We find an identical mistake in fuga 2, 7 (see Thierry's note, p. 145). luminum amissione: cf.

Scap. 3, 4: Vigellius Saturninus, qui primus hic gladium in nos egit, lumina amisit.

7. Hoc = luminum amissionem. Tert. often uses hoc to denote one or more words from the preceding sentence, cf. 2, I; apol. 12, 5: 19nibus urimur; hoc et illi a prima quidem massa; Prax. 26, 8: hoc (sc. filium dei esse) et satanas eum in temptationibus novit. See Waltz., lit., 362; Thornell, 2, 9 and Eranos 7 (1907), 99-100. credo: in parenthesis, cf. TLL IV: 1137, 19 seqq.;

1, 20; 2, 14. 18. 24. 48 of the soothsayers of the Babylonian king (Vulg. sapientes); it is also used by Philo somn. 1, 220; vito Mos. 1, 92 in connection with Exod. 7, 11. More important, however, is that the word crOqM't~~ also occurs in magical and astrological texts: for instance, in the great magical

lib :J, /

':J , / -':1 ,15

J I I

papyrus of Paris, vss. 154 seqq., it is said of the Egyptian King Psammetichus that nature made him aptO"'tov O"ocptO"'t~v; similar qualifications of magicians are found in a text quoted by A. Dieterich, Abraxas, 187, 14-6; Herm Trismeg. in W. Gundel, Neue astrologische Texte des Herm. Trismeg. (Abh. Bay.

Akad. d. Wiss., N. F. 12, 1936),78,13 seqq.: sophistas, augures, astronomos, astrologos, vaticinatores, divinatores, avium vindicatores, etc. Ph ilosoph us, too, is occasionally used in the sense of 'magician', cf. Firm. Mat. math. 3,

12, 6: magos, philosophos et caelestia saepe tractantes; ib., 3, 3, 18; Apul. mag. 27; Rhetorius in Catal. codd. astrol. graec. VIII, 4: 147, 13-5; 148, 2;

165, 1-4. See Abt, Apol. 171, n. 4; Cumont, Rei. orient., 173-4 and L 'Egypte des astrologues, 121-2; Bidez-Cumont, Mages, 2, 339, n. 3. For the other meanings of sophista in Tert., see Waszink, 356-7. Chaldaeos:

'astrologers', just as in apol. 19, 5-6. It is the oldest Latin denomination of these people (Cato agric. 5, 4; cf. Val. Max. 1,3, 3). For the semantic development of this ethnical name, which eventually became a professional designation, see Cumont, Astr. Rei., 26-7; Baumstark, art. 'Chaldaioi', RE III: word ('scribe') too narrow in this connection, where the sapientia saecuti is generally disqualified. Besides, it is quite probable that here Tert. offers his own translation of the whole passage, as it contains some more divergences from the other translations: aevi ... saecuti instead of saeculi ... mundi (however, Marc. 5, 5, 7: nonne infatuavit deus sapientiam mundi?; cf. also 5, 6,

1), infatuavit instead of stultam fecit. conquisitor huius aevi: conquisitor as a translation of O"U(Tl'tT]'t~~ (= disputator) is found from Vetus Latina and Tert. onwards, see TLL IV: 357, 17-27; Lietzmann's comm. on 1 Cor. 1,20

(HdbNT9, 9). Huius aevi = 'tOU cxiwvo~ 'tou'tou; for the notion 6 cxiwv oU'to~, see

H. Sasse, art. 'cxiwv, cxiwvtO~', in Kittell, 197-209 (especially 202-7). For the various meanings of aevum in Tert., see Waltz., Comm., 66. An interesting interpretation is found in the Ambrosiaster (PL 17, 199 A): conquisitor ... saeculi hic est, qui constellationibus agi mundum et duodecim signis ortus et occasus fieri decernit calcutis, nihil omnino sine horum motu putans posse fieri. infatuavit: this verb, which is particularly frequent in Christian Latin literature (see TLL VII, 1: 1354,69 - 55, 19), is found with a personal object since Cic. Flacc. 47: neminem ... adeo infatuare potuit, ut ... ; with a nonpersonal object it is first found in the present quotation of the second half of 2058-61; TLL, Onomast. II: 367, 34 seqq. incantatores: occurs for the first time in Tert., like incantatio (cult. fem. 1, 2, 1), see TLL VII 1: 846, 8 seqq.;

Hoppe, Beitr., 136. Their working-method is described by Hier. in Dan. 2, 2 (498 C): videntur mihi incantatores esse, qui verbis rem peragunt (as opposed to the magi et malefici, 'qui factis rem peragunt'). The incantatio was an essential feature of magic, cf. Apul. mag. 47: igitur (sc. magia) et occulta non minus quam taetra et horribilis plerumque noctibus vigilata et tenebris abstrusa et arbitris solitaria et carminibus murmurata. For more particulars, see Pfaff, art. 'Incantatio', RE IX: 1241-4, Pfister, art 'Epode' (l1t(!lo~), RE,

Suppl. IV: 323-44; Abt, Apol., 41-4. coniectores: a name of predictors of the future and interpreters of dreams already found several times in Plautus

(e.g. Amph. 428) and Cicero (e.g. part. 2, 6; div. 1,45). Enumerations similar to the present one are found in Cic. nat. d. 1,55: haruspices augures harioli vates coniectores; div. 1, 132: non habeo ... nauci Marsum augurem, non

Vlcanos haruspices, non de circo astrologos, non Isiacos coniectores non interpretes somniorum; Quint. instit. 5, 7, 36: haruspicum augurum c~niec torum mathematicorumfides; Arnob. 1,24: haruspices ... coniectores harioli vates et numquam non vani ... fanatici. The verb coniectare is used in an. 46,

5 of the interpretation of dreams (see Waszink, 493), in connection with astrology in pall. 6, 2: qui stellarem (sc. artem) coniectat, and Suet. Nero 6,2:

De genitura eius statim multa et formidolosa multis coniectantibus. See TLL

IV: 313, 43-56. -

Iitterator: the Greek text has ypcxfl.fl.omu~, usually-also by Tert.-translated scriba, which is accordingly used in all other Latin translations of 1 Cor. 1, 20 (cf. Vetus Latina codd. de g; Ambrosiast. = PL 17

1 Cor. 1, 20 (LXX lfl.wpcxv~v, Vulg. stultam fecit) and in quotations of or allusions to Is. 44, 25 (fl.wpcx[vwv, Vulg. stultam faciens) in Tert. in Marc. 4, 25,

5: avertens in posteriora sapientes et cogitationes eorum infatuans; 5, 5, 7 (obj. sapientiam); 5, 6, 1 (sapientia: neuter plural of adj.); Prax. 19, 4 (consWum). An allusion to this part of 1 Cor. 1, 20, in which the verb infatuare is not used, occurs in res. 3, 3: tunc meminero ... ipsam sapientiam saeculi stultitiam nominatam. It should be observed that it is only in the present passage that Tert. applies the words sapientiam saecuti of the quotation to the occult pseudo-sciences, not to human wisdom in general. The same is done by the Ambrosiaster, ib., with regard to astrology. huius saeculi: 'tou x60"fl.ou: for the notion of 6 x60"fl.o~ (ou'tod, see H. Sasse, art. 'xoO"fl.iw, x60"fl.o~', etc., Kittel 3, 867-98 (especially 889 seqq.).

8. mathematice: Tert. winds up with a direct attack on the Christian (9, quidam) who has been the occasion of this whole argument. Nihil scis: 'If you, astrologer, were really clairvoyant, you would have seen (before your conversion) that you would become a Christian and, then, as a Christian would have to give up astrology. But obviously you did not see that. Ergo: nihil scis.' This is, of course, a Tertullianean sophism, or rather a mockery.

This way of thought is different from that of e.g. Jerome (in Is. 4, 7, 12) and Augustine (serm. 119, 2; enarr. in Ps. 140 (141», where the astrologers are said to be blind with regard to what is really important to themselves. debueras: the pluperfect instead of the imperfect is frequently found (see

Hoppe, Beitr., 39-40); it 'emphasizes the remoteness of the event' (Waszink, I~A· , , Aug. c. d. 10, 28 (1, 447, 7-9 D.); Vulg.). Possibly Tert. has here avoided the term scriba deliberately, because he thought the usual sense of this

~cr'tLV crOL fl~plc; ouo~ xA7jpoC; lv 't<{) AO"(~ 'tou't~. Ao"(oc; has here the meaning

'teaching', 'Gospel', cf. ib. 8,4. 14 (by some, e.g. Overbeck, Leyden Translation, Canisius-translation, Conzelmann in his commentary (HdbNT, 7, 54-5),

179). Ipsa '" quae: 'in Tert. 's works ipse is frequently almost equivalent to idem, but in most cases its original meaning still obtains, especially before a relative clause ('the very same')', Waszink 193 (there also literature on this subject); see also LOfst., Per., 65; Svennung, Oros., 67-8. te de periculo suo instrueret: 'would instruct (inform) you of its own danger'; the expression is also found in Ulpian, cf. dig. 27, 9, 5, II: requirere debet eum, qui se

AO"(OC; is interpreted as meaning 'the matter', i.e. the subject under discussion, which is the conferring of the Holy Spirit by means of the imposition of hands; however, this does not produce an essential change of the meaning of the passage); see Preuschen's note on Acts 8, 21 (HdbNT, 7, 51). It is striking that here the translation of AO"(OC; is ratio, which in this connection can only mean 'system, theory, science' (all other versions have sermo). This and the context in which the quotation is given (cf. especially the preceding words nihil tibi futurum cum ista professione) point to the fact that Tert. interprets the passage in the sense that a Christian is not allowed to practise astrology and magic. So this is exactly the reverse of what St. Peter means by these words, spoken to Simon Magus: 'you have nothing to do with the Gospel'.

Are we here once more concerned with an inaccuracy of Tert. caused by quoting from memory (cf. the note on 9, 6 isdem ... apostolis) or has he deliberately changed the tenor of the passage? regna caelorum: for the plural caelorum see Schrijn.-Mohrm., Cypr. 1, 12 and 64-5. The expression is chosen for the sake of parallelism with the following caelo. Regna caelorum is the translation of ~CXcrLAdcx 'tWV oupcxvwv which is used in the NT by Matthew instead of, but with the same content as, the customary ~CXcrLAdcx 'tou awu (also found in Matth. 12, 28; 21, 31. 43); see K. L. Schmidt, art. '~CXcrLAdcx', Kittel in~truat de fortunis pupilli; ib. 27, 8, 1, 3. climacterica: since the days of Hippocrates physicians considered the uneven days, and of these especially the seventh, to be critical in the course of an illness, and in the case of prolonged diseases the corresponding months and years (xP[crLfloL ~fltpCXL, II~V~

, ') U d .

""1

C;,

~VLCXU'tOL.

n er the mfluence of old traditions and Pythagorean ideas this theory developed into a division of the whole span of human life into periods of seven ~r. nine years, of which the last was considered to be critical for being the transition between one period and another. Since the Pythagoreans attached a special value to squares, the forty-ninth and the eighty-first years of a person's life were particularly feared. The sixty-third year, however, was r:g~~ded as preeminently dangerous, since it was critical according to both diVISIOns; consequently it received the name cicVOPOXACXC;, cicvOpoxA<icr't1]C;, 'quod omnem vi~i substantiam frangat atque debilitet', cf. Firm. Mat. math. 4, 20,

3; Censonn. d. nat. 14, 9-15. Although astrology adopted this theory, it developed at the same time its own system of 'critical periods' (XALflcxx't7jP~c;,

XALflcxx't1]pLxol EVLCXU'tO[, fl7jv~c;, ~fltpCXL, WpCXL), based on astrological calculations and divided irregularly over the whole of life. A striking illustration is offered by the ironical description of the visit of a certain Regulus to the sick wife of :iso, give~ by Plin. ep., 2, 20, 2 seqq.: ille ... quo die, qua hora nata esset, tnterrogaVlt ... 'habes', inquit, 'c1imactericum tempus, sed evades'. He then c?nsults a haruspex, after which he sacrifices and then asserts exta cum slderum .signi/icatione congruere. This theory was also applied to all dangers threatenmg human existence, cf. Gell. 3, lO, 9: pericula quoque vitae fortunarumque omnium, quae c1imacteras Chaldaei appellant. It is in this sense

1, 582, 15 seqq. The loss of the ~CXcrLAdcx 'tou awu is identical with the loss of the (w~, with the a<ivcx'toc;, cf. the list of sins 1 Cor. 6, 9-lO; Gal. 5,19-21, and see comm. on 1, 2: perisse. So Tert. argues that the astrologer need not hope to be saved, that Death (mors secunda) will be his share. digitus: used in calculating, cf. apol. 19, 5: multis instrumentis cum digitorum subputatoriis gesticulis asserendum (E) est, and see TLL V, 1: Il25, 12 seqq.; here especially used of astrological calculations (Babylonii numeri, Hor. carm. 1, 11, 2-3), cf. the passage of Pliny's letter quoted above; see also [Ambr.] acta Sebast. th~t Tert. is using c1imacterica here. We find c1imactericus as an adj. in Plin. mm., C~nsorinus and Sidon. ep. 8, 11, 9; the only other instances of the substantival use of the neuter plural c1imacterica

= XALflcxx't7jP~c;, are [Ambros.] acta Sebast. 16, 55 (PL 17, 1137 C) and probably 16, 56 (1138 A), cf. TLL III: 1349, 17-28. See BOUChe-Leclercq, 316-32; Gundel, Sterne 275300; Boll, art. 'XALflcxx't7jP~c;', RE XI: 843-4; Kroll, art. 'Iatromathematik:' RE

IX: 802-4 -

praecanl't· Mesna t' d'

. . .

. '

. r S rea mg praecavlt IS mcorrect: precogni-

16,54 (PL 17, 1137 A). -

radius: a small rod, used by mathematicians and astronomers (astrologers) to make drawings on a board strewed with fine sand, cf. e.g. Verg. Aen. 6, 849-50: caelique meatus / describent radio et surgentia sidera dicent; Hier. in Ezech. 4; Hug, art. 'Radius', RE XXV: 39.

abutitur caelo: the astrologer uses heaven for an unlawful purpose, that is, he abuses the creation, which is one of the reasons for his damnation. For a further elaboration of this idea see spect. 2; cult. fem. 1, 8, 3-6; apol. 42, 2; cor. 6, 3 seqq. tl~n, ~ot prevention is the province of the astrologer; note also the parallelism with !nstrueret. For the form, cf. Marc. 4, 40, 2: praecanit (without variants)' also m. cam. Chr. 6, 1 Kroymann reads praecanebat following the Trecensi~

Ch. lO. The profession of schoolmaster and teacher (PraeCl~ebat rell.) but in Iud. lO, 18 he reads praecinebat also following the Trecensls (praecanebat P N F R). Non est tibi ... ratione: Acts 8, 21: oux

'Undoubtedly Christians are not allowed to be schoolmasters or teachers since such men are involved in a variety of idolatrous practices: first they have to

IV, .) U KV1:.I, K J:. MAKJ\..~

10, REMARKS

make known the gods, their names, genealogies, etc. which, of course, contributes to idolatry, and, second, they have to observe the heathen festivals for the sake of their incomes (§ 1). A schoolmaster cannot take part in the Quinquatria were of special importance, because school began in March and at this festival the schoolmaster had to strive for new pupils. Ovid, Fast; III 829-30, advises the magistri not to despise Minerva, because she attracts new pupils (discipulos attrahit ilia novos).-The schoolmaster had, of course, to manifest himself as such at the festivity. The tabula VII idolorum must have had that function. It must have been a kind of emblem of the schoolmaster.

Quinquatria without the tablet with the names of the seven idols (planets). He has to dedicate the first fee of a new pupil to Minerva; and when he eats from it, although he does not eat something belonging to a sacrifice, he perpetrates an idolatrous act (§ 2). The same holds good of other honoraria, like strenae,

Septimontium, etc. Moreover, he has to take part in other idolatrous activities. In honour of Flora the school has to be garlanded, etc. (§ 3). The b. Ipsam primam novi discipuli stipem. The first fee of the new pupil, paid at the Quinquatria, had to be dedicated "to the honour and the name of Minerva". One should notice the pronoun ipsa here. It links this second sentence with the previous one: "That first fee itself (about which I spoke just now) has to be dedicated ... " . whole pomp of the devil has to be assisted by him. Who could maintain that this is allowed to any Christian?

One may object: 'If teaching is not allowed to a Christian, then learning is not so either. This means denying him admittance not only to human education but also to the studia divina' (§ 4). We must, indeed, admit that a Christian cannot do without literary instruction and also that he cannot make a division into acceptable and unacceptable parts, admitting the one and refusing the other. So a Christian may go to school. This is not inconsequent, since the situation of the pupil is different from that of the teacher; hence it is understandable that the Christian is allowed to be the one and not the other.

If a Christian teaches, he confirms the preaching of the heathen gods contained in literature (§ 5); he calls them 'gods', which the Bible forbids. So from the very beginning he builds up the faith in the devil. How could he, c. What does this dedication mean? Some authors think that the schoolmaster had to give the first fee to Minerva, e.g. 1. G. Frazer in his note on Ovid. Fasti III 830: " ... which it appears he had to hand over to Minerva"

(Loeb ed.). But the rest of the sentence implies that the schoolmaster uses this money for his maintenance. Tertullian argues: even if one may say that it is not an idolothytum (i.e. something formally sacrificed to the idols), which of course a Christian may not eat, it nevertheless contaminates the schoolmaster when he eats from what he has dedicated "to the name and the honour of Minerva". Obviously this dedication does not mean a sacrificial offering, but the schoolmaster calls the fee Minerval, thus giving honour to the name of Minerva. being a catechist of the idols, not be guilty of idolatry? As a pupil, however, a Christian will behave like the man who receives a cup with poisoned contents from somebody not aware of this fact; he will accept it, but not drink from d. Elaboration of the argument. The next two sentences are an elaboration of the argument with regard to the Minerval. First he says: "I ask you

(Quid?), is there less contamination (in this than in a idololythum in the strict sense of the word)-and are, therefore, earnings dedicated to the name and the honour of the idols better?" And he continues: Quam Minervalia, quam

Saturnalia (= Tam Min ervalia , quam Saturnalia) ... In other words:

Minervalia are as bad as Saturnalia. It is obvious that this statement is conit (§ 6).

The necessity of instruction, then, is a valid excuse. Moreover, just as it is easier for a Christian student to avoid the heathen festivities than for a teacher, it is easier not to teach literature, than not to study it (§ 7). '

Remarks nected with what precedes, because by itself it seems senseless. Now Tertullian was dealing with the Quinquatria, a festival in honour of Minerva. Does

Minervalia refer to this feast? However, Minervalia is not an official name (see below). Moreover, the Quinquatria as such were not the subject of the previous passage, but the behaviour of the schoolmasters on this occasion, especially the prima stips, called Minerval. We think that Tertullian is playing on this word and says: Those Minervalia, i.e. those stipes, are as idolatrous as the Saturnalia are idolatrous. Now the heathen festivity par excellence was the Saturnalia. Even the humblest slave was involved in it. How could those

Minervalia not contaminate the schoolmaster who takes part in the Quinquatria? a. The ludimagister and the Quinquatria. 'What schoolmaster, if he is without the list of the seven idols, will still celebrate the Quinquatria?' The implications of this question are (1) that the schoolmaster has to partake in the festivities of the Quinquatria and (2) that he cannot do so without a tablet with the seven idols (= planets) on it. Two questions arise: why did the schoolmaster have to partake in these festivities? What is the function of the tablet with the seven idols? (Obviously the carrying of this tablet is considered by Tertullian as an idolatrous act and hence forbidden to a Christian.) The schoolmaster had to partake in the Quinquatria, because at that occasion he earned a part of his (slender) income in the form of a tip. Moreover, the

10,1 11:\3 10'<'

e. Teacher: no-Student: yes. If it is not allowed to a Christian to be a teacher because of the contacts with idolatry implied, it seems consequent to state that it is not allowed to be a pupil of somebody who teaches those matters. When

Tertullian maintains that, because of the necessity of learning, it is allowed for a Christian to be a student of literature, his attitude seems to be inconsistent. However, Tertullian is convinced that it is not. He argues that the ways of contact with idolatry on the part of teacher and student are different, because the mental process of teaching is different from that of learning

(diversa est enim ratio discendi et docendi). The student can keep at a distance from certain parts of the instructed matter; the teacher can not. The teacher is a kind of catechist of the idols; the pupil can act like the man who accepts a poison, but does not drink it. elementary instruction is under discussion. It should be explained as a rhetorical element.

We do not agree with this interpretation. Apart from the fact that Tert. speaks of sed et ceteris professoribus litterarum and of saecularia studia, which cannot be explained away as the author tries to do, we think that the phrase Videamus igitur necessitatem litteratoriae eruditionis, respiciamus ex parte eam admitti non posse, ex parte vitari cannot be understood as referring to the instruction in reading and writing. (See our explanation of this phrase, below 196). Moreover, if Tert. had only the art of reading and writing in mind, his argument in 10, 6 (At cum fidelis haec discit, si iam sapit, qui sit

... ) would be pointless. In our view it is obvious that Tert. is referring to the dangers of the idolatrous contents of heathen instruction, particularly of the saecularia studia, which, as Bayer himself agrees, means 'literarische

Bildungskultur', i.e. the higher studies. f. The attitude of the pupil. Describing the attitude of the pupil who is instructed in heathen matters (At cum fidelis haec discit), Tertullian distinguishes two cases. The first is, si iam sapit, qui sit, "if he already understand who he is", i.e. if he already understands what it means to be a Christian (there is no reason to conjecture with Oehler quid sit, which would mean that the student understands the subject of instruction); in this case he will, of course, not accept the instruction. The second case is that the pupil does not yet understand 'who he is' or is only beginning to understand his being a Christian. What will he do, according to Tertullian? He says: prius oportet sapere quod prius didicit, id est de deo et fide. Here Tert. does not say what the pupil will do but what he ought to do. Formally the argument loses herewith its stringency. The reason of this turn lies in the fact that Tert. is thinking here of children. Only children can be said to have been instructed first about God and faith. So the verb oportet refers to what as a matter of l. de ludimagistris ... ceteris professoribus Iitterarum: from their seventh till approximately their twelfth year children were given their primary schooling (primae litterae) by the ludimagister, who taught them reading, writing and the elements of arithmetic {cf. pall. 6, 2: de meo (sc. pallio) vestiuntur et primus informator litterarum et primus enodator vocis et primus numerorum harenarius et grammaticus et rhetor, etc.). After the letters, syllables, words and small sentences, practice-matter consisted of versus, dicta clarorum virorum and electi ex poetis maxime loci (Quint. inst. 1, 1, 35-6), which were learnt by heart and recited, often after having been dictated. After this and until accepting the toga virilis children could attend the lessons of the grammaticus, whose program consisted of recte loquendi scientia and poetarum enarratio (Quint. inst. 1, 4, 2), i.e. language and literature. The explanation of the texts was concerned both with form and content (poetarum pertractatio, verborum interpretatio and historiarum cognitio, Cic. de orat. 1, course will happen in those children. Hence he can assert that what will happen in the first case (si iam sapit) will happen a fortiori (multo magis) in the second (si nondum sapit).

187). The latter department included history, geography and other sciences; the emphasis, however, was on mythology (see below). With the grammaticus, too, the texts were learnt by heart and recited. St. Augustine gives a good characterization of these forms of tuition (con! 1, 13; in this and the following chapters the instruction in mythology is elaborately rejected).

Finally, one could attend the lessons of the rhetor, lasting for an indefinite period of time. This was a formal schooling, only concerning itself with the technical side of oratory (Cicero's and Quintilian's ideal of a broad cultural education of the orator has not been realized in practice). See Marrou, Education, 258-89, and St. Aug., 3-157; Vergeest, 13 seqq. It is clear from the argument that Tert. is concerned with schoolmasters as well as with teachers. The word litterae has the complex meaning of 'reading, writing, language and literature (with everything connected with it),; for the omission of de before g. Recently C. M. M. Bayer put the question as to the kind of instruction which Tertullian had in mind in this chapter ('Tertullian zur Schulbildung der

Christen: Welche Art des Unterrichts ist Gegenstand der Erbrterungen im 10.

Kapitel des Werkes De idololatria?', Romische Quartalschrift fur christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 78 (1983), 186-191). He discusses the terms used in this chapter (litterae, eruditio, litteratura and saecularia studia) and comes to the conclusion that it is elementary instruction which he has in mind and which he allows the Christian to follow. He admits that it is indeed the professores litterarum who are mentioned in 10, 1 but, according to the author, Tert. does not deal with them in the rest of the chapter. He admits also that saecularia studia seems to point in the direction of a more advanced kind of instruction, but the expression stands in a context in which only the

JV,! lV, l-IV,~ lOJ

ceteris, see LOfstedt, Z. Spr. Tert., 61. affines ... idololatriae: in Tert. affinis with a genitive (found from Terent. Heaut. 215 onwards) means either

'related to, akin to' (e.g. Herm. 29, 2: affinis eius (sc. terrae) caro nostra; pud. 5, 4: moechia affinis idololatriae (cf. idol. 12, 5: idololatriae affinitates; idol. 14, 3) or 'having a part in' (e.g. pat. 11, 8: numquid inpatientes pads affines?), 'capable of' (e.g. an. 24, 2: (animam) oblivion is affinem, but ib. at festivals schoolmasters received gifts in money can quite well be expressed by means of the verb suppetere 'to be present, to be in store'. Several scholars wrongly supposed that during or with the help of these festivals schoolmasters calculated their incomes; it is on this account that Mercerus conjectured supputent, which was adopted by Oehler and Reifferscheid. As after ut qui

Tert. not only uses a subjunctive but also an indicative (e.g. apol. 21, 3; 24, I: oblivionis capacem an imam) or, as in the present passage, in connection with an offence or crime, 'involved in, implicated in, guilty of' (cf. pat. 7, 6: affines cupiditatis; thus already Rhet. Her. 4, 12: huius sceleris qui sunt affines; Landgraf's note on Cic. Rosc. Amer. 18, p. 50); in res. 32,5: discendi magis affinis quam praesumendi, the adjective is almost equivalent to cupidus. See TLL I: 1218, 55 seqq., and 1219, 3 seqq.; Waszink, 308. _ multimodae: the adj. multimodus, which is a retrograde formation from the adverb multimodis (cf. TLL VIII: 1589,54) is found for the first time in Tert.

(also an. 52, 3), unless we are to assume that in Lucr. 3, 855-6: motus materiai

/ multimodis quam sint the reading multimodi of the two main mss. 0 and Q is the correct one (Diels and Martin accept this reading; Bailey rejects it with the not particularly valid argument: 'there is no other trace of the adj.'). _ deos nationum praedicare: these words are explained by the subsequent nomina ... enuntiare. Of course the ludimagister, too, provided mythological explanations of his text, but as a part of the poetarum enarratio, this explication was the special province of the grammaticus; cf. Sen. ep. 88, 3; Quint. inst. I, 2, 14; Cic. Verr. II I, 47-8. With regard to the knowledge in this field high standards were imposed on the teacher, cf. Iuv. 7, 229 seqq.; Tiberius was fond of testing it by questions, cf. Suet. Tib. 70, 5. Quintilian censured

11; 46, 7; orat. 6,4; see Waltzing, Comm., 94; Hofm., Synt., 713) Gelenius' reading suppetant is unnecessary: suppetent is a gnomic future; cf. in the next sentence Quis ludimagister ... Quinquatria frequentabit?

2. tabula septem idolorum: 'the list of the seven idols', i.e. of the seven planet-gods, after which the days of the week were called, cf. Petron. 30, 3: duae tabulae in utroque poste defixae, quarum ... altera lunae cursum stellarumque septem imagines pictas (sc. habebat); et qui dies boni quique incommodi essent ... notabantur; see also Tib. 1, 3, 18, and from Tert. nat.

1, 13, 3: vos ... , qui etiam in laterculum septem dierum solem recepistis (in TLL VII, 2: 1002, 21 wrongly quoted as bapt. 1, 13, 3); Schneider ad loco observes that laterculus with the meaning 'register', 'list' is used for the first time by Tert. in this passage and in Valent. 29, 4. The planetary week, which came into use in Hellenistic times, has its origin in the astrological belief that each day is subject to the power of one of the planet-gods. Consequently, its propagation accompanied that of the astral religions and astrology (cf. comm. on ch. 9). This propagation can be traced back to the age of Augustus. On this subject are of fundamental importance F. Boll, art. 'Hebdomas', RE VII:

2547-78, and E. Schiirer, 'Die siebenUigige Woche im Gebrauch der christlichen Kirche der ersten drei J ahrhunderte', ZNTW 6 (1905), 1-66; cf. also E. Maass, Tagesgdtter, 263-83; Cumont, Ant. Class. 4 (1935), 43, and Rei. or., 155.287, n. 25: Wendland, Kultur, 157-8 and 177. Quinquatria: a variant of Quinquatrus, formed on the analogy of the names of other festivals: it is found not only in later literature (the first instances are Suet.

Nero 34, 2; Domit. 4,4) and in glosses (e.g. Corp. Gloss. Lat. 2, p. 167,31; 4, p. 384, 8 Quinquatria Minervalia; cf. the note on 10, 3 Minervalia), but also in the calendars of Philocalus and Silvius (CIL F, p. 260-1) and the Menol.

Rust. Colot. (ib. p. 280). The form is censured by Charisius (1, 81,20 Keil) but accepted by Priscianus (2, 309, 12-7 Keil). Originally it was a festival in honour of Mars, celebrated on the 19th of March. However, this day came to be considered as a Minerva-festival, because the temple of this goddess on the Aventine was consecrated on this day. Afterwards we find the Quinquatrus extended to five days (19 till 23 March; it is uncertain whether this was already the case in 168 B.C., as is implied by Livy, 44, 20, 1: legati ex

Macedonia Quinquatribus ultimis ... venerunt (the wording may be Livy's own or that of his source). Related to this is the fact that the name, which exagg~ration in this matter (inst. 1, 8, 18-21). See Marrou, St. Aug., 128-31, and Education, 377-8; Vergeest, 72-3. genealogias, fabulas: apart from a fragment of Suetonius in Diomedes (I, 482, 33 Keil = Suet. frg. p. 16, 8 R.) genealogia Occurs for the first time in Tert., especially with reference to the Gnostics, e.g. praescr. 33,8; cam. Chr. 24, 9; an. 18,4 (see TLL VI, 2: 1769,

35 seqq.). The characterization of their doctrine as fabulae et genealogiae interminabiles (praescr. 7, 7; cf. Valent. 3, 4) was familiar to Tert. from I Tim. I, 4 (see Dibelius' note, HdbNT, 13, 10). In the present passage the two notions are connected with reference to heathendom, as often in apologetic literature. This is easy to understand, since genealogies are an essential part of the myths. In both cases fabulae has a derogatory meaning, cf. apol. 12,

1: quantum ... de deis vestris, nomina solummodo video quorundam veterum mortuorum et fabulas audio et sacra de fabulis recognosco. quaeque: cf. the note on 11, 3. sollemnia festaque: festum is equivalent to dies festus; sollemne means id quod die festo agitur, cf. Colum. 2, 21, 5: sollemnia festorum; Suet. Nero, 34, 3: sollemnia Quinquatruum. ut quibus ... suppetent: It is unnecessary to alter the lectio tradita, as the established practice that

JU,L

IV,£.. actually meant post diem quintum Idus, was erroneously considered to refer to the period of five days (cf. e.g. Ovid fast. 3,810); for the explanation and refutation of this incorrect interpretation, see Varro ling. 6, 14; Gell. 2, 21,

7; Festus p. 304-6 Lindsay. As Minerva was the patroness of handicraft and artistic skill, the festival was celebrated not only by artisans, artists (cf. Fasti

Praen., elL P, p. 234: artificum dies) and doctors, but also, and enthusiastically, by schoolmasters, cf. Ovid fast. 3, 829-30: nec vos, turba fere censu fraudata, magistri, spernite (sc. Pallada): disci pulos adtrahit ilia sumptibus eruditos; et quod in corbonam pro peccato virgo vel vidua vel totam substantiam suam effundens quilibet pauper obtulerat, hoc Kalendariam strenam et Saturnaliciam sportulam et Minervale munus grammaticus et orator aut in sumptus domesticos aut in templi stipes aut in sordida scorta convertit; Varro r.r. 3, 2, 18, where Axius says: recipe me quaeso discipulum villaticae pastionis, and Merula answers: qui simulac promiseris

Minerval, incipiam (it is beyond doubt that Iuv. 10, 114-7 does not refer to this, but for the rest the interpretation of this passage is a difficult question, see the notes of Friedlander and Duff). The Minerval was not the yearly wages

(thUS Altheim), but a gift in money (thus Wissowa). This is not only evident from the way in which it is discussed by St. Jerome, but also from the present passage. It is indicated by the word stips, which does not mean 'wages' but 'tip, small gift in money' (see E. Flinck, Ann. A cad. Scient. Fennicae, ser. B tom. XI, 10 (Helsingfors 1921),63-70; L. Deubner, Glolta 3 (1912), 39), it is novos. Still in late antiquity pupils had a holiday during this festival, cf.

Symm. ep. 5, 85, 3. See Wissowa, ReI., 253-4 and art. 'Minerva', Roscher, 2, 2985-7; Altheim, art. 'Minerva', RE XV, 2: 1778-80 and Rom. ReI. Oesch.

1, 196-9; Warde Fowler, Festivals, 57-62; Latte, RRO, 361 seqq. See also the commentaries of Frazer and Bomer on Ovid fast. 3,809 seqq. tamen frequentabit: it has been attempted to eliminate the difficulties offered by this sentence by reading tamen non instead of tamen or by splitting up the sentence and putting a question-mark after idolorum and a full stop after frequentabit.

The former attempt serves no purpose: it is only the meaning which is changed (which, as will appear, is unnecessary), and the structure of the sentence which is responsible for the trouble, remains the same. The second solution' which was elaborately defended by Hartel, 1, 43-4, is impossible, because i~ that case tam en must be restrictive (cf. 12, 5), as is pointed out by Hartel himself (he paraphrases: 'jeder beniitzt die heidnische Wochentafel und besucht als Mitglied der Zunft wenigstens das Zunftfest'). However, this restriction is incompatible with the preceding words sollemnia festaque

(plural!) observare and with the subsequent argument, from which it is clear that ~he schoolmasters had to celebrate a variety of heathen festivals (cf. put on one level with the strenae (for stips used to denote strena, cf. e.g. Ovid fast. 1, 189. 192. 219) and with the presents given on the occasion of other festivals. These gifts were welcome to the schoolmasters, for their wages were slender (cf. Ovid fast. 3,829, quoted on p. 186); see Marrou, Education, 362.

370. 380-1 (the rhetor earned more than the ludimagister and the grammaticus); Vergeest, 18-9; Marquardt, Privatleben, 94-6. For that matter, the use of the terms vectigalia and quaestus (10, 1-2) might point to the fact that these gifts were considered as wages; see also the note on 13,4: sunt quidam dies munerum, quae apud alios honoris titulum, apud alios mercedis debitum expungunt. Literature: see the note on Quinquatria, and cf. also Marquardt,

Privatleben, 94-6; Bliimner, Privataltertiimer, 315-6. 324-5. 334. ut ... vitetur: ut ... pro idololatria vitetur is a consecutive clause to ipsam ... consecrat; etsi ... dicatur should be joined to ut ... vitetur: 'so that, even if it may be said that in name he is not contaminated by < consuming> a sacrifice to an idol and dedicated to an idol, he ought to be avoided on account of idolatry, because in fact he is contaminated by living from a tip dedicated to a goddess, which is something like an idolothytum (i.e. food or drink which is formally dedicated to an idol)'. etsi ... dicatur: of etsi with a subjunctive hardly any certain instances are found before the Dig., 'ubi hunc usum vigere iam ex eo apparet quod indo et coni. promiscue ponuntur' (TLL V, 2: 977,

4-5; cf. the material ib. 977, 5-51). It is evident that Tert. has adopted this construction from the idiom of lawyers. Cf. also Kiihn.-Stegm. 2, 440 (this subject is not clearly discussed in Hofmann and Hofm.-Szant.; it is to be regretted that Claesson does not make any distinction between the various functions of etsi. In an. etsi is found 20 times with an ind., 5 times with a subj., and 11 times sine verbo). non profanatus alicui idolo: from the dative it is clear that profanatus must have the meaning 'dedicated to'; we do not know of any other passage where the old-fashioned verb profanare is used especl~ly the conclusion: omnis diaboli pompa frequentatur). However, there IS no need for any alteration. Sine tabula septem idolorum is a (predicative) adjunct to ludimagister, i.e. we have to supply wv; for this, see the note on 5, 4: suspensi in modum. The meaning is: 'what schoolmaster will celebrate the Quinquatria, if he does not use the heathen weekly calendar?',

?r, as Oehler correctly paraphrases: 'nullus magister tabulam septem Idolorum non habet, qui Quinquatria frequentare seque in censu et numero

~u~im~gistrorum haberi vult.' So Quinquatria frequentabit is a paraphrase of WIll Sh.1I be ab.le to be a schoolmaster'. This paraphrase was possible, because

~he Q~m~uatna were the special festival of the schoolmasters (see above). The ~ntentlOn IS clear: to be a schoolmaster implies already in itself the practice of Id~latry. Ipsam '" consecrat: Tert. is alluding to the Minervale munus or ~mer~al, which schoolmasters received on occasion of the QUinquatria, cf.

Hler. m Eph. 3, 6, 4 (PL 26, 573 C-574 A): legant (viz., Eph. 6, 4) episcopi atq~e presbyteri, qui fi/ios suos saecularibus Iitteris erudiunt et faciunt comoedlas legere et mimorum turpia scripta can tare, de ecclesiasticis forsitan

IV,L

IV,~ in this way, because projanatus de idolothyto in itself implies the consumption of the offering. pro idololatria: for pro used with the meaning propter, see Hofm., Synt., 534; Hofm.-Szant., Synt., 270, where much literature is mentioned. Gelenius' conjecture pro idololatra is quite superfluous and grammatically incorrect, since Tert. would have written ut idololatres. It is worth while to state that the forms idololatres and -en only occur in the present treatise and in De pudicitia, cf. Claesson S.V., 706 (the forms -ae and -as, which Claesson rightly regards as belonging to -es, not to -a, which is found nowhere in Tert., also occur in pud. only). Quid ... nuncupatus?: this sentence has come down to us in a corrupt form; undoubtedly the main fault is eo quem (A B). Kroymann's conjecture ( ... pro idololatria vitatur, quid minus est inquinamenti in eo, quem praestat (sc. idololatrem) quaestus, etc.) is too violent to be correct. The interpretation of Oehler, who reads eo quam, is incomprehensible. Hartel, 1, 44-5, retains the eo quem of A B; he supposes eo to be a dative in the singular and joins quem to praestat as an object, supplying idololatran (sic) from the preceding sentence (,Wie, ist jener weniger befleckt, welchen der dem Namen und der Ehre der Gotzen geweihte Erwerb zum Gotzendiener macht?'). However, as was remarked by Hoppe (Beitr.,

21), eo cannot be a dat. sing., since this is inconsistent with Tert. 's usage. The only way to obtain a comprehensible sentence which fits the context is to follow Reifferscheid in putting a question-mark after quid and reading eoque instead of eo quem (which is only a very slight alteration): 'What do you think? Is there less contamination < in this than in a idolothytum in the strict sense of the word> and are, therefore, earnings, which are dedicated to the name and the honour of the idols, better?' So eo refers to the words minus est inquinamenti. The current of thought of the entire passage runs as follows: referring to a person. Perhaps we may compare Salv. De gubern. dei 8,2, 10: quis ... illi idolo (viz., the African virgo Caelestis) non initiatus? Quis non a stirpe ipsajorsitan ac nativitate votus? Nec loquor de hominibus sicut vita ita etiam projessione paganis, et qui sicut projani erant errore, sic nomine.

Cf. also Acta SS. Agapes, Chionae, Irenes, etc. 3 (p. 393 Ruinart), where, when asked why the martyrs refuse to eat the sacrificial meat, Agape replies: minime decet satanae devotam me esse. It can not be doubted that Tert. uses this rare word in order to make a pun on projanatus in the sense of pollutus

(,desecrated, defiled'), with which it is often connected, cf. e.g. Lact. d.i. 5,

9, 17: qui sanctissimam quoque corporis sui partem contra jas omne polluant acprojanent; Gaudent. tract. 15,21,147-51 Glueck; Rufin. Arrian. 5,3 (270,

22, 3 Engelbrecht): aures projanas et pollutas conscientias. A similar pun is probably found in Sulp. Sev. chron. 2, 20, 1: Hic (sc. Matthatias, Iohannis filius) cum a regiis cogeretur edicto parere, egregia constantia projana contemnens, Hebraeum publice projanantem in ore omnium iugulavit (the victim projanavit, 'profaned', but he did so projanando 'by sacrificing' (two sentences before we read: per universas urbes palam in plateis litabatur».

Thus, according to Tert., it is only in name that the schoolmaster is not 'dedicated to an idol' and, therefore, 'desecrated' and 'defiled' as a Christian.

verbo tenus: 'in name, nominally'; the expression is formed for the first time in Cic. leg. 3, 14. See Wolfflin, ALL 1, 421 seqq. (especially 424). The words should be joined to non projanatus de idolothyto: in name the schoolmaster is not contaminated by < consuming> a sacrifice to an idol. de idolothyto: the word idolothytum only occurs in Latin from the Vetus

Latina and Tert. onwards. It is one of the demands made by the apostles assembled in council that one should abstain from things sacrified to idols

(Acts 15, 29 and 21, 25; cf. idol. 24, 3). This rule was rigidly enforced all times, cf. Apoc. 2, 20; Did. 6, 3 (see the note by R. Knopf, HdbNT, Erg. Bd.,

21). St. Augustine remarks that it is better to starve to death than to eat what has been sacrified to an idol (bon. coniug. 16, 18; cf. ep. 46, 11; 47, 6); in Tert. e.g. spect. 13, 4; ieiun. 15, 5. The reason for this was found in the exposition of St. Paul in 1 Cor. 10, 14 seqq. (especially 19-20): by sacrificing to the gods and especially by partaking of that which has been sacrificed to them a more intimate communion with the demons is established (see Lietzmann's comm.ad loc., HdbNT, 9,47-52; Dolger, 'Der Kelch der Damonen',

AC 4 (1934),266-70, and Exorz., 20-2). esse: Oehler, Hartel, Kroymann and Bohm regard this infinitive not as an auxiliary to projanatus but as an equivalent of edere. In that case, however, the construction of the clause etsi

... dicatur becomes very forced. Besides, Tert. never uses this form (he does use edere, e.g. spect. 13, 4; Marc. 2, 10, 1; an. 16, 4). It is true, in the present passage the form esse might have been chosen for metrical reasons (esse dicatur, the excellent clausula 1 j"). However, it is unnecessary to interpret esse

'the dedication of the prima stips to Minerva is an act of idolatry, even if it may be said that the money does not, on account of this dedication, become a idolothytum in the strict sense of the word. But is there an essential difference between these two acts? Do earnings dedicated to pagan gods contaminate less than a idolothytum in the strict sense, in other words: is it better to partake of food bought with this money than to eat from what has been sacrificed to the heathen gods (idolothytum)?' So this last sentence is especially connected with etsi ... dicatur. Here Tert. revokes in its entirety the restriction which he made before (but which was already robbed of its sting by the addition of verbo tenus). He even lends a more general character to his proposition by speaking of quaestus. From the use of this word it is clear that he is not only thinking of the Minerval. This is confirmed by the next sentence: there are more heathen festivals during which the schoolmasters receive gratuities. As, consequently, quaestus also refers to these presents,

Hartel's idolorum instead of idolo (A B) is certainly correct. Besides, this emendation is supported by the plural nominibus et honoribus (on the other

l~U

1U,2-IU,J

10,3 IYI

Romance. It seems to be a Sabine word meaning 'health' (cf. Lyd. mens. 4, 4 (68, 16-8 W.): 6 o~ 'EA7ttOt<XIIO~ &11 't~ 7tept ~Op'tWII cr'tp1jIl<XII 't~1I 0y(et<XII -r1i L<X~(IIWII hand, in the case of Minerva we find the singular: honori et nomini; Kellner, who retains idolo, is forced to give the impossible translation: 'der Erwerb ... , der durch Namen und Ehrenerweisungen den Gotzen geweiht ist').-In the literal sense inquinamentum is found since Vitruvius, figuratively only since the Vetus Latina and Tert., see TLL VII, 1: 1810, 12-3; Diercks, 148; Stephan,

CPWIIU Alyecr9<x( CP7]crt; Symm. reI. 15, 1. The form strenuae already occurs in an inscription from Hadrian's time (CIL VI: 33885, 8; cf. also ib. 10234, 14).

Consentius censures it as a barbarism (OL 5, 396, 26-9, 397, 34 seq.).This form seems to have arisen, because the word was connected with strenuus (to which it is indeed etymologically related), cf. Symm. reI. 15, 1: nomen

(strenarum) indicio est viris strenuis haec convenire virtute; Non. 16, 32 (p.

24 L.): strena dicta est a strenuitate. Pompon ius Pictoribus: adside, siqua ventura est alia strena strenuae; a 10th cent. gloss. in Nonius' cod. Harleianus (cf.

Lindsay, ALL 9, 598): strenuis hominibus solet accidere aliquid prosperum, unde strena dicitur etiam vulgo. See Deubner, Glotta 3 (1912), 38-9; Ernout,

Elem. dial. 34.231-2; Ernout-Meillet, s.v.; Walde-Hofm., S.V.; J.

Ooteghem, 'Etrennes', Les etudes c1assiques 8 (1939), 86-7; Flinck, Ann.

A cad. Scient. Fennicae, ser. B tom. XI, 10 (Helsingfors 1921), 50-74. Septimontium: almost certainly Tert. refers to the festival of the seven mountains, celebrated on December 11th. It was originally related to the seven mountain-communities from the time before the wall traditionally assigned to Servius Tullius enclosed the city, cf. Antistius Labeo ap. Festus pp. 474-6 L.;

Festus p. 458 L. (in this context it is understandable that F. Muller in one of the theses added to his inaugural dissertation De veterum, inprimis

Romanorum, studiis etymologicis (Utrecht 1910) proposed a derivation of the first part of the word from s(a)eptum, not from septem). Varro already explains the name ab his septem montibus, in quis sita urbs est (ling. 6, 24), and during the empire this festival was regarded as a commemoration of the completion of the synoikismos by the incorporation of the seventh hill, cf.

Pluto Quaest. Rom. 69: 'to o~ Le7t't0f.t0uII'ttoli O(youcrw &7tt 't~ 'tOil e~oof.toll AOCPOII 'tU

123. nuncupatus: this verb is perhaps used here on purpose, in order to suggest that the stips was only 'in name' given to the goddess.

3. Quam ... quam = tam ... quam, cf. 3, 3 with the note. Minervalia may be put here instead of Quinquatria for the sake of the parallelism with Saturnalia. This unofficial name of the festival is further found only in Servo

(Serg.) comm. in Donat. (OL 4, 434, 32) and in glosses, e.g. COL 3, 239, 32:

't,x 1t(xII<x91jIl<Xt<X quinquatries Minervalia and ib. 2, 393, 15; 4, 384, 8; 5, 311, 1.

However, see Remark d. Saturnalia: the original day of the Saturnalia was December 17th, but as a popular festival it had been extended to seven days already in the first century B.C. (cf. Macr. Sat. 1, 10,3). During the empire the popularity of the festival first increased; later, however, it was overshadowed by the Kalendae lanuariae. Yet it was celebrated as late as the fifth century, as is evident from the calendar of Polemius Silvius (A.D. 448-9), where, however, it is no longer designated by the original heathen name but is calledferiae servorum (CIL P, p. 279); cf. Auson.fer. 15-6 (p. 105 Peiper):

Saturnalia ... festa ... servorum, cum famulantur eri. quem: Kroymann (Q. c., 26) justly remarks: 'inepta est Gelenii coniectura quae pro quem;

Saturnalia enim sub tempore Saturnalium celebrari, id dicere dementis est'.

Quem refers, of course, to Saturni. For this use of celebrare (TLL III: 745, 40: 'i.q. deos, numina religiose colere') see ib. 40-62. The first instance of this use is Verg. Aen.8, 76: semper honore meo, semper celebrabere donis. _ etiam serviculis: serviculus is a hapax (Hoppe, Beitr., 140). Tert. created this diminutive in order to emphasize that 'even the humblest slaves have to participate in this celebration'. strenae: this word denotes the gifts that were exchanged on New Year's Day. They mainly consisted of money (for which the term stips was used, e.g. Ovid fast. 1, 189 seqq.; Suet. Cal. 42;

Audollent, Defix. tab., 137). That on this occasion schoolmasters received a gift in money from (the parents of) their pupils is mentioned, apart from the present passage and Hier. loc. cit. on p. 186-7 (Kalendariam strenam) by Liban. or. 9, 16-7 (1,397, 11 Foerster) and descr. Kal. 9 (8,475,6-9 F.).'For further particulars, see the note on 14, 6. Here (but not in 14, 6) the Agob. has the form strenuae. However, strenae is the normal form of the word which is also found in the glosses (COL 2, XXXVII. 316, 21. 494, 12. 520:

25; only 2, 189, the form strenna, as in the present passage in Mesnart's edition), which gave rise to the later derivations strenicus (= strenarum cupidus) and strenare (= strenam mittere), and which has been incorporated in 7tOAet 7tpocrx<X't<Xllef.t7]97jIl<xt x<xt 't~1I 'PWf.t7]1I ~7t't<XAOCPOIi yellicr9<xt; Lydus, mens. 4, 155

(172, 23 seqq. W.). It is clear from the present passage that in Tert.'s days this festival was also celebrated in Africa; this is easy to understand in view of the interpretation given to it. That schoolmasters received a gratuity, which was also called septimontium, is not mentioned anywhere else. That the school had a holiday on this day (Wissowa, Oes. Abh., 230-who in n. 1 quotes only the present passage-considers this probable) cannot be ascertained from the present passage (as is also impossible in the case of Bruma and Cara Cognatio). Brumae: this word does not denote the Saturnalia, as was asserted by Marquardt, Privatleben, 94, n. 6 (probably on the strength of the fact that Martial repeatedly connects Bruma and Saturnalia, e.g. 12,

81: Brumae diebus feriisque Saturni; more passages are given by Crawford, Byzant. Ztschr. 23 (1921), 365 seqq.). It was a separate festival but, apart from Tert., it is mentioned neither in Latin literature nor in the inscriptions.

We do find it, however, in the calendars of Philocalus and Silvius (CIL P,

1 ;I,/,.

1U,3

lV,.:) pp. 276-7), marked against November 24th. Mommsen's assertion (CIL P, p.

287) that these recordings do not refer to the festival has been refuted by Crawford, p. 368-9; cf. also Nilsson, art. 'Saturnalia' RE XXVI: 210. _

Carae Cognationis: this name is also found in }.1enol. Rust. Colot. and Vall. litterarii magistris, licet non sint professores, tamen usurpatum est, ut his quoque ius dicatur (ib. 6); see Klingmtiller, art. 'Honorarium', RE VIII:

2270-5. Florae ... coronandae: as in this and the next two sentences Tert. no longer speaks about the income of the schoolmaster, we have to follow

Rigaltius in putting a full stop after omnia (so this is not a case of asyndeton, as was suggested by Lbfstedt (Z. Spr. Tert., 32) on the strength of Reifferscheid's interpunction). Undoubtedly we must read Florae with Rigaltius and Reifferscheid (besides, this is most in accordance with the reading of A B); flore, the reading of Gelenius and Oehler, is either a superfluous addition or an incomprehensible restriction of coronandae: it would not be easy to understand why it is exactly the garlanding with flowers that is censured and why the quite popular and to Tert. very unsympathetic laureis coronare (cf. ch. 15) should not even be mentioned. In cor. 13,8, too, this practice is mentioned in general terms: a saeculo coronantur et lupanaria et latrinae et pistrinae et carcer et ludus et ipsa amphitheatra et ipsa spoliaria ipsaeque

(CIL P , p. 287), in the calendar of Silvius (ib. p. 259), and in CIL VI: 10234

13; cf. also Ovid fast. 2,617; Mart. 9, 54-5. In Philocalus (CIL 12, p. 258):

Ovid fast. 2, 617 and Val. Max. 2, 1, 8 the festival is called Caristia (cf. also

TLL III: 459, 75-82). It was celebrated on February 22nd by means of a common meal of the members of a family, ut, si qua inter necessarias personas querella esset orta, apud sacra mensae et inter hilaritatem animorum et fautoribus concordiae adhibitis tolleretur (Val. Max. 1.1.); hence in glosses the denominations 1:(f.L~ crun&V(X~, 1:. cruyy&vd<x~, 1:. cruyy&vw;iv and 1:(f.LL<x ouyyiv&(<x (TLL III: 1478, 53-4). Besides, the festival had the meaning of a commemoration of the dead and the meal that of a meal in commemoration of the dead

(on this account Silvius includes it in the tempus obitus). As such it linked up directly with the official Parentalia, which were celebrated from February libitinae. On the other hand, the reading Florae does not involve a restriction of coronandae (there have been more occasions on which the schools were wreathed, just as other buildings, cf. ch. 15): that it is precisely for the honour of Flora (Florae has been given an emphatic frontposition in the sentence!) that the schools must be wreathed is mentioned as a particularly horrifying example. The ludi Florales (since 173 B.C. a fixed festival, lasting in Caesar's time from April 28th to May 3rd) were specially hated by the Christians because of their lascivious character (cf. e.g. spect. 17 (see Buchner, 77. 132);

[Cypr.] quod idola 4; Arnob. adv. nat. 7,33; Aug. c.d. 2,27); they regarded Flora as a meretrix (cf. e.g. Min. Fel. 25, 8; [Cypr.] ib.; Lact. d.i. 1, 20, 6;

Prud. c. Symm. 1, 266. An inscription from Constantine (Cirta) proves that during the empire the Floralia were celebrated in Africa (CIL VIII: 6958). See

Wissowa, Rei., 197-8.455-6, and art. 'Flora' and 'Floralia', RE VI: 2747-52; Habel, art. 'Ludi publici', nr. 5, RE Suppl. V: 625-6; DS 2, 1189-91; J.

Heckenbach, De nuditate sacra sacrisque vinculis (RVV 9, Giessen 1911), 59-61. In this connection it deserves mention that Tert. concludes his argumentation against the wreathing of houses with the words: ne indueris domui tuaefaciem novi lupanaris (15, 11). f1aminicae ... feriis: at the day of the sacrifice by the flaminicae and the aediles 'the school is honoured by a holiday'. The holiday is said to be an honour to the school, just as in the previous phrase the wreaths were said to be an ornament of the school. In fact the honour concerns, of course, the gods (alternately the demons). The festivity mentioned here refers to Africa (and to other provinces?), not to Rome. This is clear from the use of the plural flam in icae , and from the fact that these priestesses are denoted as official figures because they are mentioned together with aediles. In Rome the flaminica Dialis was the only one of the wives of the jlamines who had a religious function (see Wissowa, Rei.,

13th to 21st (Lydus de mens. 4, 24, still numbers the Caristia among the dies parentales). Klauser has made it highly probable that the Christian festival of the Cathedra Petri, celebrated on the same date, originally had the same char- ~cter. That on the occasion of this festival schoolmasters received a gratuity

IS only known from the present passage. However, it does appear from Mart.

9, 54-5 that people sent each other food (i.c. poultry); for this day the lex collegi Aesculapi et Hygiae provides a distribution of money, bread and wine

(CIL VI: 10234, 13). See Wissowa, Rei., 232-3 and art. 'Caristia', RE III:

1592-3; Warde Fowler, Festivals, 308-9; Marquardt, Staatsverwalt., 3, 127; Klauser, Cathedra, 152-83; Cumont, Lux, 435-6; Bomer, comm. on Ovid fast. 2, ~17 and Ahnenkult, 30, n. 2. honoraria: this is the only passage where thiS word denotes a present given to schoolmasters on the occasion of a fes.tival (TLL VI, 3: 2935, 84). Usually it means 'gift of honour' (e.g. to the magistrate who governs a province) or it is synonymous with the summa honoraria, which was paid to the municipal treasury on being admitted to an office or a priesthood (e.g. Trajan in Plin. ep. 10, 113; cf. Tert. apol. 39, 5).

In the technical juridical idiom the word illustrates the contrast between artes liberales. and artes sordidae: the former can only be remunerated by a honoranum, the latter are paid with merces (which belongs to a illiberalis et sordidus quaestus, cf. e.g. Cic. off 1, 150-1). Sometimes merces is used in the sense of honorarium (e.g. Ulp. dig. 50, 13, 1 pr.); the inverse case, however, does not occur. During the empire claims for honorarium were acknowledged and protected. This protection was also received by praeceptores, but only by those who taught artes liberales; among these Ulpian does reckon the rhetores and grammatici, but he does not include the ludimagistri. Yet he makes the protection also apply to them, even though only as an extension: ludi quoque

lU,3 - lU4,4 10,4 17J

506), and she alone was indicated by means of flam in ica without an attribute (see Wissowa, Rei., 506, n. 5; TLL VI, 1: 862,45 seqq.). Here we should think of the emperor-cult (thus Bickel, TLL, ib. 863, 4); in the provinces the priests and priestesses of the living emperor and of his wife were often indicated by jlamen andflaminica without an attribute, see Riewald, art. 'Sacerdotes', RE this is the climax of the argument and at the same time the conclusion of the preceding survey of idolatrous practices in scholastic life. These are characterized as pompa diaboli 'pomp of the devil', i.e. 'works of the devil' or 'idolatry'. For more particulars, see Waszink, 'Pompa diaboli' (especially 29); cf. also 18,8: Tu si diaboli pompam eierasti, quicquid ex ea attigeris, id scias esse idololatrian. For the expression, cf. Commod. instr. 2, 18, 4: cuncta

Zabuli pompa. In this passagefrequentare is used in a way already found in the classical period, but afterwards becoming more frequent, in which the verb only indicates the repetition, but the nature of the action appears from the context (= usurpari, usui esse). Cf. in Tert. e.g. orat. 22, 3: vocabulum istud frequentatur; cam. Chr. 7, 9: cum Martha et Maria aliaeque in commercio eius (sc. Christi) frequententur ('are frequently mentioned'); apol. 22, 2

(see Waltz., Iit., 260); test. an. 4, 10; bapt. 5, 5; ux. 1, 8, 5; paen. 9, 2. non magistro: Uip'

~\I, which in Tert. 's works is quite frequent; see Hoppe, Synt., 107; Hartel, 4,80; Thorn., 1,59-60; 2, 63; 3, 14. instrumentum ... ad omnem vitam: cf. Cic. de orat. 3, 195; ad quorum (sc. operum artis) intel/egentiam a natura minus habent instrumenti. litteratura: this word indicates both the instruction by the ludimagister and by the grammaticus, cf. e.g. Sen. ep. 88, 20: prima iI/a, ut antiqui vocabant, litteratura, per quam pueris elementa traduntur; Quint. i. o. 2, 1, 4: grammatica, quam in Latinum

XXV: 1651-2; F. Geiger, De sacerdotibus Augustorum municipalibus, thesis Halle 1913, 21-3. For the aediles in the provincial cities, see Marquardt,

Staatsverw., 1, 166-7; Kubitschek, art. 'Aedilis', REI: 458-63; more literature is given in the Ox/. Class. Dict., 582-3. It is most plausible that creati belongs both to jlaminicae and to aediles (for the choice of the former, see Geiger,

57-9). Several questions remain. Does this custom only refer to the sacrifice of thejlaminicae and aediles, and not to that of theflamines and duoviri iuri dicundo? Are the jlaminicae and aediles only mentioned by way of example or has their mentioning a special significance? In the latter case the point might be that, compared to the duoviri iuri dicundo, the aediles were minor officials and that the cult of the emperor's wife at Carthage was less important than that of the emperor himself and, for instance, the virgo Caelestis (for the cult of the latter, see Dolger, AC 1 (1929),92-106); in that case Tert.'s argument would be that the schools even got a holiday, when the less important officials made the sacrifice on the occasion of their election (and that, accordingly, this would certainly happen when this was done by the more important officials). transferentes litteraturam vocaverunt. Quomodo ... possunt: for the idea, cf. cor. 8, 1-2: iam ... audio dici et alia multa (apart from wreaths), ab eis prolata, quos saeculum deos credidit, tamen et in nostris hodie usibus et in pristinorum sanctorum et in dei rebus et in ipso Christo deprehendi, non alias scilicet hominem functo quam per communia ista instrumenta exhibition is humanae .... Primus litteras Mercurius enarraverit: necessarias confitebor et commerciis rerum et nostris erga deum studiis. We may not attach a too farreaching significance to the present passage. By studia divina or, as he says in cor. 8, studia erga deum Tert. certainly does not mean more than the reading and study of the Bible, about which he is also talking in apol. 18-20, cf. especially apol. 18, 1: sed quo plenius et inpressius tam ipsum quam dispositiones eius et voluntates adiremus, adiecit instrumentum litteraturae, si qui velit de deo inquirere et inquisito invenire et invento credere et credito deservire. Of the saecularia studia, too, we should not form a too high conception: in this connection no more is meant by it than the things one could learn from the ludimagister and the grammaticus; in the next sentence Tert. indicates them by litteratoria eruditio. At any rate an interpretation as that of Lortz (1, 370):

'Ganz aIIgemein und grundsatzlich proklamiert die Moglichkeit einer philosophischen Erkenntnis in Glaubenssachen der ... folgenschwere Satz idol. 10: quomodo ... esse non possunt', exceeds by far the tenor of this passage. The study of profane learning as preparatory to the study of Holy Scripture, recommended and practised by the Alexandrian

4. idoli natali: cf. e.g. Cic. ad A tt. 4, 1, 4: idem natalis erat et Brundisinae coloniae et tuae vicinae Salutis; Ovid fast. 3, 837-8: Captae delubra Minervae, / quae dea natali coepit habere suo (see Bomer's note on ib. 812);

Arnob. adv. nat. 7, 32: Tel/uris natalis; Lact. d.i. 6,20,34: ludorum celebrationes deorumfesta sunt, siquidem ob natales eorum vel templorum novorum dedicationes sunt constituti. So by the birthday of a god the day of the dedication of his temple was meant. See Wissowa, Rei., 56-7. 459. 474-5; Keyssner,

'Natalis templi' , RE XVI: 1800-2; W. Schmidt, Geburtstag im Altertum (RVV 7), Giessen 1908, 116 seqq. It cannot be decided what god or gods Tert. has in mind here. In view of the vague way of phrasing it is by no means necessary that it is only Minerva who is referred to (cf. P . de Labriolle, Arch. Lat. Med.

Aevi 2 (1926), 180); it is even little probable that here, without any further exp~ication, Tert. should again refer to Minerva and her Quinquatria, after havmg mentioned several other divinities and festivals in the preceding sentences. One is even tempted, for the very reason that the flaminicae are me~tioned in the preceding sentence, to think again of the emperor-cult (in ~hIlocalus' calendar the birthdays of the consecrated emperors are indicated m the same way as the dedication-days of temples, see Wissowa, Rei., 344-5.

447.459.474, n. 6; Schmidt, 59 seqq.). Omnis diaboli pompa frequentatur:

1~0

1U,41U, 0

IU,OIU, / -11, SUR VEY

1~1

tur in vobis, see Waszink's note on an. 26, 1. de idolis catechizat: apart from the present passage, Tert. only uses the verb catechizare in cor. 11, 4 and Marc. 4, 29, 10. As in none of these cases the verb refers to catechumens,

Janssen (p. 40) concludes: 'seine Bedeutung ist also nicht technisch' . However, the present passage only reveals its point and significance, if we think of the religious instruction of the candidates for baptism: by the instruction in mythology the belief in the heathen gods is fostered; it is as it were a 'heathen catechumenate'. At cum fidelis haec discit: haec refers to the contents of the Iitterae in sifidelis Iitteras doceat. si iam sapit, qui sit: sc. Christianus. An alteration of qui (Oehler wrote quid) is not necessary. si nondum sapit aut ubi coeperit sapere, prius sa pi at oportet: Hartel, 1, 46-8, justly deletes the full stop found after sapit in A and in all editions. By that interpunction the assertion that a pupil who is not yet a conscious Christian rejects the instruction about the heathen gods would go without an explanation. In this case, however, an explanation is even more necessary than in the case of ubi coeperit sapere (it is probable that the faulty interpunction led

Rigaltius to read dudum instead of nondum). After sapere, too, we must not put a full stop but a colon, for prius sapiat oportet seqq. explains multo magis

... sapere. For oportet see Remark f. ab ignaro: Hartel, 1, 46-8, accepting Oehler's conjecture quid sit, wants to read an ignarus; he connects sciens with si iam sapit, quid sit, and ignarus with si nondum sapit aut ibi coeperit sapere

(sc., quid sit). However, sciens denotes the Christian pupil (also in the second case, for prius sapiat oportet, quod prius didicit, id est de deo et fide), ignarus the heathen teacher. The latter is ignorant of the fact that the things which he teaches (the idolorum praedicationes) are poison to the spirit. The pupil listens to his reading (ab ignaro accipit), but he does not accept it (nee bibit). The simile alludes to the characterization of the heathens as ignorantes.

et erit: et is not a copulative but it introduces a conclusion. school of Clement and Origen, was most elaborately and profoundly discussed by St. Augustine in his De doctrina christiana (see especially Marrou,

St. Aug., 387 seqq.). sine quibus ... non possunt, cf. 8, 1.

5. necessitatem: on the statement that studia Iitterarum are unavoidable for a Christian, cf. Rambaux, 75, n. 85. respiciamus: cf. 5, 4 and 12, 4. ex parte ... vitari: Van der Nat remarked: 'to vitari we have to supply non posse: the instruction is partly unacceptable, viz., in so far as it provides knowledge of the pagan gods and of mythology (insertae idolorum praedicationes), but also partly indispensable, viz., in so far as it provides knowledge which is necessary to daily life'. Obviously he meant to say the same as Bohm, who observes here: 'Die literarische Bildung kann einerseits nicht erlaubt und andererseits nicht vermieden werden'. We think, however, that ex parte ... ex parte has to be interpreted literally, and that one should not supply non posse to vitari. Tert. intends to say that this eruditio is one great whole, which cannot be divided into an acceptable and an unacceptable part. In other words, non posse refers to both ex parte admitti and ex parte vitari. The construction of the sentence is remarkable in so far as non posse has been put in the center; one would rather have expected: non posse eam ex parte admitti, ex parte vitari or eam ex parte admitti, ex parte vitari non posse. Fideles ... capit: in connection with this statement cf. Hagen, Antike und Abendland 24 (1978),

83 with note 18; see also the paper by P. Scholl in: H . Th. Johann (ed.), Erziehung und Bildung in der heidn. und christl. Antike (Darmstadt 1976),

503-26, especially 509 seq. capit renders lI/8€XE't(Xt, 'it is possible', which is very frequent in Tert. It is not possible (non capit) at the same time to be a Christian and to teach literature. insertas ... praedicationes: cf. 18, 3: purpura vel cetera insignia dignitatum et potestatum insertae dignitatibus et potestatibus idololatriae ... dicata. Tert. occasionally uses praedicatio to indicate sermons by heretics; Braun, 434, n. 2 quotes Herm. 1, 2 and praescr.

34, 8; 44, 6.

7. Huic ... deputatur: for deputare as an equivalent of attribuere, see the note on 1, 5. As to excusatio, cf. e.g. Marc. 4, 38, 1: Refer .. . et haec ad excusationem creatoris et ad comparationem Christi; Cic. rep. I, 9: perfugia quae sumunt sibi ad excusationem; Plin. ep. 4, 17, 11; Tac. hist. 2, 30, 2. For Tert.'s partiality to this kind of prepositional expressions, see the note on 5,

3. necessitas refers to 10, 5. publicis propriis: for the biarticulate asyndeton in Tert., see Thorn., 2, 19-21; Hartel, 2, 4, 8; Hoppe, Beitr., 51-4

(who, however, regards the present instance as 'Nicht ganz zweifellos'); Saflund, 65 seqq.; Waszink, 138, and, more generally, Hofm., Synt., 846-7;

Tidner, Part. cop., 29 seqq.; Wahlen, 75 seqq.

6. Deos ... obsignat: for obsignare 'to seal', see the note on 12, 1. Hoc nomine, sc. deorum: by calling them 'gods' he 'seals', i.e. confirms, their divinity. ut diximus: this is a mistake; it is only in chapter 20 that Tert. discusses this point. deos pronuntiari must have the meaning of deos 'deos' vocari. nomen ... collocari: nomen hoc, sc. deorum. For in vano collocari, se~ c~mm. ~n 20, 3. prima ... aedificatur: diabolo is a dat. commodi: by ~hlS mstructlOn the belief in the heathen gods is built up, which is in the mterest of the devil, since it is his purpose to keep or to lead people away from the Christian faith . The original meaning of aedificare is still clearly present, as nearly always in Tert. The only instance of the specifically Christian sense

'to edify' in his works is cult. fem. 2, 11 , 2: ut exemplo sitis illis, ut aedificenCh. 11. The function of trader

'Already because of the other sins, first of all covetousness-which is also

11, SURVEY, REMARKS

11, REMARKS

called idolatry by St. Paul!-and its servant, mendacity, not to speak of perjury, it may be doubted whether trade is a fitting occupation for a Christian.

By the way, as soon as covetousness disappears the pursuit of gain disappears, and with it the need for trade (§ 1). b. The meaning of 'cetera'. Apart from De generationibus at the beginning, the sentence has one great difficulty, viz. cetera delictorum. To what are 'the other sins' opposed? Hartel opposes them to what precedes, and, moreover, he counts negotatio among these other sins. He translates: "wenn wir die noch ubrigen sundhaften Handlungen nach ihren Ursprungen und Motiven (de

But let us for the moment assume that there is a pursuit of gain which is free from the sins mentioned above; trade is certainly guilty of idolatry, if it supplies such foreign wares as frankincense, which are of vital importance to the idols. And it does not matter that these wares are also used for other purposes, even by Christians. generationibus = secundum generationes) erwagen, wenn wir vor Allem erwagen, dass die Begierde die Wurzel alles Bosen, dann dass die Luge die

Dienerin der Begierde sei der Meineid kann ubergangen werden, da dem Christen auch nur zu schworen verboten ist -, so ist selbst Handelserwerb dem Diener Gottes nicht angemessen". He misses an interrogative particle in the question negotiatio ... apta est? and, therefore, reads nec negotiatio ... apta est. He explains: "denn es wird von Tertullian aus der Zahl der noch nicht erorterten Delicte nur eines mehr, die negotiatio, herausgegriffen und naher untersucht". This remark shows that, according to Hartel, cetera delictorum indicate all the sins not yet dealt with in the previous chapters, and of all these sins Tertullian will discuss negotiatio only. This would imply that, from the beginning, negotiatio is considered as a delictum, which is not in agreement with the contents of the present chapter. It is, moreover, very improbable that cetera delictorum is opposed to what precedes, since in the previous chapters Tertullian did not discuss delicta like cupiditas, mendacium, periurium, but professions not allowed to Christians. The same objection can

One should not adduce as a counter-argument that in this way all trade might be combated (§ 2). The more serious the sin, the more carefully one should guard against it and against everything that renders it possible (§ 3).

Even if the sin is committed by another, the person who creates the possibility is equally guilty (§ 4a). This principle is recognized in other cases of serious delicts, for instance, in the case of the leno (who makes fornication possible) and the lanista (who teaches gladiators how to kill) (§§ 4b-5). We should no more admit the incense-trader into the Church than the supplier of public victims, for the only difference between the two is that the latter procures meat, the former incense for the demons.

One should, moreover, notice that incense was offered even before the images of gods (idols) existed, and also now incense is offered without an idol being present. This shows the importance of incense (§§ 6-7a). be made against putting negotiatio on a level with cupiditas etc., as Hartel does.

The incense-trader cannot avoid inner conflict. How can he show his abhorrence of temples and altars, for which he himself provided? How can he exorcise the demons whom he daily feeds? (§§ 7b-8a).

Thus cetera cannot be opposed to what precedes. It is not opposed to what follows, viz., negotiatio, either. Otherwise negotiatio would be considered as a delictum from the beginning, which is not true.

[Conclusion of chapters 3-11, 7J We conclude: no handcraft, profession or trade, which plays a part in either the making or the provision of idols, is free from idolatry, i.e. the service existing in the worship of idols (§ 8b). '

Cetera delictorum are opposed to the sin which dominates the whole treatise, viz., idolatry. Tertullian is going to discuss the question, whether trade can exist without idolatry. But before he comes to this question he says:

'if < apart from the question of idolatry> one considers the other sins Remarks <which accompany trade>, ... , is trade, then, allowed to a Christian?' The first sin of the cetera, cupidity, will, moreover, appear to be called 'idolatry' by St. Paul. In this way the argument becomes typically Tertullianean: apart from the question of idolatry, trade means cupidity, which is idolatry! a. The construction of the text of 11, 1. The text of the first sentence of this chapter is in disorder in A and B, which have full stops after delictorum, ministrum and liceat. A first correction was made by Gelenius, who removed the full stop after delictorum and put a comma after recogitemus. As there was still no main sentence after the clause si ... recogitemus, Rigaltius deleted si. However, Iunius had already seen that negotiatio ... apta est? is the main sentence, and that imprimis ... liceat is an extensive elaboration of cetera delictorum. Reduced to its essential elements the sentence runs as follows: si cetera delictorum recogitemus, ... , negotiatio servo dei apta est? Literally: "if we consider the other sins, ... , is trade, then, an occupation which suits a servant of God (a Christian)"? c. De generationibus. Hartel tried to give a sense to de generationibus, namely that it should be the equivalent of secundum generationes: "nach ihren Ursprungen und Motiven". Already from a linguistic point of view this seems to be inadmissible. It would, moreover, mean that Tertullian dealt here with the motives of the cetera delictorum, which is not true. The first delictum, cupidity, is itself the motive of trade.

II, I 11, I ... VI

If it means something here, generatio must have the meaning of 'id quod generatum est', thus 'fruit' or 'product'. But this does not fit into the context, since Tertullian does not discuss the 'fruits' of trade, but the sins accompanying it. Moreover, the construction would be odd, as Van der Nat observed in poetry, especially epigrams (see G. A. Gerhardt, Phoinix von Kolophon

(Leipzig-Berlin 1909), 98-103), and in Latin literature (there particularly for the loss of fortune, see Lewis-Short s.vv. naufragium and naufragus); Tert., too, uses it repeatedly, cf. ad 24, l. quamvis ... dicta sit cupiditas:

Heraldus' conjecture quum bis, adopted by Reifferscheid (cum bis) , is unnecessary. This parenthesis is a correction of cetera (sc. delicto rum) and especially of cupiditatem. Its insertion at this point in the sentence is to be explained psychologically by the association with idolatry produced by the words circa fidem naufragium sunt passi. The train of thought is as follows:

'if we think of the other sins < outside idolatry>, especially of covetousness, the root of all evil, which, according to St. Paul, has made some lose their faith-although actually this is no other sin than idolatry, as the same apostle calls covetousness also idolatry-etc.' The intention is to give extra emphasis to the wickedness of covetousness, and at the same time to connect the discussion of this sin more closely with the subject of the treatise, viz., idolatry. ab eodem apostolo: i.e. St. Paul, who was twice quoted before without his name being mentioned. idololatria .•. dicta sit cupiditas: Col. 3, 5: 't~v Vig. Chr. 17 (1963),80, where he discussed this text extensively. He comes to the conclusion that De generationibus must be the corrupt form of a sub-title.

The original reading probably was De negotiationibus, which was erroneously inserted in the text by a copyist.

Recently R. W. Daniel made an ingenious suggestion in Vig. Chr. 39 (1985), 63-4, arguing that De generationibus originally belongs behind de discursibus in 11, 2. It would have been omitted in an old manuscript under the influence of the following negotiationis (hence negotiationibus in A before the correction), and added in the margin; then it was inserted in the text on a wrong place.

1. recogitemus: the verb recogitare occurs more than once in Plautus, is unusual in the classical period but is used more frequently again in the first century A.D.; in Tert. it is fairly frequent (e.g. in an. seven times). It is used as a synonym of cogitare, cf. e.g. an. 10, 5: Hoc magis credas, si deum recogites tantum artificem in modicis quantum et in maxim is. For this weakening of the meaning of rein compounds, cf. Waszink's note on an. 46,

2: respicere est enim, inquiunt, per cornu, where further literature is quoted.

Waltzing, Et., 363, wrongly asserts that recogitare is only accompanied by the neuter of a pronoun in the accusative (otherwise by de with an ablative), cf. e.g. an. 9, 7. 10, 6. 25, 8; test. an. 5, 2; Marc. 4, 16, 3 (= Zach. 8, 17); exh. cast. 10, 2. cupiditatem ... sunt passi: a contamination of 1 Tim. 6, 10: pC~cx yap 7t(xv'tWV 'tWV XCXXWV Ecr'tLV ~ qnAcxPYupCcx, ~.; 'tLV~'; oP~YOfJ-~Vot am1tAcxv~9T]crcxv a7t()

'tij.; 1tCcr't~w,; XCXL ECXU'tOU'; 1t~pLi1t~LPCXV OOUVCXL'; 1tOAAcxt.;, and 1 Tim. 1, 19: EXWV 1tCcr'tLV

1tAWV~~Ccxv, ~'tL'; Ecr'tLV dOWAOACX'tpdcx; Eph. 5, 5: 1tAwvix'tT]';, 0'; lcr'tLV dOwAoA6:'tPT]';.

So 1thov~~Ccx is translated by Tert. cupiditas, just as by Cyprian, ep. 55, 27, and HieL ep. 14, 5, 1-2 (who yet renders 1thovix'tT]'; by fraudator); VUlg.: avaritia, avarus. mendacium, cupiditatis ministrum ... periurio: for the theme of the perfidy of cupidity, cf. e.g. Cic. parad. 6, 43; HOL carm. 3, 24,

59: periura ... fides; Phaedr. 4, 20, 24: caelum fatigas sordido periurio (sc. avarus); Lact. d.i. 1, 4, 5: voluntas fingendi ac mentiendi eorum est, qui opes adpetunt, qui lucra desiderant; Basil. homil. in divi/. 7 (PG 31, 297 C): TC.; lcr'tLV 6 cP~uoou,; 1tcx't~P; 'tC.; 6 1tAcxcr't0YPCXipCcx,; OT]fJ-LOUPYO';; 'tC.; 6 't1jv lmopxCcxv y~vv~crcx.;; oux 6 1tAOU'tO';; oux ~ 1t~PL 'tOU'tOV cr1tOUO~; Aster. Amas. homil. 3 (PG 40, 209 B).

That trade is based on cupidity is a theme of popular philosophy cf. e.g. HOL sat. 1, 1,37-40 and ep. 1,1,42-6 with Heinze's comm.; Philo q. omn. prob. lib. 78: (the Essenes) lfJ-1topCcx.; ... ~ xcx1tT]hCcx.; ~ VCXUXAT]pCCX'; ouo' QVCXP LcrCXcrL, 'tcX'; d.;

XCXL &ycx9~v crUVdOT]crLV, ~v 'tLV~'; &1twcr6:fJ-~Vot mpL 't~v 1tCcr'tLV lvcxu6:YT]crcxv. cupiditatem radicem omnium malorum: similarly Polyc. ad Phil. 4, 1: &pX~ o~ 7t(xv'twv xcxAi1twV qnAcxPYupCcx, which need not hark back to St. Paul (see

Dibelius, HdbNT, 13, 53-4), since it is a frequently occurring apophthegm which by its form is typical of the diatribe (see Geffcken, Kyn., 40), where it is used in relation to the attack of the rich, cf. e.g. Stob. eclog. 3, 10, 37

(417 Hense): BCwv 6 crOipLcr't~.; 't~v ipLACXPYUPCcxv fJ-T]'tP01tOALV E.AEY~ 1t6:0"Tj'; xcxxCcx.; dVCXL;

Diog. Laert. 6, 50: 't~v ipLACXPYUPCcxv dm (sc. Diogenes of Sinope) fJ-T]'tP01tOALV

1t6:v'twv 'tWV xcxxwv; Ps. Phocyl. 42: ~ ipLAOXPT]fJ-ocruvT] fJ-~'tT]P xcxxo'tT]'to.; a1t6:crT]';; orac. Sibyll. 8, 17: apx~ 1t<XcrL XCXXWV ipOAOXPT]fJ-ocruvT] XCXL tXVOLCX. Some more passages are given by Dibelius, 1.1.; see also Geffcken, Kyn., 41-4. Similarly at a much later date loh. Chrysostom. in Matth. hom. 63 (64) = PG 58, 608:

1tAWV~~Ccxv aipopfJ-a.; &1tOOL01tOfJ-1tOUfJ-~Vot. Similarly Tat. orat. 11 (11, 28 Schw.): vcxu'tCAA~cr9cxL oLa 't~v &1tAT]cr'tCCXV ouxlm'tT]o~uw; Amob. 2,40; Lact. d.i. 5, 17, 10 seqq. Trade is already charged with fraud in Hdt. 1, 153; cf. also Wendland,

Philo Diatr., 40. ne iurare quidem Iiceat: cf. ad 23,2; cf. also Marc. 2, 19, 3 and Rambaux, 273. Ceterum: not adversative but with the meaning

'besides'. The train of thought is: 'the lawfulness of trade is dubious. And, besides, trade is unnecessary, if the sin of covetousness, from which it springs, is absent'. The same meaning of ceterum is found in 17, 1. si cupiditas ... necessitas negotiandi: according to Van der Nat, the lectio tradita (no question-mark after the first acquirendi) was justly restored by Hartel, 1, 48, and the question-mark placed by Leopold, Oehler and Reifferscheid on the strength of a note by Pameiius, destroys the argument. Hartel and Van der

01 fJ-~v E~w9~v &x.p01tOALV xcxxwv 't~v ipLACXPYUPCcxv lx6:AoUV. naufragium sunt passi: the metaphor of shipwreck is a favourite one both in Greek philosophy and

I I ,L.

L.U.)

J J,J-JJ,L.

fides navigat ... inextricabile impactis naufragium est, where impactis denotes Nat interpret this passage as one sentence, in which the words quae est causa acquirendi are a relative clause and cessante causa acquirendi is a repetition of the contents of the previous part of the sentence. We think that the question-mark is required indeed and that the passage consists of two sentences which constitute the following kind of argument: 'if a, then b; if b, then c': If there is no cupiditas, there is no causa acquirendi (the rhetorical question is the equivalent of a negation); if there is no causa acquirendi, there is no necessitas negotiandi. Thus the question-mark does not destroy the argument and there is no repetition either. One should moreover observe that the Agobardinus often has a full stop (or rather a point) at the end of a question

(e.g. Quibus insidiis. and quibus plagis. in ch. 1, fol. 105 V). Mesnart and Gelenius have a colon after the first acquirendi and a comma after the second, which shows that they consider the passage to consist of two sentences. This can only mean that they, too, interpret quae est causa acquirendi as a rhetorical question. Cessante: for cessare with the meaning of deficere, deesse, desinere, cf. e.g. test. an. 5,5; Marc. 1,11,7; nat. 1,1, 10. This meaning is particularly frequent in juridical literature. See TLL III: 960, 21 seqq.;

Thierry, 176; Goelzer, Jer., 274. eos qui impegerunt in scopulos (cf. also TLL VII, 1: 616, 59-61); this use of impingere is also found in pud. 13, 20: qui de fide in blasphemiam impegerunt; we may also compare the use of incursare with the name of a crime in the accus.: nat. 1,2,8: quotiens in tenebris incursasset incesta; ieiun.

12, 1: delicta incursantes. eam: formally this pronoun refers back to iustitia quaestus but in reality it denotes the notion of negotatio, which is the present theme of discussion and which has already been mentioned; besides, it is also present in the expression iustitia quaestus. ipsam ... idolorum animam et spiritum ... daemonium: for a discussion of the notions anima and spiritus in Tert.'s works, see Waszink's commentary on an. 10-11. Cf. also Aug. c.d. 8,

26 (referring to the doctrine of Hermes): ut pro anima sit daemon, pro corpore simulacrum; also cf. 7, 1: manus matres idolorum. The idols-both in the sense of 'images of deities' and of 'false gods'-are lifeless; that what makes them appear to be living beings is the demons' hiding sub istis nominibus institutis simulacris; these are the auctores of the signa, miracula and oracula ascribed to the gods or their images; see Remarks at ch. 1. omne daemonium saginat: the sacrifices are the food of the demons; cf. apol.

23, 14: renuant (daemones) se immundos spiritus esse, quod vel ex pabulis eorum, sanguine et fumo et putidis rogis pecorum et impuratissimis linguis ipsorum vatum intellegi debuit. They are said to occupy the images for the very purpose of receiving these sacrifices and to lie in wait for them: eadem

... obscuritate contagion is adspiratio daemonum et angelorum mentis quoque corruptelas agit ... erroribus variis, quorum iste potissimus, quo deos istos captis et circumscriptis mentibus commendat, ut et sibi pabula propria nidoris et sanguinis curet simulacris et imaginibus oblata (apol. 22, 6). Likewise

2. iustitia quaestus = quaestus iustus, cf. e.g. orat. 7, 2: iustitiam exactionis. For this use of the genitive Schrijn.-Mohrm., Cypr., 1, 86, have proposed the term genitivus in versus. A reversal of functions takes place in consequence of the fact that the notion expressed by the abstract substantive is dominating. See also Merkx, 17-9 (with more literature); Waszink, 388-9;

Diercks, 131-2. Much, though unshifted, material for Tert. is given by Hoppe, Synt., 85 seqq. (cf. also Gerlo, 2, 55; Kok, 111 and 131 (but on p. 147 his note is wrong); Stephan, 72-3). secura de ... observatione: for securus de, cf. nat. 2, 1, 5; cult fem. 2, 2, 2; ux. 1, 5, 2; bapt. 18, 6; res. 13, 4; cor. 2, 2; see Hoppe, Synt., 34. Observatio means 'the guarding against, the avoidance of', just as in 11, 3; see Hoppe, Beitr., 102-3. For the corresponding meaning of observare (wrongly postulated by Hoppe in pat. 10, 4; see Borleffs' adnotatio critica), cf. pud. 12, 4 (= Acta 15, 29): a quibus observando (= abstinendo, as is evident from the context), and see Rbnsch, It., 374, and Sem. 3, 61; Svennung, Oros., 31, n. 1. in crimen offendere idololatriae: this expression does not seem to occur elsewhere. For the underlying image we may think of the proverb bis ad eundem lapidem offendere (Cic. ep. ad fam. 10, 20, 2; Auson. ep. 11; see Otto, 186) or the equally proverbial ship-

Athenag. legato 26 (145, 16-8 G.): oL Oot(f.lOIl&~ ... oL 1tpocr't&'t1Jx6't&~ 't~ <X1t() 'tWII

L&pdwII ottf.lot'tl Xott 'totu'tot 1t&PlAlXf.lWf.l&IIOl; ib. 27 (146, 22-3); Clem. Alex. protr.

2, 40, 1; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 29 (226, 25 seqq.); 3, 37 (223, 20 seqq.); Acta Thomae 76 (191, 13-6 Bonnet); 77 (192, 4-10); Min Fel. 27, 2; Lact. d.i. 2,

16, 10-4; cf. also 1 Cor. 10, 20-1 with Lietzmann's note (HdbNT, 9, 49); Dibelius, Geisterwelt, 67-71; Dblger, AC 4 (1934),266-70. non = nonne, as more than once in Tert. (who also uses nonne rather frequently, see

Claesson's Index, 1046). See for this use Hofm., Synt., 648-9. Viderint, si ... usui erit: cf. 7, 3. The subject of viderint is not the traders, as Oehler thought, but merces, as was observed by Hartel (1, 49-50: 'es mbgen immerhin dieselben Waaren dienen'). tura: for Tert. 's attack of the turarii, see

Schbllgen, 217-8. cetera peregrinitatis: here peregrinitas means 'foreign wares', cf. cult. fem. 2, 10,2: libidinem possidendae pretiositatis (Kok, 185).

For the use of abstractum pro concreto in Tert., see Hoppe, Synt., 91-4; LOfstedt, Apol., 96, n. 1; generally, Hofm., Synt., 792-3; LOfstedt, Per., 1114, and Verm. Stud., 211-6; Wahlen, 186-7. cetera peregrinitatis, wreck, cf. Ribbeck, trag. inc., 139: neque me patiar iterum ad unum scopulum ... offendere; Ovid Pont. 4, 14, 21-2; see Otto, 314. The latter alternative is here much more likely, since it corresponds with 11, 1 : naufragium sunt passi (cf. also the argument in pud. 13) and with 24, 1: inter hos scopulos et sinus, inter haec vada et freta idololatriae velificata spiritu dei

kV"t I i, L ll,~ - ll, j ..,V J

sacrificium idolorum: this is the reading of A Band Gelenius, whose interpunction, however, is erroneous (cf. the critical apparatus). Iunius corrected the punctuation but read ad sacrificium id%rum, undoubtedly because he thought the singular sacrificium odd as an apposition to cetera peregrinitatis.

His conjecture was adopted by Reifferscheid, who, however, did not put a comma after id%rum. Probably this does not mean that he connected ad sacrificium, just as ad pigmenta medicinalia and ad so/acia sepulturae, with usui sunt, an interpretation which would already have to be rejected because of the singular sacrificium (against the plural in the two other adjuncts; however, in the next sentence we find pompae ... sacerdotia ... sacrificia). Hoppe,

Synt., 146, too, follows Iunius, and wants to supply pertinentia to ad sacrificium id%rum. However, the other instances of an ellipsis of pertinere quoted by him are of a different nature: in those a verbal form is omitted, e.g. pud.

8, II: Nihil enim ad Andromacham; Prax. 22, 5; an. 42, I (caused by the 06~<x of Epicurus quoted there: 0 9cX\I<X'to~ ouU\I 1tpO~ ~fJ.a~). Yet it is not impossible to join ad sacrificium to cetera peregrinitatis, since Tert. has a partiality to short prepositional adjuncts, also used attributively, cf. e.g. mart. 4, 9: passiones ad consecutionem gloriae caelestis; an. 24, 8: iIIo in spatio ante tempora oblivionis; ib.: tanti ante corpus aevi. However, in that case, too, the singular remains unusual. Therefore, it seems preferable to preserve the lectio tradita, and to follow Hartel, I, 49-50, and Oehler (in spite of the latter's unwieldy translation) in regarding sacrificium idolorum as a qualifying apposition to tura et cetera peregrinitatis. The same unusual incongruence is found in Liv.

5,47,3: canes ... , sollicitum anima/ ad nocturnosstrepitus; 22, 57,6: locum ... iam ante hostiis humanis, minime Romano sacro, inbutum; 27, 48, 10:

Hispani, vetus miles peritusque Romanae pugnae; Tac. hist. 2, 46: praetoriani ... , proprius Dthonis miles. Also Verg. Aen. 8, 729: clipeum Volcani, dona parentis, though of a somewhat different nature, proves the license in this

Christians kept incense out of their worship (it is not until the second half of the fourth century that there are certain testimonies of its ritual use), cf. apo/.

30, 5-6: qui ei (sc. deo) offero opimam et maiorem hostiam quam ipse mandavit, oration em de carne pudica, de anima innocenti, de spiritu sancto profectam, non grana turis unius assis, Arabicae arboris lacrimas; more passages are given by C. F. Atchley, A History of the use of incense (London 1909),

81-96. From the present passage and from apol. 42, 7 it is clear that odores were used in funerals . The exact nature of this use is not mentioned. The earliest testimonies of burning perfumes at the side of the corpse and during the funeral date from the fourth century (but we should not forget that our information about burial-practices of the time before Constantine is extremely scanty). ad pigmenta ... ad solacia ... usui sunt: for the use of ad, see the note on 5, 3. Cf. Lact. d.i. 2, 10, 1: ut usui esse homini possent

(animalia), alia nimirum ad cibos, alia vero ad vestitum. pompae: for the use of perfumes in processions, cf., for instance, the description of the pompa in the ludi Romani by Dion. Hal. Antiq. 7, 72, 13: x<xt fJ.~'t' <xu'toT~ (scil. the citherand flute-players) or 't~ 't1X 91)fJ.~<X't~p~<x XOfJ.(~O\l't~~ lcp' W\I &pWfJ.<X't<X x<xt

A~~<X\lW'to~ 1t<XP' OA7]\I 000\1 191)fJ.~a'to. A good survey of the various pompae is given by F. Bomer, art. 'Pompa', RE XXI: 1878-1994. periculis ... discursibus: the risks and nervous agitation of the trader pressed by cupidity constitute a 't61to~, which was eagerly employed, especially in popular philosophy and in literature influenced by it. Thus already Cato in the first sentence of his

De agri cultura: Est interdum praestare mercaturis rem quaerere nisi tam periculosum sit; further e.g. Hor. sat. 1, 1,6-7. 29-3l. 38-9; ep. 1, 1,45; carm .

3,24, 36-44 with Heinze's notes; Sen. brev. vito 2, 1; Basil. hom. in div. 1 (PG

31, 279 B); in Tert. pat. 7, 11-2: gentilium est omnibus detrimentis impatientiam adhibere qui rem pecuniariam fortasse animae anteponant. Nam et faciunt, cum lucri cupiditatibus quaestuosa pericula mercimoniorum in mari respect permitted (for a general discussion of the use of the singular instead of the plural and the reverse, see LOfst., Synt., I, 12-26.27-65). For the use of odores in heathen cults, cf. II, 6. pigmenta medicinalia: pigmentum in the sense of 'ointment, balm' also in scorp. I, 12; medicinalis also in cor. 8,

2; cf. Firm. Mat. math. 3, 12, 10: pigmentorum medicinalium inventores.

Pigmentum has the original meaning 'pigment' in cult. fem. 2, 8, 2. The word acquired this double meaning, because the trade in perfumes usually went together with that in pigments and medicaments, see Bliimner, Technologie, exercent. negotiationis tuae: see apparatus criticus and Remark C. procurator idolorum: cf. uX. 2, 4, 1: habens in latere diaboli servum, procuratorem domini sui. The procurator is a slave or a freedman controlling the possessions of his master, 'manager, agent', see Bliimner, Privataltertiimer,

282-3.

3. Graviora ... quaeque: Tert. often joins quisque to a comparative instead of a superlative, both in the singular and in the plural, cf. e.g. apol. 50, 13: exquisitior quaeque crudelitas vestra; pud. 8, 7: condicio gratior quaeque; ux.

2, 4, 2: pauperiora quaeque tuguria; an. 9, 1: so/lemniora quaeque. This use occurs for the first time in Apul. mund. 25: propiores quosque; cf. Waszink's note on an. 9, 1 (p. 165). Sometimes Tert. joins it also to a positive degree, cf. Waszink on an. 2, 4 (108-9). extendunt: cf. 2, 3 extensius. non interest: Tert. is very partial to this expression, especially in the combination

I, 361-2, and Privataltertiimer, 481-2; Marquardt, Privatleben, 782. For incense, myrrh and cassia as medicines, see Abt, Apol., 131 (with more literature); S. Eitrem, Dpferritus und Voropfer der Griechen und Romer

(Kristiania 1915), 253-9. For the three ways of using them, cf. Apul. apol. 32: ut si tus et casiam et myrram ... juneri tantum emptos arbitreris, cum et medicamento parentur et sacrificio. solacia sepulturae: in Tert. 's time the

11,311,5 I J ,) ,lU I

de loco non interest, which is frequently found in juridical literature; cf.

Waszink's, note on an. 1, 2 (84) and F. Norden, Apuleius und das rdmische Privatrecht, 102-3. Here the meaning: 'it does not make any difference' is practically equivalent to: 'it does not make the situation any better (less serious), . locorum has a parallel in the indication of stuprum by the vague term rem (for the general tendency to use euphemisms in sexual matters, see Waszink's comm. on an. 38, 2 intellegit quae sint, and fines, p. 435-6). For the construction with exercere, cf. e.g. VIp. dig. 5, 3, 27, 1: nam et in multorum honestorum virorum praediis lupanaria exercentur. For lenocinium exercere, cf. Vip. dig. 48, 5, 30, 3: qui lenocinium in uxore exercuit. Sic et: the leno and the lanista are in the same situation: the leno does not commit stuprum himself, but he makes it possible to commit stuprum; in the same way, the lanista, who is the drill-sergeant of the gladiators, does not commit murders himself, but he teaches his pupils to do so. lanistam ... arceri: for the Ian ista , see Friedlander, 2, 64 seqq.; SchOllgen, 96, n. 489. Among the heathens the gladiatorial games were chiefly censured by the philosophers, cf. e.g. Sen. ep. 7, 3 seqq.; 90, 45; 95, 33. However, they were not forbidden until

Constantine, cf. Cod. Theod. 15, 11, 1; Cod. Iustin. 11, 44, 1. The Christians combated them fiercely from the first, cf. in Tert. spect. 12 and 19; apol. 15,

4-6 and 38, 4; pud. 7, 15; also Athenag. legato 35; Theophil. ad Autol. 3, 15; Tat. orat. 23; Iren. adv. haer. 1, 1, 12 (1 , 55 Harvey); Min. Fel. 30, 6 and 37,

4. Denique: Van der Nat translates 'for instance'. However, in that case something must have been mentioned of which an instance is given, which is not the case here. As in 4, 2 it should be rendered by 'after all'. reatus: cf. 1, 1. istud = hoc, cf. 2, 3. quod mihi de stupro interdictum sit: for this construction of interdicere (already found in Cato ad fil. fro 1: interdixi tibi de medicis; Cic. Caecin. 23), cf. apol. 45, 3: quid eruditius, de maleficio an et de maliloquio interdicere? ; mono 15, 1: de cibis interdicebant; see TLL

VII, 1: 2175, 21-33; Hoppe, Beitr., 21-2; cf. the note on 4, 1 at the end. In later Latin the subjunctive and the indicative are used promiscuously after the causal quod (just as after quia and quoniam), see Hofm., Synt., 722; Thierry,

108; Kok, 177; Hoppe, Synt., 76-7; Goelzer, Nr., 360. In the next sentence we find an indicative again (quod ... segregavi); cf. an. 17, 2 (in one sentence): quod ... adseverat .. . , quod .. . persuadeat, quod ... infamet, quod ... iungat.

nihil ... operae ... exhibeo: a juridical expression, cf. e.g. Papin. dig. 50, 1, 17 pr.: an operas patrono vel ministerium capto luminibus exhibeat; see

TLL V, 2: 1425, 71 seqq. For exhibere, exhibitio, cf. the note on 6, 2.

11; Cypr. adDonat. 7; [Cypr.] despect. 5; Lact. d.i. 6,20,9-15; Salvian. gub. d. 6, 2, 10-1; Prud. C. Symm. 1, 379 seqq.; 2, 1091 seqq. and 1122-9. Consequently, both the lanista and the gladiator were kept out of the Church in Church-orders and by councils, cf. Hippol. Trad. apost. = Const. eccles.

Aeg. 11, 7 (Funk, Didascalia, 2, 107): qui gladiator est vel gladiatores pugnare docet vel venator est venans vel famulus publicus in ludo gladiatorio occupatus, aut desinant aut reiciantur; Didasc. 2,62, 1-2 (ib. 1, 176); Epit.

22,9 (ib. 2, 86); Const. apost. 8,32,9 (ib. 1, 534); Syn. Arel. I C. 3 (ib. 282-3).

See Bigelmair, 260 seqq. 311-3; Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 234-5; Biichner, 6-13. 116-7. nec: according to Van der Nat, this word is here equivalent to ne .. . quidem, which in our opinion is not the case, since the translation

5. Nam quod: the anaphora-to which Tert. has a partiality, cf. 1, 4enhances the vehemence of the argument; cf. also in 11, 2 cum (three times) and de (five times), and in 11, 7 quo ore ... quo ore. lenocinium: for a long time there were no penal provisions against the lenones, although they were considered to be infames, cf. Vlpianus dig. 23, 2, 43, 6-9; Suet. Tib. 35; moreover they had to pay a special tax, cf. Suet. Cal. 40; Tert. fuga 13, 3.

The occupation was not absolutely forbidden until Theodosius and Valentinianus, cf. Cod. Theod. 15, 8, 2. See Kleinfeller, art. 'Lenocinium', RE XII:

1942-3; Bliimner, Privataltertiimer, 369. 615. However, sexual sins were fiercely combated by Jews and Christians; see, for instance, the lists of sins referred to in Remark e at ch. 1; the provision that the leno should not be admitted into the Church was already made by Hippol. Trad. apostol. =

Const. eccles. Aeg. 11 , 2 (Funk, Didascalia, 2, 106): si quis leno est, id est 'and ... not' is quite satisfying, as also in 3, 2; it is only in 7, 2 that the meaning ne ... quidem is to b! supposed. per se: this conjecture by Gelenius is certainly correct; 'posse' which is found in A B is either due to the preceding posse or it has originated from a wrong abbreviation (1' instead of p; for a similar case, cf. 2, 2 polluceret). aliis: this is the reading of Gelenius, hesitantly defended by Hoppe, Beitr., 21 (,vielleicht richtig'); A has alio, B alios. Alio as a dative of alius is to be rejected here; it is true that this form actually occurs (see TLL I: 1623, 17 seqq.), but we do not find such morphological pecularities in Tert. (the Thes. refers interrogatively to mono

3, 4: si alio bono comparatum adumbretur (sc. bonum) but there alio bono is undoubtedly an ablative; in pat. 5, 25 Borleffs and Kroymann are wrong, to our mind, in reading ipso with M N F X, which they interpret as a dative, as against ipsi P). Alio as an adverb is impossible; the instances given in TLL

I: 1589,27 seqq. are of a completely different nature (the same applies to eo meretrices sustinens, aut desinat aut reiciatur; cf. Epit. 22, 7 (ib. 2, 86);

Const. apostol. 8, 32, 7 (ib. 1, 534). id genus locorum: i.e. lupanaria.

This, and not Gelenius' odd conjecture id genus lucrum alterius causa (a contradictio in adiecto) is the correct reading, cf. an. 34, 2: Helenam quandam

Tyriam de loco libidinis publicae ... redemit (Simon Magus); mart. 2, 7: non in loca libidinum publicarum oculi tui impingunt. Moreover, the general term

L.VO 11,)-11,tl J J, / ~V7

in e.g. orat. 8, 6; 22, 6, see Diercks, 127. 222). Alios is out of the question.

For these reasons, we best adopt the reading given by Gelenius. It may find support in the preceding variation of plural and singular, if we may assume that this variation is deliberately regular: in 11, 3: ab aliis per me; in 11,

4: alUs ... mihi; mihi ... alUs; in 11, 5: carnem meam ... me alterius causa: so now again it is the turn of the plural against per se! The corruption may have been due to the fact that subministrare was joined to an accusative on the analogy of docere, which it here closely approaches in meaning. _ magis proximum: 'more obvious' (Currey: 'More to the point'); the superlative is fully equivalent here to a positive (= manijestus); cf. nat. 2, 12,

37; apol. 23, 17; res. 7, 10; Marc. 4, 19, 11. Similarly tam proximus, e.g. test. an. 5, 5; quam proximus, e.g. bapt. 17, 5; proximus in Min. Fel. 19, 2. See

Hoppe, Serm. Tert., 48-50, and Beitr., 87; Ldfst., Synt., 2, 199-208 (with more literature).

7. facilius: cf. the note on 8, 4. idolo: dropt out because of haplography in A B; it was only restored by the observant reader De la Cerda. fidei conscientiam: Van der Nat translates: 'the certainty of faith' and adds: 'which gives constantia (qua constantia exorcizabit alumnos suos?); cf. praescr. 31,

4: (haereses) quibus nulla constantia de conscientia competit ad defendendam sibi veritatem ('aucune assurance de leur conviction', Refoule).' We prefer

Thelwall's translation: 'the conscience of the faith itself', since it is the conscience of the faith, i.e. of being a Christian, which gives the constantia.

For the notion of conscientiafidei cf. Valent. 3,4: sed qui ex aliqua conscientia venerit fidei; Hil. in Matth. 4, 28 (PL 9, 942 B); syn. 4 (PL 10, 483 A); likewise iustitiae conscientia in nat. 1, 1,5; 1,6,5; apol. 4, 13. See TLL IV:

364,61 seqq. Quo ore ... quo ore: the second quo ore was wrongly deleted by De la Cerda, since Tert. has more than once such a pathetical repetition, especially at the beginning of a sentence. Cf. e.g. pud. 1, 8, Marc. 1, 27, 5 and res. 9, 2:

Ab~it, absit; an. 17, 13: Non licet, non licet; Prax. 29, 1:

Obmutescat, obmutescat ista blasphemia; paen. 8, 3: ille est scilicet, ille est, qui .... See Ldfst., Z. Spr. Tert., 74-5; Waszink, 252; Stephan, 65. For quo ore cf. e.g. Marc. 2, 12, 1: ... quo ore constitues diversitatem duorum deorum in separatione ... ? si per templa transibit: 'if he passes through the temples'. Dolger, 'Heidnische Begri.iJ3ung und christliche Verhohnung der

Heidentempel. Despuere und exsufflare in der Damonenbeschworung', AC 3 (1932), 192-203, translates: 'wenn er an den (heidnischen) Tempeln vori.ibergeht' (likewise Kellner). Although the usual meaning of transire per is 'to pass through', Dolger's translation seems indeed possible, if we compare passages like Aug. Enarr. in Ps. 128, 13 (PL 37, 1695): nostis enim, fratres, quando transitur per operantes, est consuetudo ut dicatur illis: benedictio domini super vos. Nevertheless this interpretation is incorrect, for though the temples, too, were treated by the Christians with the same marks of abhorrence (cf. spect. 13,4: nec minus templa quam monumenta despuimus), there is in the present passage only mention of the altar which is placed in front of the image of the deity within the temple. despuet et exsufflabit: although Tert. uses despuere often metaphorically (e.g. nat. 1, 6, 6: (leges) despuuntur; ib. 1, 10, 10; Marc. 1,29, 3; see Hoppe, Synt., 184; Waszink,

520), it is here intended literally, as is already suggested by its connection with exsufflare. Spitting was a mark of ridicule and scorn; consequently it was considered a criminal offence to spit in a sanctuary, cf. e.g. on the locus Doliola in urbe Varro ling. 5, 157: locus ... ubi non licet despuere; Liv. 5,40,8; Paul. ex Fest. p. 60 L. For its survival in Christian ritual, see Dolger, Sonne, 30-3, and AC 3 (1932) 202 and 5 (1936),50-1; Dekkers, 181, n. 3; Canon 96 Basil.; cf. W. Riedel, Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien (Leipzig

1900), 273. In the conflict between the religions the sacred objects were mutually spit upon as mark of utter abhorrence. Thus the Christians spat on 6. publicarum victimarum redemptor: he who farms the supply of sacrificial animals from the state, 'supplier of public victims'; cf. also 17, 3.

de turario dissimulabit: dissimulare de is a rare construction: according to TLL V, 1: 1481, 46-8, it only occurs in SaIl. Cat. 47, 1, Paulus dig. 40, 13,

4: servus de condicione sua dissimulat, and in two more passages in Tert., viz., Marc. 4, 43, 3 and fuga 8, 2. It seems probable that here too Tert. adopted the idiom of lawyers. his mercibus, viz., odoribus. informis idololatria: this ancient form of idolatry was performed without images

(informis = sine formis, i.e. sine idolis; cf. 3, 4: omnis forma vel formula idolum se dici exposcit); see for this meaning TLL VII, 1: 1475, 14 seqq. In 3, 2 Tert. spoke of this phase of idolatry as rude iIIud negotium humanae calamitatis, where rudis has the same meaning as informis in the present passage. These two adjectives are fairly frequently found together, e.g. Flor. epit. 3, 10, 5: (naves) rudes et informes; Tac. Germ. 45, 5 and ann. 12, 35,

2; Tert. adv. Herm. 25, 2: terram ... iIIam informem et invisibilem et rudem; virgo vel. 1, 6: (fructus) rudis aliquamdiu et inform is; bapt. 3, 2). opus idololatriae: cf. 3, 1: idololatria agebatur (sc. in ancient times) non isto nomine, sed in isto opere. ecquid = nonne, just as in an. 18, 12; Marc.

1,9,7; 4, 7, I; res. 53,13; exh. cast. 9, 9. It has the meaning of num e.g. in praescr. 28, I. See TLL V, 2: 55, 34 seqq.; Waszink, 267; Hoppe, Beitr., 117, n. 2, who rightly rejects Oehler's alteration into et quid; for ecquis and et quis, see the literature mentioned by Waszink and Fr. Gruenler, De ecquis sive etquis pronomine quaestiones orthographicae (thesis Marburg 1911). _ maioris operae: i.e. than the maker of idols, as is clear from the reason stated: nam facilius sine idololatria quam sine turarii merce; cf. II, 2: sane non ilia principalis idololatria?

11,7 11,1 - ll,~-l L , SURVEY -"11

seeing a heathen image, altar or sanctuary, cf. spect. 13, 4 (quoted above); Min. Fe!. 8, 4: deos despuunt; Prud. c. Symm. 1, 578-9: quota pars (sci!. populi) est / quae Iovis infectam sanie non despuat aram? We should not forget in this connection that the heathens showed veneration when passing an image or a temple, cf. e.g. Min. Fe!. 2, 4; Apu!. apol. 56. However, spitting is at the same time an exorcizing gesture: saliva was thought to have a healing and an apotropaic power. It is an ancient custom to spit on seeing an epileptic or afuriosus, cf. e.g. Plin. n.h. 10, 69; 28, 35: despuimus comitiales morbos, hoc est, contagia regerimus; Tert. an. 50, 2: ut haeretici magi Menandri

Samaritani furor conspuetur. Blowing (exsufflare), too, is-at least in the Orient-a customary practice to ward off evil, particularly demons: Lucian,

Philops. 12, tells of a Babylonian sorcerer blowing at some serpents which were burnt U1t() 'to q:>ucrijfLom; Celsus ap. Orig. c. Cels. 1,68 (122,8-10) of Egyptian magicians: xoct OCX(fLOVCXe; a1to av9pw1twv E~EACXUVOV'twv xcxt vocroue; a1toq:>ucrwv'twv; magi cure possessed persons by blowing, cf. the recipe in the great magic papyrus of Paris, 3080-3: opx(~wv OE q:>ucrcx [cx] a1to 'twv axpwv xcxt (de!. Tambornino) 'twv 1tOOWV aq:>cxLpwv (aq:>cxLpwv instead of a1tcx(pwv, Deissmann, Licht, 221, n. 10) 'to q:>ucr1jfLCX ewe; 'tOU 1tpocrW1tOU dcrXPL9ijcrE'tCXL (viz., the demon; EXXPL9ijcrE'tCXL

Dieterich but cf. Deissmann, ib., 220, n. 1); see Dieterich, Abraxas, 141; Tambornino, 12. 81; Deissmann, Licht, 216 seqq., especially 221. The verb exsufflare occurs since Vet. Lat. and Tert.; Sulp. Sev. still apologizes for using it (dial. 3, 8, 2): quem (daemonem) eminus, ut verbo, quia ita necesse

69, 15; see H. Janssen, 100-1). Qua constantia ... praestat?: an analogous argument against the soldier occurs in cor. 11, 3: Et excubabit pro templis, quibus renuntiavit? Et cenabit illic, ubi apostolo non placet? Et quos interdum exorcism is fugavit, noctibus defensabit, incumbens et requiescens super pilum, quo perfossum est latus Christi? alumnos suos: the demons, cf. 11, 2: omne daemonium saginat. cellarium: 'pantry', a synonym of cella; it is found since Scaev. dig. 32, 41, 1: cellarium iunctum diaetae; in Tert. also res. 27,6. See TLL III: 762, 63 seqq.; Rensch, It., 31;

Olck, art. 'Cella', RE III: 1871-8. excluserit: excludere is a technical term for exorcizing, see TLL V, 2: 1268, 72 seqq.; Waszink, 109. sibi placeat de fide: for de added to a causal ablative, see TLL V, 1: 65, 45 seqq. For sibi placere de, cf. Marc. 4, 35, 9. inimicum: cf. an. 2: Christianos, qui spiritalia nequitiae, non quidem socia conscientia, sed in i mica scientia novimus, nec invitatoria operatione, sed expugnatoria dominatione tractamus ... .

8. de eo impetrare: Tert. is the first to use de instead of ab with impetrare, cf. fuga 2,6; ieiun. 9,2; see TLL VII, 1: 601, 42-9; Thierry, 138. Nulla igitur ars ... idolorum colendorum: this section gives a summary with a conclusion of the preceding chapters: ars: ch. 3-8, professio: ch. 9-10, negotiatio: ch. 11, 1-7. On this passage cf. also Monceaux, Histoire Iitteraire, 278-9, and the comments of Rambaux, 157, n. 279. famulatum idolorum colendorum: the heavy, rhyming endings (see Hoppe, Synt., 162 seqq.) and the clausula (l est, parum Latino loquamur, exsufflans (sci!. Martinus); see TLL V, 2:

1943, 42-5. exorcizabit: the verb exorcizare, which is found since Tert., occurs only once outside Christian literature, viz., in the curious passage Ulp. dig. 50, 13, 1, 3, where an enumeration of people who might be regarded as medici (medicosfortassis quis accipiet eos qui ... ) is concluded as follows: non tamen si incantavit, si inprecatus est, si, ut vulgari verbo impostorum utar, si exorcizavit: non sunt ista medicinae genera, tametsi sint, qui hos sibi profuisse cum praedicatione adfirment; see TLL V, 2: 1557, 39 seqq. A ~) constitute an impressive conclusion. Obviously Tert. intends to give a rendering of the term idololatria. What he wants to say is: 'Unless we state that 'idolatry' is something else than 'the service consisting in the veneration

(colere) of the idols.' The genitive idolorum colendorum is an explicative one; the concepts of colere and famulatus coincide. In 3, 4 Tert. states that every idolorum famulatus et servitus is idolatry; there idolorum is, of course, an objective genitive. description of exorcizing is found in apol. 23 (especially 4-6. 15-6); for further particulars, see the literature mentioned in the preceding note, and Wendland,

Kultur, 216-9; Tambornino, 107-9. That Tert. should suggest the possibility that a turarius works as an exorcizer is not surprising: every Christian is capable of doing so, cf. apol. 23, 4: edatur hic aliqui ibidem sub tribunali

Ch. 12. A second refutation of those who plead the necessity of securing sustenance 'Now I shall go into a fuller consideration of the excuse based on the necessity of securing sustenance. vestro, quem daemone agi constet: iussus a quolibet Christiano loqui spiritus i1le tam se daemonem confitebitur, <quod> in vero est, quam alibi deum, quod in falso est; cor. 11, 3; Scap. 2, 9; thus already Mark 16,

First, this excuse comes too late. You should have thought of it before you became a Christian (§ 1).

But also now the sayings of the Lord show all your pleas of poverty, provision for posterity and slavery to be unfounded. To be the Lord's disciple means to take your cross and to follow Him (§ 2). If the Lord commands to leave parents, wives and children, how could those parents and children be a reason not to leave crafts, trades and professions? James, John and Matthew

17 (see Klostermann's note, HdbNT, 3,173-4); cf. also Orig. c. Cels. 1,6 (59, 16-7) about exorcism: 'tocrOU'tOV fLEV yE OUVCX'tCXL 'to OVOfLCX 'tOU 'I1jcroG XCX'ttX 'tWV

OCXLfLovwv, we; ecr9' (hE xcxt U1tO q:>CXUAWV OVOfLCX~OfLEVOV avuELV. Tert. does not yet know a separate class of exorcistae (this term does not occur until Cyprian, e.g. ep.

IL, I LU l~ , :; UK Vl: Y, K l:MAKK.S

show us that for the sake of God we have to abandon even our dearest relations (§ 3). None of those who were chosen by the Lord were concerned about their livelihood. Faith fears starvation no more than any kind of death for the sake of God (§ 4). deorum. Propterea igitur, quoniam utraque species idolorum condicionis un ius est, dum mortui et dii unum sunt, utraque idololatria abstinemus.

Finally Tertullian sums up the ways in which superstition is perpetrated, or otherwise said, the diverse species of idolatrous acts. First, there are sacrifices and priesthoods, two kinds of manifest idolatry. Then spectacles and the like, and the festivals; these are kinds of hidden idolatry. In the introduction to the following part of the treatise Tertullian will state that manifest idolatry needs no discussion and that the spectacles already have been dealt with (in the treatise De spectaculis), so that only the festivities have to be discussed here.

This final passage of the first part of De idololatria affords an interesting survey of the whole subject matter.

This may seem to be difficult, but whatever is difficult with man is easy with God. At any rate, let us not flatter ourselves with His clemency to such an extent that we let ourselves be tempted to idolatry by the necessity of securing sustenance, not only in the cases discussed up till now, but with regard to all forms of superstition (§§ 4b-5). '

Remarks a. Structure of the argument. The argumentation consists of two parts. First

Tertullian states: 'you are too late. You ought to have looked before you 1. necessitatibus humanae exhibitionis: this refers to the refutation in 5, 12, which is elaborated in ch. 8, of the assertion that it may be necessary to make an image of a pagan divinity in order to be able to live (in 8, 2 we find the expression necessitas exhibitionis; cf. the note on exhibitionis in 6, 2). nobis ... supplaudimus: the same expression with the meaning 'to be selfsatisfied' is found in the above-mentioned 14th letter of St. Jerome: nec sibi quisquam de corporis tan tum mundi castitate supplaudat (9, 2), and in his comm. in Eph. 2, 3 (PL 26, 480 B): qui sibi de sapientia supplaudebat. Here we have a slightly different shade of meaning: 'to flatter oneself with', cf. pud. 19, 1: quando etiam Iohannes nescio quid diversae parti supplaudere leapt, like that prudent man of the Gospel who wants to build a house' (Luke

14, 28-30). In the second part Tertullian argues that also now (et nunc), i.e. now that he has become a Christian, his opponent has the dicta and the exempla of the Lord preventing him to make such excuses.

In a diatribe style Tertullian lets his opponent make objections which he answers by quoting a dictum of the Lord. Then he refers to the exemplum of the Lord who carried His cross and whom his disciples have to follow. He also refers to the examples of the apostles James, John and Matthew. Nobody of them said: 'I have nothing to live from'. And Tertullian continues: faith does not fear starvation, it does not even fear death. videatur ('to applaud'). A similar expression is found in 12,5: Sic tamen nobis de mansuetudine et clementia dei blandiamur. post fidem obsignatam:

'after the sealing of faith', i.e. after baptism. Faith precedes baptism, which is 'the seal of faith', e.g. spect. 24, 2: hoc erit pompa diaboli, adversus quam in signaculo fidei eieramus; cf. ib. 4, 1; bapt. 6, 1: (abolitio delicto rum) quam fides impetrat obsignata in patre et filio et spiritu sancto; ib. 13, 2 a lengthy b. Survey. At the end of the chapter Tertullian emphasizes that the Christian should avoid like a pestilence all kinds of idolatry, not only those discussed above, but the whole array of human superstition. He then discerns the following species: service of gods, dead people or kings. This is a remarkable distinction for an author who adheres to Euhemerism, which theory says that the gods have been men, often kings, who received divine veneration after death or already during their earthly lives. The gods then are in fact dead people, as Tertullian often says. They are idols (see Remarks at c. 1) and "pertain to the impure spirits". That is to say that they are intermediary entities between those spirits and men. In the present text Tertullian probably aims at the cult of the dead and of the (living) king. In cor. 10, 2 he qualifies the worship of the dead as a 'second idolatry': nam et mortuorum est ita coronari, quoniam et ipsi idola statim fiunt et habitu et cultu consecrationis, quae apud nos secunda idololatria est. There is no essential difference between the cult of the gods and that of the dead, cf. spect. 12, 4-5: Quoniam et idololatria parentationis est species: tam haec quam ilia mortuis ministrat. In mortuorum autem idolis daemonia consistunt; ib. 13,2-3 daemoniis ... scilicet consistentibus in consecrationibus idolorum sive mortuorum sive, ut putant, argument against those who assert (13, 1): baptismum non est necessarium quibus fides satis est (see Refouh~'s note, p. 86, n. 1); paen. 6, 16: lavacrum iIlud obsignatio est fidei; praescr. 36, 5: eam (sci!. fidem) aqua signat (sci!. ecclesia Romana); an. 41,4. We should remember that already by themselves these words provide an argument, which to Tert. is decisive. Obsignare is a juridical term denoting the sealing of a contract, a testament, etc., as a guarantee of authenticity and inviolability. In the same way, baptism is the sealing of faith. Besides, baptism (and especially the baptismal oath (&1t6'tIX~t~) and the confession of faith (crUV'tIX~t~)) constitutes by itself a contract between God and man, carrying contractual obligations; this is most clearly shown in an. 35, 3; cf. also spect. 4, 1 and 24, 2; bapt. 6, 2. For further particulars, see Dolger, Sphragis, 99-104, and Sonne, 119-24; Refoule, Bapt., 48-53; G.

H. W. Lampe, The Seal of the Spirit (London 1951), 157 seqq.; cf. also Waszink, 455. For the paralleling of baptism with the sacramentum militiae,

12,1-12,2 12,2

see comm. on 19,2. non habeo quo vivam: Tert. repeats the excuse of the artifices for making images of pagan divinities which was mentioned in 5, 1, and which he is now going to refute more fully. Cf. for this passage also

Schollgen, 233. For such repetitions, which are fairly frequent in Tert.'s works, especially after excursions, cf. an. 25, 1 with Waszink's note. abruptae: 'inconsiderate, rash' (Gloss. praeceps, inmoderatus vel infrenatus, inconsideratus, TLL I: 142, 3-5) is found since Sen. controv. 2 pr. 2 as a qualification of style, since Val. Max. 8, 1 abs. 3 to denote a trait of character.

In Tert. cf. an. 8, 1: Abruptum a/ioquin et absurdum est (sc., to make a certain statement); in Marc. 4, 29, 4 abruptus is almost synonymous with absurdus: Adhibenda tamen ... etiam abrupta defensio est adversus abruptam pravocationem. See the passages quoted by Waszink on an. 8, 1 (155). Ante: Tert. avoids antea even in correspondence with postea, cf. e.g. res. 47, may be corrected in the sense that it is a word from colloquial language, from which Plautus, the old versions of the Bible and the idiom of lawyers used to borrow numerous words and expressions. The present use of egenus as a translation of 1t'twX6~ was undoubtedly influenced by the preceding Egebo (not the opposite: the opponent wants to say: 'non habeo quo vivam': this is egebo, not pauper era). Sed nolite ... liIia: Kroymann wants to read: Sed nolite ... victu. 'Et vestitus' (scil. non habeo): habemus exempla (this is probably a slip of the pen) liIia. The reason is probably that in this passage Tert. is answering the objections one at a time. If we retain the traditional interpunction, this is the only answer where something is added which had not been mentioned by the opponent. However, in Kroymann's reading we miss the adversative conjunction which introduces the first answers . Vestitus, too, is awkward as a plural accusative. The most important objection, however, is that also in Matth. 6, 25 (cf. ib. 31; Luke 12, 22), to which Tert. alludes in the present passage, food and clothing are mentioned together. It stands to reason that here, too, the remark about clothing is added as it were in the same breath. For this reason a change of interpunction is unnecessary. The only remarkable fact is that instead of the simple admonition from Matth. 6,

25 we find the example of the lilies from Matth. 6, 28 (Luke 12, 27) added.

cogitare is the translation of fL€.P\fL\I~\I (Matth. 6, 25); see Ronsch, It., 352

(cf. 308); Stephan, 78. Cf. the preceding note. Substantia with the meaning 'property' is a juridical term, see the literature mentioned in the note on 2,

1; Koffmane, 59; Ronsch, It., 325. Substantia may be a nominative (cf. uX.

1,4, 5-6; fuga 14, 1) as well as an ablative (cf. nat. 2, 15,7; an. 2,7). omnia ... dividenda: cf. mon. 14, 7: discessit et iIIe dives, qui non ceperat substantiae dividendae egenis praeceptum. Tert. is the only Latin author to use dividere in the translation of this passage: all other versions have dare. Tertullian here clearly adopts the variant reading in Luke 18, 22, viz., O\<xoo~; most Greek

MSS have 06~, which is also found in Matth. 19,21 and Mark 10,21; see Aalders, Luc., 273 (cf. 256-7). Aalders rightly leaves the quotations occurring in Marc. out of consideration, as being derived from Marcion's Gospel.

There, in 4, 36, 4, we find: omnia, quaecumque habes, vende et da pauperibus, and a little further on (36, 7): vende .. . quae habes ... et da ... egenis. Nemo ... operi: oped does not belong to the quotation; it is rather a variation on the text of Luke: ~lXcr\Adqc 'toG 8e.oG. It can be explained in two ways: 1 ° operi = 'the Christian way of life'. Tert. chooses a neutral term instead of the Biblical 'kingdom of God'. 2° operi = 'the activity of the plougher' . In this case Tert. changes the meaning of the text, making it refer totally to the work of the plougher and leaving to the reader the task to work out the comparison. condicionalis: a juridical term, denoting, both as an adjective to servus (e.g. cod. Theod. 10, 1, 5 and cod. lust. 10, 1, 7, 1: per condicionales servos; cf. Aug. Enarr. in Ps. 145, 3: ita serviat (scil. caro) nobis

13 and 53, 10; also in the present passage we find postea at the end of the sentence. See LOfst., Z. Spr. Tert., 88-9, and, for other authors, Per. 74-5;

Hofm., Synt., 499 seqq.; Schrijn.-Mohrm., 1, 132. aedifex is a hapax, see

TLL I: 917, 1-3. -

defunctus: Rigaltius (followed by all later editors except Oehler) here reads defectus, a suggestion by Iunius. Both were probably led to this conjecture by the absense of an ablative (or an accusative, see TLL V,

1: 378,47 seqq.; Borleffs, Mnem. N.S. 60 (1933),87, n. 1; Diercks, 221 on orat. 22, 5) after defunctus. However, defungi is more than once used absolutely with the meaning 'to have done with, to acquit oneself of', which shows a variety of shades. Most frequent is the use in the sense of 'to die'

(especially the perfect participle), said of things 'to cease (to exist)' . The verb is strikingly frequent in Tert.: Claesson in his index quotes 46 instances.

2. dicta domini, exempla: the asyndeton has been justly defended by Hoppe, Beitr., 53; cf. 10, 7: de pub/icis, propriis sollemnitatibus. exempla: for this word, see Petre's monograph (for the present passage pp. 47. 119.

129). causationem: this word is used as an equivalent of excusatio from Tert. and the Vetus Latina onwards, cf. cor. 11,7; exh. cast. 12,1. In Marc.

5, 20, 1 (= Phil. 1, 18) we find causatione as a translation of 1tpo<p<Xcr€.\ (Vulg.: per occasionem). It does not seem to be a law term. See TLL III: 702, 30 seqq.; Hoppe, Serm. Tert., 74. For causari, see Hoppe, Synt., 35; Thierry,

190. felices egenos dominus appellat: Tert. refers to the first words of the beatitudes of Luke 6, 20 fLlXx<xPW\ ot 1t'twxoL Matthew has the same words but adds 't~ 1t\l€.UfLlX't\. Tert. here clearly speaks of purely material poverty. egenos: although the word occurs in Plautus, and after him again from Vergil and Livy onwards, it does not become more frequent until Tert. and later authors, see TLL V, 2: 231, 34-6. As Ulpian uses it more than once (TLL ib.

231, 82 seqq.) and the word is also frequent in early versions of the Bible, Norden's remark (on Verg. Aen. 6, 91: in rebus egenis) that it is an archaism

12,2

l~,~-J~,..J sicut condicionale mancipium) and as a substantive (e.g. cod. lust. 8, 17, 11:

(testes) licet condicionales sint, quos vulgo tabel/arios appel/ant; Aug. c.

Faust. 22, 55 (650, 17-8): ut etiam per hanc condicionalem libera ilia uxor Iacob laborans filios heredes regni suscipiat), a slave who cannot become free

('einer der pers6nlich und fur immer zu einem gewissen Amte verpflichtet ist', Heumann-Seckel, s.v.); see TLL IV: 138, 1 seqq. With a different meaning we find condicionalis e.g. in an. 52, 2, see Waszink, ad loc. (p. 535). _ duobus dominis: the Christian is a servus dei, cf. 2, 1 with the note. On this sentence (Matth. 6, 24) cf. Rambaux 134, n. 47; Tert. quotes this sentence rather frequently: spect. 26, 4; uX. 2, 3, 4; an. 16, 7; cor. 1, 1; 12, 4.5. Si vis ... necesse est: this corresponds most closely to Luke 14, 27, not, as Aalders thinks, to Matth. 16,24 in which the word flCXe1j"t~~ (here: discipulus) fails. The use of tol/ere is remarkable indeed, the Greek text having ~cxcmX~~t

(one would expect portare, cf. Ransch, N. T. Tert., 594), however, cf. fuga 7, 2: qui pluris fecerit an imam suam quam me (- Luke 14, 26; cf. an. 13,

3), non est me dignus (Matth. 10, 38) et qui non tol/it crucem suam et sequitur me non potest esse meus discipulus (Luke 14, 27). This last passage also clearly illustrates how Tert. blends various related passages from Holy

Scripture (cf. 11, 1 with the note; for the mutual influencing of parallel passages in quotations generally, see E. Jacquier, Le Nouveau Testament dans

I'Eglise chretienne, P (1911), 10 seqq.); similarly, scorp. 11, 1: qui pluris ... fecerit etiam animam suam quam me (- Luke 14, 26), non est me dignus sione modulata, tum et orantes confitemur Christo. For the interpretation of this text see F. J. Dalger, 'Beitrage zur Geschichte des Kreuzzeichens', lbAC

5 (1962), 5 seqq. and, for the explication of this entire passage, Maria Ko Ha Fong, Crucem tollendo Christum sequi. Untersuchung zum Verstiindnis eines

Logions lesu in der aften Kirche (Munsterische Beitrage zur Theologie, 52, Munster 1984), 68-70. corpus ... quod in modum crucis est: Rigaltius' emendation crucis instead of the reading xp~ which is handed down in A and B, is undoubtedly correct, cf. nat. 1, 12, 7: ipsi quoque corpori nostro tacita et secreta linea crucis situs est, quod caput emicat, quod spina dirigitur, quod umerorum obliquatio < ...... >. For a similar confusion of Christus (Xp~) and spiritus (~p~), see Thbrn., 1, 65, n. 1; Evans, 265, on Prax. 13, 2 and Kroymann's adnot. crit. on Marc. 4,42,6. For in modum, cf. 5,4. The modes of appearance of the cross in the world are a favourite theme. For the human body as afigura of the cross, cf. Just. apol. 1, 55, 4: "to 8t &VepW1t~LOV crXTiflcx

.. . ou8tv O(no 8dxvucrLV 7J "to crXTiflcx "tOU cr"tcxupou; Maximus of Turin writes in his fiftieth homily, which is entirely devoted to the subject of this appearance of the cross everywhere (PL 57, 342 C-343 A), 343 A: ipsius enim incessus hominis, cum manus levaverit, crucem pingit atque ideo elevatis manibus orare praecipimur, ut ipso quoque membrorum gestu passionem domini fateamur; tunc enim citius nostra exauditur oratio, cum Christum, quem mens loquitur, etiam corpus imitatur. Justin devotes the entire chapter apol.

1, 55 to a detailed exposition of the ubiquitous appearance of the cross in the world. He begins by stating that the meaning of the cross has not been recognized by the demons, and that this is the reason why it has not been imitated by them; then he continues: xcx"tcxvo~crcx"t~ ... 1t<xv"tcx "tel EV "t~ x6crfl~, d O(v~u "tOU

(Matth. 10, 38) ... et qui animam suam invenerit perdet iIIam, qui vero perdiderit mei causa inveniet illam (Matth. 10, 39). Therefore, it is also incorrect that Aalders (p. 59. 95) relates an. 55, 5: si crucem tuam tollas et sequaris dominum particularly to Matth. 10, 38 (although he admits influence of Matth. 16, 24); it may just as well be regarded as an allusion to Matth. 16,

24 (Mark 8, 34; Luke 14, 27; perhaps even Luke 9, 23). Tert. merely reproduces the contents of these passages without exactly realizing the different particulars of form in each of them. id est, angustias ... crucis est: this explanation (id est) strictly refers to the words crucem tuam in the previous free quotation of Scripture. One might, however, also suppose that the words crucem tuam tollas et dominum sequaris necesse est represent to Tert. one idea, viz., 'to carry your cross behind the Lord'. This cross is explained in two ways: 1. crux = angustiae et cruciatus; 2. crux = corpus.

The first explication is usual; as to the second, the idea that the body which one has to carry is like a cross is a remarkable adaptation of an idea that is not unknown to Platonism (cf. the opening sentence of Porphyry's Vita

Plotini). One should notice the circular composition of the sentence: crucem tuam ... in modum crucis est. The idea, that the human body in modum crucis est, is also mentioned by Tert. in nat. 1, 12, 7 and orat. 14: Nos vero non attollimus (sc. manus) tantum, sed etiam expandimus et, dominica pascrX~flCX"tO~ "t01J"tOU (viz., of the cross) 8LOtX~L"tCXt 7J XOLVWV(CXV tX~LV 81)VCX"tCXl. Similarly,

Maximus of Turin, towards the end of the homily just quoted: hoc igitur dominico signo scinditur mare, terra colitur, caelum regitur, homines conservantur. The signum crucis, salutis is seen in nature by Tert. (birds: orat. 29,

4; bull: Marc. 3, 18, 3-4 = Iud. 10, 7) and further in the quarters of the heavens (Maxim., op. cit., p. 341 C) and in a number of objects (statues:

Just., loco cit., 7; Tert. nat.l, 12,5-13; signa vexillorum and tropaea: Just., loco cit., 6; nat. 1, 12, 14-6; apol. 16,8; ship: Marc. 3, 18, 3-4 = Iud. 10,7;

Just., loc. cit., 7; Tert. nat. 1, 12,5-13; signa vexillorum and tropaea: Just., loco cit., 3; Min. Fel., loco cit.; Maxim., op. cit., p. 342 B). See DACL S.V.

'Orante', XII: 2293, and the literature mentioned by Diercks, 292.

3. Parentes ... relinquendi erunt: this argument, which is derived from Holy Scripture (viz., Matth. 10, 37-this text stands immediately before Et qui non accipit crucem suam-and ib. 19, 29), is not an expression of Tert. 's rigorism. In his time it certainly had persuasive power, since the rupture of family-ties was often a consequence of conversion, and was accepted as such,

: 0

1 1., j

J 4 ,.) -

J L. ,"+

cf. e.g. apol. 3, 4; Pass. Per pet. et Felic. 3, 3; 5-6. See Bardy, Conversion, 220-9. de artibus ... negotiationibus '" professionibus: once more the enumeration which we found in 11, 8; cf. the note on that passage. pignera: as is evident from the preceding words liberorum et parentum causa and from the following examples, not 'children' (as in nat. 1, 15,5), but 'beloved ones, relations', cf. nat. 2, 9, 14: qui pro salute principum et domus eorum adversus liberos et coniuges et <omne> pignus suum deierant; orat. 8, 3. For Prax.

3,5, see Evans, Prax., 200. The spelling of A is inconsistent: in nat. 1, 15, 5 and orat. 8, 3 we find pignora. Cf. also Oehler's note on the present passage

(p. 86 g). pignera et artificia et negotia: for this enumeration, see below at cum ... fidei. derelinquenda: this verb is rarely used until the first century of our era, in which it occurs a number of times in Pliny (more frequently than in Columella, cf. Waszink, 130). It is a technical term in juridical literature (= omittere, neglegere possessionem, TLL V, 1: 627, 72 seqq.).

However, that this should be the reason for its first frequent occurrence in Tert. does not seem certain, since this verb is also very common in other

Christian authors. At all events, an important reason for its frequency is the fact that it gives the excellent clausula lex, i.e. the entire clausula 1 in one word; cf. in this connection Waszink, 'The Technique of the Clausula in Tertullian's De anima' (Vig. Chr. 4 (1950),212-45),214. cum ... vocati ... tardum fuit fidei: Here the first thing to be explained is how the pignera, artijicia and negotia are included in the three quotations from Holy Scripture. In the first passage a leaving of all three factors is meant (pater = pignus, navis = both artijicium (the art of fishing) and negotium); in the second passage teloneum = negotium, in the third sepelire patrem = pignus. In bapt. 12, 9

Tert. gives the same examples in the same order: id (sc. faith) si apostolis and 60-1 is changed for the sake of the climax). cum ... derelinquunt, cum

... suscitatur, cum ... fuit: variation of tenses is quite common in Tert., cf. the numerous instances collected by LOfstedt, Krit. Apol., 103-5, and Z. Spr.

Tert., 23-5 . 80-1; see also Hoppe, Beitr., 38-9; Waszink, 102; Serbom, 100-2 (with more literature). Therefore Borleffs' alteration of the text in bapt. 12,

9 (quoted above) is unnecessary. Iacobus: it is necessary to adopt this reading of Mesnart and Gelenius, since always (also in Tert.) lacob, the reading of A, is the name of the patriarch. Moreover, cf. Marc. 4, 3, 3: Petrus et lohannes et lacobus; ib. 5, 3, 6; Prax. 15, 8. teloneo: this word, borrowed from Greek, is not found before the Vetus Latina and Tert. (also in bapt. 12,9); cf. Rensch, It., 246. The word occurs in Vulg. Matth. 9, 9,

Mark 2, 14, and Luke 2, 17 as a translation of 't&AWIIWII. tardum fuit fidei:

Oehler gives a correct paraphrase: 'Vel in re tam pia, ut patris sepultura, immorari tardum est visum ad capessandam fidem'. The adj. tardus is used here with a causative sense, = 'retarding', 'delaying', as, for instance, in Prop. 1, 10, 16: dominae tardas ... aperire fores; for further instances, see

OLD s.v., par. 3 (not all the passages quoted there are relevant). Fidei is a brachylogical expression instead of fidei capessendae, as was rightly observed by Oehler. Tert. not rarely puts a single subst. instead of a subst. connected with a participle or a gerundivum, e.g. Valent. 1, 1: Valentiniani, frequentissimum plane collegium inter haereticos, quia ... ad fabulas (sc. inveniendas) facile est ....

4. Nemo: in this paragraph the extreme consequence of the preceding argument is put forward, while it is at the same time an explication of the startingpoint, which was already briefly stated in 5, 1: 'if necessary, the physical life should be sacrified'. Cf. also 23, 7: det (sc. dominus) ... nobis abrumpendae omnis necessitatis constantiam. The readiness to die for one's faith is often expressed very generally, for instance in Aristid. apol. 15, 10: E'tO\[J.OC dcnv U1ttp

XpLa'toii 'tcX~ <jIuxcX~ exU'tWII 1tpoia8exL, in most cases, however, with a special reference to martyrium, cf. e.g. Just. apol. 1, 39, 3-5; 1, 57, 1-2; ep. ad Diogn. d~fuit, nescio quorum fides tuta sit; uno verbo domini suscitatur a teloneo (sc. f~de~ .Borleffs; suscitatus BT; Borleffs' conjecture is supported by tardum fuit fidel m the present passage, and by fidesfamem non timet in 12,4), dereliquit

(derelinquit Borleffs, unnecessarily, cf. infra) patrem et navem et (del.

Borleffs) artem qua vitam sustentabat deseruit, patris exsequias despexit; summum i/lud domini praeceptum Qui patrem aut matrem mihi praeposuerit non est me dignus ante perfecit quam audivit. So in this passage the examples are given as an illustration of Matth. 10, 37. We find the ~ame th~ught with reference to Matth. 12, 48 in cam. Chr. 7, 8 seqq., partlcularly lb. 7, 13: negavit (Christus) itaque parentes quomodo docuit

1 and 10,7; Lact. d.i. 5, 13,5. Bardy (Conversion, 170-1) justly remarks: 'au IIIe siecle comme au lIe, il faut etre pret a accepter Ie martyre si l'on desire etre disciple du Christ'. Therefore, the heathens characterized the Christians as an expeditum morti genus (spect. 1,5; cf. Min. Fel. 8, 5; Just. apol. 2,2,

19-3 (4), 1). They regarded the Christian attitude as obstinatio, cf. apol. 50, 15; nat. 1,18,1; thus already in Plin. ep. ad Trai. 96,3; Marc. Aur. 11,5; cf. also Lucian. Peregr. 13. For further literature, see Bardy, Conversion,

~egandos, pro dei opere. Matth. 12, 48 and Luke 8, 21 are brought together ~n '!farc. 4, 19, 11. The present passage (not the one from De baptismo) was lmltated by Hier. ep. 38, 5, 1: patrem senem cum navicula et rete dimittunt. publicanus a teloneo surgit et sequitur salvatorem; volens discipulus revert; dom~m et suis ante renuntiare magistri voce prohibetur; sepultura non datur patn et pietatis genus est impium esse pro domino (the order of Luke 9, 59-60

167-71; H. Delehaye, Les origines du culte des martyrs (Brussels 1912), 1-26; Bauer, HdbNT, Erg. Bd., 247-8; Geffcken, Zw. gr. Apol., 162-3; Bi.ichner,

36. Fides famem non timet: this sentence was copied by Hier. ep. 14, 10, 3: De cibo cogitas? Sed fides famem non timet. famem non minus ... con-

.L.LU

IL,4-IL,)

lL,) LLI

present passage, also in e.g. ux. 2, 2, 1; Min. Fel. 33, 1. In spect. 14, 1 it is joined to quod, in mart. 4, 1 to quia. The word mansuetudo occurs four more times in Tert. 's works: Marc. 4, 9, 10 and 4, 29, 10; an. 24, 5; virgo vel. 1,

6. Rambaux, 299, n. 55, rightly observes that Tert. nowhere recommends this virtue to human beings. idololatriae affinitates: cf. 10, 1: affines illos esse multimodae idololatriae. 'The domain of idolatry': in this metaphor the abstractum is used pro concreto. afflatum eius: sc., idololatriae, cf. idol.

16, 1: nul/um autem periculum observari de flatu idololatriae. The use of this term is explained by the words vice pestis, for Tert. is thinking of the contagion caused by a disease, cf. Ovid met. 7, 551: dilapsa (sc. corpora) liquescunt adflatuque nocent et agunt contagia late (for more similar passages see TLL I: 1228, 46 seqq.); cf. also apol. 23, 16: de contactu deque afflatu nostro; Herm. 14,5: Plus bonumfloruisset sine mali afflatu. Moreover, Tert. frequently uses this substantive on account of his definition of the human soul as afflatus or flatus dei: an. 16, 1; 27, 4; 36, 4; Marc. 1, 24, 5; 5, 6, 11; mono temnendam ... quam omne mortis genus: here fames has the meaning of 'death from starvation', cf. Sail. ep. Pomp. I: fame, miserrima omnium morte; Liv. 27, 44, 8: fame ac frigore, quae miserrima mortis genera sint; 4,

9, 3; 21,41, 11; Amm. Marc. 17,9,4: fame, ignavissimo mortis genere. Gmne = omne aliud; for this meaning, which is frequent in later Latin, see LOfst.,

Beitr., 1l3-5, and Per., 174; Tidner, Part. copul., 2, n. 1; Svennung, Gros., 76, n. 1; Waszink, 250. Related to this is the use of aliquis in the sense of alius quis, and of ullus in the sense of ullus alius, see the note on 6, 2. Didicit

... : an allusion to Luke 14, 26 (cf. the note on 12, 3: si vis ... necesse est) or to Matth. 10, 28. For respicere 'to take into account, to trouble about', cf.

5, 4. quanto magis: viz., non respicere. Ellipsis of a verb after quanto magis is very frequent, cf. e.g. spect. 3,5 and 23,5; nat. 1,7, 13. 15; 2, 8,

3; ux. I, 6, 2; fuga 5, 3; an. 6, 3; 17, 10; 58, 5. 'quo magis and quanto magis usually introduce an argumentum a fortiori', Waszink, 276; cf. also Hartel,

1, 47. Quotusquisque haec adimplevit?: it is unnecessary to adopt Kroymann's alteration adimplebit. The opponent is thinking of the small number of (stereotype) examples that has been cited, and uses this fact as a ground for his excuse: 'only very few persons have fulfilled these conditions',

16, 2; Valent. 24,2. vice pestis: vice 'like' is not found before Plin. min.; in Tert. e.g. cult. fem. 2, 10, 1; apol. 27, 7; 48, 12. For the simile, cf. Ovid met. 7, 547-53: silvisque agrisque viisque / corpora foeda iacent, vitiantur odoribus aurae. / ... dilapsa liquescunt / adflatuque nocent et agunt contagia late. / pervenit ad miseros damno graviore colonos / pestis; Val. Max.

1,8 ext. 19: corporis ... iacentispestifero adflatu. The simile is the more striking as such phenomena were ascribed to the demons, cf. apol. 22, 4-5; the demons are frequently said by the Christians to cure diseases which they first had caused themselves; cf. Courcelle, art. 'Divinatio', RAC 3, 1245. The passage from the Apologeticum also testifies to the strongly material conception, which Tert. has both of the constitution of the demons and of their afflatus; see about this d' Al(:s, 154-5; Lortz, Apol., 2, 41. de longinquo: this prepositional expression does not occur before Tert. (TLL V, 1: 79, 72-3), who uses it frequently, just as many other expressions with de, see Hoppe,

Synt., 101, and Beitr., 87-8; Waltz., Comm., 20. 203. vitemus: this is the reading of A, whereas Band Gelenius read devitemus. As Tert. shows no distinct preference for either verb (in idol. 10, 2 we find vitare, in 14, 1 and 24, 3 devitare), it is preferable to adopt the reading of the only extant MS.

The alteration of vitemus into devitemus after de longinquo is more probable than the reverse. in his ... , quae: for hic as an antecedent (here = hic tatis), cf. 7, 1 with the note. deis suis: the possessive pronoun is added with a quite deliberate intention, cf. 20, 3. defunctis: see above Remark b. For the survival of the worship of the dead among the Christians, see D6lger, AC, 2

(1930),90-1 and 98-9 with more literature. regibus: cf. the definition of the emperor-cult in nat. 1, 17, 2: secunda a deis retigio ... Caesarianae maiestatis; apol. 35, 5. Of course Tert. is thinking here, too, of the dead beings who were deified according to Euhemerus (cf. the preceding note). For a detailed discusi.e. the examples only concern exceptional cases and cannot be regarded as a generally applicable standard; the strength of a normal human being is inadequate to tf,ese requirements. quae ... facilia: in spite of the divergence from the Greek (Luke 18, 27: "ta a.ouvOt."tOt. 1tOt.pa a.VepW1tOL~ ouvOt."tOt. 1tOt.pa "t4l ee4l lcrnv) , this sentence should be regarded as a quotation, cf. bapt. 2, 2-3: miratur (sc. incredulitas) ... simplicia quasi vana, magnifica quasi impossibilia. Et sit plane ut putas: satis ad utrumque divina pronuntiatio praecucurrit: 'Stulta mundi elegit deus, ut confundat sapientiam eius' (1 Cor.

1,27), et: 'Quae difficilia penes homines, facilia penes deum'(Luke 18, 27). In conformity with the Greek text is res. 57, 11: Quae impossibilia apud homines, possibilia apud deum. Note the slight difference among these quotations: Tert. is clearly quoting from memory. See Aalders, Luc. 248.2567. 273. penes: Tert. uses penes and apud promiscuously and even likes to vary them (e.g. an. 14, 2; fuga 1, 1; 2, 4); for more particulars and literature see Waszink, 214-5; Thierry, 110. l36.

5. Sic tamen ... blandiamur: sic has restrictive meaning: 'only in so far'.

Tamen is adversative to a concession which was not expressed, e.g. 'even if it remains very difficult'. Tamen here becomes more or less synonymous with certe. For this use of tamen, see Hofm., Synt., 672; Wahlen, 61-3 (with further literature). nobis de mansuetudine ... blandiamur: sibi blandiri means 'to have (false) illusions, to delude oneself' (the same meaning in 23,

1; cf. also 12, 1 nobis supplaudimus). It is first used by [QUint.] declo 330 (297,

15); Plin. ep. 51, 11, see TLL II: 2033, 1 seqq.; followed by de, as in the

1314, SUR VEY , REMARKS

IL,)- U, SU RVEY

sion, see 15 (especially 15, 2 and 15, 7) with the comm. mancipatae: cf. 1, 5 with the note. ad eosdem spiritus immundos pertinentis: the immundi spiritus are the devil, the demons and the fallen angels, see the notes on 1, 5 and 4,2. For the part they play in idolatry, cf. also 11,2; 15,2; spect. 6,4:

Sed de idololatria nihil differt apud nos, sub quo nomine et titulo, dum ad eosdem spiritus perveniat, quibus renuntiamus. Licebit mortuis, licebit deis suis faciant, perinde mortuis suis ut diis faciunt; una condicio partis utriusque est, una idololatria, una renuntiatio nostra adversus idololatrian. hoc genus: this should not be supplied with the genitive of a noun: this expression, which is to be regarded as a fossilized apposition, is also used substantively in apol. 2, 7: Traianus rescripsit hoc genus (= homines huius generis) inquirendos quidem non esse, oblatos vero puniri oportere (for a similar use of the genitive huiusmodi, cf. 13, 2). For hoc genus with a substantive, cf. 20,

2: hoc genus nomina; orat. 27: hoc genus psalmos; an. 32, 2; apol. 27, 7. See Hoppe, Synt., 17; Waltz., Et., 160; Hofm. , Synt. , 385; LOfst., Per., 293, and Synt., 1, 261 -2; 2, 31. them consider you as not being a Christian: so you have been tested, and condemned. In both cases the Lord will be ashamed of you (§ 6).

14. Many Christians think that they are allowed to do sometimes what the heathens do in order to avoid that "the name" is blasphemed (§ 1), but the only blasphemy to be avoided is the justified blasphemy, e.g. on account of fraud or injury. The blasphemy for observing the Christian rules should not be avoided; on the contrary it may exist as long as we exist (§ 3a).

Neither Paul's adhortation to please all nor his assertion that he has become everything to everybody may be used as an argument to join the heathens in their idolatry (§§ 3b-4).

True, Paul allows us to live together with the sinners, otherwise we would have to leave the world, he says. But he does not allow us to sin together with them. The unity in nature, not that in superstition, should be the source of our gladness (§ 5).

If we are not allowed to celebrate the festivities with the pagans, we are certainly not allowed to celebrate them among ourselves. Even the Jewish celebrations, which once were agreeable to God, are now forbidden; this holds a fortiori true of the pagan festivities (§ 6). The Christians should take example by the heathens, who would never take part in the festivities of the Christians.

Chs. 13-14. On taking part in pagan holidays and extraordinary festivities 'Sacrifices and priesthoods need not to be discussed. The spectacles have already been dealt with. What remains are the holidays and extraordinary festivals. There we are indulgent, sometimes to our wantonness, sometimes to If a Christian would argue that some indulgence must be granted to the flesh, i.e. that the flesh must have its relaxation in the festivities, I answer: you have your festive days, even more than the heathens have (§ 7).' our timidity, in opposition to the faith and the discipline which we all have accepted (communem) (§ 1).

The first point of discussion will be whether a Christian is allowed to join the pagans. The Scriptural 'Rejoice with the rejoicing and grieve with the grieving' is no argument in favour of this, because it is an adhortation of the apostle to the brethren to be unanimous among themselves. In the matter under discussion (ad haec) there is no communion between pagans and Christians, just as there is no communion between light and darkness, life and death. Otherwise the word of Scripture "The world will rejoice but you will mourn" would become untrue. Look at the example of Eleazar and the rich man (§§ 2-4).

Remarks Chapters 13 and 14 are a unity. They contain one series of arguments against those Christians who wish to take part in the heathen festivities.

In the introductory paragraph Tertullian gives two motifs, wantonness or timidity, i.e. the desire on the dissipation of those festivities or the fear to be recognized as Christian. With regard to the first motif, one could object: do those festivities not have an element of relaxation which is not unallowed to a Christian? This objection is actually referred to in 14, 7, where Tertullian says: si quid et carni indulgendum est. His answer is: yes, but you do have your own festivities. About the timiditas Tertullian will speak in 13, 6 and again 20, 1 and 21-22.

Some of those days, one objects, are an occasion for gifts, sometimes as an homage, sometimes as a discharge of debt. Do you mean that I shall not accept what is due to me or restore what is due to somebody else?-If this custom was started on account of superstition, you have to keep yourself far from it. You should not do as if you are bound to this particular day for paying debts or receiving what is due to you (§ 5). You yourself should set the rule by which you wish to be dealt with. If you join the pagans in order to hide that you are a Christian, you contaminate your conscience; on the other hand, if the others know that you are a Christian, your taking part will make

Tertullian discusses two main points: 1. A Christian's taking part in heathen festivities together with heathens (13, 2-14, 5; to this the beginning words, De hoc primo consistam, refer); 2. the celebration of these festivities by the Christians among themselves (14, 6-7).

The arguments of those who think that they are allowed to celebrate the festivities together with the heathens are nearly all references to Scriptural

LL4 U,l B,L

texts. Tertullian refutes them easily. Only one argument is of a different nature: Sunt quidam dies munerum (14, 4b) 'There are', the opponent says,

'certain days, on which gifts are spent and debts are paid. Is it not allowed to me to take part in this social behaviour, which is in fact a question of social justice?' (Tertullian undoubtedly aims at the Saturnalia, which he mentions in 14, 4 together with the Kalendae Ianuariae, which was another gift-day, cf.

14, 6; 10, 3).

Tertullian's answer is: if this institution has an idolatrous origin, you have to keep distance from it. You must, of course, pay your debts and you may receive what is due to you, but why should you not do that at another time

(citra diei observationem) and so avoid this idolatrous environment? You yourself should set the rule, i.e. the time of paying and being paid. suum titulum et suum haereticum). See the chapter on the datation (Introd., p. 10). retractari: De la Cerda rightly observes: 'Retractari est, tractari accurate, non, iterum tractari'. interdum lasciviae, interdum timiditati: two motives profoundly despised by the severe and fervent Tert. About the timiditas (i.e. the fear to be detected as a Christian), see ch. 21-22, and the announcement in 20, 1. subscribimus: subscribere with the meaning dare, concedere, is a law term. This sense is the usual one in Tert. adversus fidem disciplinamque communem: it seems that fides denotes the regula fidei and disciplina the rules of life. One could say that fides is the logos and disciplina the nomos. For disciplina see the note on 2, 4. As to the addition communem one should notice that adversus fidem disciplinamque asks for a complement.

Tert. could have used nostram but he chooses the stronger adjective communem in order to underline the gravitas delicti. The reading adopted here is that of A which is also found in Bmg. Band Gelenius read communicantes nationibus in idolicis rebus ('thus communicating with the heathens in idolatry') which represents an entirely different text whose origin is obscure.

The adj. idolicus is found here for the first time (the Greek adj. d8wAtx6~ occurs in the scholia on Plato, Gorg. 452 d; Syrian. in Arist. Metaphys. 7, 32;

Damasc. de princip. 453; Iamblich. de myst. 3, 13; the adv. ·xw~ in Porphyr.

Sent. 10 and scho!. on Plato, Gorg. 456 a). Afterwards, idolicus is found only in Priscillianus (4 times), Paulin. No!. (once) and Paulin. Petricordius (5 times).

The following passage (Cur enim et lateas) deals with what was indicated by timiditati indulgere in the introductory passage of 15, 1: the Christian takes part in the festivities in order to hide that he is a Christian. Tertullian's argument against him is rather complex. First he discusses the case that the Christian tries to hide his being a Christian, while the other does not know it. In this case the ignorance of the other is a contamination of your conscience, Tertullian says. The ignorance of the heathen (which is an ignorance of something that should not be unknown) throws a slur on the conscience of the Christian. Then Tertullian discusses the case in which the Christian tries to hide his being a Christian, while the other knows that he is one (Si non ignoraris quod sis Christianus). Now Tertullian evokes the image of a trial, in which that Christian acts against the conscience of the other and is so put to the test. But, Tertullian continues, the other party will surely (enimvero) not insist; he will rather pretend not to know that you are a Christian

(dissimulaberis is the passive form of dissimulabit te esse Christianum 'he ( = the opponent) will indeed do as if you are not a Christian'). And he concludes: temptatus addictus es, i.e. 'having been tested you have been condemned, because you have shown yourself not to be a Christian and the adversary has admitted that you are not indeed'.

2. De hoc quidem primo: on account of the question whether it is allowed for a Christian to take part in such festivities Tert. now puts his first question:

'Is a Christian allowed to join the pagans in external behaviour?'. In a second part of this section the question arises, whether it is allowed to join them in the practice of giving and receiving gifts at certain gift-days. consistam: as a legal term consistere means iudicio congredi, actione experiri (Oehler's formulation; cf. TLL IV: 465, 48-66: '2 speciatim: a) de partibus litis, in prim is de accusatore'). In Tert. 's works this meaning is very frequently found,

In 14, 6-7 Tertullian speaks of celebration of heathen festivities among the Christians themselves. What does he have in mind here? We think of the possibility that at heathen gift-days Christians took part in the festivity by giving presents to each other and to have meals with each other. Tertullian's words, Saturnalia et Ianuariae etc., point in this direction. e.g. apol. 4, 1: iam de causa innocentiae consistam; ib. 46, 1: constitimus adversus omnium criminum intentationem; 46, 15: si de simplicitate consistam. debeat: here it goes in the direction of liceat ('is allowed' in the translation). Gaudere cum gaudentibus: Tert. had already worked out this thought in the slightly earlier treatise De spectacu lis , mentioned just now, where he speaks of 'the alternate succession of things' in the following way:

I. De spectaculis ... eiusmodi: Tert. often uses eiusmodi and huiusmodi instead of talis, both with a substantive, as is the case here, or on itself as in 13,2; 14,6; 16,4. suum iam volumen implevimus: cf. cult. fem. 1, 8, 4: sicut de iI/is suum volumen edidimus, which also refers to De spectaculis

(similarly an. 3, 4 on the treatise De censu animae ad Hermogenem: habet Vicibus disposita res est: nunc illi laetantur, nos conflictamur. 'Saeculum', inquit, 'gaudebit, vos tristes eritis' (Ioh. 16, 20). Lugeamus ergo, dum ethnici gaudent, ut, cum lugere coeperint, gaudeamus, ne pariter nunc gaudentes tunc quoque pariter lugeamus (28, 1-2). Cf. on this passage Rambaux 396, n. 246 and 397, n. 248.

13,3-13,4 13,4

and 'the torment to which the rich man is condemned'. These refreshment and torment 'bring on a level' the alternate vicissitudes of evil and good. The words aemula retributione give a nearer qualification of this process: 'by way of a retribution which strives to equality'. One may also interpret this ablative as appositional (the ablative = 'which is'); cf. the note on 8, 1 eodem crimine.

The relevant material (also for the 'resultative ablative') has been collected in Waszink's note on an. 19,5 (271-5). On the conception of compensatio, which plays a fairly important part in Tert. 's works, cf. Rambaux, 87 and the passages collected ib. n. 171. Eleazar ... dives: it seems to be probable that here already Tert. regards the story of Lazarus and the rich man (Luc. 16, 9 seqq.) as the description of a real event, as he was to assert a few years later in an. 7, where he was certainly influenced by Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 2, 55 (cf.

Waszink ad loc., 146-9). The Hebraic form Eleazar also occurs in an. 7, 2; the Syriac form Lazarus is used in res. 17, 2; cf. the note of Iunius. apud inferos: Iunius: 'Observandum autem quod ait apud injeros etiam de Lazaro.

Nam inferos Latini Patres, ut Graeci &o'Yjv pro omni loco aut statu mortuorum dixerunt promiscue atque in hunc sensum Lazarus et dives apud inferos collocantur'. in sinu Abrahae: for the explication of the term sinus Abrahae cf., apart from the literature quoted by Waszink, loco cit., J. E. Niederhuber,

Die Eschatologie des hi. Ambrosius (Paderborn 1907),62 ss. Sunt quid am ... expungunt: this sentence should be considered as introducing the objection of the opponent in 'Non ergo ... '. Thus they belong to the words of the opponent, which, in consequence, do not begin at Non ergo. The opponent wants to justify his behaviour by stating that there are certain gift-days; now this is a question of social behaviour, even of social justice; by forbidding a Christian to take part in this usage, Tert. prevents him from doing justice to someone else and receiving what is his. dies munerum: Tert. undoubtedly means the Saturnalia, which he is going to discuss in the next chapter (14, 4). honoris ... expungunt: Oehler interprets: 'Per honoris titulum significantur praemia honoraria illa, quorum supra mentio facta erat cap. 10, pro quibus in ignobilioris ordinis hominibus simplici nomine mercedes dici ait'. titulum: 'motive, reason'; cf. comm. on 1, 2. mercedis debitum expungunt:

Rigaltius (quoted by Oehler) observes: 'Unde et Mercedonius seu Mercedinus mensis dictus, posteaque dies Mercedini, in tres menses tributi'. Oehler quotes in addition: 'Paul. ex Festo p. 124 (= p. 111, 15 Lindsay): 'Mercedonios dixerunt a merced em solvendo'; gloss. lsid. : 'Mercedonius, qui solvit mercedem'; V. Scaliger, De emendatione tempo rum 2,77'. Cf. further Agnes

Kirsopp Michels, The Calendar oj the Roman Republic (Princeton 1967), 18:

3. Ceterum ad haec ... et morti: these words have a model in a passage from spect. 26,4: Quid luci et tenebris? Quid vitae et morti? nihil communionis: The word communio refers to unanimitas in the previous sentence. As to the sense of the passage, cf. 19, 2: Non convenit sacramento divino et humano. Numerous similar passages have been collected by Fredouille, 320-3.

aut scindimus quod est scriptum: 'otherwise', i.e. in the case of taking part in the festivities of the pagans, 'we (i.e. the Christians) rescind the word of Christ: the world will rejoice, but you will mourn'. The verb scindere must be understood in the sense of 'to make untrue'. In De corona 13, 4 Tert. quotes the same Scripture text. In his commentary Fontaine observes that Tert. deforms the words of the Lord here in a twofold way: he makes a prophetic future to a moral commandment and he transforms an allusion to Christ's passion and resurrection into a precept concerning the attitude with regard to persecution. In our view, this is too strong a verdict. There is no need for saying that Tert. interprets the future tenses as imperatives. One may even state that, with regard to gaudebit, such an interpretation is hardly possible. We agree with Fontaine that the text is used in a context which is different from the original one. But we think that in both cases Tert.'s way of arguing is the following: 'if we rejoice with the pagans by partaking in their festivities or ceremonies, we make untrue what the Lord has said. Hence let us not do so'. The text of De spectaculis confirms this interpretation. There the context does not admit us to understand the Scripture words as a commandment, because it speaks of how things go: vicibus disposita res est, etc. On the other side one finds the same adhortation there (/ugeamus). scindimus: here De la Cerda writes rescindimus, which is a quite probable conjecture, since the verb rescindere, a law term, is frequently used by Tert. (Claesson quotes 24 instances). It is practically always a synonym of delere, whereas scindere, which is found 13 times, usually has a concrete sense, e.g. Marc. 2, 24, 7 (1

Reg. 15, 28): et scindetur Israel in duas partes (id. in apol. 38, 2); ib. 4, 42,

5: scissum est et templi velum (id. in Iud. 13, 14). With an accus. of the intern object it occurs Marc. 4, 6, 3 and 5, 19, 3: difjerentiam scindit (-at; pass.

Valent. 39, 1: quanta diversitas scinditur). The only instance of scindere with the meaning rescindere, delere is Scap. 4, 3: scisso eodem elogio; this one instance is sufficient to retain the lectio tradita.

4. Eleazar ... compensant: the meaning of this difficultly construed sentence is clear: there is a compensation in the hereafter for the good and the evil experienced in this life, so that the sum of good and evil for every individual is equal. This is illustrated in the cases of Eleazar (Lazarus) and the rich man. For a correct understanding of the sentence one should recall to mind that the subjects of compensant are Eleazar ... rejrigerium consecutus and dives in tormento constitutus, i.e. 'the refreshment which Eleazar retains'

'The correct name of the intercalary months was mensis intercalaris. The name Mercedonius, mentioned only by Plutarch (Numa 18, 3, Caesar 59, 2), must have been a popular nickname'. In the article 'Mercedonius', TLL VIII:

791,49-62, V. Bulhart quotes a third passage, viz., Lyd. De mens. 4, 92 (144),

13,413,6 15 ,0

p. 164, 18 Wunsch, under the heading: 'November, quo conductor domino fundi mercedem solvebat'. (Cf. Sontheimer, RE XVI: 59, 65). expungunt: see 1, 1.

Tert. and that it is also frequent in juridical texts. The words enimvero et dissimulaberis are then to be interpreted as a parenthetic clause (in the translation we write 'certainly (or 'indeed') people will even (et) pretend not to know that you are a Christian'). The et is contrasted by the words contra eonseientiam alterius agis: the situation is this that a man acting in this way does not only act contrary to the knowledge of the pagan in question but that he will also cause an opposite reaction of that pagan: the latter will treat him as if he were, indeed, a non-Christian. temptatus addictus es: Currey quotes a lengthy note by De la Cerda who wants to prove that tentari is used by early

Christian writers to signify: 'to be overcome by temptation' (which is not quite correct: in this rather unclear note De la Cerda also observes that several times St. Jerome in Adv. Iovin. II uses tentatio with the meaning peccatum).

Currey concludes: 'tentare is used in the peculiar sense expressed by our English tempt. Here tentatus is 'tempted'; addietus, 'given over to the power of the tempter, overcome by the temptation'.' This explication is not correct. temptatus certainly means 'tested' and addietus, to which Oehler supplied peeeato and De la Cerda diabolo, is an abbreviate expression instead of 5. Non: we adopt the reading of Bmg, because the way of arguing does not admit nunc (A B). Non ... alienum should be understood as a conclusion from the previous introductory observation, in the form of a question. consecraverunt: by consecration a link is made between man and demon. This may be the consecration of an idol (cf. 15, 5); here it is the consecration of a mos. This is an utterance of superstition, and means, in consequence, idolatry (= demonolatry). extraneus ab omni eorum vanitate: every act of idolatry is vanitas, because it worships what is unworthy of being worshipped.

Cf. 1, 4. idolothyta: because of the context of idolatry the gifts became 'offerings to the demons'. In cor. 10, 5 Tert. says the same of the crown worn by the soldiers at a donativum ceremony: et corona idolothytum efficitur (see the note by Fontaine). Cf. also Clem. Alex. Paed. 2, 8, 72, 2, where Marrou notes (SC 108, p. 144, n. 1): 'Tres heureusement, Clement transpose au cas de la couronne les conseils formules par Saint Paul au sujet des idolothytes'; he then refers to Tert. cor. 10 and Gussen, 84, n. 3. citra: 'apart from, except'. Cf. pud. 9, 21: sed plus est, quod nihil aliud argumentari Iicet citra id de quo agebatur. See Lewis and Short s.v. citra, IlIa 3, and Waszink's note on an. 20, 4 (286). addietus poenae, as was observed by A. Klotz in his article 'addico' in TLL, where under the heading 'aliquem alicui rei dicare, idem fere quod damnare'

(1: 575, 33) the present passage is quoted in the first place in the second part of this group, which has the heading: '2. omissa poenae notione'. This rubric contains a considerable amount of passages from later Latin (about 35). The next passage in time is Cypr. Ad Demetr. 24: eremabit addietos

(clearly = damnatos) ardens semper gehenna. Remarkable is also Vulg. Iacob 5, 6: addixistis et oecidistis istum (NT: x(XnoLx<xcr(X't~); cf. also Vulg. 2 Petr. 2,

19: a quo enim quis superatus est, huius et servus est. Tert. compares the Christian who hides his belief before somebody else who knows that he is a Christian with somebody who stands his trial. He is tested (temptaris), and ascertains that he is not a Christian. The 'judge' (= the other person) knows that he is a Christian, but (as it was often the case in actions against Christians) he is willing to do as if he were not (enimvero et dissimulaberis).

This means, in fact, a condemnation, i.e. the condemnation of not being a Christian. Thus: temptatus, addietus es. 'You were tested, and condemned'

(this is not an asyndeton, as Bbhm says: the condemnation is a consequence of the test). On this condemnation a punishment must follow. On the denial of being a Christian cf. also 22, 3 and Rambaux, 274, with n. 103. eerte

... in caelis: hac refers to the possibility that one is known to be a Christian, iliac to the opposite. In both cases the person in question tries to hide the fact that he is a Christian; obviously, Tert. supposes, because he is ashamed of Christ. Now, Christ has said: 'Whoever will be ashamed of me before men, of him I, too, will be ashamed before my Father in heaven'. Thus in both cases mentioned above the person who is ashamed of Christ before men, is

6. conscientiam: the word is here a synonym of scientia, as is not rarely the case in Tert.'s works (cf. TLL IV: 364, 22-60 ('I: communis complurium scientia') and some passages in 364,61-365,37 (,II: is animi status quo quis alicuius rei sibi ipse conscius est')). The clearest instance is found in an. 17, 2: mendacium visui obicitur, quod remos in aqua inflexos vel infractos adseverat adversus conscientiam integritatis. In TLL IV: 368, 24 seqq. several passages are adduced from Tert. but the only further instance of this meaning of conscientia in his works is orat. 22, 9: interest nostra, quod dei gratia exerceatur, solius dei conscientiae commendare. Si non ignoraris

... addictus es: of the first part of this sentence a correct paraphrase is given by Oehler: 'Si te Christianum esse ab ethnicis non ignoratur, contra alterius conscientiam agis, quippe aliter agens, quam tibi ex fide Christiana agendum esse ethnicus non ignoret'. More difficult is the way of thought in the second part. A and B read here: enim vero et dissimulaberis, instead of which Latinius conjectured sin vero et dissimulaveris, which was adopted by Iunius and Reifferscheid, whereas Oehler combines the two readings and reads: sin vero et dissimulaberis. In the opinion of Van der Nat, shown by his constitution of the text, the reading of A B can be maintained-an opinion shared by us. In this context it is worthy of mention that enimvero is used 19 times by

14,1-14,2

23U 13,6-14,1

objection against his condemnation of splendid dress, etc.: Sed enim a quibusdam dicitur: ne blasphemetur nomen in nobis, si quid de pristino habitu et cultu detrahamus. Tert. reacts there in the same manner as in the present text: Thus let us then also persist in our sinful life, then the heathens will not blaspheme: Non auferamus ergo < a > nobis et vitia pristina; simus et moribus isdem, si et superficie eadem: et tunc vere non blasphemabunt guilty of Christ being ashamed before his Father, so he is guilty of shame in the Lord (confusio in domino). The Bible quotation of Tert. has something remarkable. In the Vulgate Matth. 10, 33 reads: qui autem negaverit me coram hominibus, negabo et ego coram Patre meo qui in caelis est; Mark 8,

38: Qui enim me confusus fuerit ... et filius hominis confundetur eum cum venerit in gloria patris. In Tert.'s version the construction is exactly that of Matthew but the verb negare (&pviof.lon) has been changed into that of Mark, viz., confundi (l1tOt;LcrxUV0f.lOt;L, which is also found in the parallel verse Luke 9,

26). A still shorter form is found in fuga 7, 1: Qui mei confusus fuerit, et ego confundar eius coram patre meo. In Marc. 4, 21, 12 only the first part of Luke

9, 26 is quoted: qui mei confusus fuerit. nationes. (Kroymann reads nomen instead of non; Dom Dekkers, CC I, p.

367, considers this an excellent conjecture; in the Sources Chn:tiennes edition of cult. fem. M. Turcan maintains the manuscript reading which is in our vision correct, because the negation is essential here; the statement is in perfect agreement with idol. 14,2: Desinamus et non blasphemabitur.) Tert. continues: Grandis blasphemia, <si> de qua dicatur: 'Ex quo facta est

Christiana, pauperius incedit'. Such a blasphemia is a grandiose one, in Tert.'s opinion. This agrees with 0 blasphemiam martyrii affinem in 14,3.

The only blasphemia which is to be avoided is the iusta blasphemia, mentioned in the next sentence; in cult. fem. 2, 12, 1 Tert. observes: Optemus tantummodo, ne iustae blasphemationis causa simus. Porro: here 'on the other hand', 'but'. materia dignae querellae = materia digna querellae (or querella). An enallage to avoid too many a-endings.

14,1. Sed enim: these particles show that Tert. continues the discussion of the previous chapter: 'But < I have to say something more> for a very great number of Christians (on plerique see the note on 2, 2) think that a more indulgent attitude is suggested by Holy Scripture'. Tert. will discuss three texts: 1. ne nomen blasphemetur; 2. omnibus per omnia placeo; 3. ceterum de mundo exiretis. induxerunt animo: in classical Latin one finds only inducere in animum, 'to suppose', 'to imagine'. agnoscendum is here practically equivalent of (ap)probandum, as was asserted by Oehler and Currey ('that we should acknowledge with approbation'); cf. the material collected in TLL I: 1359, 63-1361, 37 (under the heading: 'III. ad probandi, approbandi notionem accedit'). Among the first group of instances (cf. 'iam talia', 1359, 63-1360, 4) two passages from Tert. are quoted, viz., orat. 12: neque enim agnosci poterit < a > spiritu sancto spiritus inquinatus, and ieiun.

16, 5: Sed et omnem 'tOt;1t~LVOij>pOcrUv'Yjv ethnici agnoscunt. From the instances quoted next under the heading 'aliquid' (1360, 5-78) it is evident that Tert. had got accustomed to this use of agnoscere, which he certainly borrowed from the legal idiom (TLL I.c. 1360,43: 'ICT! passim'. In this connection six passages from Tert. are quoted, e.g. an. 9, 3: quia spiritalia charismata agnoscimus). ne nomen blasphemetur: this is partly a quotation of 1 Tim.

6, 1: Ne nomen domini et doctrina blasphemetur. What 'name' is Tert. speaking of? One could argue that he thinks of the nomen Christianum (the name 'Christian') and that he purposely leaves out the word Domini. However, in the Scripture text quoted some lines further on nomen meum is the name of God (nomen dei blasphemare also occurs in Vulg. Lev. 24, 11, n. domini b. ib. 24, 16; Rom. 2, 24 in Marc. 5, 13, 7 and Iud. 13,26). One could object that the sUffragia in the circus were aimed at the Christians, thus nomen Christianum. But in spect. 27, 1 Tert. says: Odisse debemus istos conventus et coetus ethnicorum, quoniam illic nomen dei blasphematur, illic in nos quotidiani leones expostulantur. A striking parallel of the present passage is found in cult. fem. 2, 11, 3, where Tert. lets the women make the following

2. vestri (A Bmg) is the correct reading, cf. Hoppe, Beitr., 18, on mei, sui, nostri causa. scelestis suffragiis: Oehler comments: 'Suffragia igitur non sunt favores populi in circo speculantis, ut quidam interpretati sunt, sed praeiudicia et detestationes sectae Christianae, quae ibi vulgo audiebantur'. In spect. 27, 2 Tert., arguing that a Christian may not attend those spectacles, asks his Christian confrater: Quid facies in ilIo suffragiorum impiorum aestuario reprehensus? In cor. 1, 2 he mentions another case of unfavourable suffragia, viz., the reaction of the other soldiers on the heroic conduct of the Christian colleague who refuses to wear the crown at a donativum ceremony and openly declares that he is a Christian: SUffragia exinde. Desinamus, et non blasphemabitur: in the previous sentence Tert. has stated: 'If we are to avoid any blasphemy of the name, we are all lost (i.e. we are completely wrong in what we do), for the whole circus is full of blasphemies, undeserved blasphemies it is true, but blasphemies'. Now Tert. draws the conclusion:

'The only way to stop this blasphemy is that we cease to exist'. He puts it in his lapidary manner: 'Let us cease (to exist), and the blasphemy will stop'. The verb, desinamus, may be understood in two senses: 'let us cease to exist as Christians' or 'let us cease to exist as human beings'. Oehler interprets it in the first sense: 'Desinamus, sc. esse'. The same explication is given by Currey:

'Immo dum sumus, sc. dum sumus Christiani', opposed to 'desinamus, sc. esse'. From a logical point of view this interpretation seems to be see most plausible one, because the fulfillment of this simpler condition suf-

14,2.-14,3

"'JJ blasphemetur. The present words of St. Paul have nothing to do with this argument. Tert. seems to point here to a deeper feeling which, in his view, leads his opponents in their conduct towards the heathens: p/acere hominibus.

One could also say that this quotation does not belong to the previous paragraphs but introduces the argument of par. 4. On the quotation of Gal. fices to stop the blasphemy. But Tert. always prefers the stronger statement.

At any ~ate, it is evident that this sentence is closely connected with the previous passage. The division in paragraphs is misleading here. Immo dum sum us: one could even think that this sentence, too, should be put together with the previous paragraph. But this is not true. Tert. starts here what one could call 'an eulogy of that kind of blasphemy'. 'No', he says,

1, 10, cf. Rambaux, 134, n. 48, who refers to a similar quotation from Holy Scripture, viz., Rom. 8, 8, which is quoted in Marc. 5, 10, 11; res. 10, 3 and 46, 2; ieiun. 7, 6; pud. 17, 12. The second Scripture text adduced by the opponents is that of St. Paul in which he states: omnibus per omnia p/aceo

(1 Cor. 10, 33). Tert. sweeps this argument from the table by some suggestive questions.

< there is no reason for putting an end to that blasphemy>, 'let there be blasphemy as long as we live, but then a blasphemy on account of our observance of the rules of our religion, not on account of transgressing them'.

Arguing along this way Tert. will come to the exclamation: 0 blasphemiam martyrii affinem. in exorbitatione: 'by deviating from the orbit which one should follow', a vivid metaphor. About the term, see the note on 8, 2 (p.

4. Nimirum: 'certainly', introducing an ironic observation. Saturnalia: see 10, 3. Kalendas Ianuarias: see 10, 3. modestia ... integritate: a number of similar enumerations of virtues in Tert. 's works are mentioned by Fredouille, 404, n. 147 (paen. 1,4; an. 40,4; carn. Chr. 4, 6; res. 44, 8). patientia: Tert. wrote a special treatise about this virtue which, as he states himself, he did not possess at all (1, 1: Confileor ad dominum Deum satis temere me, si non etiam impudenter, de patientia componere ausum, cui praestandae idoneus omnino non sim). humanitate: Rambaux, 292, n. 7, quotes three other instances of this substantive, which might lead to the erroneous idea that in Tert. it is rather rare; however, Claesson quotes no less than 17 instances.

147). dum probamur: sc. a Deo. Cf. 1 Thess. 2, 4: ... probati sumus a Deo and Deo, qui probat corda nostra.

3. 0 blasphemiam martyrii affinem; as Currey rightly observes, martyrium is equivalent here to 'testimony'. For this use he quotes cor. 9, 1, where Tert. mentions the tabernaculum martyrii, which is a reference to Apoc. 15, 5. The Vulgate has here tabernaculum testimonii, but Vetus Latina Cod. a reads tabernaculum martyrii. (Cf. TLL VIII: 419,78 - 420,9. At the beginning of this passage is observed: 'Iocis Italae in Vulg. respondet testimonium').

Another relevant instance in Vetus Latina 2 Tim. 1, 8, quoted by Tert. in Scorp. 13, 10. Currey also quotes cor. 1, 3 de martyrii candida laurea, but there martyrium certainly means 'martyrdom'. (See Fontaine's note ad loc.).

The latter sense is normal in Tert., but we should remain aware of the fact that in the Latin word martyrium the original meaning of the Greek, viz.,

5. Sed etsi: here Terl. answers to a possible objection of his opponents, who would refer to St. Paul's statement: 'I do not forbid you to have contacts with idolatrous and adulterous people, otherwise you should have to leave this world' (1 Cor. 5, 10). Why, they could ask, do we not take part in their festivities? Tert. answers: 'yes, we are allowed to live with them but we are not allowed to Sin with them'. On this theme of what one could call 'the Christian in the world' -'world' is understood here in the biblical sense-Tert. gives some further explanation. Sed: in the previous paragraph Terl. argued that the Christian should not become pagan with the pagans. Such an argument is naturally continued by a 'but'. However, this 'but' -phrase becomes again a negative one (non utique ... immittil ut ... ), so that the opposition with the previous phrase disappears. ceterum de mundo exiretis: in the Vulgate the quotation of 1 Cor. 5, 10 runs as follows: Alioquin debueratis de hoc mundo exiisse. In pud. 18, 7 Tert. cites the text in this fashion: ceterum oportebat vos exire de mundo (cf. an. 35, 2: Ceterum oportebat nos de mundo exire). For ceterum = alioquin cf. TLL III: 972, 52 seqq.; see also 17, 1. eas habenas conversationis immittit, ut: 'he does not slacken the reins (= the rules) of contact so, that ... '. A remarkable case of 'testimony', was still felt: Tert. 's use of the word in this sense was certainly influenced by the Vetus Latina. For affinis with a genitive, see note on 10, 1.

quae tunc me testatur: here Tert. explains how the blasphemy is almost a testimony: if one is blasphemed (detested) because of being a Christian

(propterea), this is a testimony that one is a Christian. Benedictio est nominis: the substantive maledictio corresponds, of course, to blasphemia.

Maledictio custoditae disciplinae corresponds to blasphemetur in observatione ... disciplinae at the beginning of this paragraph. The placing of the predicate noun, benedictio, at the beginning of the sentence gives it a special emphasis, just as in Tert.'s most famous sentence: Semen est sanguis Christianorum (apol. 50, 13). One should read the passage from 0 blasphemiam until disciplinae as a kind of peroration, in which speech strives to a climax.

First Tert. states that this kind of blasphemy is a 'testimony', then he calls it even a benediction. And then, as it were at a lower voice, he quotes a word of St. Paul: 'If I would want to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ' . In the previous passage Tert. fought against the argument: ne nomen

J .... , J-J '+,u

the use of is for tatis or rather tali modo. Ciacconius' conjecture immittit should be retained; it is in agreement with the love of metaphorical speech, which Tert. always shows. The expression habenas immittere occurs for the first time in Lucr. 5, 787; cf. TLL s. vv. immitto (VII: 471, 50 seqq.) and habena (VI: 2392, 63). See especially Norden's note on Verg. Aen. 6, 1 classique inmittit habenas (p. 111). The genitive conversationis belongs to habenas.

Tert. does not mention the indirect object of immittit (sc. nobis). Currey retains immutat and translates: 'There is no such inversion of the laws of discipline', which is certainly wrong. compeccare: this verb is very rarely used in Latin: apart from the present passage it is found twice in Caelius

Aurelianus. Here Tert. chose it, as Bohm, 139, justly observes, for the sake of parallelism with convivere and commisceri. Ubi est commercium '" permittit: Tert. explains the thesis formulated just now: 'one is allowed to live with, not allowed to sin with'. He states: 'Wherever is commercium vitae, i.e. wherever people live together, there is sin; but in the first we may partake, in the second we may not'. In other words: 'A Christian cannot avoid to come in contact with sinners (apostolus concedit), because there is sin wherever is common life; but nobody will allow the Christian himself to sin'. There is no reason to assume a lacuna between ibi and peccare; cf. Bohm, 139-41. Lieet convivere ... commori non licet: because 'sin' means 'death', this statement is another wording of the previous one. conlaetemur ex communione naturae, non superstitionis: the concept of 'nature' comes here instead of that of 'life' (communio naturae instead of commercium vitae), and 'superstition' instead of 'sin'. The term 'nature' is, in this view, neutral; the same holds good of anima and mundus in the following phrases. At conlaetemur one should recall to mind that Tert. is still thinking of the participation in heathen festivals. disciplina: 'rule of life' , 'nomos' . Cf. 2, 4; 13, 1. com- 'allowedness' Tert. speaks of ius. Iudaeis: this Scripture text played an important role in the question between the Jews and the Christians, whether the latter had to observe the Jewish feasts; see Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, passim. From Tert. cf. orat. 2, 3: Hoc est quod Israeli exprobratur, quod caelum ac terram spiritus contestatur, lilios', dicens, 'genui et illi me non agnoverunt' (Is. 1, 2). Cf. Bender, 122. Because of this reprobation these feasts are extranea for the Christians. This holds good a jortiori for the heathen festivities. For polemics against the Sabbath, cf. Schenkel, Rh. Mus.

66 (1911), 399 seqq. Cf. also Herm. 45. feriae, of course, indicates the ceremoniae mentioned in Is. 1, 13-4. Is. 1, 13 is also quoted in Marc. 1, 20,

5, where we find the form neomeniam. Saturnalia ... Matronales: of the jeriae mentioned here the first three belong to the festivals at which the schools were free. Cf. the note on 10, 3, p. 191, where the Saturnalia and the Brumae are mentioned. By Ianuariae Tert. means, of course, the Kalendae

Ianuariae, at which the strenae were given (cf. the note on 10, 3). The Matronalia (1 March), at which the schools were not free, as it seems, are added because this was regarded as a particular important festival; cf.

Wissowa, Rei., 185 and Warde Fowler, Festivals, 38. As to the form of the name (-Ies) which seems to occur only in the present passage, cf. Wissowa,

Rei., 185, n. 7: one should supply jeriae, which word is found in the preceding clause. munera ... constrepunt: obviously Tert. wants to give a vivid sketch of those unallowed festivities in the Christian houses. It is not quite clear how this sentence has to be punctuated. Before Oehler the usual punctuation was: munera commeant, strenae consonant, lusus, convivia constrepunt, but then the second phrase 'strenae consonant' is entirely senseless. Oehler writes: munera commeant, strenae, consonant lusus, convivia constrepunt. Indeed strenae, since it has to be separated from consonant must be connected with what precedes. So Tert. must have said that what is exchanged (commeant) is the gifts in general (munera) and the gifts of the New Year (strenae) in particular. Currey considers Oehler's punctuation to be strange. He maintains the punctuation first mentioned above and refers to Scaliger's conjecture et strenae. Obviously Scaliger is reluctant to accept the phrase strenae consonant, nor is he willing to accept the asyndeton which arises, when consonant is combined with lusus.

~ossessores: a rare word from later Latin. TLL s.v. (III: 2143, 40-52) mentIOns two passages from glosses, one from an inscription of the emperor

Gordianus (elL III 12339, anna 238-40), the present passage and four from Augustine. So the word occurs for the first time here; it clearly belongs to the legal idiom.

6. Quodsi: here Tert. passes into another subject-matter: the celebration of those heathen festivities among the Christians themselves. In other words: the C~ri.stians themselves are the organizers of the feasts . After having stated that thiS IS worse than only to take part in the festivities organized by the heathens,

T.ert. argues: even the Jewish feasts, which were once beloved by God, are forbidden, let alone the Saturnalia, etc. esset ... est: there is no need to follow

Pamelius in substituting est for esset, as was shown by Thornell, Eranos 6 (1916), 114 seqq. and by Trankle in his note on Iud. 8, 7 (p. 73). ius ... communionis: one should notice the legal terminology: instead of 7. O. melior: Tert. reproaches his fellow Christians to be less faithful to their principles than the heathens to theirs. This comparison is, of course, meant by Tert. as an argument. vindieat: 'to lay claim to as one's own, appropriate' (L & S). Non dominicum diem ... communieassent: 'Even if they knew those Christian festivities (as in the case under discussion the Christians 'know' the heathen festivities which the heathens celebrate among themselves), the heathens would not do what those Christians do.' Tert.

15 , SURVEY, REMARKS

'<'.JU

14, / -1), SURVEY

makes this supposition 'even if they knew those festivities' in order to prevent the Christians saying 'we are making our own festivities'. The dies dominicus

(here masculine) is, of course, the Sunday, called dies solis in apol. 16, II (cf.

Waltzing ad loc., p. 117) and nat. I, 13, I. See also Teeuwen, 41, and Bartelink, Vig. Chr. 19 (1965),200. Kellner (BKV7>, 160, n. 2) thought that dominicum diem means 'Eastern'; for that reason he erroneously read in the sequel (like Latinius) duos dies instead of tuos dies. Cf. on the whole question

L. Koep, ' "Religion" und "Ritus" als Problem des fruhen Christentums', JbAC 5 (1962), 53 with n. 73. tuos: this reading of B and Gel is certainly preferable to tamen of A. Tuus is used in a pregnant sense here: 'right for you'. pentecosten implere non poterunt: the fifty days after Eastern were regarded as one great festivity. Cf. E. Dekkers, 154, who quotes ieiun. 14,2:

Cur quinquaginta exinde (viz., after Eastern) diebus in omni exultatione decurrimus? and cor. 3, 4: Die dominico ieiunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis ado rare. Eadem immunitate a die Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus. The term Pentecoste can indicate the period of fifty days after Easter and also the feast at the end of the fifty days. Here Tert. states that the pagans with all their festivities do not attain the number of fifty festive days which the Christians have after Easter; hence habes tuos dies, which is correctly explained by Bohm, 142. fictitious names, by consecration they cause a bond between men and demons.

Enoch spoke already about this kind of superstition (§ 6). Now, if demons are adored at the doors, those lamps and wreaths cannot but pertain to them

(§ 7a).

How severe God'sjudgment is in these matters appears from a dream which He sent to one of our brethren, whose slaves had, without his knowledge, adorned his door (§§ 7b-8a).

Thus we have to obey the secular magistrates, as the Apostle commands us to do, and to honour them, but without committing idolatry (§ 8b). A good example was given by the three brothers in their behaviour towards

Nebuchadnezzar and by Daniel towards Darius (§§ 9-1Oa).

Let the heathens have their lamps and wreaths, the lamps denoting their lack of true light, the fading wreaths their being destined to the fire. You are the light of the world and the ever verdant tree.-Do not give your house the appearance of things that you have renounced, viz., temples and brothels

(§§ lOb-ll). '

Remark The way of arguing. In the previous two chapters Tertullian showed that Christians are not allowed to take part in the festivals of the heathens. They should not show their participation in those festivities in outward appearance or behaviour: sive habitu sive victu vel quo alio genere laetitiae. To the outward glance of those festivities he opposes now the deeds which, according to Scripture, should shine (hence: sed).

Ch. 15. The decoration of doors with lamps and wreaths 'Another pagan habit comes up for discussion, viz., the decoration of doors with lamps and wreaths. What to think of it?

If it is a homage to an idol, it is evidently a form of idolatry. If it is a homage to a human being, one should bear in mind that every form of idolatry is directed toward human beings (§ I), for the pagan gods had been men, as the heathens themselves agree. Now it makes no difference whether one worships human beings from the past or of the present time. The condemnable element of idolatry does not lie in the persons who are its direct object but in the fact that the acts concerned pertain to the demons (§ 2).

The verb lucere leads Tertullian's thought to the lamps at the doors at the festivals in honour of the emperor. Thus he comes to speak about the decoration of the doors with lamps and wreaths at that occasion.

For the understanding of Tertullian's argumentation in this chapter one should bear in mind that to him (I) those lamps and wreaths have in themselves an idolatrous nature, and (2) that there is a relationship between this decoration and the fact that, according to the belief of Romans and Greeks, there are gods of the door.

It is true that Christ says that one should render the things which are Caesar's to Caesar; but he adds that the things which belong to God should be given to God. In fact, Scripture itself shows what should be given to Caesar, viz., the money. Thus you must give to Caesar what bears the image of Caesar and to God what bears the image of God, that is yourself as a human being (§ 4). Otherwise nothing is left to God.

Tertullian discusses first the nature of the pagan activity of decorating doors at the occasion of a festivity in honour of the emperor. If it is a homage to an idol (as the activity in itself seems to suggest), one has of course to do with idolatry. But the opponent may object that what he is doing is just to give honour to a human being (viz., the emperor). Tertullian answers: we should not forget that all idolatry is worship to men, because the so-called gods have been human beings (Euhemerism). Thus the fact that this decoration is meant to be a homage to a human being does not per se free it from being idolatrous. It is not the person to whom the homage is given (personas,

Does this mean that I consider those lamps and wreaths as a homage to God? Of course not. In outward appearance they pertain to Caesar, who is honoured by them as a god, but secretely they pertain to the demons (§ 5).

One should see this adornment of doors in connection with the fact that Romans as well as Greeks know gods of doors. Although these are idle and

15,1

15,1

that Tert. has written Sed luceant, inquit, operae, just because he is quoting freely; he is opposing the operae to the habitus, etc., in the previous chapters: strictly speaking the pronoun is superfluous, and Tert. usually likes the shortest formulation. On the other hand, in cult. fem. 2, 13, 1 he writes:

Luceant operae vestrae; this parallel confirms at least the reading operae of the present text. For the use of opera with the meaning of opus (or rather the plural operae instead of opera), which is quite usual in Tert. 's works (in an. it occurs four times), cf. Waszink's note on an. 10, 8 (192), where further literature is mentioned. tabernae et ianuae nostrae: Tert. means '< the doors of> our shops and houses' . The reason for this way of expression could be that ianua was used only of the proper house and that the taberna had a ostium. Tert. avoids the longer ostia tabernarum nostrarum. Plures iam: before starting the discussion of the question whether this practice is allowed to Christians, Tert. observes that at the moment the decoration of doors is even more common among Christians than among pagans. This observation is not without purpose. If the practice will appear to be unallowed to a Christian, the absence of a social constraint, which would exist if everybody else kept up this practice, makes the behaviour of those Christians the more objectionable. lucernis et laureis: this combination is also found in 15, 10 and in apol. 35,4. 11. De ista quoque specie: sc. idololatriae. Bohm thinks that species means here 'case' (Germ. 'Fall'), a meaning which stems from the idiom of lawyers; she refers to Ulpian, Dig. 9, 2, 5: proponitur apud eum species talis. Si idoli honor ... idololatria est: the repetition of idoli honor in the apodosis emphasizes the evidence of the argument (idoli honor = idololatria). Si hominis ... in causam esse: for the way of arguing, see Remark.

recogitemus ... in hominis causam esse: LOfstedt, Tert. Apol., 114, n. 1, thinks that these words are a corruption conflated partly from what follows

(recogitemus omnem idololatriam) and partly from what precedes (in hominis causam = hominis causa). Thornell, 1, 17-8, rejects this interpretation. We, too, think that · the tradition should be accepted. Tert. is arguing here very emphatically. The objection of the opponent, which is included in si hominis causa est, is retorted first by a phrase in which the same words hominis causa are used, just as in the previous phrase idoli honor was repeated. Then he reiterates the phrase, changing causa into cultura, which term betrays the religious (= idolatrous) nature of the activity. in hominis causam: this expression is quite rare; two passages quoted in TLL III: 670, 68-9 are of a different nature, because in both cases the main verb requires in with an accusative of direction: Sen. ben. 5, 12, 6: omne alimentum in causam doloris trahit, and Florus epit. 2, 6, 3: in causam belli Saguntos electa est. The same holds good for three instances of in causam in Tert. which are quoted by Bohm, 143: an. 38, 4; res. 37,3; ieiun. 12,2. One might, however, refer to apol. 40, 1 where a number of manuscripts read: omnis popularis incommodi quae opponuntur) that makes this homage idolatrous but the kind of activity.

And in tllis case that activity is something idolatrous, i.e. pertaining to the demons. One can put it also in this way: he who decorates his door in honour of the emperor commits an idolatrous act and honours the demons. The emperor is, in fact, an idol just like the god whose image is honoured. The emperor functions here as an entity between man and demon. By means of the emperor the demon draws man's worship away from the one God to Himself (cf. Remark c at ch. 1 'Tertullian on idols').

The opponent then refers to the Lord's saying: "Give what is Caesar's to Caesar" . Tertullian answers: 'Yes, but the Lord also says "Give to God what is God's" '. If one gives everything to Caesar, nothing remains for God.

Here the opponent reacts: 'Are, then, according to you (inquis) , these lamps and wreaths an honour to God?' In other words: 'Do you, Tertullian, then, mean to say that those lamps and wreaths are an honour to God?'

Tertullian answers: 'Of course I do not say that; I say that they are a homage to him (the emperor) who is honoured by them instead of God. However, this is only the outward side (quantum in manifesto est) of the activity; secretly it pertains to the demons.' Again it becomes evident that to Tertullian the decoration of the door is intrinsically an act of worship. Because this act of worship is not directed to the one true God, it must be directed to the demons.

He who asserts that it is a homage to the emperor only touches the outward side.

Then Tertullian lays a connection between the habit of decorating the doors and the Roman belief in gods of the door, like Carna, Forculus, Limentinus and lanus. These are in themselves no more than idle and fictitious names,

Tertullian says, but they are again a point of contact between man and the demons. Thus the doors have a function in superstition, as Enoch already predicted. Those lamps and wreaths, which were said to be a homage to the emperor, actually are a homage to idols in the doors. Idolo feceris, quidquid ostio feceris. 'Idol' is here again the entity between man and demon, i.e. the gods of the door, which are, it is true, empty names, function as an intermediate entity between man and demon.

After the argumentation of 15, I-7a Tertullian refers to the dream of one of the brethren to illustrate his case. Then he draws the conclusion: Igitur ... one should honour the magistrates, but within the limits of the Christian discipline. Two examples from the OT confirm this conclusion.

The final part (§§ lOb-II) is highly rhetorical. It looks like a peroration.

1. Sed luceant, inquit, operae: a rather free quotation of Matth. 5, 16 which in the Vulgate runs as follows: Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus, ut videant opera vestra bona. As to the reading of this quotation, A omits vestrae. All editors, also Van der Nat, add the pronoun. But it seems probable

D,jD ,) k 41 k 'W D,I - I),j

... Christianos in causam esse (RSPF; in causa FZVL; causam the rest of the mss.). But perhaps the explanation of the present in causam lies in the fact that in hominis causa est corresponds to si ido/i honor est; thus causa takes the place of honor. If Tert. had used honor, he would have written in hominis honorem, now he uses causa and writes in hominis causam. quoted in Marc. 4,38, 3 and cor. 12,4; see Braun's article quoted in the Introduction, p. 10. Bene, quod: cf. 5, 4. consultatio movebatur: a studied expression for interrogabatur. praestandusne ... an non: cf. Matth. 22, 17:

~~tcr'tt\l 80GvOt~ xTjvcrov KOt(crOtp~ Tj 0\1; monetam ... et de imagine refers to the two texts, Matth. 22, 19 and 20. imaginem dei: cf. Gen. 1, 26. This text has had an enormous influence in early Christian thinking about man, in connection with Plato's famous conception of OflO(WcrL~ 9t~ (Theaet. 176 b 1). See

H. Merki, art. 'Ebenbildlichkeit', RAC 4, 459-79.

2. in homines ... culturam: cultura with the meaning 'religious worship' is late Latin and is mostly found in Christian authors; see TLL IV: 1323, 561324, 30. In Tert. it is found seven times, always with this meaning, e.g. nat.

1, 10, 8: deorum dico culturam; cam. Chr. 4, 6: culturam veri dei; scorp. 2, 14: ab omni factura atque cultura id%rum. et ipsos is the reading of A;

B and Gel, followed by Oehler and Reifferscheid, omit et. Bohm thinks that et can be maintained notwithstanding the fact that etiam occurs in the same sentence. This observation is based on the supposition that etiam is a duplication. However, et belongs to ipsos deos, etiam to apud suos; so there is no reason not to follow A . deos nationum: cf. 10, 1 and 2, 4. retro: cf. 3,

1. suos: i.e. the heathens (they are sui with regard to the deos nationum).

opponuntur: this verb should be taken in its literal sense 'to set before' but it has a pregnant sense here, viz., 'to set before the eyes (or the mind) for adoration'. Hence the translation of Currey: 'are presented for adoration', and Thelwall: 'are set up for worship' (Kellner: 'die ihr Objekt sind'). This is the only instance of this pregnant meaning mentioned in TLL (IX, 2: 764,

6-7, where the dative venerationi is supplied).

4. Ergo inquis: this use of inquis is very remarkable. It is put into the mouth of the opponent. Tert. has his opponent say: 'So you, Tertullian, say that .. .'. A strong case of diatribe style. See Remark above. Ergo ... honor dei est Iucernae ... ?: one should retain the punctuation of Oehler. Lucernae and taurus are the subjects of the sentence, but the verb has already become singular under the influence of the predicate noun honor at the beginning of the sentence. Non utique quod = non utique inquam, quod (answer to ergo inquis?). quantum in manifesto ... ad daemonia perveniens: A reads quantum in manifesta est operatione, quae est in occulto ... , which reading was defended by Kroymann and approved by Dom Dekkers. We think, however, that the reading of Band Gelenius is to be preferred because 1 ° it avoids the almost contradictory phrase in manifesta ... operatione, quae est in occulto, which only can be saved from contradiction, if one assumes that quae refers to operatione only, 2° it presents an obvious opposition between in manifesto and in occulto, and 3° it is in agreement with Tert.'s opinion that the proper operatio consists in what happens in occulto; the outward appearance (in manifesto) is opposed to the real activity which pertains to the demons and which is in occulto. Externally this act is directed to the emperor, but in occulto it concerns the demons. The emperor functions as idol (cf. Remark c at ch. 1).

3. Reddenda sunt: next there follows an objection in the form of a quotation of Matth. 22, 21: 'You must give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor'. This objection is in the line of thought of the opponent who in the previous paragraph defended the thesis that the decoration of doors was just in hominis causam. Tert. 's reaction consists of two elements: first he draws attention to the fact that the quotation is incomplete: Christ also says that one should give to God what belongs to God. Moreover, he says, the Bible text makes it perfectly clear what Christ wants to be given to the emperor, viz., the money, that is to say: that which bears the image of the emperor. That is why he asked those who interrogated him to show the money. Now just as the precept to give Caesar what is Caesar's means that one has to give Caesar what bears his image, so the precept to give to God what belongs to God means that one has to give to God what bears God's image, i.e. man. That means that man has to give himself to God. The presupposition of this argument is, of course, that a religious act is a giving of oneself. If the adornment of doors is a religious-or rather, an idolatrous-act (and Tert. is convinced of it), man is giving himself to the emperor. Then one gives all things to Caesar (omnia Caesaris) and nothing remains for God. This verse is also

5. Certi enim esse debemus: here Tert. brings a new element into the discussion, viz., the fact that Romans and Greeks worship also (etiam) gods of doors. Now those lamps and wreaths placed at the doors in honour of the emperor appeared to be a manifestation of religion. Thus they cannot but have something to do with those gods who are idols just like the emperor (see

Remark c at ch. 1). Hence the statement: quidquid ostio feceris, idolo feceris; and what has been done for an idol is in fact done for the demons. Thus the operatio manifesta of the decoration of doors appears again to pertain in occulto to the demons. Hence enim. si quos latet ..• Iitteraturae saecularis: the conjunction si is here almost equivalent to etsi. This observation shows that Tert. is here addressing people to whom the Roman numina are not known from daily life, i.e., non-Romans. In cor. 7, 3 he also refers to the

15,5-15,6 :l43 L4L 15,5

literature of the pagan world: litterae ad hoc saeculares necessariae (see Fontaine's note). The impersonal latet with an accus. (evidently caused by the similar use of fugit, fallit, and praeterit) is found for the first time in Vitruv.

9, 2, 3; see TLL VII, 2: 997, 27-9; Hoppe, Synt., 14, who quotes test. an. 2, 2: De natura quoque dei, quem praedicamus, nec te latet. Carnam ...

Ianum: this enumeration, which undoubtedly was borrowed by Tert. from Varro's Antiquitates Divinae (cf. Peter, art. 'Indigitamentsgotter', Roscher,

Mythol. Lex. 2, 146), is found more than once in Tert.'s works. The earliest passage is nat. 2, 15, 5 (in a long list of indigitamenta: taceo deos Forculum a foribus et Car <lacuna of 10 spaces for letters> nibus et liminum Limentinum. Gothofredus, foIlowed by Borleffs, conjectured Car<deam a cardi>nibus. An entirely similar sentence is found in cor.-a treatise which contains numerous paraIlels to the text of idol.-13, 9: quantos deos etiam ostiis diabolus adfinxerit (Fontaine rightly observes: 'adfixfortasse legendum conicio'): [anum a ianua, Limentinum a limine, Forculum et Carnam (codd.

ARB; the only lectio varia is Carna in NF) aforibus atque cardinibus. FinaIly we have to mention scorp. 10, 6: Quas mihi potestates ianitrices adfirmas iuxta Romanam superstitionem, t Barnum t (A B; Cardum Gel, Cardeam

Pam, [anum Rig, Carnum Hildebrand) quendam et Forculum et Limentinum? The form Cardea, which in the present passage occurs in A B is also found in a very similar passage in [Cypr.j quod idola 4: Est et Scansus ab ascensibus dictus et Forculus a foribus et a liminibus Limentius et Cardea a cardinibus, and, though with variants, in a passage of Aug., civ. dei 4,8: tres deos isti posuerunt, Forculum foribus, Cardeam (Carneam bl Klr) cardini,

Limentinum limini. Di sunt saeculi, atque inter hos Cardea (Carnea Cld Q(lf Cardines a bl) femina est, quae cardin em servat. On account of these data

Walter Otto in his article 'Carna' (TLL Onom. II: 200, 42-201, 5) arrives at the foIlowing conclusion: 'Videtur igitur et TertuIlianus et Augustinus scripsisse Carna, mutatum autem in nonnuIlis codicibus esse hoc nomen, ut cardini similius fieret, modo in Carda, modo in Cardea vel Cardines.' A direct connection of Carna with carda occurs for the first time in Ovid fast. 6, 101-2

(on June 1): Prima dies tibi, Carna, datur: dea cardin is haec est: / numine clausa aperit, claudit aperta suo (since in this work Ovid draws heavily on Varro's pupil Verrius Flaccus, it is possible that this connection was already found in Varro). Otto defended his interpretation in RE Suppl. 3, 1184 and Rh. Mus. 64 (1909), 459 seqq. His final conclusion is that there has never been in Roman religion a goddess Cardea, a conclusion which was adopted by Wissowa, Rei., 107, n. 3 and Gesamm. Abhandl., 138 seqq., and by F. Bomer in his edition of Ovid fast. 2, 343. In Walde-Hofmann, 1, 166, Carna is qualified as an Etruscan goddess of death; Bomer, too, takes into account the possibility that the name is Etruscan. On the other hand, Warde Fowler,

Festivals, 130-2, does not doubt the correctness of the name Cardea. In our opinion it is to be assumed that Varro in his Antiquitates divinae did mention the name Carna (as we already supposed supra when quoting Ovid fast. 6,

101-2). At all events, the passages from Tert. are favourable to this supposition: cor. 13, 9 has Carnam, scorp. 10, 6 has Barnum, which contains the sequel -arn-, and in nat. 15, 5 the lacuna of ten letter-spaces in A is better fiIled by -nli a cardi-, which has exactly ten spaces, than by -deli a cardi-. Since the present sentence and cor. 13, 9 are practicaIly identical (in cor. 13 the Greek gods Apollo Thyraeus and Antelii dei, which we find here, are mentioned immediately after the passage quoted), it is evident that in both sentences the same goddess must be mentioned. Forculum: Forculus is only mentioned in the passages quoted sub Carna; see Peter, art. 'Indigitamenta',

Roscher, 2, 199. Limentinum: cf. Schur, art. 'Limentinus', RE 13,571-2; Peter, art. 'Indigitamenta', Roscher, 2, 202; Latte, 208, n. 4. This god is mentioned in all the passages from Tert. and Augustine quoted sub Carna, and further in Arnob. 4, 9. 11. 12 (cf. ib. 1, 28). A goddess Lima (Arnob. 4, 9) is not quite certain; with regard to the name, cf. Peter in Roscher 2, 167 seqq.

et utique scimus ... obligamentum: 'and, of course, we know', Tert. says, 'that these names are (apart from the part of the door which they indicate) just empty names. But when, by means of a consecratio, those objects are declared to be holy (cum tamen in superstition em deducuntur), they attract the demons (rapere ad se daemonia). The consecration makes those names function as idols, which constitute a point of contact, the band (obligamentum) between man and demon' . Another case of consecration is described and discussed in cor. 10,2: Quid autem tam dignum idolo quam quod et mortuo?

Nam et mortuorum est ita coronari, quoniam et ipsi idola statim fiunt et habitu et cultu consecrationis, quae apud nos secunda idololatria est. See the article 'Consecratio I (aIlgemein)' by L. Koep in RAC 3, 269-83. obligamentum: cf. cor. 14, 1 : (caput viri Christiani) ne velamento quidem obnoxium, nedum obligamento. Obligamentum is a rare word (9 instances in TLL) which is found for the first time in the Vetus Latina (Lev. 26, 13

(Lugd.); IV Reg. 12, 20 (Legion.» and Tert. (here, cor., loc. cit., and Marc. 3,

22, 3: legis obligamenta et onera). The meaning found here (in TLL under the heading speciatim pertinet ad devotionem) occurs in one more passage,

Oros. hist. 4, 13,4: (decemviri quosdam) viros defoderunt; sed obligamentum hoc magicum in contrarium ... versum est).

6. Alioquin daemonia nullum habent nomen: in order to avoid that the reader would think that those names of numina were names of demons (and thus not nomina inania), Tert. adds: 'Moreover (Alioquin), the demons have no names by themselves: they get a name where they get a hold in the visible world, but this is not a proper name' . pignus: a metaphor from the juridical sphere. That name gives, as was said just now, the demon a point of contact

D,/S-D,I)

IJ,0-IJ,1I

with the sensible world. Now this point of contact, which is the consequence of the consecratio, is for the demon a basis of certainty just like a pledge, viz., the certainty that he will receive the veneration of the human beings (see Remark c at ch. 1). Etiam apud Graecos ... legimus: the verb legimus contains a reference to the litteratura saecularis. The fact that also the Greeks know gods of doors confirms Tert.'s feeling that this decoration of doors has something to do with idolatry. Apollinem Thyraeum et Antelios daemonas: these same gods are mentioned in cor. 13, 9, where Tert. writes immediately behind Forculum et Carnam a foribus atque cardinibus: etiam apud Graecos Thyraeum Apollinem et Antelios daemonas. For Apollo to the family, but to the servants of the pater familias (cf. servi a few lines earlier). For passages mentioning the presence of slaves in Christian families, see Sch6llgen, 223. 242. 254. Igitur quod attineat ad honores regum: after the excursion about the numina of doors Tert. returns to the proper subjectmatter of this chapter: the honouring of the emperor. For the SUbjunctive attineat, cf. an. 38, 1: quodfaciat ad, with the comment of Waszink who says:

'quod faciat ad = quod pertineat ad' (433). Most times the indicative is used: quod facit / attinet ad (see TLL). The difference between the two is that by the subjunctive the expression gets a general nature: 'whatever pertains to ... ' .

(Cf. the coniunctivus generalis of the Greek). The subjunctive of an. 18, 2: quod dictum sit = w~ E1tO~ d1tetv seems to have a different nature, being the equivalent of ut ita dicam (see Waszink, p. 257). intra limites disciplinae:

'serve the emperor but do not transgress the rules of Christian life'. This rule is illustrated by two examples from the OT. For disciplina, see the note on 2,4. eupato~ (not mentioned in Nilsson, Gesch. d. griech. Religion) cf. Macrob.

Saturn. 1, 9, 6 (quoting Nigidius Figulus); Schol. in Soph. El. 637 (ad 1tpo· cr-ra-rijplO~): on 1tPO -rwv 9upwv Lopu-rat. Antelios daemonas: mentioned in Aeschyl. Agam. 519: oa(fJ.ov€~ or' av-rijAlOL; Soph. Ai. 805; Eurip. Ion 1550 and fr. 538. These demons are o( d~ ava-roA7)V 6pwv-re~ (Schol. Aeschyl. ad loc.), o(

1tPO -rwv1tuAwv (oPUfJ.€VOL (Hesych., s.v. av-rijAlOL). Cf. Fontaine, note on cor. 13,

9. Haec igitur ... Enoch: cf. the note on 4, 2: Antecesserat Enoch (enim hoc Van der Nat with A) praedicens omnia elementa, omnem mundi censum, quae caelo, quae mari, quae terra continentur, in idololatrian versuros daemonas et spiritus desertorum angelorum, ut pro deo adversus deum consecrarentur. In this enumeration Tert. wants to say: 'Enoch also predicts the adoration of doors': hence etiam ostia. And as a confirmation he adds: 'we experience that also the doors of bath-houses are adored' (this statement is only found here).

9. iIIud exemplum trium fratrum: if one compares the present text with that of the book Daniel, where the story is told, one observes that the latter, in the Vulgate version, speaks of deos tuos non colimus, et statuam auream, quam erexisti, non adorabimus (Dan. 3, 18; cf. 3, 12), whereas Tert. .speaks of honorem imaginis eius (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar himself). In scorp. 8, 6 Tert. quotes the Bible text, and this quotation is revealing: tunc manifestum fiet tibi, quod neque idolo tuo famulabimur nec imaginem tuam auream, quam statuisti, adorabimus. Where the Vulgate has deos tuos (non colimus)

Tert. writes idolo tuo (neque ... famulabimur). Now the original text has a plural form (Hebrew: elohim, Aramaic: ellihin). This plural is used either for 7. Si autem ... pertinebunt: this is the conclusion of the passage which begins at Certi enim esse debemus. See our comment at 15, 3. The division of the paragraphs is faulty here. Hoc in loco: here Tert. quotes an instance from his personal experience, a thing which he does more than once. Cf. the autoptic description of the vision of a Montanist sister in an. 9, 4 and the miracle described in the same treatise 51, 6 (with the remark: de mea didicl); see also spect. 26. The description of this punishment in a dream reminds us of the famous dream of St. Jerome, in which he was punished for being

'a Ciceronian, not a Christian'. The castigatum graviter may refer to a flagellation (as seems also to be the case in the dream of St. Jerome). Here a further motive is added for the mentioning of this dream, viz., that it was certainly 'shown to one man for the sake of all'. gaudiis pubJicis: cf.

Barnes, 248: 'The legend gaudia publica first appears on the imperial coinage in 207; but 207 is not the date of the De idololatria'. (Barnes defended then a very early datation of the present treatise; see, however, p. 13)'.

'the God of Israel', in which case it should, of course, be rendered by the singular 'God', or it is not used for the God of Israel; in this case two possibilities of rendering are open: 'the god' or 'the gods' (we owe this information to dr. P . A. M. de Boer, emeritus professor of exegesis of the Old

Testament at Leiden University). In the present case one finds, in the modern translations, either 'your gods' or 'your god' . Tert. has chosen the second rendering and understands 'your god' as applying to the 'image of gold' which Nebuchadnezzar had erected (Dan. 3, 1) and which must have been an image of himself. In Tert. 's view the image of a living being can be an idolum (see

J. C. M. van Winden, 'Idolum and Idololatria in TertuIIian', Vig. Chr. 36

(1982), 105 seqq.). One finds the same interpretation in the commentary of A. Bentzen, in the series Handbuch z. AT (Tiibingen, 21952). See further L.

Koep, 'Kaisertum und Christenbekenntnis im Widerspruch' (JbAC 4 (1961), 58-76) 62, n. 28, and the literature quoted there, especially H . Kruse, Studien zur offiziellen Ge/tung des Kaiserbildes im romischen Reiche (Paderborn

8. factum: a very brief formulation for id quod factum erato disciplina: here equivalent to 'behaviour', 'way of life'. familiae nostrae does not refer

1934), 84-89. alias: 'at all other occasions' (i.e. except the honouring of the image of the king). quicquid ... extollit: extollit is the reading of A. B

IS,I}-IS,1O

IS,II-16-17,1 SURVEY

to Laeta (quoted by Oehler): nec capil/um irrufes, et aliquid ei de gehennae ignibus auspiceris. Cf. also Tert. ux. 1, 6, 3: Romae quidem quae ignis iI/ius inextinguibilis imaginem tractant, auspicia poenae suae cum ipso dracone curantes. and Gelenius, followed by Oehler and Reifferscheid, read extol/itur. The latter reading can only be admitted, if quicquid is the equivalent of si quid: 'one has to do with idolatry, if something is extolled'. Otherwise it makes Tert. say nonsense, viz., idololatria est id quod extollitur. B6hm regards the reading of A as possible but thinks that the transitive verb has here a reflexive or 11. lumen mundi ... arbor virens semper: the lamps at the doors remind

Tert. of the well-known Gospel text: 'you are the light of the world'. The arbor virens semper is an image that has come up in Tert.'s mind because of the fading laurel wreaths. ne feceris templum ianuam tuam: this is clearly an allusion to the adorning with wreaths of the doors of temples, a practice explicitly forbidden in Cod. Justin. 1, 11, 7 (Valentinianus and Marcianus): absit a saeculo nostro ... redimiri sertis tempiorum impios postes. si lupanaribus ... novi lupanaris: cf. apol. 35,4: Cur die laeto non laureis postes obumbramus nec lucernis diem infringimus? Honesta res est, sol/emnitate publica exigente, induere domui tuae habitum alicuius novi lupanaris? mediopassive sense; this, however, results in a statement like idololatria est quicquid se ... extol/it, which gives no sense either. We think that idolatry, i.e. the latreia of idols, is an activity which can very well be described by extol/ere in the active sense. The strange element in the description is quicquid. Perhaps this strange element becomes understandable, if one assumes that Tert. has transposed here a definition of idolatres (idolater) into that of idolatry.

Idolatres would be very well described as: quisquis ... extollit (the object aliquid is omitted). To describe idolo/atria Tert. changed quisquis into quicquid.

For the omission of the object, see IS, 8 (coronaverat; praeceperat).

Obviously Tert. deals here with the same question as in the present text of idol. In ux. 2, 6, 1 he sneers: Et procedet (sc. ancilla dei) de ianua laureata et lucernata, ut de novo consistorio Iibidinum publicarum? Tert. speaks of 10. Sic et Daniel: Daniel is mentioned for more than one reason by Tert.

(cf. Danielou, Origines, 259-60). tamdiu: 'only as long as'; cf. 18, 1, where Tert. argues that Daniel would not have stood in office so long, if this office would have made him guilty of idolatry. ilIi: sc. the three brothers just mentioned. Accendant igitur: the final paragraph, which looks like a peroration, contains two arguments, or rather two sarcastic moves. The first runs as follows: 'Let those who are in the dark lighten their lamps every day.'

Thereby they themselves testify that they are in the dark (testimonium tenebrarum). The sarcasm of Tert. lies, of course, in the fact that, in his opinion, this light does not enlighten the darkness in which the heathens are.

'And let those who are destined for the fire (of hell) themselves, affix to their door the laurels doomed presently to burn'. Therewith they give an omen of their future punishment (suspicia poenarum). 'But you, Christians, are a light of the world (Matth. 4, 15) and an evergreen tree. So you have nothing to do with that light that does not enlighten, and the laurel which is fading away.

The second 'argument' has the nature of an adhortation: 'You have renounced the temples (this was implicated in renouncing the Satan at baptism), so do not make your door a temple < which you are doing by making it a place of false worship> '. Then Tert., who always is looking for a stronger formulation, continues: 'You have renounced the brothels (this was implicated in your renouncing 'the works of Satan' at baptism), so do not give your house the appearance of a new brothel <which you are doing by making it a place of adultery in a religious sense> '. ilIis competunt ... poenarum: this sentence is in the same strain as the famous final chapter of De spectaculis

(c. 30). Oehler also compares cult. fem. 2, 6, 1, where Tert. says about women who have the habit of capil/um croco vertere: male ac pessime sibi auspicantur flammeo capite. This passage was evidently imitated by St. Jerome in his letter

'the appearance of a new brothel'. One could, of course, understand this 'new' in opposition to 'old' in time. This would imply that new brothels were decorated in this manner. But it seems better to understand it in the sense of 'a new kind of brothel', which agrees with the interpretation of this sentence given above. It is another case of Tert. 's sarcasm. As to the idea behind this passage-that of idolatry as spiritual fornication-, see scorp. 3, 4: invitantur ad idola, ut et spiritu fornicarentur.

Chs. 16-17, 1. Participation in private festivities 'There is no objection against visits at private and social festivities, like those of the assuming of the toga virilis, of betrothals, of weddings and namegivings, although there is some breath of idolatry around them (§ 1). Here the reasons of our attendance are to be considered. Now these reasons are a vestment (toga), a marriage, etc., which are not condemned by any word of Holy

Scripture. Thus as long as we are invited just for those reasons, our presence there is not objectionable. But if I am invited to participate in the sacrifice that takes place at that occasion, I am not aI/owed to go (§§ 2-5). [17J What else can slaves, freedmen and servants of magistrates do, who have to accompany their masters when they are sacrificing? But if they give assistance in the sacrifice, they are guilty of idolatry. According to this rule we can also be in the service of a magistrate just as the patriarch and other forefathers were in the service of idolatrous kings, without, however, passing the border of idolatry

(§ 1).'

L4~

16-1 7,1, REMARKS-I 6, 1-16,2

IU,4.--JU,:J

As to the dress, it only forbids travesty; now the name of the toga virilis shows clearly that this is not the case here. Weddings and name-givings are not forbidden either. It should be noted that the Scripture text quoted (Deut. 22, 5) has nothing to do with idolatry. This passage is a remarkable instance of Tert.'s associative thinking. Deut. 22, 5 is also quoted in spect. 23,6: cum in lege praescribit maledictum esse qui muliebribus (in CC I, p. 247, 22 erroneously mulieribus) vestietur (LXX cr'tOAT]V YUVOtLXEL<Xv, Vetus Latina (Lugd.) stolam mulie<b>rem, Vulg. vestefeminea). The neuter plural used as a subst. is also found in Plin. nat. hist. 37, 17: qui super cetera muliebria soccos induebat; Paulus dig. 34, 2, 32, 4: si qua alia muliebria apparuerint

(TLL VIII: 1569,21-5). -

Toga ... etiam appellationis virilis est: even (etiam) the name of the toga shows that it is worn by men only. Tert. points to the fact that the toga pura is also called toga virilis. Appellationis virilis is, of course, a genitive of quality.

Remarks In the present section Tertullian deals with several kinds of social duties, which may be ranged under one rule (see huius regulae in 17, 1). In our view ch. 17, 1 belongs to ch. 16; Pamelius' division in chapters is misleading here.

First Tertullian discusses the question of whether a Christian is allowed to take part in family festivities. He is aware of the fact that these festivities involve idolatrous acts, viz., sacrifices. But, he says, as long as the Christian does not participate in that part of the feast, he is allowed to take part in it.

The cases of Christian slaves, freedmen and servants are adduced as a confirmation of the thesis defended in ch. 16: 'Moreover, how will slaves, etc., be able to function?' Just as this slave is allowed to accompany his master, also when he is sacrificing, a Christian is allowed to take part in a family festivity. Sed si merum ... 'but the slave is not allowed to assist in the sacrifice itself' . Thus to the slaves and the other Christians the same rule holds good: service is allowed, but idolatrous acts should be avoided. This is the rule referred to by Tertullian in the next sentence (Huius regulae). Here one has the example of those 'royal' slaves like Joseph and Daniel who served their kings, but without perpetrating idolatry.

3. Sed his ... sacrificia: this is an objection of the imaginary opponent, who figures so often in this treatise. It was already anticipated in the first sentence: de flatu idololatriae, quae intervenit. Sim vocatus ... quantum sibi Iibet: in this paragraph Tert. discusses the case that he is invited without any danger for participation in the religious acts which accompany the festivities. The first sentence has the nature of a hypothetical period, of which the apodosis has been left out, because it is evident. 'Suppose, I am invited without any mentioning of the sacrifice, and the fulfilment of my duty takes place at pleasure, < then there is no objection>'. One could also put it in the following manner: the opponent said: 'But < do you realize that> these festivities do not go without sacrifices?' Tert. answers: '< Yes, but I start from the supposition> that I am invited without any mentioning etc.'. The words Sim vocatus ... titulus officii refer to the invitation, either written or spoken. In this invitation there s:lOuld not be any indication that the sacrifice is the reason of the attendance (titu/us officii). The words et operae ... libet

1. Circa officia vero: in the case of festivals in the private sphere, Tert. makes a sharp distinction between the reason of the festivity itself and the accompanying religious acts, the sacrifices. If the proper object of the festivity is 'pure', a Christian is allowed to take part in it, notwithstanding the flatus idololatriae which is around it because of the sacrifice. togae purae: this is a usual designation of the toga virilis. The term occurs for the first time in Cicero, Ep. ad Alt. 6,1,12 and 7,8,5; also in Catullus 68,15: vestis ... pura.

The use of purae is not without purpose here (see the observation just made).

nominalium: this festival is identical with the dies lustricus, on which children received their name (girls on the eighth day, boys on the ninth). The name nominalia also occurs in Corp. Gloss. Lat. II: 134, 22 Goetz-Schoell with the translation OVOfl<X'to9Ecr(<x; cf. J. H. Waszink and S. Breemer, 'Fata

Scribunda', Mnem. III, 13 (1947), 254-70, also in Waszink, Opuscula selecta (Leiden 1979),238-54, especially p. 257, resp. 241. de flatu idololatriae: see the note on 12, 5 omnem afflatum eius (sc. idololatriae). refer to the actual presence at the festivity. This presence should not carry any religious obligation. It must be allowed to the Christian to behave there as he likes (quantum sibi libet). ad sacrificium: this conjecture by Van der Nat is unavoidable. A has the impossible reading ad sacrificiis, B and Gel in sacrificiis; Rigaltius conjectures adsacrificii in one word with the following explication: 'Sim vocatus, inquit, dum officium meum aut opera mea non possit haberi pro adsacrificio, id est administratione seu participatione aut concessu sacrificii.' This conjecture is accepted by Oehler and regarded as very probable by Bbhm, 147. However, there does not seem to exist a Latin substantive adsacrificium (cf. Max. Ihm s.v. (TLL II: 847, 30-4) who only quotes the present passage with a question mark). In support of this conjecture Oehler quotes the verbs adinvenire and advivere used by Tert.-which do

2. Eas mundas esse: eas refers to causae, i.e. the reasons of the festivities (= toga virilis etc.), which are also the reasons for taking part in the festivities. These causae, in Tert.'s view, are the 'material causes' of the festivities: the toga, the ring, etc. In themselves they have nothing to do with idolatry. de alicuius idoli honore: cf. 15, 1: Si idoli honor est. Nullum denique cultum: Scripture is adduced as a decisive argument (hence denique).

10,,)- 10, +

whom is the author thinking? In theory there are two possibilities here: Tert. himself (the invited Christian) or the heathen who invites him. Our analysis given above leads to the conclusion that Tert. himself is meant. not prove anything in favour of the existence of a substantive-and two pseudo-substantives, viz., adtradux (pat. 5, 10: a similar haphazard conjecture by Rigaltius) and admilitia (not in TLL). The only possibility (but far from plausible) for retaining the reading of A is that the text of the invitation for the rendering of the service (titulus officii) could begin with or contain the words ad sacrificii participationem, and that only the first two of these words were used in every-day speech to indicate the text as a whole (as is nowadays usual for the quoting of papal bulls): nec 'ad sacrificii' sit titulus officii. But no traces of the use of such a compendium seem to be known. expunctio: of this substantive only seven instances are mentioned in TLL V, 2: 1813, 1323. It occurs three times in Tert.'s works (apart from the present passage in ieiun. 10, 2 and praescr. 10, 7); he is the first to use it. This is certainly not a Christianism, since the verb expungere is a technical term of book-keeping; see the note on 1, 1 (p. 81). Operae meae expunctio: 'the fulfilment of the service', i.e. 'my actual presence'. quantum sibi Jibet: for this expression

Oehler refers to Herm. 23, 22: Fuerit licet materia quantum sibi libet vel potius Hermogeni (instead of libet the mss. have licet, which was accepted by 4. Utinam quantum sibi quidem: 'Oh, if it were at our pleasure indeed, and it were possible for us not to see what we are forbidden to do'. Here Tert. extends, as it were, the 'at pleasure' from his own participation in the festivity to the festivity in its totality. He utters the wish that not only there would not be a need to take part in the forbidden part of the festivity but that there would not be a need of seeing it. This means that he wishes that this part did not exist at all.-Oehler, who did refer quantum sibi libet to the inviting heathen, must, of course, give a different explanation of the present sentence.

After the paraphrase just quoted (utatur ille opera mea et officio meo, quantum sibi libet) he continues as follows: 'Mox voto dictum castigat. Utinam quantum sibi quidem, quasi diceret: utinam illud quod proxime dixi, quantum sibi quidem, disiungi queat ab officio operave mea, ut iam dominus ille gentilis ad eas sollemnitates neminem vocaret Christianum, nec videre possemus quod facere nobis nefas est'. To him Tert.'s wish would imply that the Waszink in his edition; but one should certainly accept Van der Vliet's conjecture libet, which was also translated by Waszink in his translation, p. 58: heathen's 'pleasure' had the consequence that he did not invite any Christian who, then, would not have to see what is forbidden to him. However, the words 'disiungi queat ab officio operave mea' have no fundament in the text.

Moreover, Oehler has to assume that, while the invited Christian is the subject of the first part of the first sentence (sim vocatus ... expunctio) and of the second part of the second sentence (nec videre possemus ... nefas est), the words quantum sibi libet refer to another subject, viz., the inviting heathen.

(The above given interpretation shows that the reading of A gives a good sense and should be maintained. Bohm gives a faulty description of the situation.

She considers the reading licet, which is no more than a printer's error in CC, to be correct and seems to think that A has quidam in the last sentence of 16,

'Matter may have existed as much as it likes-or rather as much as Hermogenes likes'). In the explanation given above the expression has been rendered by 'at pleasure'. The question is: at whose pleasure? In our opinion the answer must be: of the person who is ~peaking here; which means that quantum sibi libet is equivalent here to quantum nobis libet. Oehler and Thelwall, however, have a different opinion. Thelwall translates: 'and the discharge of my good offices is at the service < of my friends>'. Oehler paraphrases: utatur Ule opera mea et officio meo, quantum sibi libet.

Obviously he makes the heathen already the (psychological) subject of the words et operae meae expunctio by interpreting these words as the beginning of the apodosis of the hypothetical construction. ('Suppose I am invited, etc., let then the performance of my duties be at his pleasure. ') However, in that case Tert. would assert that the condition for taking part in the festivity of a heathen is that he will take part 'in so far as the inviting heathen wishes that he takes part' . But Tert. cannot but assert that he will take part in it only in so far as he himself wishes to do so. (Oehler's misinterpretation is probably caused by the fact that he thinks that Tert. speaks here about slaves who are summoned to be present at the festivity. But the case of the slaves is not introduced until 17, 1, as was rightly noticed by Currey in his instructive note, p. 93 ff.) The expression quantum sibi libet seems to have been a standing

3.) _ nee videre possemus: one should notice that the negation belongs to videre. Tert. utters the wish that it would be possible not to see what is forbidden to the Christian. We prefer the reading of A (possemus), because Tert. utters a wish which can not be fulfilled. Sed quoniam ... officiosos habent: because the Evil One has filled the whole world with idolatry, the Christians cannot avoid every contact with it. (He could also here (cf. 14, 5) have referred to St. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians, 5, 10: 'Ctherwise you had to leave this world'.) Hence they are allowed to take part in some activities of the heathens. The condition however is that these activities are a service to the (pagan) man, not to the idol. One should notice that adesse in quibusdam does not mean 'to be present at some actions' but 'to take part in some actions' . In other words, Tert. has in view the actions of the Christian at such a festivity. Those actions must be so that they do not make him a ~xpression felt as a whole in which the question to whom it referred is open;

It could be rendered by 'at one's pleasure' . To determine whose pleasure is meant, one has to ask: who is the (psychological) subject of the sentence? Of

1/ ,2-11S, SURVEY

2)05 10,41 /, 1

servant (officiosus) of a pagan god (a/iquem officiosum habere = 'to render somebody ready to serve'). malus: for the various denominations of the devil cf. Bartelink, Vig. Chr. 19 (1965), 198-9, where further literature is quoted. Plane: 'certainly', 'evidently', 'I will not go, if I am invited to a priestly activity and to a sacrifice', Tert. says, 'because this is serving the idols in its proper sense'. 'But', he adds, ' I shall also not contribute to it by advice or by financial support or otherwise'. consilio ... fun gar: the verb fungi has unusual objects here. This seems to have been caused by the previous sacerdotium. Tert. wants to say: Plane non fungar sacerdotio, sed neque consilio, etc. in eiusmodi: sc. re or casu; see the note on 13, 1 eiusmodi. pronunciation of a word that belongs to the ritual, and which is for that reason necessary, is forbidden. minister ... idololatriae: the use of the word minister in this context of people who are in a subordinate status is, of course, intentional. Instead of minister domini vel patroni vel praesidis (cf. the text of the first sentence of par. 1), they become minister idololatriae. Huius regulae ... apparuerunt: after discussing the case of a free presence of a Christian at private pagan festivities, and the case of the forced presence of slaves and freedmen with their masters at such festivities, Tert. now passes on to the case of the voluntary service by Christians of pagan magistrates. secundum patriarchas et ceteros maiores: obviously Tert. has in mind one of the patriarchs, viz. , Joseph, and one of the great prophets, viz., Daniel. Hence the word Hinc in the next sentence. Joseph and Daniel are examples of men not only serving heathen magistrates but also functioning as magistrates themselves. This subject is going to be discussed in par. 2-3. usque ad finem idololatriae: the image is that of two areas: one is pure, the other idolatrous.

A Christian has to stay within the first area and must not pass the border of the second. apparuerunt: Joseph and Daniel, however august, are still qualified as servants. The verb apparere means here: 'to appear as a servant, to attend, wait upon, serve'; for this sense of the verb see TLL II: 267, 62-268,

5. Si ... sacrificii: Tert. formulates his conclusions in a summary.

17, 1. Ceterum ... sed: in the previous chapter Tert. spoke about the free presence of a Christian at a private festivity of a heathen who invited him.

Now he comes to a case in which this presence is not free, viz., the case of a slave, freedman or servant who, because of his status, has to be close to his superior. How could this be allowed, if the presence discussed in ch. 16 is forbidden? Obviously Tert. assumes that everybody will agree that this presence is allowed. The first sentence may be interpreted in two ways: 1. 'Moreover, how will slaves be able to function?' The case of the slaves is advanced as an additional argument. 2. 'Otherwise (i.e. if what I said above is not true), how could the slaves function?' For ceterum = alioquin see the note at 14, 5. But here, too, the restriction of ch. 16 holds good; hence the following sed.

Apparently Pamelius did not understand this, otherwise he would not have made a new chapter begin here. servi ... praesidibus: the domini and patroni correspond to the servi and liberti, the praesides to the officiales.

Officiales are those who fulfil an officium, in service of a praeses. Officialis is a late Latin word, occurring for the first time in Apuleius (met. 1, 25, 4),

Tert. and Ulpian; it belongs to the legal idiom. As to Christian officiales at Carthage, see Schbllgen, 162 and 247 ss. One should observe that the praesides, who are opposed here to the officiales must not necessarily be the governors of provinces; we also find the officialis of an aedilis (Apul. met.

1,25,4) and officiales iudicum (Cod. Theodos. 8,4,25, 1, cf. TLL IX, 2:

512, 54-5). This statement is important for the interpretation of the nomen praesidis in 23, 2. Iiberti: this conjecture by Iunius must be the correct reading, since it corresponds with patronis. Currey wants to retain the liberi of A B Gel, writing: 'But Dion. Hal. (II, 22) tells us that the priests were assisted by their children, if they had any, and if not, by the children of other families called camilli. Probably liberi refers to these' . It is, however, questionable whether this custom still existed in the time of Tertullian. merum: the 'pure wine' which has to be used at sacrifices. immo si verbo: even the 13; with a dative it is found for the first time in Calpurn. Piso hist. fr. 27,

2 and in several laws. In Tert. it occurs with a dative in apol. 13, 7: haruspex mortuis apparet; spect. 17, 5; nat. 2, 5, 17; mon.17, 3.

Chs. 17,2-18. Are Christians allowed to take posts of honour or power?

'Here arises a question, which recently has become actual. If a Christian can keep himself free of idolatrous acts, is he then allowed to take a post of honour or power? The cases of Joseph and Daniel seem to suggest a positive answer (§ 2). Let us suppose that in a function of honour he can avoid every act contrary to Christian ethics, which is hardly credible (§ 3).

18. But we will confine ourselves to the attire and pomp of these offices.

There is a correspondence between one's dress and one'sfunction. Among the Egyptians and Babylonians (Joseph and Daniel) the purple and gold ornaments were signs of dignity just as the togae praetextae etc. and the wreaths of provincial priests, but the situation of Joseph and Daniel was different (§ 1). In their case the purple was a sheer mark of honour, bestowed upon the confidents of the king. It was in no way connected with idolatrous acts; otherwise they would have refused it instantly. So the purple of Joseph and Daniel was a sign of distinction, not of dignity. It may be compared with the toga of boys and the stoia' of girls, which are also signs of distinction, not of power, of status, not of superstition (§§ 2-3a).

But the purple and other signs of our dignitaries are soiled by the idolatry which is inherent in their dignities and powers. This is confirmed by the fact

17,2-1~, SURVEY, REMARKS

17,217,3

Joseph and Daniel, one should bear in mind that old and new (i.c. old and new covenant) are not always comparable. For the Christians Christ is the example, who refused all dignity and power, which he considered as pomp of the devil. You, Christian, have renounced that pomp. 4) The fact that the worldly powers are hostile to Christianity confirms his thesis. that the same insignia are given to the idols; and rightly so, for the demons are 'the m(1gistrates of this world' (§ 3b). Thus you are already soiled by the ornaments alone, even if you do not perform the idolatrous acts belonging to them (§ 4a).

As to your reference to the example of Joseph and Daniel, you should bear in mind that old and new are not always comparable. There is a great difference between their situation and yours (§ 4b). They were slaves, whereas you are slave of nobody, except Christ. You should follow the example given

The last paragraph is a kind of appendix, in which he says that not only high functions but also (high) birth and (great) possessions include the danger of idolatry, obviously through social contacts and duties. But, TerL adds, there is always a way out. by your Lord. He was humble, unpretentious in dress, inglorious in countenance (§ 5). He did not exercise power even over his own people. He refused to become king. In this way he gave an example to his followers, turning them away from all pomp and splendour both of dignity and power

(§ 6). In fact, more than everybody else the son of God would have made use of this pomp and magnificence, were it not that he regarded it as foreign to himself and his followers. And he did so because he regarded it as part of the pomp of the devil (§ 7). Now you have renounced the devil's pomp; if you

2. Hinc: TerL refers to a question which has been raised recently and which is closely connected with the previous one; but here the emphasis is laid upon the high function as such, not on its subordination to a pagan king. servus dei: again an intentional use of this qualification of the Christian, on account of the context in which was spoken of servants of lords or magistrates. About the question whether a Christ could be a magistrate, cf. especially Schdllgen,

171-5, 182, 192, 247. dignitatis aut potestatis administrationem: cf. in the same sentence et dignitatem et potestatem administraverunt. Administrare = nevertheless touch those things, you perpetrate idolatry.

Moreover the hostile behaviour of the magistrates towards God and his servants should warn you (§ 8).

'to practise'. Joseph and Daniel combined dignitas and potestas (et ... et), but the two are discernible, as appears from aut. See also par. 3. secundum quod = sicut (see Bdhm, 150-1). For TerL's use of quod = (or almost =) sicut, cf. Waszink's note on an. 10, 6 (189-90). in ornamento et purpura: cf. Dan. 5, 29: tunc iubente rege indutus est Daniel purpura. Purpura is a specification of ornamentum. See Gen. 41, 39 seqq., Dan. 2, 48 seqq.

But even your (high) birth and wealth are a hindrance in the fight against idolatry. There are, however, always means to avoid it, because, if other means fail, the way to martyrdom, which makes you a magistrate of heaven, is open (§ 9). '

Remarks 3. Cedamus itaque: TerL has to grant that for a Christian the exercise of such a function must be possible, since it has been achieved by Joseph and Daniel. Hence itaque. On the other hand, the verb cedere already indicates that TerL's feelings go in the opposite direction. Therefore the reading cedamus of A is to be preferred to the reading credamus of B and Gel. Cedere does not mean here 'to permit' but 'to concede', 'to grant (an actual fact),.

Hence it is constructed with an acc. c. inf., as in an. 24, 1: oblivionis capacem an imam non cedam (sc. Platoni). in quoquo honore ... iam vero quae sunt potestatis: a distinction is made here between the functions of honor and potestas. In the case of potestas TerL is thinking of power in the domain of jurisdiction, whereas the term honor comprehends all other functions of the honores, among which the aedilitates have a prominent place. ut ... in solo honoris nomine incedat: he may just bear the name of the office, but is not allowed to act as such. This prohibition is worked out in detail, in order to make it clear that this condition can hardly be fulfilled. neque ... accommodet: he may, of course, not make a sacrifice himself; but neither is he allowed to make others sacrifice on his authority. Nevertheless sacrifices must

In 17, 2 Tert. brings up a new question: Is a Christian allowed to take a post of honour or power? Evidently the cases of Joseph and Daniel, who came already up for discussion in the previous section about the functioning of slaves, occasioned this question. Joseph and Daniel were on the one hand slaves or servants of their kings, but they functioned also as magistrates. Are

Christians allowed to do so?

Tertullian's answer consists of four parts (the division of chapters is misleading again). 1) The Christian must avoid every idolatrous act which is normally connected with these functions of honour and power. Joseph and Daniel achieved this. TertuIIian is ready to admit that this possibility exists, although he has his doubts. 2) The attire and pomp, however, belonging to those functions, make it for the Christian impossible to take those posts, for there is an intrinsic relationship between those ornaments and the idolatrous acts pertaining to those functions. The fact that the idols are adorned with the same insignia clearly shows the nature of the latter. In the case of Joseph and Daniel the insignia had an different status. 3) As to the comparison with

L)O J I,j l~, I L) I

be made! non hostias locet: sc. emendas. Currey notes: locare 'to put out the contract', redimere 'to take it up'. He then quotes 11, 6: publicarum victimarum redemptor. non curas templorum deleget: he may, of course, not take care himself of these temples, but neither is he allowed to delegate this care to others. Nevertheless it must be done! non vectigalia ... procuret: contributions had to be paid to a magistrate, to games, and to holy places: a source of income for keeping up the temple. non spectacula ... praesit: he is not allowed to contribute in any way to spectacles, the main amusement of the people. In spect. Tert. has argued that the spectacles are forbidden for Christians. They belong to the pompa diaboli, they stem from the pagan religion, they are opposed to Christian ethics. A Christian magistrate would not be allowed to give these spectacles either at his own costs or at public expenses. Neither would he be allowed to preside them. nihil sollemne pronuntiet vel edicat: the meaning of sollemne is 'a religious rite or formula' (cf. the next note). This is, by definition, an idolatrous act. Thus the Christian dignitary would not be allowed to pronounce it himself or publish it by proclamation. ne iuret quidem: to swear = to invoke the gods, which means idolatry, because of the official formula. Cf. also the comm. on 23,

2. iam vero quae sunt potestatis: here Tert. sums up what is forbidden to a Christian, who would have accepted a function with power of jurisdiction.

He is not allowed to function as judge in a case of life or death, honour or dishonour; in a case of money it could be tolerated. neque iudicet ... torqueat: as to the nature of these restrictions one should notice that they have no connections with idolatry. There is no idolatrous aspect in an action or legislation de capite, etc. The exercise of potestas seems to be forbidden for a Christian because of the precept of charity with which the magistrate may come into conflict. pudore: pudor means here 'ignominy', cf. apol. 4, 9: in pudoris notam capitis poena con versa est: 'The penalty of death was changed into that of ignominy'. praedamnet: RigaItius observes: 'Damnat iudex, praedamnat legislator. Utroque abstineat Christianus, neque de capite

(one should add vel de pudore) cuiusquam aut legem aut sententiam ferat'; Oehler and Currey agree with this interpretation. Although this is correct, the legislator is not the only instance who praedamnat; in 4, 3 (cf. the note)

Enoch's swearing to the sinners is qualified as praedamnare; every authoritative text may contain a praedamnatio. See further on this verb the note on 4, 2 at the end. recludat: as an equivalent of claudere, in cludere , this verb, which usually means 'to open', is only found in legal texts (cf. OLD s. v., 7). Tert. uses it only in the present passage. si haec credibile est fieri posse: this addition, which seems to concern the restrictions with regard to both honor and po testas , shows that Tert. is highly sceptical about the possibility of realizing these conditions, which were postulated in the verb

Cedamus. In fact these restrictions make the concession unreal. Ch. 18 will give a positive argument for the incompatibility between these functions and Christian life.

1. lam vero: as in 17, 3 iam vera indicates a continuation of the argument.

Currey gives a different, adversative interpretation, paraphrasing the argument as follows: 'Suppose, for argument's sake, that a Christian magistrate could avoid all the duties, ordinary and extra-ordinary, which are the special functions of magistrates, yet an examination of the mere insignia of office will show them to be idolatrous, and therefore the office to be unlawful.' However, one should notice that in 17, 3 Tert.'s argument already tended in the direction of a negative answer, so that one could paraphrase also as follows:

'Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that a Christian magistrate could avoid idolatrous acts in the exercise of his function < but this is, in fact, impossible>; now an examination of the mere insignia of office will show them to be idolatrous, etc.' de solo suggestu: suggestus means 'pomp' here.

The substantive is much used by Tert., with a number of different meanings, for which cf. A. Engelbrecht, Wien. Stud. 28 (1906), 50-58 and Waszink's note on an. 1, 1 (83). The suggestus is the only aspect of a high function which Tert. takes into consideration here. Proprius habitus ... condicione: Tert. has stated that he will deal with the pomp and attire of the magistrates, obviously as a decisive argument against the permissibility of those functions for a Christian. Now it stands to reason that his opponent also here will refer to the examples of Joseph and Daniel. The present text should be understood as an anticipation of this objection. 'There is <, I admit, > an appropriate dressing for different occasions. This means that (Igitur) there is an agreement between the purple and gold of Joseph and Daniel on one hand and the insignia under discussion on the other hand. < So far I agree> but there is an essential difference between the two (sed non eadem condicione),. The difference is, as will be made clear in 18,2, that in the cases of Joseph and Daniel there was no connection with idolatry, whereas such a connection is to be stated in the case of the offices under discussion. ad honorem et dignitatem: these substantives are frequently connected with each other since

Cicero, De lege agr., 1,27; cf. TLL V, 1: 1139,58-67. They have in the time of Tert. roughly the same meaning and are regularly opposed to potestas (the difference being that between magistrates sine et cum imperio). purpura ilia et aurum cervicis ornamentum: cf. 17, 2 and Dan. 5, 29: Tunc iubente rege indutus est Daniel purpura et circumdata est torques aurea colla eius. The combination of the purple and the golden necklace is only found in Scripture with regard to Daniel. About Joseph Gen. 41, 42 (Vulg.) says: Tulit anulum de manu sua (sc. Pharao) et dedit in manu eius; vestivitque eum stoia byssina et colla torquem auream circumposuit. It is noteworthy that Tert. does not use the adjective aureus, as the Scripture texts have, but the substantive

J~ , J - l~ ,2

1~ , 2-1~, 3 aurum, to which cerVlCIS ornamentum seems to be an appositIOn. dignitatis: 'of dignity' (= honour) and nothing else. In 18, 3 Tert. will argue that this is not applicable to the Roman insignia. praetextae ... provincialium: see Iunius' note: 'Praetextae magistratuum, trabeae deorum, regum sive imperatorum et augurum, palmatae triumphantium. Coronarum aurearum, quas sacerdotes provinciales gestabant, exempla habentur

Antonini Eiagabali et Aquileiensium apud Herodianum Libro V et VIII', quoted by Oehler. praetextae: for the connection of the toga praetexta with idolatry Currey quotes a remarkable passage from Livy, viz., IO, 7, 9 seqq.

trabeae: this must refer to the trabea with purple and white stripes which was worn by consuls and knights in their transvectio; cf. Mommsen, Rom.

Staatsrecht III 1, 513, E. Schuppe, art. 'Trabea', RE VI, 1860-2, Currey's note ad loc. (who mentions two other kinds of trabea, viz. , that used for the gods and that used by augurs), and Friedlander's note on Iuv. Sat. IO, 35.

Currey adds: 'The procession of knights started from the temple of Mars, and so was connected with idolworship'. palmatae: this refers to the purple tunica and the toga palmata worn by the statue of Jupiter Capitolinus, and by the triumphator on the day of his triumph (Iuv. Sat. IO, 38 in tunica Iovis).

For further details, see Mommsen, Rom. Staatsrecht I 3, 411 s.; Marquardt, Privatleben, 542 s.; Wissowa, ReI., 127. The toga palmata is also mentioned in cor. 13, 1, which passage shows still other similarities with the present text.

coronae aureae sacerdotum provincialium: Rigaltius, followed by Currey, puts a comma after sacerdotum. Currey observes: 'There is no reason for limiting the crowns to provincial priests'. However, the parallel passage cor.

13, 1 shows this interpretation to be erroneous. Tert. says there, in a survey of several kinds of crowns: sunt et provinciales aureae. Fontaine refers in his note to Aug., ep. 138, 4, 19, where Augustine says that Apuleius has been sacerdos provinciae, so in the present passage provincialium must be connected with sacerdotum. non eadem condicione: eadem condicione is opposed here to eodem more. As to the meaning of condicio, cf. idol. 1, 3:

Fraudis condicio ea est, opinor, si ... ; 1, 4: cetera (crimina) ... in idololatria condicionem suam repraesentant; Marc. 2, 22, 2: longe diversas habendo causas ab idololatriae condicione. Condicio denotes here 'the conditions that make a thing what it is', 'the essential element', 'the essence' . Hence one could even translate: 'but there is an essential difference'. individuae jamiliaritatis praerogativa of the apostles. Cf. further res. 18, 12:

Abraham, patrem jidei, divinae jamiliaritatis virum. The word jamiliaritas has undoubtedly been chosen by Tert. because it is frequently used in connection with Daniel, who in Bel et Draco LXX (II, p. 936-7 ed. Rahlfs) is called

(in the 'altera versio') O\)fl~LW"t~~ "tou ~O(.crLAE.W~ (Vulg. Dan. 14, 1 con viva regis).

Interesting in this context is the following sentence from an. 48,4, where Tert. is discussing the connection between fasting and dreaming, and evidently already for some time has in mind Daniel 2, 16 seqq. Now in 48, 4 Tert. first observes that a connection between fasting and dreaming is also found in pagan religion (which for him, of course, is superstition): Sic enim et daemonia expostulant eam a suis somniatoribus, ad lenocinium scilicet divinitatis, quia jamiliarem dei norunt, quia et Daniel rursus trium hebdomadum statione aruit victu; it seems to be evident that the choice of the adjective jamiliaris has been evoked by the fact that Tert. is thinking of Daniel, the jamiliaris (CI\)fl~LW"tfj~) dei (in his comm. on an. 48, 4 (p. 513)

Waszink assumes that jamiliaris has a causative sense there; however, since such a sense of this adj. occurs nowhere else, it is preferable to interpret: 'that the sobrietas is amica, percara deo'). purpurati: this word designs 'an official at a royal (esp. eastern) court' (OLD s.v.); it is rather frequent in this sense in Livy and Curtius. candidati: in Tert. 's works this word is found ten times connected with a genitive, e.g. orat. 3, 3: nos, angelorum, si meruerimus, candidati; Marc. 2, 25, 5: restitution is candidatos (TLL III: 238,

53-6); the earliest instances of this use are found in Val. Max., Sen. and Quintil. Danielem: see the note on 15, IO. nee Belem nee draconem: the story of the fraud of the priests of Bel which was revealed to the king by Daniel is told in the same chapter (LXX vss. 3-12; Vulg. 14, 2-22), that concerning the dragon in LXX vss. 23-42 (Vulg. 14, 22-41).

3. Simplex igitur: Tert. gives a forced extension to his argument as he likes to do so many times. He states: 'Thus that purple was something simple' (i.e. without any association of idolatry); and he goes on: 'it is not even a mark of dignity' (in the previous paragraph he has said that the purple and gold were insignia divinitatis; now he tries to make a stronger case by stating that the purple is not even that) 'but a sign of free citizenship among the barbarians'. 'For', he explains, 'in a certain sense Joseph who had been slave, and Daniel, who had become captive-and therewith also a slave (cf. Gaius,

Inst., 1, 3, 2)-obtained the citizenship of Babylon and Egypt by means of the dress of barbarian freedom'. Tert. makes this move in order to compare the ornaments of Joseph and Daniel with the Roman toga puerilis praetexta

(for boys) and the stoIa puerilis (for girls) which are given as a sign of descent, not of power or honor, of status, and not of superstition. Thus there is no connection at all with idolatry and, in consequence, they are allowed for 2. Tantum enim honoris nomine: the position of tantum, at the beginning of the sentence, is remarkable. Honoris is, as was stated above, the equivalent of dig nita tis in the previous sentence. familiaritatem: the equivalent of amicitiam. We may add that Tert. uses the substantive jamiliaritas particularly to denote the relation of a man to a king or to God or Christ· for instance, in bapt. 12, 8 he speaks about the primae adlectionis et e;inde

LOU HI,j HS,j-llS,4 .Ltl!

Christians. nee iam dignitatis erat: after dignitatis Hartel, I, 51, wants to supply sacerdotalis (in thought, as it seems, not putting it in the text, since he writes 'erg. sacerdotalis'). But here dignitatis certainly has the same meaning as in par. I, where it is used as synonymous to honor. qui per eaptivitatem statum verterat: lit. 'who through captivity had changed his status', i.e. 'who had fallen into a lower status through captivity'. puerilis praetexta ... et puerilis stoIa seems to be the correct reading (defended by Heinrich Gomperz,

22). The first puerilis is found in A alone (pueris B Gel), the second in A B (puellis Gel). Puerilis praetexta as the ordinary vestment of a boy is frequently mentioned, e.g. Tac. ann. I, 3, 2: necdum posita puerili praetexta. The puerilis stoIa must be the vestment of a girl; on stoia cf. Dig. 34, 2, 23:

(vestimenta) muliebria ... veluti stolae, pallia, tunicae, etc. The use of puerilis with the meaning 'belonging to a girl' is extremely rare, as is formulated in the OLD: 'never or at least very rarely of a girl'; a doubtful case is Apul. met.

3,20: mihi ... Fotis puerile obtulit corollarium'; further Martial. 9, 67, 3 (an unclear case) is quoted. We may add with Bbhm, 154, n. 3, Ovid met. 5,400, where it is said of Proserpine: tantaque simplicitas puerilibus adjuit annis, though the more general meaning 'childish' is also possible there. _ nativitatis insignia: cf. apol. 6, 2: honestorum natalium insignia. nativitatis

... generis ... ordinis: terms for a social status. Ceterum: in contradiction to the Egyptian and Babylonian situation, the Roman purple and other insignia have a strong connection with idolatry. Thus to accept those dignities means to be contaminated with idolatry. This is confirmed by the fact that the idols themselves are adorned with the same insignia. (Cum praeterea introduces a second argument; Tert. occasionally calls such an argument secundo gradu, e.g. an. 24, 4: Secundo gradu opponam; cf. Waszink's note ad loc., p. 310). Then Tert. adds: this is done rightly (merito), for the demons

(to which the idols belong) are the magistrates of this world. He omits a necessary sentence: 'Thus the high dignitaries and the demons are colleagues, for they are both magistrates, and so they belong to one and the same collegium, and for that reason they wear unius collegii insignia'. dignitatum et potestatum: for this differentiation, cf. the note on par. 1 honorem et dignitatem. insertae: Hartel's conjecture inserta is wrong. Tert. is speaking about the purple and the further insignia dignitatum et potestatum which are dedicated from the beginning to the idolatry which is involved in (insertae with dat.) those high functions, and thus they have projanationis suae maculam. profanationis: this substantive is omitted in the OLD; Lewis and Short only quote the present passage. The insignia are said to be 'dedicated to idolatry' and for that reason they have 'the stain of their projanatio': thus the projanatio is caused by the dedication to the idols. Now projanare has, apart from the meaning 'to render profane' also that of 'to bring to a god before the temple', 'to dedicate'. So projanatio means here 'dedication (viz., to a pagan god)', and it belongs to the domain of idolatry. cum praeterea:

Bbhm, 155, follows Lbfstedt, Verm. Stud., 162 seq., who thinks that here an evolution in the meaning of praeterea from 'moreover' to 'above all' (= praesertim) becomes visible: cum praeterea would mean 'above all because'

(one should note the sequence: in the translation cum comes after praeterea).

We think that Tert. introduces here a further argument (see above) which is not put 'above all others' (Lbfstedt's statement may have been caused by the fact that cum praesertim is found throughout Latin texts with cum at the second place ('especially because'». praetextae et trabeae: cf. the note on par. 1. lati clavi: all editions have laticlavi, but Hubner in TLL VII, 2:

1005, 67 rightly observes that we must read lati clavi, since Tert. is speaking of the well-known adornment of the tunica of Roman senators and knights, on which cf. TLL III: 1330,44 seqq. and Hula, art. 'Clavus', RE IV: 4-9. The adj. laticlavus used as a subst. is found in Cod. Theod. 6, 4, 17, 1: dedecus videtur mulieres ad laticlavum atque insignia procedere (TLL VII, 2: 1005, 624). fasces ... et virgae: the well-known attributes of the lictors. daemonia magistratus sunt huius saeculi: this statement was probably caused by the designation of the devil as ocPXwv 'toG x6crfJ-oU 'tOU'tOU in Joh. 12, 31 and 16, 11

(cf. W. Bauer on 12, 31 in HdbNT, 6, p. 163) .

4. Quid ... administres?: 'If there is such a close connection between that pomp and idolatry, what is then the point in wearing these insignia, without explicitly offering sacrifices, etc.? In this way one does not avoid idolatry, since merely to wear those dresses means to be idolatrous, for nemo inmundis mundus videri potest'. Tert. illustrates this with the example of dirty clothes.

'If one puts on a tunic which is dirty, it may perhaps be that this dress is not soiled through you, but it is impossible that the dirty clothes keep you clean'.

This illustration is remarkable. Tert. wants to show that the dress of the high functions necessarily soils the person who wears it. In the example of the dirty tunic this would mean: 'you cannot wear a dirty tunic without becoming dirty yourself'. However, Tert. states: sed tu per iI/am mundus esse non poteris.

This seems to mean: 'the dirty tunic does not make one clean'. This meaning is also suggested by the context: poterit ilia non inquinari per te - tu mundus esse non poteris per i1/am. If this is the correct interpretation, it has a consequence for the previous sentence: Nemo inmundis mundus videri potest. If per i1/am is not the equivalent of in ilia, in other words, if per i1/am has a causative meaning, this may apply also to inmundis ('Nobody can be seen as pure through impure things'). In this case there is no reason to follow Rigaitius, who conjectured in inmundis (haplology), which is in itself a very attractive conjecture. administres: Tert. does not say 'opera jacere' but 'opera administrare', because he thinks of the opera of high dignitaries, who have to 'administrate'. immundis mundus: for the word-play Bbhm, 155, refers

18,5-18,6

1~,4-1~,5 to cult. fem. 1, 4, 2: cultum dicimus, quem mundum muliebrem vocant, ornatum, quem immundum muliebrem con venit dici. videri: h.1. seems to be an equivalent of esse ('to be seen as ... '). lam nunc: the argument of Tert. 's imaginary opponent was based on the examples of Joseph and Daniel.

Until now Tert. has accepted these examples as an argument. Now he states that this is not always a valid argument (therewith iam nunc receives an almost adversative sense). 'There is a difference between the old and the new, the crude and the perfect, the initial and the fully developed, the servile and the free.' By these opposites Tert. wants to describe the differences between Old and New Testament, the latter being the fulfilling of the first; the New Testament is freedom through the liberating deeds of Christ. That means that Joseph and Daniel were still slaves, 'You, Christian, are not, unless you want to say that you are 'a slave of Christ' ,-but Christ has also liberated you from the captivity of the world. Therefore, you should behave in accordance with the example given by the Lord'. Thus the essence of Tert. 's argument in this paragraph is this: the example of Christ who was humble (without honour) and did not exercise power forbids the Christian to accept functions of honour and power. One should notice that this argument would be valid, even if honour and power had nothing to do with idolatry. obstipuerunt super te multi, sic inglorius erit inter viros aspectus eius, et forma eius inter filios hominum) and 53, 2 (LXX: oux tcrm doot; cxu't0 ouoE 06~cx· xcxt dOOfL~v cxu'tov, xcxt OUX dX~v doot; ouoE xcinot;, Vulg.: non est species ei neque decor et vidimus eum et non erat aspectus). In TLL S.V. inglorius Is. 52, 14 is connected (VII, 1: 1555,70) with Marc. 3, 17,2: Si inglorius, si ignobilis, si inhonorabilis, meus erit Christus, and the present passage (ib. 1556, 36-8) with ib. 53, 2. Further passages to be quoted in this context are Marc. 3, 7,

2, Iud. 14,2, Prax. 11,8 (all three quoting Is. 53,2). Cf. on this subject the monograph by J. Kollwitz, Das Christusbild des dritten lahrhunderts (Munster LW. 1953); cf. also W. J. A. Visser, Die Entwicklung des Christusbildes

(Bonn 1934).

6. Si potestatis ... functus est: the sordidum ministerium is, of course, the washing of the feet of the apostles at the last supper. From this gesture Tert. concludes that Christ did not exercise power, not even over his followers.

How could these followers be allowed to exercise power? Perhaps Tert. is also thinking of Luke 22, 27, where Jesus says: irw oE iv fL€.cr~ UfLWV dfL\ wt; 0

O\cxxovwv. si regem ... refugit: Tert. combines John 18, 36-7, where Christ before Pilatus declares that he is king but that his kingdom is not of this world

(conscius sui regni) with John 6, 15, where Christ, aware that the enthusiast masses would come and seize him to proclaim him king, withdrew to the hills by himself. dedit formam: cf. par. 5: exforma dominica and 13,6: Daformam, in qua velis agi tecum: forma means regula, norma. dirigendo omni fastigio et suggestu: this passage has given rise to a number of conjectures all of which are superfluous, since dirigere here clearly means, as is formulated in TLL VI: 1237, 38: 'i.q. ad rectam normam accommodare, revocare' (a meaning probably common in the idiom of lawyers, cf. ib. 1239,

45-56). The relevant passages are mentioned ib. 1237,58 - 1238,15; in Tert.'s works this meaning is fairly frequent; it occurs three times in the well-known first chapter of his treatise De virginibus velandis, where the nova disciplina is described (one should bear in mind that the text under discussion here is speaking about that nova disciplina of the Christians in comparison with the old one, under which Joseph and Daniel lived): ut ... paulatim dirigeretur et ordinaretur et ad perfectum perduceretur disciplina a ... spiritu sancto; est paracleti administratio ... quod disciplina dirigitur ... ; is (sc. fructus) rudis (cf. rudia in idol. 18, 4) ... et informis paulatim aetatem suam dirigens eruditur in mansuetudinem saporis; further, cf. resurr. 2, 1: Christo ... servabatur ... dubitata dirigere. In the next part of the article in TLL (p. 1238, 16-32) with the title 'i.q. stabilire, confirmare', five passages from Tert. are quoted. Here the meaning is very near to corrigere, for which six passages are cited (ib.

5. etiam condicione servi erant: condicio is a law-term, cf. Gaius, Inst. 1, 3, 5: in servorum condicione nul/a differentia est. tu vero nullius servus '"

Iiberavit: the Christian is the slave of nobody (= of no human being); in so far as he is still a slave, he is a slave of Christ only, who has liberated him from the captivity of the world. In this context we should first of all notice the (faulty) etymology of servus found in Gaius, inst. 1,3,3: Servi autem ex eo appel/ati sunt, quod imperatores captivos vendere iubent ac per hoc servare nec occidere solent. Thus the Christians are free, because Christ has liberated them from the captivity of the world (the captivity being regarded as the origin of slavery). However, they remain slaves of Christ, because every slave has a dominus, and the Christians venerate Dominum Iesum Christum (Tert. plays with the two meanings of d(D)ominus). in quantum: the expression in quantum ( ... in tan tum) is found for the first time in Tacitus; Tert. uses it in an. 7, 4. ex forma dominica: 'in accordance with the norm established by the Lord'; cf. 13, 6: da formam. in humilitate ... incessit: for this use of incedere (almost as a copulative verb), see the note on 1, 2. For humilitate cf.

Philipp. 2, 8: humiliavit semet ipsum factus oboediens usque ad mortem (Vulg.). vestitu incultus: this is concluded from a word of Christ (Matth.

11, 8; Luke 7, 25), which does not deal with himself but with John the Baptist.

vultu denique et aspectu inglorius: this statement is based on two sentences in Isaiah, viz., 52, 14 (LXX: QV 'tP01tOV ixcr't~croV't<X\ i1tt crE 1tOno[ oii'twt; eXoo~~cr~\

1237,80 - 1238,1; no passages from Tert.). Although the conjectures made instead of dirigendo are thus shown to be unnecessary, we shall discuss them eX1tO eXv9pw1twv 'to d06t; crou xed ~ 06~<x crou eX1tO 'tWV eXv9pw1twv, VUlg.: sicut

::04

1~,6-1~,7 lIS, I-lIS,';! kO.J

briefly here. Clearly impossible are Mercerus' de reiciendo and the deiciendo or derogando supposed by Reifferscheid. Iunius reads derigendo which he explains as deponendo or destituendo. Concerning Rigaitius Currey writes:

'Rigalt says that rigeo is applied to the stiffness of gold and ornaments; dirigere (from dirigeo) or derigere may mean, 'to dissolve that stiffness'; dirigendo omni jastigio ac suggestu, 'for the dissipation of all pride and grandeur'.' On this Currey observes: 'But Rigalt gives no example of this usage of dirigere, nor does he account for such a construction of the gerund of a neuter verb'. Oehler reads derigendo; he translates the verb derigere by 'to be cold, without feeling towards something' and supposes jastigio and suggestu to be datives, thus translating: 'being without feeling towards pride and pomp'. Against Oehler Hoppe, Beitr., 96, rightly observes that in Tert. the dative of the fourth declension always ends in -ui. Hoppe accepts dirigendo but takes jastigio and suggestu to be separate ablatives, observing: 'Wenn man jedoch, die Praeposition de betonend, als Bedeutung 'ablenken' annimmt, erkHirt sich dieser' (viz., the separate ablative). Apparently Hoppe's interpretation is: 'leading away from pride and pomp'. Currey rightly takes dirigere to mean 'measure', 'adapt to a rule', 'bring to a level'. quam ... quam = tam ... quam; cf. the note on 4, 4. n. 3, we mention Hoppe, Synt., 60; LOfstedt, Per., 153 seqq.; Salonius, Vitae

Patr., 291; Schrijn.-Mohrm., Cypr., 2, 35 seqq. A similarly abundant form of the future, as in an. 1, 1 videbor dimicaturus seems to be peculiar to Tert., cf. Waszink's note (p. 83). quanti = quot; cf. 8,4: quot parietes ... insulae quantae?; 6, 2: qui tantos efficis. The rendering 'so great' is impossible, since the fasces had a fixed measure. quam noluit ... deputavit: Tert. enlarges his argumentation in short paratactic sentences, which have a causal nature in themselves: 'He did not want it, because he rejected it; he rejected it, because he condemned it; he condemned it, because he regarded it as belonging to the pompa diaboli.' pompa diaboli: cf. the note on 10, 4. possent:

Wissowa conjectures possunt, obviously in view of the following dei non sunt; however, the reading possent of A should be maintained, because the irrealis can be continued until the relative clause: non enim damnasset, nisi non sua < essent >; alterius autem esse non possent, nisi diaboli < essent > , quae dei non sunt.

8. Vel hoc: Tert. adds still another argument why the functions of power and honour of this world should be refused by the Christians. Not without reason potestates stands in front here, because those who have power decide to punish the Christians: per iIIas (sc. potestates) ... supplicia consulta sunt.

per iIIas ... ignorantur: Latinius, followed by Iunius, reads irrogantur.

Rigaltius rightly defends the lectio tradita. For the sake of clearness we give Currey's paraphrase: 'It is owing to the powers of the world that punishments are devised against the Christians; it is owing to them that the penalties decreed by God against the impious are unknown (because their persecutions prevent the spread of Christianity, which reveals these penalties)'. Of course,

Tert. is thinking of punishments in the here-after (cf. e.g. an. 27).

7. Quis enim: the argument in this paragraph runs as follows: 'If this pomp were something desirable, it would have been appropriate to Christ. But obviously Christ did not want it for himself. And he did not want it, because he regarded it as not belonging to him, and herewith-since things belong either to God (Christ) or to the devil-as part of the pomp of the devil. Now it is this very pomp of the devil which is abjured in baptism. And therewith you have abjured also these functions of honour and power, which are in fact idolatry'. In the introductory note of par. 5 we observed that the reference to the example of Christ, who refused honour and power, was an argument that as such has nothing to do with idolatry. In the present paragraph, however,

Tert. argues that not to follow the example of Christ means idolatry. Was our observation incorrect? We think it was not. The explanation lies in the fact that in. the present text idolatry is taken in the larger sense of 'anything not belongmg to God (Christ)" just as in the first chapter of idol. Tert. states that every sin is idolatry, because whatever is not given to God is given to the devil.

In our observation idolatry was meant in the stricter sense of actions directed explicitly to the idols (demons). Not to follow Christ in his humility and powerlessness is idolatry in the second sense, not in the first. usus fuisset: this .abu~da~t form of the pluperfect seems to be the result of a tendency to elUCidatIOn m popular speech, as is stated by B6hm, 158; she refers to Plautus

9. The first sentence is again the formulation of an objection that could be made by the opponent: 'But, then, both high birth and property (substantia) hinder us from avoiding idolatry'. To say it in Thelwall's words (p. 170, n.

2): 'From your birth and means, you will be expected to fill offices which are in some way connected with idolatry'. Tert. answers, radically as always: 'We can always avoid it, because in the end there always remains the way of martyrdom'. The correct interpretation of this sentence was first given by De la

Cerda, whose words are quoted by Oehler and may be repeated here: 'Non deerunt remedia in ecclesia et apud Christianos contra hoc malum. Sed esto: nullum sit remedium, ut aliter vitam agas, nisi cum his insignibus idololatricis, certo tibi deesse non potest, quo in caelis regnaturus es feliciore multo purpura et magistratu'. And he adds: 'Puto indicari martyrium q.d. Remedio passionis pro Christo obitae habebis in caelis purpuram martyris, cui magistratus terrenus nullus comparandus'. magistratus .•. in caelis: for this

~oen. 40 oblitus jui (alongside oblitus sum ib. 118) and Tert. Marc. 4,23,4:

Sl non ... in credulos semper juisset expertus. From the literature quoted ib.

17, ::'UKVnY, KnMAKK:S

1':1, REMARK:S

":'01

idea Thelwall refers to Matth. 19, 28: sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim, iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel and Luke 22, 30 (parallel to the Matthew text); 1 Cor. 6, 2: An nescitis quoniam sancti de hoc mundo iudicabunt?;

Apoc. 3,21: Qui vicerit, dabo ei sedere mecum in throno meo (cf. ib. 2, 26-7).

As to the form of the quotation, cf. the passages collected by Rambaux, 146, n. 1, especially apol. 1, 2: Scit (sc. veritas) se peregrinam in terris agere ... dignitatem in caelis habere.

('Chronologia Tertullianea. Le De carne Christi et Ie De idololatria', Annales de la Faculte des Lettres et Sciences humaines de Nice n° 21, 1974, 279) we think that Tertullian speaks of a part of the army, viz., the higher ranks and so we prefer to give to the relative clause a restrictive nature.

2. inter dignitatem et potestatem. Here again two possibilities exist: does Tertullian speak of the militia as something between dignity and power or as something belonging to the domain of 'dignity and power'? Rordorf adheres to the first opinion ("eine Mittelstellung zwischen Wiirde und Amtsgewalt" p. 109, cf. the translation on p. 107). We think that Scaliger was right when he wrote intra in the margin of the edition of Iunius as an equivalent of inter.

Tertullian speaks here of that part of the army, which is within the domain of dignity and power, i.e. the higher ranks. So Braun, l.c. 279.

3. At nunc de isto quaeritur. Here the adjunct nunc admits two interpretations. It may point to the inner structure of the treatise ('now' = 'at this point of the treatise') or to the time in which Tertullian wrote the work ('now' =

'in these days'); Rordorf advocates the second explanation ('gegenwartig', p. 107; 118; 119 n. 35; 120). In his view this nunc refers to a political situation which lies some years before the time in which Tertullian wrote De corona (p.

118, cf. 119 n. 35). In the time of De idol. "the question is raised" whether a Christian is allowed to be a military man at all. Tertullian flatly says 'no'.

Some years later, when he writes De corona (see below) he cannot maintain this intolerant standpoint any more, because he had to face the undeniable fact that Christians were serving in the army in great numbers. This change was caused by the militarizing of the Roman State in the early 3rd century.

Soldiers were assumed in civil services in large numbers. These functions were attractive to Christians, too, particularly since there was no danger that they came in a situation which was forbidden to them, viz., war with the necessity to kill people.-We would like to draw attention to the fact that this interesting explanation of the difference between idol. and cor. does not oblige us to follow the author in his interpretation of nunc. In other words, one may follow the author in that explanation and nevertheless interpret nunc as 'at this point in the treatise'. Also elsewhere nunc has this meaning; e.g.

Marc. 3, 18, 1: (praedicatione crucis) de qua nunc maxime quaeritur; Prax.

8, 2: iam nunc quaeritur quis quomodo utatur aliqua re et vocabulo eius.

Ch. 19. The Christian and the military service 'It might seem that herewith also a decision has been given about the compatibility of Christianity and the higher military ranks.

But now the question is raised whether being a Christian is compatible with being a soldier at all, even if it concerns the lower ranks, who do not run the risk of being obliged to sacrifice or to pass capital sentences (§ 1).

The answer is in the negative: divine oath and human oath do not go together; one soul cannot serve both God and Caesar.

Biblical examples seem to indicate that the Christians are allowed to wage war (§ 2). But how will they be allowed to do so, how will they even be allowed to do military service in peace without the sword, which the Lord has taken away? It is true, the soldiers who came to John the Baptist received from him a rule of life and the centurio came to faith < and obviously remained a soldier>; but in Peter all later soldiers were disarmed by Christ.

The military dress belongs to actions forbidden to a Christian and is, therefore, forbidden itself (§ 3).

Remarks a. The meaning of the text of 19, 1. The two first sentences of this chapter contain various elements which admit various interpretations. Hence the diversity of opinions about this chapter among modern authors.

1. de militia ... quae inter dignitatem et potestatem est. The relative clause may have an explicative or a restrictive nature. In the first supposition Tertullian says that the military service in its totality is something inter dignitatem et potestatem. In the second he points to a part of the militia, namely that inter dignitatem et potestatem (the higher ranks). W. Rordorf (,Tertullians

Beurteilung des Soldatenstandes', Vig. Chr. 23,1969,109) seems to adhere to the first interpretation. According to him, Tertullian states here that the previous chapters implicitly contain his opinion with regard to the military service, at least with regard to the higher ranks. This 'at least' seems to imply that also the lower ranks are comprehended in the formula inter dignitatem et potestatem. His observation in note 4, p. 108, with regard to the construction of the sentence points into the same direction. With R. Braun b. The text of 19, 2b (Et virgam ... ludere). In 19, 2a Tert. stated that military service, even that of the common soldier, is incompatible with the Christian belief: non con venit. The structure of the rest of this chapter is as follows: 19, 2 b contains an objection against this thesis, put in the mouth of an imaginary opponent who refers to examples from the OT which point in another direction; in 19, 3 Tert. answers this objection.

IY, REMARKS

26Y

lY, REMARKS

Now the answer of Tert. is clear, but the objection in 19, 2b is far from clear. First there is uncertainty with regard to the reading. The oldest testimony, the Mesnart edition of 1545 (the Agobardinus ends at 18, 9), reads as follows: Et vir gam portabit Moyses, fibulam et Aaron, cingetur loro et loannes, agmen aget et Iesus Nave, bellavit et populus, si placet ludere. The second edition, viz., that of Gelenius of 1550, reads: Et virgam portavit

Moyses, fibulam et Aaron, cingitur loro et loannes, agmen agit et Jesus Nave, bellavit et populus, si placet ludere.

Then the argument runs as follows: "Moses carried a rod, Aaron a buckle, John girded himself with a belt, Jesus Nave led an army and the people waged war, if I may play with the matter". Obviously the people is the Jewish people. But now there exists a discrepancy between the objection and Tertullian's answer: "How will they (the people) wage war?", etc., where the subject is, of course, the Christian (people). Moreover, also here Tert. would speak of a populus Christianus (subject of bellabit), which is improbable. And also here si placet ludere remains problematic.

The reading of Mesnart has an irregularity in the perfect tense of bellavit after three future tenses. In Gelenius' reading the succession of perfect, present, present, perfect is remarkable. As to the latter observation, such a succession is not unknown in Tertullian's work (cf. 12, 3; Herm. 26, 1; cor. 11, 4; nat. 2,8, 13 and LOfstedt, Krit. Apol., 102-5 and Z. Spr. Tert., 23 seqq. Dr.

J. den Boeft, with whom we discussed the present matter, drew our attention to these parallels and this literature). On the other hand, the irregularity in Mesnart cannot be maintained. If the three future tenses are correct, there must be a mistake in bellavit (an interchange of b and v is not unusual, cf. ad 1, 2 negabit). Thus one should read either portabit, cingetur, aget, bellabit or portavit, cingitur, agit, bellavit.

All problems disappear, if one reads Petrus instead of populus with Van der Vliet, Birt and Dekkers (see second apparatus in CC). Then the text runs as follows. First Tertullian lets the opponent refer to precedents in the OT:

"Moses carried a rod, Aaron wore a buckle, John girded himself with a belt, Jesus Nave led an army" ; here Tertullian himself comes in adding "and Peter waged war, if I may permit myself a joke". Tertullian points to Peter cutting off MaIchus' ear in the garden of Gethsemane; the joke is of course in qualifying this deed as waging war. (Now the joke is in the immediately preceding element of the sentence just as in an. 32, 2; cf. comm. of Waszink ad loc., p. 386). And Tertullian answers: "But how will he wage war any more

... , without the sword that the Lord has taken away?" Just like Peter, the Christian is not allowed to be a warrior any more.-The reading populus may have been caused by a scribe who read petrus in his manuscript as an abbreviation of populus (plus); after agmen agit et Iesus Nave the statement populus bellavit is something to be expected.

Obviously the reading of Mesnart is the lectio diJJicilior, and should be maintained, if possible (with the 'correction' bellabit). One has to assume, then, that Tertullian refers to precedents from the past but that he does not mention those facts from the past as things that have taken place (virgam portavit Moyses), but lets them function as arguments as follows: "Moyses will carry a rod, Aaron a buckle etc." (Tert. uses this figure of style also in cor.

8, 4: habebit etiam paenulam Paulus). This argumentation asks for a consequence like this: "Moses will carry a rod, etc., will the Christian not do the same?" , in other words, "if Moses will carry a rod, ... how will the Christian not do the same?" Such an argument may be discovered in the present text, if one interprets bellabit et populus as a consequence: "Moses will carry a rod, etc., then the people (= the Christians) will wage war". There are three objections against this interpretation: 1) the words bellabit et populus seem to be on a level with the preceding statements (one should notice the repeated et which suggests parallelism: Et ... Moyses, et Aaron, et lohannes, et Iesus

Nave, et populus). 2) populus is a usual term for the Jewish people and it is obvious here after agmen aget Iesus Nave; but is it used already in this time for the Christian people? 3) how to explain si placet ludere?; unless one assumes that Tert. qualifies the whole argument as a joke, which seems to be incorrect. We think, therefore, that the reading of Mesnart cannot be maintained. The wrong element in the anomaly is not in bellavit but in portabit, which has come instead of portavit and has caused the future tense of the following two verbs. c. The argument oj ch. 19. One should consider the argument of ch. 19 in connection with that of 17, 2-18, 9. The words in isto capitulo at the beginning of ch. 19 are a clear indication of this. From the previous argument Tertullian concludes that the higher ranks in the army are forbidden for Christians. But what about the lower ranks of the common soldiers? Are they also (etiam) forbidden? The answer seems to be 'no', since for the common soldier there is no need of sacrificing or passing capital sentences. One should notice that this observation agrees with that in ch. 17, 3 regarding the higher functions. There it was said that those higher functions could perhaps be conceded, if there was no danger of sacrificing and passing capital sentences. But then, in ch. 18, it appeared that nevertheless those functions were forbidden because of the 'ornaments' of those dignitaries, which were idolatrous. In ch. 19 Tertullian immediately states that divine and human 'sacrament' do not go together, but after that he comes to speak about the 'ornaments' of soldiers and concludes at the end: "No dress (habitus) is lawful for us, if it is connected with an unlawful action".

The question arises, what activity Tertullian has in mind. In ch. 18 he pointed to idolatrous acts. Here he seems to have in mind the killing of other

L./U

J~, REMARKS

1'::1, REMARKS

2/1

people, since he is dealing with, among others, the sword (see also ch. 17, end). However, this would be quite unusual in early Christian literature. Elsewhere what is objectionable in the army is in the idolatrous acts, which the soldiers have to take part in. (See J. Helgeland, 'Christians and the Roman

Army from Marcus Aurelius to Constantine' in ANRW II 23, I, p. 740. In this large contribution Helgeland gives a good survey of the opinions of the early Christians with regard to the service in the army.) And does Tertullian's statement in 19, 2 Non con venit ... signo Christi et signo diaboli, castris /ucis et castris tenebrarum not point in the same direction? One should, moreover, not forget that Tertullian in this treatise deals with idolatry. That is why we think that he also here points to the idolatrous actions, with which those military attributes are connected.

First and foremost one should bear in mind that in De corona Tertullian discusses the case of a soldier, a Christian soldier, who refused to put the corona on his head at the occasion of a donativum. So he had to deal with a Christian who, at any rate, had not left the army at his conversion. If Tertullian had taken the position of idol. 19, 1-2, he could, of course, have had admiration for the heroic behaviour of that soldier, but he should have stated that this soldier had been wrong in not leaving the army at his conversion. The treatise De corona would not have been written, then. Now that he started writing on that soldier, he had to take a nuanced position. And one can hardly imagine that after writing this treatise Tertullian discussed the matter in the way he did in De id%/atria.

One should, however, notice how near Tert. is to an intolerant standpoint, also in De corona. In ch. 11 he deals with the problem of compatibility of Christian faith with military service. He uses there in a longer context the same formulas as in De id%/atria 19, 2: d. De id%/atria and De corona. Tertullian's standpoint with regard to the compatibility of military service and Christian belief in De id%/atria is different from that in De corona. It differs also from that of the Church in those days. The difference is in the fact that in De corona and in the Constitutiones apostolicae (from the beginning of the 3rd century) a distinction is made between two cases: a Christian who wants to become a soldier and a soldier who wants to become a Christian and remain a soldier. About the first case there is no difference of opinion; it is not allowed. With respect to the second,

De corona and the Const. Apost. regard it as allowed, provided that one avoids idolatry. In De id%/atria Tertullian distinguishes both cases explicitly and rejects them both.

De id%/atria 19, 2 Non convenit sacramento divino et humano, signo Christi et signo diaboli, De corona 11 (1) Credimusne humanum sacramentum divino superduci Ii cere ...

(3) Et signum postulabit a principe, qui iam a Deo accepit ...

(4) Ipsum de castris lucis in castra castris lucis et castris tenebrarum. tenebrarum nomen deferre transgressionis est.

Various questions may be posed here. How to explain this difference of opinion within the works of Tertullian himself? Was there an evolution in his thinking about these matters? In what direction did this evolution go? An answer to the latter question is also an answer to the question of the relative chronology of the two works under discussion.

After that he concedes that the situation of those who came to faith while they were already serving in the army is different (P/ane, si quos militia praeventos fides posterior invenit, alia condicio est); and he compares these soldiers with those who came to John the Baptist and the centurio who was praised by Christ (see the same references in 19, 3), who were obviously allowed to remain soldiers. But, he continues, he has to leave the service as soon as it makes him come into conflict with his service of God. And he expands on these duties in such a way that it seems hardly possible to combine the two services. At the end he states: Puta denique /icere militiam usque ad causam coronae. Fontaine puts the question: "cette position formelle d'une hypothese exprime-t-elle Ie fond de la pensee de Tertullien?" ... And he states

"Mais Tertullien ne se range certainement qu'a regret a cette «hypothese»" .

One feels Tertullian's reluctance, although he can not deny the compatibility of Christian faith and military service here. For if he did so, he says, the question of the corona would not have come up for discussion (si omni ope expu/ero militiam, frustra iam de corona mi/itari provocaverim). Thus the position of De id%/atria is not so much more intolerant that that of De corAs was already mentioned above, Rordorf explains the difference by assuming that Tertullian had to leave his intolerant standpoint of De id%/atria because of the changes in the society of his days, in particular the militarizing of the administration. He thus assumes that the more tolerant De corona is of a later date than the De id%/atria. Braun, who does not follow the argument of Rordorf, agrees with him in situating the De corona after De id%/atria; he thinks even that it is considerably later. His arguments are of a stylistic order (see art. cit.). According to him there is a chronological order between De id%/atria, Adv. Marc. IV and De corona. Here Braun differs from the majority of French authors who consider De corona as the earlier work. We, too, think that De id%/atria is the earlier treatise. Our arguments, however, are somewhat different from those mentioned just now.

1./1.

J~,J-J~,1.

J~,1.-J~,j L,/j

ona. We think that De idololatria has been written before De corona, but there need not be much time between the two. this subject we quote only the well-known monographs by E. de Backer,

Sacramentum and J. de Ghellinck, Pour l'histoire du mot sacramentum (Louvain 1924),66 seqq., also F. J. Oolger, 'Sacramentum militiae', AC 2

(1930),268-80 and Sonne, par. 15: COer Treueid fUr Christus. Sacramentum', pp. 110-9. For further literature, see Waszink's comm. on an. 1, 4: fidei sacramentum (= baptism), p. 90-1. castris lucis et castris tenebrarum: an allusion to 2 Cor. 6, 15, which is rendered more literally in pud. 15, 5: Quae autem communicatio luci et tenebris? Two further allusions are found in idol.

I. Posset: this reading of B and Gel (the text of A after 18, 9 evitandum is lost) was rejected by Leopold, who read possit; he was followed by Oehler and Reifferscheid. However, if one decides that an irrealis is not defendable here, we would conjecture potest rather than possit. But in our view the reading posset can be maintained. The argument runs as follows: 'One could think that herewith the case of military service ... has been dealt with < so that no further discussion is necessary> but ... '. in isto capitulo: Tert. evidently had made himself a division of the treatise into chapters. It seems probable that he made the present chapter begin at 17, 2: Hinc proxime dissertatio oborta est. inter: here practically = intra, which seems to be conjectured by Scaliger (see the Remarks, p. 267). Such a use of inter occurs also elsewhere in Tert.'s works. A clear example is an. 42,2: hominem, in quo inter omnia finiendo et ipsa finitur (sc. mors): 'man, in the destruction of whom among 13, 3: nihil communion is est lumini et tenebris, vitae et morti and spect. 26,

4: Quid luci et tenebris? Quid vitae et morti? Cf. on this entire passage J.

Helgeland, 'Christians and the Roman Army from Marcus Aurelius to Constantine', ANR W II 23, 1, 738-40, where the present passage is discussed; we quote here the following statement on p. 739: 'When he (i.e. Tert.) mentioned the phrase 'camp of light and camp of darkness', his point is to compare the Church, which met in conventional houses, with the cult of Mithra celebrated most frequently in subterranean sanctuaries which are, therefore, dark'. non potest una anima duobus deberi: cf. Matth. 6, 24 (Luke 16, 13).

By the addition deo et Caesari Tert. combines this Scripture text with Matth.

22, 21 and parallels discussed in the note on 15, 3. Et virgam .•. si placet ludere: on this entire passage cf. the Remarks, p. 267-9. Here we only want to add that in the first three instances quoted Tert. plays upon the double sense of the words virga, fibula and lorum. Virga can denote both the rod of Moses, mentioned in Exod. 4, 2 and 17,5, and the rod of the Roman centurio which is more frequently called vitis. This use of virga occurs e.g. in Tac.

Ann. 1, 23; Juvenal 8, 247 and 14, 63; Sil. Ital. 6, 43. Fibula denotes the all things (= as a part of all things) death is also destroyed itself'. A similar case is Marc. 5, 7, 10: ab eo (sc. deo) igitur inter omnia ('as a part of all things'

= 'just as everything in general') et Christus (see Waszink's note on an. 42, 2, p. 460). A third case is an. 9, 5, where inter ilia means 'as one of those things' (ib. 173). Similar expressions are found in TLL VII, I: 2133, 15-68

(inter omnia ... et is only quoted from an. 42, 2 and Marc. 5, 7, 10). For inter

= intra in later Latin, see LOfstedt, Spatlat. Stud., 82 and Verm. Stud., 176 seq. caligata: this adjective, which occurs for the first time in Suetonius, Aug. 25, 3 and Vitell. 7, 6, is found three times in the Digests

(Venul., 48, 3, 9; Men., 49, 16,65; Ulpian. 3,2,2 pr.). That it is an official term from Roman law is evident from Novell. Justin. 74, 4, 3: milites armatos, quos lex caligatos appellat (XIXALIIX'tOU~); furthermore, the word occurs in ten funeral inscriptions of soldiers. necessitas immolationum vel capitalium iudiciorum: these are the main dangers threatening those Christians who are in dignity resp. in power, as appeared from 17, 2-3. buckle worn by the high-priest Aaron (Exod. 28, 12: et pones in utroque latere superumera!is memoriale filiis Israhel). A golden fibula is also mentioned with regard to another high-priest, viz., Simon, in 1 Macc. 14, 44, where it is said that, besides the high-priest, nobody is allowed to wear it (it is forbidden u/li ex populo et sacerdotibus ... et vestiri purpura et uti fibula aurea).

Further golden fibulae were worn by tribuni militum, cf. Plin. nat. 33, 39: M.

Bruti ... frementis fibulas tribunicias ex auro geri (TLL VI: 644, 54-61); Aurelianus also allowed soldiers to wear golden fibulae (Vopisc. Aurelian. 46,

5); finally, the present passage is quoted in TLL, loc. cit., preceded by the words huc pertinere videtur. Lorum refers to both the girdle worn by soldiers and the girdle worn by John the Baptist, Matth. 3, 4 and Mark 1, 6: (WVT]V 2. Non convenit sacramento divino et humano: in a lapidary style Tert. formulates his decision. lunius observes: 'Hellenismus est, ut loan. 2 (obviously he means loh. 2, 4: 't( lflOL XIXL 000 et passim: pro eo quod est, Sacramento divino cum humano'. This is the outcome of Tert. 's very thorough argument in the treatise De corona, cf. especially 11, 1: Credimusne humanum sacramentum divino superduci licere, et in alium dominum respondere post

Christum, et eierare patrem ac matrem et omnem proximum, quos et lex honorari et post deum diligi praecepit, quos et evangelium, solum Christum pluris faciens, sic quoque honoravit? Of course, sacramentum humanum

OtPfllX't(VTjv; the Vulgate has zona(m) pe/licia(m), the Vetus Latina (cod. k) zonam coream. The translation lorum is also found in Vitae patrum 5, 8, 17 and other passages (TLL VII, 2: 1682, 5 seqq.). refers to the military oath, sacramentum divinum to the sacrament of faith, the baptism, at which one binds oneself to God. From the vast literature on 3. quomodo etiam in pace militabit: as Currey observes, this statement is not in accordance with the rule of the early Church; it is even at variance with

20,1

L/4

LV, SURVEY, REMARKS

the view of Tert. himself, cf. apol. 42, 3: Navigamus et nos vobiscum et vobiscum militamus et rusticamur et mercamur. gladio, quem dominus abstulit: sc. Petro: a reference to Matth. 26, 52, a verse which is frequently quoted by Tert.; in a similar context it occurs in cor. 11, 2, further in pat. 3,

8, fuga 8, 1 (cf. Rambaux, 269, with note 54). An allusion is found in cor.

1,3: gladium nec dominicae defensioni necessarium. Nam etsi adierant ... discinxit: the Gospel tells (Luke 3, 14) that soldiers came to John the Baptist asking what they should do. John answered: 'do not bully, do not blackmail', etc., but he did not say: 'leave the army'. Neither did Jesus himself give this command to the centurion in Matth. 8, 5-10. However, these two passages cannot be used as arguments in favour of the permissibility of military service for Christians, for in disarming Peter Christ disarmed all Christians. This argument is a parallel to the refutation of the four occupationes found in par.

2, and so confirms our interpretation of that passage. Tert. uses the pluperfects adierant and crediderat, which in time precede the discinxit, in order to show that they are refuted by the later statement. NuUus habitus: see above the Remarks (p. 269) and cf. Helgeland, loco cit., p. 740.

This preliminary remark (20, 2-4) concerns the prohibition of the Law to name the gods of the heathens. If one interprets this prohibition strictly, one could not maintain normal social contacts, e.g. by saying "you find him in the temple of Aesculapius", for this would be, then, idolatry in words. No,

TertuIIian says, we are only forbidden to call them 'gods' . And if we have to speak of them as gods, we must show our standpoint. What a Christian has to avoid is that his words about the heathen gods imply that he gives honour to them.

After this introductory remark Tertullian starts discussing the first vice, that of habit, which appears to be the vice of swearing. The division in chapters by Pamelius is also here not ideal. It would have been better to 'give' a chapter to each of the two vices, thus to begin ch. 21 at 20, 4 (see the observation of Iunius mentioned in the apparatus at the text) and make one chapter

22 of ch. 21-22. We will take the chapters 21-22 together.

1. conversatio here has the meaning which in TLL IV: 852, 27-8 is formulated as ratio agendi, vivendi, mores, consuetudo, condicio, status. This meaning occurs almost exclusively in texts of Christian authors, where it is quite frequent. The oldest instances of this meaning are found in Tert.; TLL quotes sixteen instances from his works (the quotation 'idol. 6' should be

'test. an. 6,2'). The passages from the Vetus Latina occur in texts which are later than Tert.'s works. divinae disciplinae: cf. the note on 2,4. ecce homo et facta eius and ex ore tuo iustificaberis (Matth. 12, 37, also quoted in Marc. 2, 25, 3): Tert. quotes these two texts on account of the words facta and ore, which are to motivate his division of idololatria in factis and idololatria in verbis. While the second text can be reduced to Matth. 12, 37

(Ex verbis enim tuis iustificaberis), the first is found nowhere in Holy Scripture. De la Cerda observed already that it also occurs in (Ps.-)Augustine,

Medit. 39 (PL 40, 937), 'sed sine adscriptione loci'. This text applies to men at the final judgment: Vae mihi misero cum venerit dies iudicii et apertijuerint libri conscientiarum, cum dicetur de me 'ecce homo et opera eius' (opera is used instead of facta). It should be noticed that in Matthew the second text, too, functions in the context of 'the day of judgment'. Iunius surmises that the first quotation comes from the Book of Enoch and that it was found in the neighbourhood of the Enoch text quoted in 4, 2. However, Iunius is not able to refer to a definite passage. We think that, if Scripture is not the source,

Enoch is an obvious candidate, because his book was regarded by Tert. as belonging to the holy books; moreover, the book of Enoch is full of passages in which the day of judgment is spoken of as a threatening reality for the sinners; but an evident parallel text fails. etiam ... quoque: see the note by B6hm, 164. idololatriae incursum: in the works of Christian Latin authors of the second until the fifth century the substantives incursus and incursio

Ch. 20. Idolatry in words: Preliminary remark. The vice of habit The Christian way of life is not only threatened by idolatrous deeds but also by idolatrous words, which may have their origin in habit or in timidity (§ 1).

The prohibition of the Law to name the gods of the pagans should not be interpreted in such a manner that we are forbidden to pronounce those names.

This would make social life impossible (§ 2). No, the Law forbids us to call them 'gods' (§ 3). And if it is sometimes necessary to speak about them as gods, we must add something to make it clear that we do not call them gods.

Holy Scripture is our example here. These remarks should be made in advance (§ 4).

Now a vice of custom is to say 'Mechercule' or 'Medius Fidius', even when some are not aware of the fact that this is an act of swearing by Hercules. An oath by the gods whom you have forsworn cannot but be a tampering of faith with idolatry, since it gives honour to those gods (§ 5). '

Remarks After discussing the various kinds of idolatry in deeds in ch. 3-19, TertuIIian now draws attention to the dangers of idolatry in words, which threaten

Christian life. Here, too, he deals only with hidden forms of idolatry. The open forms, i.e. giving honour to the gods by our words, need of course not be discussed. Having stated that this kind of idolatry is caused either by bad habit or by timidity, he does not immediately bring up the discussion of these vices but first makes a preliminary observation, which he qualifies explicitly as such at the end of it. (Sed hoc mihi ad sequentia magis praestructum est.)

:.W,L-:.W,4

1./0

L.U,I - L.U,L.

Si ita quem vocavero, Ursinus, followed by Rigaltius: si quem ita vocavero.

Both editors clearly want to get rid of eum, which in our opinion is not offensive. rather frequently denote the attack of a demon (and therewith of idolatry).

This use was undoubtedly influenced by the wording of Ps. 90, 6: non timebis ... ab incursu (LXX a7to aUfl.7t'twfl.tX'to~) et daemonio meridiana (Vulg.). From Tert. we may quote an. 57, 4: mortes, quas incursibus (sc. of demons, mentioned in the beginning of the sentence) deputant (see Waszink's note, pp.

578-9); apol. 37, 9: a daemoniorum incursibus; res. 58, 5: aut ubi incursus infesti apud Christum? ubi daemonici impetus apud spiritum sanctum ... ?

Further cf. for incursus Lact. d.i. 2, 15,6; 4, 27, 2. 14; [Clem.] recogn. 4,4.

17, for incursio Firm. Mat. Math. 8, 11, 4 (cf. 6, 11, 11) and Aug. c. epist.

Fund. 11 (p. 207, 19): dextera luminis tueatur et eripiat nos ab omni incursione (incursatione l.v.) maligna. de consuetudinis vitio: Tert. regards the power of custom as dangerous for the Christian faith, because it may contain elements of pagan religion. He mentions consuetudo between vetustas and necessitas in the famous enumeration of institutions of pagan civilisation in nat. 2, 1, 7: Adversus haec igitur nobis negotium est, adversus institutiones maiorum, auctoritates receptorum, leges dominantium, argumentationes prudentium, adversus vetustatem, consuetudinem, necessitatem, adversus

3. Hoc praecepit, ne: after saying in par. 2 how this text from Exodus should not be interpreted, Tert. now gives the correct explanation: 'it forbids to call those gods 'gods'.' He finds a confirmation of this thesis (nam) in another text, viz., Exod. 20, 7: non sumes nomen domini dei tui in vano.

These two texts were alluded to in idol. 10, 6: cum lex prohibeat, ut diximus, deos pronuntiari et nomen hoc in vano col/ocari. The latter text is referred to in Prax. 7, 8: non sumes nomen dei in vanum. in vano, id est in idolo: the adverbial expression in vano is understood here with its original meaning: 'in something idle' (cf. also 1, 4). On the other hand, idolum (d'OWAOV) has the connotation 'unreal': idols are vana, i.e. idle entities. The homage to idols is vanitas, because they are appearances of beings which do not deserve homages. Jerome interprets, as was observed by Pamelius, 1 Sam. 12, 21: nolite declinare post vana as post idola, and quotes Acts 14, 15: a7to't01J'twV

'tWV fl.tX'ttXlWV e7tta'tp~q>~tv e7tL e~ov ~wv'ttX (Vulg.: ab his vanis converti ad Deum exempla, prodigia, miracula, quae omnia adulterinam istam divinitatem corroboraverunt. On the triad vetustas consuetudo necessitas see J. Speigl,

'Herkommen und Fortschritt im Christentum nach Tertullian' (Pietas. Festschrift fur Bernhard Kotting, JbAC, Erg. Bd. 8, Munster i.W. 1980, 165vivum). Lietzmann in the HdbNT 7, p. 80, translates: 'ihr sollt euch von diesen Nichtsen dem lebendigen Gott zuwenden' and refers to Rom. 1, 21: efl.tX'ttX~weTjatXv ev 'tor~ O~tXAOI~afl.Or~ tXlhwv, on which he observes (HdbNT 8, p.

32): 'fl.ci'ttXw~ sind speziell die Gotzen, s. IV Reg. 17, 15 = Jer. 2, 5 Amos 2,

4'. Cecidit igitur: a conclusion from the word of Holy Scripture: 'who applies the name of God to an idol has fallen into idolatry, for in the given context Scripture combats idolatry which is the giving of honour to other beings than the only God'.

178), 168: 'Vetustas und necessitas konnen als Synonyme von consuetudo aufgefasst werden, insofern vetustas vor allem den Ruckhalt des Herkommens in der weit zuruckreichenden Zeit ausdruckt und necessitas den verbindlichen

Charakter des Herkommens umschreibt, der aus der langen Obung resultiert', und ib. 169: 'Die consuetudo als abstrakte Bezeichnung fUr die gesamte alte verbindliche religiose Oberlieferung der Heiden ist fur den christlichen

Apologeten Tertullian etwas durch und durch Negatives.' After this Speigl discusses the present passage and further quotes pud. 14, 27. In his opinion, this pejorative sense of consuetudo is mostly found in Tert. 's early treatises.

We may compare here the use of auv~e~~tX by Clement of Alexandria; cf. Protr.

46,1; 62, 4; 72,3; 75, 4; 89, 2; 99,1.3; 101, 1.3; 103,2; 109,3; 118, 1; particularly 109, 1, where auv~e~~tX is opposed to aA~e~~tX.

4. deos dicendum erit: a Graecism which occurs several times in Tert. 's works: pal/. 3,4: multa dicendumfuit; ib. 4, 5: Physconem et Sardanapal/um tacendum est; bapt. 15,2: quae custodiendum sit; apol. 23,2 (V): quam (sc. divinitatem) utique superiorem omni potestate credendum est; cf. Hoppe,

Synt., 17-57. The oldest instance in Latin of this construction is Plautus, Trin.

869: agitandumst vigilias; in Lucretius, in whose poem it is remarkably frequent (cf. Bailey in the Prolegomena of his edition, ch. V B, par. 13.5.b

(p. 103) and his note on 1, Ill), it is to be regarded as an archaism according to Hofm.-Szant., 372-3. There it is also observed that in late Latin only a few instances, 'z.T. des Grazismus verdachtigte Falle', are found, especially in Apuleius, Tert., and in some texts of Roman lawyers (Kalb, Roms Juristen,

2. conversatio: here this substantive obviously means 'intercourse', that is to say: the contact between people is denoted. In the case of par. 1 (ratio agendi, etc.) this contact with others is, of course, implied but it is kept in the background. Cf. for the various meanings of conversatio in Tert. H. Hoppenbrouwers, 'Conversatio. Une etude semasiologique', Graecitas et Latinitas

Christianorum Primae va , Suppl. 1, Noviomagi 1964, 45-95. hoc genus nomina = huius generis nomina; cf. note ad 12, 5: hoc genus. si ita vocavero eum: eum = 'that man', who has the name Saturnus. Iunius reads:

123). In Tert. we may assume an influence of both Apuleius, whom he imitated frequently (especially in De pallio, where the two instances quoted at the beginning of this note are found, but also e.g. in an. 52, 3, cf.

Waszink's note ad loc., 538) and of the idiom of law. quia non ego: this

↑ Back to top