Latin fathers and the classics : a studyof the apologists, Jerome and other Christian writers

694 138 9MB

English Pages [424] Year 1958

Report DMCA / Copyright


Polecaj historie

Latin fathers and the classics : a studyof the apologists, Jerome and other Christian writers

Citation preview

















Also published as ACTA UNIV.ERSITATIS





Vol. LXIV • 1958













Preface The origin of this book goes back not a few years. In the first part, >>TheApologists and Lucretius>>,I take up a subject which I have treated already in Swedish in Eranos (XXXV, I937, 4I-67); it will now be reexamined in a considerably enlarged form. >>The·western Church and Classical Culture A. D. 200-550>► was the theme of a series of lectures which I gave in Oslo in I95I on the invitation of the Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture. I am much obliged to the Board. of the Institute for permitting me to postpone the publication of these lectures until I have finished this book. It was meant to contain research and discussions which could not find place in a general survey. With time it has i_ncreasedin size and attained unexpected dimensions, mainly because of Jerome. The more I got engaged in his voluminous writings, the more I felt convinced that an exhaustive study of his relation to the Latin classics was wanted. Jerome's importance as a writer and.the reach of his influence may serve as an excuse if the second part of this book, headed >>Jeromeand Latin Literature>>, has turned out to be so large that it could better have been published separately. The third part contains heterogeneous questions illustrating various sides of the main problem, the attitude of Latin Christianity towards secular literature. These questions refer to authors different both in time and character. Some of the most prominent Christian writers as well as many lesser ones will come under our observation, although their attitude will be examined only from a special point of view. There are two reasons for this limitation of my scope. On the one hand the attitude of many authors has been examined so thoroughly that a fresh inquiry is uncalled for. On the other, some leading Fathers, e. g. Ambrose - not to speak of Augustine - in spite of useful preparatory research, have not yet received monographs which would render justice to their importance for the problems which interest the classical scholar. This is however a task that demands a separate volume.




The scattered remnants of secular thought and letters to be found in the Fathers open a wide historical prospect. They testify to the immense influence which classical culture exercised upon Christianity. No Christian writer of the IV th and the V th centuries could keep himself uninfluenced by it. Some of them attempted, more or less willingly and successfully, to bring about a compromise. This process cannot fail to captivate the student of antiquity, considering that it rescued the legacy left by the ancients from falling altogether into neglect. It represents in fact the last stage in the history of ancient civilization as well as the foundation of a new civilization resting both on Christianity and classical antiquity. Because of that it falls to a large extent also within the province of the classical scholar. The printing of this book has been made possible by generous grants from >>Humanistiska fondem> and the University of Goteborg. I wish to express to these institutions my sincere gratitude. My thanks are due also to the staff of the City and Universiti Library of Goteborg for never failing courtesy and helpfulness. I am much indebted to Dr Charles Barber, Mrs. Barbara Barber, B. A. and Mrs. Mavis von Proschwitz, M. A. for their valuable assistance in correcting my English. Goteborg 15 december 1957. Harald Hagendahl.

Contents Page

Preface .. Contents




PART I The Apologists and Lucretius Chap. r. Introduction Chap.






Chap. 3. Lactantius Chap. 4. The other apologists.



PART II Jerome and Latin Literature Chap. r. Introductory

remarks ..

Chap. 2. The writings 374-385

. . . . . . . . . .


91 100

Chap. 3. Literary work in Bethlehem 386-393


Chap. 4. Polemical and other writings 393-402 A. The controversy with Jovinianus B. The Origenist controversy C. Letters and commentaries

. .

Chap. 5. The writings 402-419 A. Commentaries . . . . . B. Letters ........ . C. Polemical writings against the Pelagians ..

Chap. 6. Aspects and conclusions ..... A. The extent of J erome's readings . a. The poets of the Republic .. b. The poets of the Empire . . . . c. The prose writers . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. The quotations: technique and purpose ... C. Jerome's attitude: principles and practice ..

215 215 246 260



PART III Miscellaneous questions



>>Illasnotissimas quattuor



The four virtues

animi perturbationes,>



33 1 347

Chap. 3. Pagan mythology and poetry applied to Christian beliefs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


A. General remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. The myth of the iron age in Christian disguise C. The conception of Purgatory

382 389 392







Chap. 1. Introduction Lucretius' influence upon Latin literature bears no proportion to his merits as poet and as thinker.1) If De rerum natura had been lost and we were left to reconstruct it from incidental quotations, as the matter stands in the case of Ennius and Lucilius, we cquld hardly realize in full that the poem on the nature of things was one of the masterpieces of Latin poetry as well as the chief literary manifestation of Epicureanism. The largest number of quotations is due to Nonius Marcellus, the grammarian, and to Macrobius, the philologist. The former confined his interest to the lexicographic point of view, the latter to Virgil's indebtedness to Lucretius and other poets. This is significant; for the influence which Lucretius exercised was almost entirely formal. It is most obvious in Virgil, whose poetical language is filled with Lucretian reminiscences, duly recognized by Gellius, Servius and Macrobius. 2) From the Augustan age the line can be traced, more or less distinctly, to Flavian times, when, according to Tacitus, some literary circles 1)

In my opinion it has been considerably


by George Depue Hadzsits

in his useful, but rather superficial survey, Lucretius and his Influence, London 1935 (Our Debt to Greece and Rome. 12). Other points on which I disagree with Hadzsits will be discussed in the sequel. - Copious, although by no means exhaustive materials for the assessment of Lucretius' influence are brought together in the standard edition of Diels (Berlin 1923), in the commentaries of Lachmann, Munro, Heinze, Giussani and Ernout-Robin, in scholarly editions of other Latin authors and in numerous dissertations and papers, e. g. the monographs of Merrill, where the relations of individual writers to Lucretius are treated. References to literature will be found as wanted in the notes. It is worthy of remark that the question of Lucretius' influence is nowhere discussed in the three bulky volumes of the last edition by Cyril Bailey (I-III, Oxford 1947), 2 ) Cf. Hadzsits, p. 31: ,)The Virgilian poetry, over and over again, echoes the language of Lucretius who exercised a mighty spell over the sensitive nature of the Mantuan. Lucretian phraseology is woven into the fabric of Virgil's verse, and, whatever the metamorphosis, it became an integral part of the new poetry».



preferred Lucretius to Virgil, and further to the archaizing movement of the second century. Its leading man, Fronto, favoured the reading of Lucretius, not from love of philosophy - for Fronto was hostile to all that bears that name - but as a means of realizing a new literary style. I mitatio veterum became the catch-word of the new school. Its aim was to renew the language by digging out and reviving obsolete or rare words in archaic literature. To that end Lucretian poetry proved useful.1) The best example will be found a century and a half after Fronto in Arnobius, who adopted Lucretian phraseology to a larger extent than anyone before or afterwards. In this connection the merely lexicographic interest of the grammarians has to be remembered. It is the last off-shoot of the archaizing movement. Ovid was transported with admiration for the sublime poet; 2) Virgil, when still inclined to follow Epicurus, paid an equally fine tribute to Lucretius as an Epicurean philosopher:

Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas atque metus omnis et inexorabile /atum subiecit pedibus strepitumque Acherontis avari. 3) For the rest, almost complete silence about the great philosopher of nature, even in those quarters where it could least have been expected. Cicero mentions Lucretius incidentally in a letter and then with appreciation, 4 ) and is credited by Jerome with having corrected the poem. 5 ) But in his philosophical writings Cicero entirely ignores Lucretius. He neither mentions his name nor quotes a single line nor shows 1

who was not favourable to Lucretius, was of a different opinion: ) Quintilian, Inst. orat. X. 1, 87 Macer et Lucretius legendi quidem, sed non itt phrasin, id est corpus eloquentiae faciant. 2 ) Amor. I. 15, 23-24:

Ca,-mina sublimis tune sunt peritura Lucreti, exitio terras cum dabit una dies. 3 ) Georg. II. 490. ') Ad Q. fratr. II. 9, 3. For different interpretations of Cicero's criticism see Diels, op. cit., p. XXXV; H. W. Litchfield, Cicero's judgment on Lucretius, Harvard Studies 1913. 0. Tescari, Lucretiana (Torino 1935), pp. 7 sqq., is on the same line as Hendrickson, Am. journ. of Phil. XXII (1901), 438. 5 Clwon. ed. Helm p. 149. As to the much debated eniemla'l!it I agree ) Hier. with the opinion of Bailey, op. cit., I, pp. 18-21.





any sign of having him in his thoughts when he combats Epicureanism. 1) This is astonishing, all the more as Cicero otherwise most willingly exalted his fellow-countrymen and their contributions to human progress. This negative attitude of Cicero's is shared by Seneca, Pliny the Elder, Quintilian and others. It might have come quite naturally, it would seem, to the Roman Stoic to tilt at the Roman Epicurean while carrying on a controversy, but this does not happen; it is rarely that Seneca mentions Lucretius. Pliny the Elder never refers to him or makes use of him; he only once lists his name among his sources. Quintilian makes no mention of Lucretius when passing in review the Roman philosophers. Neither does Horace, the Epicurean, mention his fellow-apprentice Epicuri de grege, in recognition of his indebtedness. 2) In fact, Horace was little interested in the problems of the universe which fascinated the writer of De rerum natura. His interests as a true Roman were centred in ethics, in the rules of life. Other Roman Epicureans are not likely to have differed much from his attitude in general, and particularly from his coldness towards the atomic theory. This hypothesis would account for the fact that Lucretius' exposition of Epicurean doctrine has not left more frequent and obvious traces in literature during the first few centuries. 3 ) It is not until 350 years after the lifetime of the poet that we shall meet two Latin authors who seriously occupied themselves with his way of thinking, and made extensive use of his work in their writings. They are the apologists Arnobius and Lactantius.

1) The parallels between Cicero and Lucretius (pointed out e. g. by Tescari, pp. 25-27) are mostly commonplaces of Epicureanism with no value as evidence; thus W. A. Merrill, Cicero's Knowledge of Lucretius' Poem (quoted by Bailey, I, p. 20). Most striking is the coincidence of Cic. Tusc. I. 48 and Lucretius' proems to Books III and V; cf. Bailey, loc. cit. 2) Cf. W. A. Merrill, On the Influence of Lucretius on Horace, University of CaliHadzsits, pp. 38-54. fornia Publications in Classical Philology, I (1905), ur-129; 3) Vitruvius was an admirer of Lucretius and believed that he would have an enduring influence (IX. praef. 17): Plures post nostram memoriam nascentes cum Lucretia videbuntiw velut coram de rerum natiwa dispidare. But the honourable architect did not prove a true prophet.

Chap. 2. Arnobius The fact that Arnobius borrowed freely from Lucretius was established long ago by his commentators, e. g. Elmenhorst, Heraldus, Hildebrand, and it has not failed to attract the attention of later scholars who have treated the question in greater or less detail, viz. E. Klussman,1) J. Jessen, 2) A. Rohricht, 3 ) P. Spindler, 4) W. Tschiersch, 5) F. Dalpane, 6) F. Gabarrou, 7) G. Depue Hadzits, 8 ) E. Rapisarda 9 ) and the present writer. 10) The imitations are duly noted in George E. McCracken's translation. 11) Many details will also be found in Munro's and Giussani's commentaries on Lucretius and in Diels' edition. Under such circumstances it may seem quite unnecessary and useless to take up again a »Arnobius und Lucrez, oder ein durchgang durch den epikuriiismus zum christenthum,). Philologus XXVI (1867), 362-366. 2 ) Ueber Lucrez und sein Verhattniss zu Catitll und Spateren. (Progr. Kiel, 1872), pp. 17-20. 3 ) Die Seelenlehre des Arnobius nach ihren Quellen und ihrer Entstehung untersucht. Ein Beitrag zum Verstandnis der spateren Apologetik der alien Kirche (Hamburg, 1893), Kap. I »Verhiiltnis des Arnobius zu I,ucrez und dem Epikureismus», pp. 2-21. 4 1901), pp. 3-n. ) De Arnobii genere dicendi (Diss. Strassburg, 5 ) De Arnobii studiis Latinis (Diss. Jena, 1905), pp. 8-11. 6 Arnobio sia stato un Epicureo. Lucrezio e gli apologeti cristiani :h,linucio ) >>Se Felice, Tertulliano, Cipriano, Lattanzio.>> Rivista di storia antica X (1905), 403435. Unfortunately I have not been able to consult an earlier work of the same author: De Lucretii imitatione apud Arnobium (Florentiae, 1901). 7 ) Arnobe. Son reuvre (Paris 19u), pp. 27-37. Gabarrou did not base his chapter on original research; he follows Rohricht without one contribution of his own. 8 ) Op. cit., pp. 203-215. 9 1946 = Saggi e ricerche, VI). ) Arnobio (Catania, 10 ) H. _Hagendahl, »De latinska apologeterna och Lucretius», Eranos XXXV (1937), 41-67. 11 of Sicca. The case against the pagans. Newly translated and ) Arnobius annotated by George E. McCracken. I-II. Westminster 1949 (= Ancient Christian Writers. The works of the Fathers in translation, edited by J. Qnasten and J.C. Plumpe, vol. VII-VIII). 1)





subject that has already been discussed so abundantly. However, there are some reasons which may serve as an excuse for doing so. Firstly, as I have concerned myself with the two authors for many years, I have gathered a number of unnoticed parallels which I should like to submit to the judgment of scholars. Secondly, a study of the imitations necessarily leads to the question how and why they were made. In this respect I disagree on many accounts with the views presented by earlier students. In my opinion the problem of Arnobius' indebtedness to Lucretius has to be examined again in its entirety and in connection with his general ideas, his polemical method and the purpose of his apology. There are not many new things to be said about the store of purely Lucretian words, mostly forged for the sake of metrical convenience, which Arnobius picked up, in harmony with the stylistic theory of the archaists, as I have already pointed out. The testimonia from Arnobius to be found in Diels' edition are to a great extent composed of such words. Many scholars have endeavoured to list the Lucretian words borrowed by Arnobius. Spindler (pp. 4-6) gives nearly 50 words, but he has rightly been criticized by Tschiersch (p. 8, n. 3) for having included many words which are by no means peculiar to the writers in question. Tschiersch's own list includes 22 words and is by far the best one, even though incomplete. 1) We have the advantage over earlier students in so far as we have at our disposal the published volumes of Thesaurus linguae Latinae, and can use this invaluable and labour-saving instrument for checking their results. It will be useful, I think, to make a list of all words which according to the Thesaurus occur exclusively in Lucretius and Arnobius. 2) 1) Rohricht's list (pp. 9 sq.) coincides substantially with Tschiersch's list; it has been taken over by Gabarrou (pp. 28 sq.), only excluding a few words. Hadzsits (p. 212, n. 32) only gives a selection of half a dozen words. 2) For Lucretius I follow the text of Diels' (Berlin 1923), for Amobius, unless otherwise stated, the text of Marchesi's edition (Corpus scriptorum Latinorum Paravianum, LXII, Torino 1934) which, in spite of the editor's excess of conservatism (cf. my remarks in Gnomon, XVI (1940), 21-25), is preferable to the text, now much antiquated, of Reifferscheid (Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, IV, Vienna, 1875). As both editions are out of print and as the latter probably will be more easily accessible, my references to page and line (put in brackets) will be made to the Vienna edition.


angel lit s (Thes. II. 45,15) Arnob. VII. 49 (p. 283, 16 Reiff.) angellis prominentibus - Luer. II. 428 angellis paulum prostantibus. au gm en (Thes. II. 1359,59 >>vox Lucretiana>>) Arnob. VII. 24 (258,14) non magmenta, non augmina. The word here is used in a technical sense, as augmentum by Varro and Arnobius (cf. ib. 1360, 45 sqq.). Without doubt the word has been taken over from Lucretius who has it 8 times in the usual sense of augmentum = 'incrementum'. The word reappears in a late Christian inscription. au x ilia tu s (Thes. II. 1616,59) Arnob. I. 44 (29, 17) sed opijerum, sed salutare, sed auxiliatibus plenum. The Thes. strangely rejects the evident conjecture auxiliatibus (for auxiliaribus) made by Stewechius and Zink; cf. E. L6fstedt, Arnobiana (Lund, 1917), pp. ro sq. - Luer. V. 1040. aver s a bi l is (Thes. II. 1317, 4) Arnob. VII. 45 (279, 12) aversabili corpora foeditate deonerans - Luer. VI. 390 scelus aversabile. cir cum caesura (Thes. III. n2r, Sr). Arnobius imitates the Lucretian phrase extima membrorum circumcaesura (III. 219; IV. 647) in two passages separated only by five lines: III. 13 (120, 9) extima circumscriptio membrorum, and III. 13 (120, 15) terrenorum corporum circumcaesura. It throws light upon his careful concealment of his borrowings. comp tu s (Thes. III. 2169, 33), a rare word,1) occurs in the sense of 'conjunction' only once: Luer. III. 845 sq. comptu coniugioque corporis atque animae. It has been restored and recognized as a Lucretian imitation by Lofstedt (Eranos, X [1910], 15 sq.) in Arnob. IV. 37 (172, n) ira quid sit ignorant (sc. dii) et ab eius comptu et permixtione sunt absoluti. cont ages (Thes. IV. 625, 3) Arnob. VII. 40 (273, 3) lues ... continua populum contage conficiens. Lucretius uses the word in his description of the plague at Athens, VI. 1243 sq. contagibus ibant (sc. 'moriebantur') atque labore, and in other passages, exclusively in the ablative forms contage and contagibus which, for the sake of metrical convenience, are substituted for the corresponding forms of contagium, unusable in hexameter. 2 ) 1 = 'ornatus' by Afranius, Lucretius, Commodianus and ) It is used 4 times Donatus. 2 ) Only the form canlagia is usable in hexameter. Lucretius has it four times.





di I I er it a s (Thes. V. 1069, 6) is a Lucretian coinage to replace the metrically impossible differentia, IV. 636 tantaque in his rebus distantia ditf eritasque. Arnobius evidently imitated this line II. 16 (60, 23) animantia nos esse aut consimilia ceteris aut non plurima di// eritate distantia; the word occurs again V. 36 (206, 27) difteritas ... ambiguorum ... simpliciterqu,e dictorum; VII. 23 (256, 7) longissima ·aebetdifferitate seponi; VII. 27 (261, 12) sine ulla passim difteritate comburere.1) form am e n tum (Thes. VI: I. 1088,48) Arnob. III. 16 (122, 24) lormamentis adtribuisse divinis - Luer. II. 819 formamenta. format u r a (Thes. VI: 1, 1090,2) Arnob. II. 23 (67, ro) formaturas varios - Luer. IV. 550 formaturaque labrorum; IV. 556 servat enim f ormaturam servatque figuram. The list above shows that there is no reason to share Hadzsits' incredulous attitude to Arnobius' conscious borrowings from Lucretius. 2) If we find in a quarter of the alphabet ten words - and can expect to find many more when the Thesaurus is completed - which occur nowhere but in these two authors, it must still all reasonable doubt: while the frequent close association in Arnobius of words from the same Lucretian contexts is in itself a sufficient proof of indebtedness. This fact once established we may reasonably assume that Arnobius more than once borrowed from the poet words and phrases which are not peculiar exclusively to him. In such cases Lucretian influence sometimes can prove to be more than a mere chance. One instance may be enough. The phrase luminis orae occurs often in Lucretius, but also in Ennius and Virgil. 3) Arnobius has it II. 69 (103, 28): antequam Tages Tuscus oras contingeret luminis. Four lines before he imitates Luer. V. 1452-1453. 4 ) Did he not take over the poetical expression from the same part of the fifth book, v. 1455 in luminis erigit oras? Before we leave the merely stylistic influence which Lucretius exercised upon the African rhetor, some phraseological coincidences The word is quoted also by Nonius, Gloss. and Carmen de figuris. After proclaiming his critical scruples (»it is very easy for the subjective element to enter into such studies,>) Hadzsits (p. 212) abruptly concludes that »we have a relatively safe objective criterion and can, without hesitation, believe in the theory of conscious borrowing>>, 8 ) Cf. Bailey, I, p. 597 (to Luer. I. 22). 4 ) Cf. below p. 35. 1) 2)




may be quoted which seem to deserve notice: II. 6 (51, 25) obsignatum memoria continetis, an imitation of Luer. II. 581-582 illud in his obsignatum quoque rebus habere convenit et memori mandatum mente tenere, noted by Hildebrand (ed. Halle 1844, p. n5), Munro and Bailey ad loc., Spindler p. 6. - III. 13 (120, 8) liniamentis carere corporeis neque ullas formarum effigies possidere; cf. Luer. IV. 104 sq. tenues formarum ... effigies. 1) - III. 30 (132, 5) aethera ... flagrantem vi flammea; cf. Luer. II. 215 cadit in terras vis jlammea volgo.2) - IV. 1 (142, g) verba ... cassa; cf. Luer. IV. 5n verborum copia cassa (Thes. III. 521, 12). - VI. I (214, 13) inpias ... et scelerosas mentes; cf. Luer. I. 83 scelerosa atque impia f acta. We shall now take up another and, in my opinion, far more important question. Did Arnobius' acquaintance with Lucretian poetry influence his way of thinking and debating as an apologist and, if so, to what extent? Scholars have usually paid much less attention to this question than to the stylistic borrowings. Neither Spindler nor Tschiersch nor Diels hint at it. Hadzsits discusses it at some length, but superficially, without detail and with many strange misconceptions. 3) Nor does W. Kroll in his two fundamental papers 4) render justice to the Lucretian elements in Arnobius' thought. The only scholar who has treated the subject in detail and with sound judgment is Rohricht, whose work deserves more notice than it has received. Rohricht surveyed Arnobius' strange predilection for discussing physical and biological questions, and pointed out that the apologist Thus MSS and most editors except Munro and Bailey. No other instances of this expression in Thes. VI. 870 sq. 3 ) Students of religion will be astonished to read that »Lucretius was exerting a very real influence upon the gradual shaping of Christian dogma» (p. 204), that »Arnobius subscribed to the doctrine of divine creation» (p. 207), that Lucretius could well have led him to his new faith (p. 109). On the other hand they will not find any statement of the real services Lucretius rendered the apologist in his polemics. I for my part cannot agree with A. Gudeman (in his review of Hadzsits' book in Philologische Wochenschrift 1936, col. 1142 sqq.) according to whom the parts where Hadzsits treats of Arnobius and Lactantius are to be counted ►>zu den lehrreichsten und wertvollsten Partien des Buches~. 4 (1916), 309-357); »Arno) »Die Zeit des Cornelius Labeo,>, Rhein. Mus. LXXI biusstudiem, ib. LXXII (1918), 62-II2). The papers will be quoted as Kroll I and Kroll II respectively. 1)


LA'l'I:: (pp. 34 sq., note 3). Rapisarda ranges himself with the few »sostenitori del nostro retore, che reclamano giudizi piu equi in modo da far rientrare Arnobio tra i costruttori ortodossi della dottrina cristiana» (p. 2). Of course Rapisarda disowns Jerome's account of Arnobius' conversion and takes up Klussmann's position on that point. He even knows the date of the conversion, to judge from the following statement (p. 147): »Agostino scrive le Confessioni nel 400, cioe rn5 anni dopo la conversione di Arnobio». In short, Rapisarda's Arnobio is an apology, prejudiced, uncritical and desultory; in a scholarly discussion it can be left out of account with no disadvantage. 2 ) In this connection I mention Concetta Marchesi, »Questioni Amobiani. II. Cristo ed Epicuro? (Adv. Nat. I, 38)>> (Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Marchesi has rightly Lettere ed Arti, 1928-1929, Parte II a, pp. rn18-rn24). seen that Arnobius' eulogy is influenced by Lucretius, but he seems to be unaware of the fact that this had been shown already by Klussmann and discussed by other scholars, not least by his fellow-countryman Dalpahe. 3 ) Compare especially v. 4 pro meritis eius with Arnobius' expression tantorum

ob munerum gratiam. 4 iteration (already imitated by Virgil, Eel. 5. 64 deus, deus ) The impressive ille) seems to echo in Arnobius, loc. cit. (25, 1): Deus dici deusque sentiri; cf. I. 42 (28, 9) Ergone, inquiet aliquis ... , deus est ille Christus? Deus, respondebimus, et interiorum potentiarum deus; II. 60 (96, 14) Et ideo Christus licet vobis invitis deus, deus, inquam Christus - hoe enim saepe dicendum est, etc.


1>tocontradict folly argues yet greater folly>>. Arnobius' relation to the Lucretian panegyric upon Epicurus is to be considered in the light of his opposition to Epicureanism. The two eulogies culminate in praise of the man to whom we owe our knowledge of the Divine. For Lucretius Epicurus above all had the merit of delivering mankind from the fear of gods, since he denied that the gods could interfere in the system of the world. For Arnobius the greatest blessing of Christ (quad frugif erum primo atque humano generi salutare) was to have preached the nature and omnipotence of God. No greater contrast could be imagined: one glorifies the successful opponent of religion, the other its true founder. The reason for the imitation was, if I am right, mainly literary. Arnobius' fiery zeal was attracted by the fervour of Lucretius' homage to his master. His rhetorical training enabled him to appreciate in full the power of Lucretian poetry - all his work testifies to the impression it made on him. This may have induced him to follow the poet in his own eulogy, whatever may have been his opinion of Lucretius' hero. Such an attitude, strange as it may seem to us, is not unparallelled in Christian writers. 3) With v. 54 Lucretius' eulogy has come to an end, and the poet proceeds to summarise the main topics he has treated or is going to 1

Lactantius also profited by the same part of the fifth book. Cf. below p. 60. sq. I. 31 (21, 15) Alias casibus fortuitis et concursionibus temerariis summam rerum construere atque diversitatis impetu fabricari, cum quibus hoe tempore nullum nobis omnino super tali erit obstinatione certamen. Aiunt enim sana sentientes COJZtradicere rebus stultis stultitiae esse maioris. Lactantius expresses himself similarly when he directs a blow at another doctrine of Epicurus: Opif. dei 6, g. Vereor ne huiusmodi portenta et deridicula refutare non minus ineptum esse videatur, sed libet ineptire, quoniam cum inepto agimus, ne se ille nimis argutum putet. 3 ) See Part III, Chap. 3 Pagan mythology and poetry applied to beliefs (pp. 382 sqq.). As little as Arnobius does Lactantius scruple to apply to Christ what Lucretius says in praise of Epicurus (p. 60 sq. below). )








treat. Arnobius however continues his eulogy. Christ is reported to have given information on the genesis of the world, on the warmth of the sun and the phases of the moon, on the origin of animals and men, on the senses and the nature of the soul, whether it is mortal or immortal - >>eindisparates gemisch von fragem>, says Klussmann,>>.vie sie von den antiken naturphilosophen mit vorliebe behandelt und im verlaufe seines Werkes auch von Lucrez naher erortert werdem>. Klussmann refers briefly to some passages in Lucretius where such questions are discussed. I think we have to go further than this. Not only are the questions upon which Christ is said to have taught central problems in Epicurean physics, but - and this has to be noticed they are to some extent mentioned by Lucretius in the passage which follows immediately after his eulogy. 1) Arnobius first talks of the genesis of the world (p. 25,14): Qui (sc. Christus) quo auctore, quo patre mundus iste sit constitutus et conditus, f ecit benignissime sciri, qui nativitatis eius exprompsit genus et nullius aliquando cognitione praesumptam materiam illius. Do not these words sound like a protest against Luer. V. 64 sqq.: Nunc hue rationis detulit ordo, ut mihi mortali consistere corpore mundum nativoque simul ratio reddunda sit esse; et quibus ille modis congressus materiai fundarit terram, caelum, mare, sidera, solem, lunaique globum. Like the poet, Arnobius goes on to talk of the sun and the moon, What he says about the sun has nothing corresponding to it in the part of the fifth book in question. Again, what he says about the moon: Cur luna semper in motu, isdemne quis creditur an aliis causis lucem semper atque obscuritatem resumens, seems to me to have been written with a view to v. 76 sqq.: Praeterea solis cursus lunaeque meatus expediam qua vi flectat natura gubernans; ne forte haec inter caelum terramque reamur libera sponte sua cursus lustrare perennis v. Sr neve aliqua divom volvi ratione putemus. 1) McCracken remarks (I, p. 287) without entering into particulars: >>Onlyon the basis of a belief in imitation of Lucretius by Arnobius can the remarkable statements of the second half of the chapter be explained.,



Hence Arnobius takes up the origin of the animals (animalium origo quae sit) which is mentioned by Lucretius in the same connection, v. 69 sq.: Lunaique globum; tum quae tellure animantes extiterint, and passes on to the plants (rationes quas habent semina) and the origin of men (quis ipsum finxerit hominem, quis in/ormarit vel ex materiae quo genere constructionem ipsam confirmaverit corporum). The last two topics do not occur in Lucretius in this context. Finally the nature of the soul is touched upon: Quid sit sensus, quid anima, advolaritne ad nos sponte an cum ipsis sata sit et procreata visceribus, mortis particeps degat an inmortalitatis perpetuitate donata sit. The passage corresponds to Luer. V. 59 sqq.: A nimi natura reperta est nativo primum consistere corpore creta nee posse incolumei magnum durare per aevom, but the wording is more likely to go back to other passages, I.



I gnoratur enim quae sit natura animai, nata sit an contra nascentibus insinuetur, and III. 462:

Q·uare participem leti quoque convenit esse. The apologist rounds off his exposition by means of a rhetorical amplification: Sensurine 1) nos simus an memoriam nullam nostri sensus et recordationem habituri, which has no parallel in Lucretius. We must ask ourselves the reason why Arnobius, as Kroll says, 2) made Christ appear like a professor of philosophy, treating all kinds of scientific questions. Kroll himself points to the author's want of acquaintance with the New Testament and other Christian traditions. This explains how he could display things as he did, but it does not 1)

For the emendation (uot accepted by Marchesi), cf. Lofstedt, Arnobiana, p. 10. Kroll I, p. 329: >>WasArn. iiber Christi Verdienste um uns sagt, lasst diesen vollig als einen Professor der Philosophie erscheinen; unbedenklich lasst er ihn alle moglichen physikalischen Lehren vortragen ... , was nur bei sciner Unkenntnis des NT. und sonstiger christlicher Uberlieferungen moglich isb>. Kroll has not seen that in the last part of his eulogy Arnobius still has Lucretius in mind. 2







answer the question why he actually did so. Rohricht takes another view. According to him the accumulation of Lucretian reminiscences in some chapters of the first two books is due to the rhetorical structure of the apology, which is aimed at disheartening the adversary by the mass of material and the emotional tone rather than at convincing him by rational arguments. As Rohricht takes it, it is an accidental circumstance and of no consequence for the effect which the author had in view that the materials which are massed together are almost exclusively composed of philosophic and scientific problems. 1) It passes my understanding how Rohricht could fail to notice the fact that all these scientific discussions are introduced for a very definite purpose. In his polemics Arnobius consistently took up an agnostic position, denying the possibility of knowledge. 2) If we realize this, matters will be seen in their proper light. Rohricht, p. 5: »Dass aber jene Stoffmenge fast ausschliesslich in der Anhaufung philosophischen und naturwissenschaftlichen Materials besteht, ist fiir die beabsichtigte Wirkung fast gleichgiiltig und zufiillig>>. 2 ) This is so obvious to every reader of his work that I can absolve myself from discussing it at length. I restrict myself to quoting a few instances: I. 12 (u,6) Prius est, ut doceatis, 1)

unde vel qui sitis, vobisne sit genitus et fabricatus mundus an in eum veneritis alienis ex regionibus inquilini. Quod cum dicere non sit vestrum neque explicare passitis cuius rei causa sub hac caeli convexione versemini; II. 35 (76, 3) Si nos istud nescire dicamus; II 47 (85, 10) Item confitemur nos istud ignorare nescire scientiamque tantae rei non tantum nostram ducimus infirmitatem fragilitatemque transire . .. ; II. 51 (88, 5) Quad est enim criminis genus aut rei esse alicuius ignarum aut ipsum quad nescias sine aliqua profiteri dissimulatione nescire: aut uter magis videtur inrisiane esse dignissimus vobis, qui sibi scientiam nullam tenebrasae rei alicuius adsumit, an ille qui retur se ex se apertissime scire id quad humanam transiliat notionem et quad sit caecis obseuritatibus involutum? Il. 55 (91, 6) Respondeamus necesse est nescire nos ista nee quae nullis possent facultatibus comprehendi expetisse aliquanda aut studuisse eognoseere; II. 10 (55, 4) Sed sapientibus vos viris (sc. philosophis) omnibusque instructis disciptinarum generibus creditis. Nempe iltis, qui nihil sciscunt nee pronuntiant unum, qui pro suis sententiis be/la cum adversantibus conserunt et peroieacia semper digladiantur hostili, qui cum alter alterius labefactant destruunt convelluntque decreta, cuncta incerta fecerunt nee posse aliquid sciri ex ipsa dissensione monstrarunt; II. 57 (93, 19) Inanissima igitur res est et supervacui operis, tamquam scias aliquid promere, aut velle scire contendere quod, etsi sit verum, posse videas destrui, aut aeceptare pro vero id quad forsitan non sit et ex more halucinantium proferatur; II. 74 (108, 27) Homo animal caecum et ipsum se nesciens; VII. 6 (242, 7) Animal caecum atque in nitbibus semper ignorationis incedens (= homo),


Let us now examine the other borrowings from Lucretius and, instead of isolating them, as Rohricht did, consider how they are inserted in the context. I begin with II. 7 (52, 14): Ut enim divina praeteream et naturali obscuritate res mersas, potest quisquam explicare mortalium, id quod Socrates ille comprehendere nequit in Phaedro, homo quis sit aut unde sit, etc. In fact Arnobius uses the Platonic passage (Phaedr. 230) rather wilfully, amplifying it in his own way, among other things with the following question: Utrumne illum (sc. hominem) tellus uliginis alicuius conversa putore tamquam vermes animaverit, tamquam mures, an fictoris alicuius et fabricatoris manu liniamenta haec corporis atque oris acceperit formam? The first alternative alludes to the Epicurean theory of spontaneous generation, and recalls Luer. II. 870 sqq.: Ex insensilibus, quod dico, animalia gigni. Quippe videre licet vivos existere vermes stercore de taetro, putorem cum sibi nacta est intempestivis ex imbribus umida tellus.1) Then Arnobius asks if anybody can explain why we fall asleep and wake up and dream: Immo quod ambigit in Theaeteto Plato, vigilemus aliquando an ipsum vigilare quod dicitur somni sit perpetui portio, et quod agere videamur, insomnium. 2 ) Thus Arnobius here twice refers to Plato as his informant, but he does not mention Lucretius, to whom he seems to be indebted for many of the topics he touches upon in this chapter. 3) What is said about taste (p. 53, 2): Utrum sapor in rebus sit an palati contagionibus fiat, originates in my opinion from Luer. IV. 633 sqq., where the poet discusses why the same thing tastes differently to different recipients; cf. especially v. 658 sqq.: Hoe ubi quod suave est aliis, aliis fit amarum, illi, cui suave est, levissima corpora debent contractabiliter caulas intrare 1 ) This and the following Lucretian parallels, except the discussion of taste, are listed by Rohricht, p. 6 sq. 2 ) Theaet. 158. 3 ) I exclude the theory of seeing (p. 52, 28 sqq.): Cum videre nos dicimus, radiorum et luminis intentione videamus ·an rerum imagines advolent et nostris in pupulis sidant. For although the last part resembles Lucretian passages - Rohricht p. 6 compares Luer. IV. 30 sqq. esse ea quae rerum simulacra vocamus; qiiae quasi membranae summo de corpore rerum dereptae volitant ultroque citroque per auras; IV. 42 sq. - it seems more likely that the whole passage was derived from Gellius, V. 16: Stoici causas esse videndi dicunt radiorum ex oculis ... emissionem 1 aerisque simul intentionem. Epicurus afluere semper ex omnibus corporibus simulacra quaedam corporum ipsorum eaque sese in oculos in/ erre atque ita fieri sensmn videndi putat (cf. Kroll I, p. 335, n. 1).





palati. 1) After touching upon the question why the hair turns gray,2) the apologist asks (p. 53, 5): Quid sit quad humores universi unum corpus efficiant mixtione, solum oleum respuat immersionem in se pati, sed in suam naturam inpenetrabile semper perspicue colligatur; cf. Luer. VI. ro72 sq. Vitigeni latices aquai fontibus audent misceri, cum pix nequeat gravis et leve olivom. The last item in this series of questions is in a corrupt form in the MS; referring to Luer. III. 463 sq.: Quin etiam morbis in corporis aviiis errat saepe animus; dementit enim deliraque fatur, Marchesi 3 ) has proposed the reading: Ipse denique animus, qui inmortalis a vobis et deus esse narratur, cur in aegris aeger [sit], in in/ anti bus stolidus, in senectute de/essus delira ecfatur (delira et futura MS) et insana? The long series of questions only serves as an exemplification of the line of thought which pervades chap. 6 and the first part of chap. 7. Amobius attacks the conceit of the pagans who held the Christian faith to be childish nonsense. Where, he asks, have you got so much wisdom and acuteness? Because you know grammar and composition and literature and rhetoric, idcirco vos arbitramini scire, quid sit f alsum, qitid verum, quid fieri possit aut non possit, quae imorum summorumque natura sit? It has not been noticed that the thought and the wording (quid fieri possit aut non possit) recall the famous lines in which Lucretius set down >>thefirm principle of fixed natural law which is the foundation of Epicurean physics and the instrument of the defeat of religiom> (Bailey), I. 75-77 = I 594-596: Unde refert (sc. Epicurus) nobis victor quid possit oriri, quid nequeat, finita potestas denique cuique qua nam sit ratione atque alte terminus haerens. l) The hypothesis of Lucretian influence here is strongly supported by the fact that Arnobius has made four other borrowings from the same part of the fourth book - within 15 lines. Two phraseological reminiscences have already been mentioned, viz. distantia differitasque v. 636 (see p. 15) and extima membrorum circumcaesura, v. 647 (above p. 14). V. 640 Nobis veratrum est acre venenum is quoted almost verbatim I. 1 r (see below p. 36 sq.). V. 634 sqq. underlies the wording of VII. 28 (262, 7); see below p. 43. As far as I can see, there is no other part of Lucretius' poem that has given so many echoes in Arnobius, and moreover, in different parts of the work: I. II, II. 7, II. 16, III. 13 and VII. 28. 2) No parallel has been found. 3) Riv. di Filol. 1932, p. 493 sq. Without mentioning his own conjecture Marchesi reads in his edition: delirct futura et insana.



>>Andso>>,the poet continues, >>religionin revenge is cast beneath men's feet and trampled, and victory raises us to heavem. 1) If Arnobius, as I think, had this passage in mind, he admits here indirectly that in his opinion natural science was a hindrance and an enemy to religion. Lucretius' position was just the opposite: the discovery of natural law delivered mankind from being crushed by the weight of religion. Arnobius, when condemning human wisdom, explicitly refers to a passage in the Bible (1 Cor. 3, 19) which is almost obligatory in Christian polemics 2 ) (p. 52, z): Numquamne illud vulgatum perstrinxit aures vestras >>sapientiamhominis stultitiam esse apud deum primum>>?Atque ?'.psi penitus perspicitis vos ipsos, si quando de rebus disceptatis obscuris et naturalia pergitis reserare secreta - I underline these words, which support the interpretation I have given in the foregoing - et ipsa quae dicitis, quae adseveratis, quae capitali plerumque contentione defenditis, nescire vos et unumquemque suspiciones suas pro probatis et comprehensis pertinaci obluctatione tutari. Here Arnobius, relying on scripture, resolutely throws overboard all that bears the name of research in the natural sciences, and he emphasizes his attitude by a veritable glorification of scepticism: Quid enim, si verum perspiciam, etiamsi omnia saecula in rerum investigatione ponantur, scire per nos possumus, quos ita caecos et superbos nescio quae res protulit et concinnavit invidia,3) ut cum nihil sciamus omnino, fallamu,s nos tamen et in opinionem scientiae sub inflati pectoris tumore tollamur? This is the background against which the questions we have dealt with stand out. In the eyes of the sceptic apologist they are unsolved Bailey's translation. ") It is to be noticed that this is one of the very few passages in the Bible which Arnobius proves to be aware of. " 3 ) Being incomprehensible, invidia has to be corrected. I am much in favour of Vahlen's conjecture invida (thus already Orelli, who believed it to be the reading of the MS). Is it too bold a presumption that Arnobius, here as so often, had in mind a Lucretian line, viz. I. 321: Invida praecl-usit speciem natura videndi, 'grudging nature has shut us out from seeing'? To be sure, editors have mostly taken offence at the tautology and proposed to change speciem in different ways (cf. Bailey ad loc.) or connected videndi with natura (thus Bailey). But such a tautology is by no means unprecedented: Plautus has sermones fabulandi, Cicero optio eligendi and crescendi accessio, Ammianus Marcellinus dormiendi quies etc.; cf. Stolz-Schmalz, Lateinische Grammatik. In fiinfter Auflage vollig neu bearbeitet von Manu Leumann und Ioh. Bapt. Hofmann (Mi\nchen 1928), p. 831 sq.; H. Hagendahl, >>Deabundantia sermonis Ammianei». Eranos XXII (1924), 195 sq. 1)






and unsolvable, because they are outside our power of cognition. Against those who are busy with such things he finally gives his verdict as follows (p. 53, n): Quorum infirmitas et inscientia miserabilis hoe magis est, ut cum fieri possit, ut veri aliquid aliquando dicamus, et hoe ipsum nobis incertum sit an veri aliquid dixerimus. That he took his examples to such an extent from Lucretius, is due on the one hand to the fact that the poem on the nature of things could most easily furnish him with the materials required, on the other hand to his aversion to Epicurean physics. The conclusion to which we have come here will be confirmed if we consider another passage of the same kind, II. 56-6r. There is nothing, says the apologist, that the human mind, directed by the spirit of contradiction, does not venture to confound and dissolve, however clear and true it may be, and on the other hand nothing that it cannot maintain with plausible arguments, however false it may be. Cum enim persuaserit quis esse aliquid aut non esse, amat quad opinatur adserere et acumine alias anteire, maxime si agatur res submota et abdita et caligine involuta naturae, II. 56 (92, 12). Thus challenging the philosophers, Arnobius gives an account of their discrepancies in such problems as the eternity and perishableness of the world, the number of the elements, the existence of the gods. In such cases it is a hazardous enterprise to point out the source, for the writer could easily get what he required from doxographical surveys. 1) But at the risk of being mistaken I assume the following passage to be Lucretian, II. 56 (92, 22): Eundem hunc (sc. mundum) alii elementis ex quatuor tradunt et pronuntiant stare, ex geminis alii, ex singulis tertii, sunt qui ex his nullo set individua corpora eius esse materiem et primam originem dicant. The last sentence refers to Epicurean physics, the first one is a correct comprehension of Luer. I. 705-715, where the theories of the physicists are divided into three groups: 2) I. qui materiem rerum esse putarent ignem (v. 705 sq.) or aera (v. 707) or umor (v. 708) or terra (v. 709); II. qui conduplicant primordia rerum aera iimgentes

1) Cf. Kroll I, p. 345. 2) Kroll (loc. cit.) is mistaken in referring to Doxogr. 591, 8, and he is unjust in adding the criticism: »Eine iihnliche Zusammenstellung mag Arnobius zu der argen Behauptung verleitet haben, es gcbe Leute, die zwei oder gar nur eiu Element anniihmen».



igni terramque liquori (v. 712 sq.); III. qui quattuor ex rebus posse omnia rentur ex igni, terra atque anima procrescere et imbri (v. 714 sq.). The innumerable questions about physics which are showered upon his adversaries in the following chapters may in many cases have been gathered from Lucretius, although the verbal similarities upon the whole are too insignificant to provide evidence. 1) I make an exception for one instance, hitherto unnoticed, that is quite convincing, II. 58 (94,6): Locus ipse ac spatium,2) in qua situs est ac volutatur (sc. mundus), quid sit? Infinitus (an)3) finitus, inanis an solidus? Lucretius says, I. 954 sqq.: Item quad inane repertumst seu locus ac spatium, res in qua quaeque gerantur, pervideamus utrum finitum funditus omne constet an inmensum pateat. Compare also ib. v.



Tum porro si nihil esset quad inane vocaret, omne f oret solidum.

1 ) Rohricht (p. 7) attributes a large scope to Lucretian influence, but alleges only one instance, II. 59 (95. 26): Ipsa deinde haec quid sint, sapor dico et cetera, qualitatum distantias quibus ex rationibus ducant? Ex elementis, inquitis, et ex principalibus originibus rerum. Amara sunt enim elementa vel dulcia, odoris sunt alicuius, (alicuius) coloris, ut ex eorum concretione credamus partitas esse in nascentibus qualitates quibus aut suavitas nascitur aut sensibus offensio comparatur? This seems to be directed against Luer. II. 398-443. IV. 633 sqq. What is said about the rain, II. 59 (94, 20); Edissertate nobis et dicite, quibus modis fiant et rationibus pluviae, recalls Luer. VI. 495 sqq. Nunc age, quo pacto pluvius concrescat in altis nubibus umor, et in terras demissus 'lf,I imber decidat, expediam. 2 } The expression recurs in a strange association of ideas, I. 31 (20, 29). Kroll (I, p. 325) asserts that in Arnobius •>dieGottespradikationen im ganzen platonisch und nur leise christlich iiberfarbt sindo, and adds (ib. p. 327) that none of the apologists goes so far in making use of negative attributes. Well, here we have one of the few exceptions, where something positive is said about God: Prima enim tu causa es, locus rerum ac spatium, fundamentum cunctorum quaecumque sunt. Kroll gives some Greek parallels. It is not less worth noticing that Arnobius resorts to a Lucretian reminiscence in order to express a conception of God which approaches to pantheism. 3 ) An is inserted by Ursinus and Reifferscheid, but not by Marchesi.




In chap. 60 Arnobius preaches scepticism in his usual way;1) moreover he makes Christ a guarantor of his sceptical attitude (p. 96,I7): Christus ... cum mortalium sciret caecam esse naturam neque ullam posse comprehendere veritatem positarum nee ante oculos rerum, pro comperto habere et cognito quidquid sibi esse suasisset nee pro suis suspicionibus haesitare litigiosas serere atque intendere quaestiones, omnia ista nos linquere et posthabere praecepit neque in eas res quae sint a nostra procul cognitione dimotae infructuosas inmittere cogitationes. After that, we do not wonder that Christ is even introduced delivering a discourse. This has been made evident by Thornell, 2} while other scholars have arbitrarily altered the text. The discourse begins as follows, II. 6I (97,5): >>Quidest» inquit (sc. Christus) >>vobisinvestigare conquirere, quisnam hominem f ecerit, animarum origo quae sit, quis malorum excogitaverit causas, orbe sit sol amplior an pedis unius latitudine metiatur, alieno ex lumine an propriis luceat fulgoribus luna? Quae neque scire compendium neque ignorare detrimentum est ullum. Remittite haec deo atque ipsum scire concedite, quid quare aut unde sit, debuerit esse aut non esse, supernatum sit aliquid an ortus primigenios ha beat ... V estris non est rationibus liberum inplicare vos talibus et tam remota in utilitate curare>>.Christ here touches on questions similar to those which he is alleged to have taught by the apologist in his eulogy. 3 ) Nevertheless the two passages are at direct variance with each other: in I. 38 Christ appears as a professor of philosophy teaching physical questions, in II. 6I he forbids human beings to take interest in such useless things. Marchesi has the merit of emphasizing the inconsistency; in my opinion however he has been less successful in ,explaining it. 4 ) I think it has simply to be interpreted as a proof of the author's acknowledged haste, carelessness and imperfect knowledge of the new religion. One of the problems mentioned recalls Cic. Acad. prior. II. 82: Quid potest esse sole maius? Quem mathematici amplius duodeviginti partibus confirmant maiorem esse 1 ) II. 60 (96, 6) Cum igitur et vos ipsos tantarum ac tot rerum fugiant origines, fugiant causae, fugiant rationes neque dicere neque explanare possitis, quid sit factum aut quare aut cur oportuerit non esse, verecundiam convellitis et dilaceratis nostram, qui quae nequeunt sciri nescire nos confitemur. 2 ) Patristica. Uppsala r923 (Uppsala universitets drsskrift), p. 5 sqq. 3 ) See above pp. 20 sqq. ') Op. cit., pp. rn22 sqq. Marchesi says about II. 6r: »Si ha qui il compimento imprevisto e schernitore di quanto e detto nel primo libro,» etc., about I. 38: »La epicureizzazione del Cristo e stata una finzione o una burla(!).»



quam terram. Quantulits nobis videtur I M ihi quidem quasi pedal is; Epicurus autem posse putat etiam minorem esse eum, quam videatur, sed non multo. Another may, following Rohricht, be traced back to Lucretius, V. 575 sq.: Lunaque sive notho fertur loca lumine lustrans, sive suam proprio iactat de corpore lucem. More uncertain are two phraseological resemblances: qu£d debuerit esse aut non esse (cf. Luer. V. 88 sq. VI. 64 sq. quid queat esse, quid nequeat} and ortus primigenios (also p. rn5,7), noted by Diels as a reminiscence of Luer. II. no5 sq. diemque primigenum ... coortum. As well as the passages we have discussed, the first chapters of Book I are remarkably rich in Lucretian reminiscences,1) and, as in those passages, they are mostly applied in questions about phenomena of nature. Only the reason for which they are used is different. Answering the pagans who blamed the Christians for all disasters, the apologist asks, I. 2 (4, 3): Postquam esse nomen in terris Christianae religionis occepit, quidnam inusitatum, quid incognitum, quid contra leges principaliter institutas aut sensit aut passa est rerum ipsa quae dicitur appellaturque natura?2) Together with mortalium saeculis, I. I (3, IJ), 3) which recalls the Lucretian expression mortalia saecla (II. n53; V. 79r. 805. 988), three of the questions which are showered upon the reader bear a close resemblance to Lucretian phraseology. The paraphrastic expression for mundus: I. 2 (4, 9) Numquid machinae huius et molis, qua universi tegimur et continemur inclusi, is due to Luer. V. 96 moles et machina mundi. 4 ) The phrase, ib. (4, IS), sol ... cuius omnia luce vestiuntur, may be traced back to Luer. II. I47 sq. so/eat sol ortus tempore tali convestire sua perfundens omnia luce. What is said about 1

) Most of them have been recognized by Jessen (p. 19) and Rohricht (p. 5). However we have to exclude I. r (3, 17) examina tanta maerorum and I. 2 (4, 26) sapor ... vitis liquoribus mutatur, which hardly have anything to do with the alleged Lucretian passages (V. 369 cladem inportare; 1364 pullorum examina; 14 sq. liquoris vitigeni laticem). On the other hand I add I. 2 (4, 20) frigora ... calores . .. tepores medii (see below p. 31). 2 ) The last words possibly contain an allusion to the title of Lucretius' work, as McCracken (op. cit., I, p. 269) suggests. 3 ) Also I. 25 (16, 18). 4 ). Cf. also Arnob. I. 9 (10, 6) Mole sub hac mundi; III. 35 (134, 19) Universam istam molem mundi.

I,A'l'IN l>thehelplessness of the human baby as compared with the capacity of the young animal>>(Bailey), V. 223 sqq.:


N udus humi iacet ... . . . cum primum in luminis oras nixibus ex alvo matris natura profudit, vagituque locum lugubri complet ... 228 At variae crescunt pecudes armenta feraeque, nee crepitacillis opus est, nee cuiquam adhibendast almae nutricis blanda atque infracta loquella.3 )

1) Formatura too is 'Jne of the words peculiar to the two authors. but has been noticed by Spindler and Diels. ) It escaped Rohricht, 3 ) The same passage seems to have been imitated II. 39 (79, n): (ut animae)


humana inmergerentur in semina, feminarum e:>: genitalibus prosilirent, ineptissimos ederent continuarentque vagitus ... tune ad silentium pavidae nutricis motibus et crepitaculis adducerentur auditis.


I>. Arnobius makes use of this argument, only he applies to the gods what is said about the soul, VII. 4 (240, 15): Quid quad amnis valuptas quasi quaedam est adulatio corporis natisque illis sensibus adsumitur quinque: quam si superi sentiunt, et earum necesse est sint participes corparum, per quae via est sensibus et accipiendis voluptatibus ianua. Some reminiscences of Lucretian phraseology listed by Diels in his edition of Lucretius as testimania seem to me rather uncertain: VII. 15 (249, 25) Quad est hanaris genus lignornm structibus incensis caelum fuma subtexere et effigies numinum nigrare affuscare ferali? 1




Luer. V. 466 Subtexunt caelum.

Tactus enim, tactus, pro divum numina sancta, corporis est sensus, vel cum res extera sese insinuat, vel cum laedit quae in corpore natast aut iuvat egi,ediens genitalis per Veneris res. Op. cit., II, pp. ro98 sq.




VII. 17 (251, 17) lam profccto cernetis viscera illa taurorum sacra, quibus honor a vobis auctificatur deorum, f ervescere vermibus et fluctuare .•. et ex odoribus morbidis regiones consauciare vicinas.




III. 39 Omni a suf /undcns mortis nigrore.1) III. 719 sqq. Unde cadavera rancenti iam viscere vermes expirant, atqite unde animantum copia tanta exos2) et exanguis tumidos perIliectuat artus? Vi. 955 Morbida vis. 1)

From what has gone before, it will be seen that the apologist derived no small advantage from Lucretius in his polemics against pagan religion and worship as well as in other respects. Nor did he escape altogether being influenced himself by the ideas of the Epicurean poem. This has already been established above with regard to two things, viz. the belief that the world has been created for the sake of men, and the belief in the immortality of the soul, where Arnobius followed Epicurus and took a view opposite to that of the Church. 3) It remains to be proved on another cardinal point. The pagans laid the blame for every disaster that had befallen mankind on the Christians, accusing them of evoking the wrath of the gods. This is the point of departure for Arnobius (as for other apologists), and it may be called the main theme of his work. In replying to this charge he did not take up a consistent line of action, denying either the existence of the gods or their ability to feel wrath. Occasionally he makes concessions to the point of view of his adversaries in order to throw back the blame laid on the Christians on to the pagans themselves. However, 4) this is due to the rhetor's habit of making 1 ) The words nigror and morbidus are not exclusively Lucretian; see below p. 78, sq. n. 1. 2) Another reminiscence of this is found in IV. 8 (147, 12), where the author derides the goddess Ossipago: A ut si exos genus humanum velut quidam vermiculi nasceremur ... Ossipago solidatrix ossuum nomen proprium non haberet? 3) Cf. above pp. 35 sqq., 31 sqq. 4) Cf. III. 36 (135, 20) Cum vero per vos ipsos prope omnis gens numinum sub ostentatione tollatur ingeniorum atque doctrinae, audetis intendere nostri nominis causa res humanas ab diis premi, cum quidem, si verum est esse illos uspiam atque incalescere irarum flammis, nihil habeant iustius propter quad in vos saeviant quam quad eos negatis subsistere neque ulla esse in parte naturae? V. 15 (187, 24) Nobis ... hod-ie manifestare propositum est numina ista quae promitis, si sunt uspiam


allowances ancl recriminations in season and out of season, even if they are not consonant with his own convictions or appropriate to his main line of defence. In reality there is no doubt about his real opinion: wrath is to him alien to the nature of the Divine. He emphasizes this again and again,1) most explicitly at the beginning of the sixth book, VI. 2 (214, 18): Ut enim noscatis, quid de isto nomine (scil. de diis) sentiamus iudiciique simits cuius, existimamus nos eos, si modo dii certi sunt, ut eadem rursus satiateque dicantur, cunctarum esse debere perfectarumque virtutum, sapientes iustos graves, si modo nulla est rnlpa, quad eos laudibus adcumulamus humanis, intestinis pollentes bonis, nee extraneis adminiculis >L'epicureismo nei primi scrittori latini cristiani. La polemica di Lattanzio contro l'epicureism0>>, Antiquitas II-V (1947-1950), numero 3-4, pp. 45-54 (published also in Mi&cellanea di studi di letteratura cristiana antica, Catania 1947, pp. 5-20). The two papers in Antiquitas will be quoted as Rapisarda I and Rapisarda II respectively. - I have not been able to consult a study written by a pupil of Rapisarda's: Jolanda Tomaselli Nicolosi, »L'influsso di Lucrezio su Lattanzio.•> Raccolta di studi di letteratura cristiana antica, II (Catania 1946).

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXTV: a




before his conversion, and traces of his earlier adherence to that system are to be found here and there, however strongly he combats some of its fundamental doctrines. Let me declare at once that the arguments brought forward in support of this thesis excite anything but admiration for sound judgment and scholarly competence. Rapisarda admits (II, p. 45) that the violent polemics against Epicurean doctrines convey the impression that the apologist bad above all an aversion to this system of philosophy, but he holds them to be 'motivi propagandistici' aimed at the uncultivated reader and being a misrepresentation in conformity with popular ideas. I for my part fail to see any popular misrepresentation in the only passage which Rapisarda (II, pp. 49 sq.) cites in support of his opinion (Div. inst. III. r7, 4r sq.): Archipirata quisquam vel latronum ductor si suos ad grassandum cohortetur, qua alio sermone uti potest quam ut eadem dicat quae dicit Epicurus? Deas nihil curare; non ira, non gratia tangi; inferorum poenas non esse metuendas, quad animae post mortem occidant nee ulli omnino sint inferi; voluptatem esse maximum bonum; nullam esse humanam societatem; sibi quemque consulere; neminem esse qui alterum diligat nisi sua causa; mortem non esse metuendam forti viro nee ullum dolorem, qui etiamsi torqueatur, si uratur, nihil curare se dicat. This is, as I understand it, a correct summary of cardinal points in Epicurean doctrine, and there is not the slightest doubt that the apologist gives vent to his own conviction when he concludes with a condemnatory sentence: Est plane cur quisquam putet hanc vocem viri esse sapientis, quae potest latronibus aptissime commodari., To go straight to the point: could Lactantius actually, and does he ever, touch upon those doctrines, so incompatible with the Christian conceptions of Providence, divine wrath, immortality, eternal punishment, charity towards one's neighbour, etcetera, without condemning them? If that be so, there is not a large sector within the Epicurean system where Lactantius, had he ever adhered to it, could have retained still and manifested his old sympathies. Nor do the arguments which Rapisarda mobilizes carry any weight. Rapisarda is wise in not emphasizing the fact that Lactantius, like other apologists, turns Epicurean arguments to his own account when combating polytheism,1) but he seems to me to contradict himself 1 ) I, p. 50 ►>Il vedere ... uno scrittore fare appello all' epicureismo per combattere il politeismo non ha che un valore assai relativo, poiche il cristianesimo nella sua



AND 'l'Hg



when he regards J, Philippe as an ally - in fact his only ally because of a few lines that the latter has written about the alliance between the apologist and the Epicurean poet,!) In his first paper Rapisarda alleges six passages in support of his thesis, Firstly he makes much of the fact that Lactantius while disputing the views held by the philosophers takes sides, twice, with Epicurus: against the Platonic and Aristotelian hypotheses concerning the eternity of the world (Div, inst, VII. 1,7 sqq.) and against Aristoxenus' opinion about the nature of the soul (ib, VII. 13,9). In the second case, however, Lactantius follows Cicero as his authority; nothing in the context suggests that the Lucretian lines (III. 98 sqq.) bearing on Aristoxenus were in his mind. Epicurus is mentioned with approval only in the first case: Unus igitur Epicurus auctore Democrito veridicus in hac re fuit, qui ait et ortum aliquando et aliquando periturum (sc. mundum). Why should the apologist have mentioned Epicurus here, asks Rapisarda (I, p. 51), if he had not been happy to see Epicurus triumph over the greatest philosophers of Greece? 2) On such grounds we could - and with more reason - hold Lactantius to have been a Stoic, and this has, in fact, been suggested by Brandt.3) However, diffidenza contro il simbolismo e il misticismo intellettuale dello stoicismo e del neoplatonismo non riffuggl dal mettersi da alleato all'epicureismm. 1 ) J. Philippe, »Lucrece dans la theologie chretienne,>. Revue de l'histoire des religions, XXXII (1895), p. 293: »C:eque le poete (i. e. Lucrece) ecrivait contre les . Rapisarda (loc. cit.) quotes the last sentence and praises Philippe, >>UU0dei piu dotti conoscitori della fortuna di Lucrezio», ranging him (together with Bignone) with the •>geniali e profondi ricostruttori della fortuna epicurea nell' antichita». This valuation seems to me to be as exaggerated as the scant respect shown for scholars such as Dalpane and Jessen. 2) »Quell' unus Epicurus, contrapposto ai due piu grandi filosofi della Grecia, da l'impressione che Lattanzio sia tanto lieto nel vedere trionfare la verita sull' errore, quanta nel vedere Epicure trionfare sui due grandissimi filosofi. 11 name di Epicure non sembra qui pasta coll'unico scopo di dar maggiore peso alla verita accolta dal cristianesimo: Lattanzio avrebbe potuto infatti in tanti diversi altri modi esprimere il suo pensiero senza proiettare, se non l'avesse voluto, tanta luce sul filosofo greco!» 3) Op. cit., pp. 230 sq,: »Es hat jedoch die feindschaft des Lact. gegen den Epikureismus nicht nur in seiner christlichen iiberzeugung ihren grund, sie beruht vielmehr allem anscheine nach ganz besonders auch noch darin, dass Lact. ur-




it is, I am afraid, beyond the bounds of possibility to answer such questions, considering the planning and the intentions of Divinae institutiones; I refer on this point to my further discussion. Secondly Rapisarda bases his opinion upon another category of instances which may be referred to in his own words: >>Lactantius falls back upon Lucretius not only where he could not find a more useful mainstay, but also where he could have applied to other authors less suspected and even to the Scriptures for help>>(I, p. 52 sq.). The loose suppositions and the mistakes which Rapisarda substitutes for a scholarly interpretation of the passages in question 1} leave only room for one conclusion, viz. that his hypothesis is a failure. Scholars had better consign it to oblivion. The few facts we know about Lactantius' life, chiefly thanks to Jerome, are a valuable clue to a right understanding of his literary work. 2) He was a pupil of Arnobius', thus an African by birth, and spriinglich, ehe er Christ wurde, mit seinen philosophischen anschauungen im wesentlichen auf stoischem boden stand. diesen boden hat er auch spater, nachdem er sich fiir den neuen glauben erklart, nicht so vollig verlassen, dass sich in seinen schriften, so sehr er haufig auch die stoiker bekampft, nicht doch stoische einfliisse ganz bestimmt sollten nachweisen lassem. 1 ) I shall restrict myself to a few remarks. (a) De opif. 19, 3 .,. Luer. II. 991 sq. Rapisarda asks: »Da quale necessita. pote (sc. Lattanzio) essere tratto a rivolgersi a Lucrezio piuttosto che alle stesse Sacre Scritture, allorche vuole inculcare l'amore verso i1 prossimo,>? This is wrong in more than one respect. In the context it is not a question of Christian charity, but of the origin of the sonl, and Lucretius is quoted, in a rather far-fetched way, to support Lactantius' own opinion. As to the Scriptures, it is a well-known fact that the apologist as a rule - almost on principle - abstains from alleging their testimony (see below p. 63). (b) Div. inst. III. 16, 14: Why allot a position apart to the Epicurean poet, when Lactantius, along with him, calls Cicero, Seneca and Persius to testify that philosophy has not been in existence for long? (c) lb. VII. 12, 5. After contesting Luer. III. 417 sqq. (about the mortality of the soul), Lactantius is prompt to convict the poet of self-contradiction, by misinterpreting, deliberately, as Rapisarda allows, the lines II. 999 sq. This, certainly, is not a token of sympathy or esteem. (d) The eulogy of Epicurus (Luer. VI. 23 sqq.) applied to Christ (Div. inst. VII. 27, 6) will be discussed below (p. 69). I refuse positively to recognize here, on the part of Lactantius', »un omaggio alla saggezza di Epicuro alla quale gli apologetici avevano attinto prima di entrare in seno al Cristianesimo,>. 2 ) See M. Schanz, Geschichte der romischen Literatur, III, 2. Aufl. (Miinchen 1905), pp. 445 sqq. The chronology of Lactantius' life and writings has recently been examined by J. Stevenson, ~The life and literary activity of Lactantius., Studia Patristica. Vol. I. Papers presented to the Second International Conference on Patristic

T,A'fIK I>C'estune ceuvre toute philosophique par la methode, toute profane par le ton. Plus encore que Minucius Felix, Lactance laisse clans l'ombre les questions purement religieuses; il ne cite pas une seule fois l'Ecriture: a peine voit-on que c'est un chretien qui parle. I1 appelle ses correligionnaires 'les philosophes de notre secte' [chap. 1, 2]; il designe le diable par une paraphrase tres vague [1, 7], et parle de Dieu en termes qui peuvent convenir au simple deisme sans impliquer aucune adhesion a une confession speciale; enfin il presente le christianisme comme 'la vraie doctrine philosophique' [20, 1]>>. To complete this, we may add that neither Christ nor the Christians are mentioned, that the prophecies of the Old Testament are denoted by responsa vatum nostrorum (18, 10), that the dualistic conception expressed in chap. 19, 8 is the only case where Christian doctrinal points are discussed. 2 ) No doubt, De opificio Dei is impregnated through and through with Lactantius' profane education and with his long and close familiarity with the classics, but however much this fact may be emphasized, 3 ) Studies held at Christ Church, Oxford r955, Part I, pp. 661-677 ( = Texte und Untersuchungen .zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur. 63. Band = V. Reihe, Band 8. Berlin 1957). 1) Op. cit., p. 58. 2) Brandt erroneously leaves out the passage considering it as an interpolation; cf. Pichon, pp. 13 sqq.; Schanz, pp. 456 sq. 3) Cf. Pichon, p. 3: >>Sagrande, sa seule originalite presque, sera d'appliquer et d'adapter a l'exposition du christianisme !'esprit philosophique et oratoire de l' antiquite~.



I do not think it explains sufficiently the remarkable reticence as to Christian matters.1) As I see it, this attitude was dictated by prevailing conditions. During the persecution Lactantius could not without danger compromise either himself or his pupil Demetrianus, to whom he dedicated his work, by openly professing Christianity. Hence all those vague hints and periphrastic expressions, beating about the bush. The propriety of this suggestion is confirmed by a passage in the last chapter (20, I) where Lactantius alleges the hardships of the time as an excuse for his obscurity: H aec ad te, Demetriane, interim paucis et o b s c u r i u s f o r t a s s e q u a m d e c u i t pro rerum ac temporis necessitate peroravi, quibus contentus esse debebis plura ac meliora lecturus, si nobis indulgentia caelitus venerz"t. Perhaps we may go further and assume that Lactantius was influenced, even in the choice of his subject, by circumstances, not only by care for his pupil's spiritual welfare. 2) It is certain that no objection could be made against him for discussing the structure of the human body (chap. 5-I3) 3) or psychological questions (chap. I4-I9); it looks as though he only continued the discussion of the pagan philosophers, and so he does too, taking up their views, supplementing them rather than contesting them, 4) making exaggerated use of physiological details · borrowed from Varro, Cicero and others. 5 ) But for all that Lactantius had throughout a definite aim in view, viz. to assert what to him was the substance of Christianity: the existence and wisdom of divine

1 ) Id., p. 4: »L'expression exterieure de ses convictions chretiennes est devenue de plus en plus nette. Au debut elle est voilee sous un deguisement presque philosophique, dans le De opificio Dei par exemple». 2) De opif. I, 5 sq. Et quidem laetor omnia tibi quae pro bonis habentur prospe,·e fluere, sed ita, si nihil de statu mentis inmutent. Vereor enim, ne paulatim consuetudo et iucunditas earum rerum sicut fieri solet in animum tuum inrepat, ideoque te moneo ... ne oblectamenta ista terrae pro magnis aut veris bonis habere te credas. Ci. Schanz, p. 448. 3 ) De opif. I, 16 Q·uid est tandem cur nobis invidiosum quisquam putet, si rationem corporis nostri dispicere et contemplari velimus? 4 ) Pichon, p. 60: ,>II cherche done moins a refuter qu'a completer les ceuvres profanes, et se pose non en adversaire, mais en continuateur de la philosophieo. 6 »Uber die Quellen van Lactanz'_ Schrift De ) For the sources cf. S. Brandt, opificio Dei,,. Wiener Studien XIII (1891), - Cf. Schanz, p. 449. Pichon pp. 65 sqq.



Al'>wiemit verbundenen augen in demselben kreise herum, nicht von ferne dammert ihm die ahnung, >, but taken in a broader sense, they are not contrary to Epicurean principles;1) it is certain that they do not have the purport ascribed to them by Lactantius and do not involve a contradiction of the point of view (perire animas cum corporibus) maintained throughout the third book of De rerum natura. 2 ) A direct citation brings the discussion with Lucretius to an end, § 26: Nam quod ait (III. 612-614): 'Quodsi inmortalis nostra foret mens, non tam se moriens dissolvi conquereretur, sed magis ire foras vestemque relinquere, ut anguis', equidem numquam vidi qui se quereretur in morte dissolvi : sed ille fortasse Epicureum aliquem viderat etiam dum moritur philosophantem ac de sui dissolutione in extrema spiritu disserentem. The bases being too different, the discussion does not yield much,3) and the author seems to have felt this, for he recurs to the testimony given by Hermes, an Apollonean oracle and the sibylline books before arriving at his conclusion, VII. t3, 7: Falsa est ergo Democriti et Epicuri et Dicaearchi de animae dissolutione sententia. He continues: Qui prof ecto non auderent de interitu animarum mago aliquo praesente disserere, qui sciret certis carminibus cieri ab inf eris animas et adesse et praebere se humanis oculis videndas et loqui et futura praedicere, et si auderent, re ipsa et documentis praesenI refer to Giussani's remarks on the passage in question. Cf. Brandt, op. cit., p. 243: •>Er (se. Lactantius) deutet also jene verse, die Luer. in ganz anderm Zusammenhange bringt, dem gegner gewissermassen im munde um, indem er ihm stillsehweigend die voraussetzung unterschiebt, die seele sei himmlischen ursprungs, sie stamme ex aetheris oris, so dass sie demgemiiss auch wieder zum himmel zuriickkehre,>. 3 ) Brandt (op. cit., p. 243) rightly says: >>Sosteht behauptung gegen behauptung, vergleich gegen vergleich, und die frage ist nach wie vor auf demselben punkte. dies muss zugleich das urteil iiber den gang des ganzen streites sein, den in diesem eapitel Lact. gegen Luer. fiihrb. 1) 2)



tibus vincerentur. It is an interesting contribution to the understanding of Lactantius' turn of mind that the same man who treats the philosophers with an air of patronizing superiority or with sheer contempt and whose favourite terms of reproach are delirus and delirare1) reveals himself to be the dupe of magic arts. In the peroratio, VII. 27, 6, Lactantius says that God sent us a guide to open the way of righteousness, and he continues: Hunc sequamur omnes, hunc audiamus, huic devotissime pareamus, quoniam solus, ut ait Lucretius (VI. 24-28), 'veridicis hominum purgavit pectora dictis et finem statuit cuppedinis atque timoris exposuitque bonum summum, qua tendimus omnes, quid foret, atque viam monstravit, limite parvo qua possemus ad id recto contendere cursu'. These lines form part of the proem to Book VI. Thus Lactantius did not scruple to apply to Christ what is said in praise of Epicurus, quite in the same way as Arnobius modelled his eulogy of Christ upon the homage paid to Epicurus in the proem of Book V. 2) In doing so neither of the two apologists was influenced by sympathy with Lucretius' master; on the contrary, both of them were strongly opposed to Epicurean philosophy, and there is no reason to believe that their attitude towards it had at any time been more favourable. I think we have to ascribe to Lactantius the same motive as I have supposed in Arnobius' case (see above p. 20): a high esteem for both the content and the form of the eulogy, and a feeling that such praises were applicable, not to a mortal, but only to the guide sent from Heaven. The Epitome divinarum institutionum is a rather free abridgment and revision of the main work, made by the author himself. The shortening was destructive to the literal quotations from poetry, of which only a few are left; the only quotation from Lucretius (Epit. 20, 4) is VI. 52 sq., repeated from Div. Inst. II. 3, ro (see above p. 59). 1) The verdict is applied for example to Pythagoras VII. r2, 31: Quae sententia deliri hominis ••• ne refelli quidem serio debuit, to Aristoxenus VII. 13, 9: Qua nihil dici delirius potest, to Plato III. 19, 18; Ego plane contenderim numquam quicquam in rebus humanis dictum esse delirius, to Epicurus III. 17. 29: Homine, quo-sano ac vigente nullus aeger ineptius deliravit, to Lucretius De opif. 6, 1: Omnia quae delirat Lucretius. =) See above pp. 17 sqq.



In Div. inst. II. 17,4 Lactantius turns against those who pronounce God destitute of wrath, which in his opinion involves the extinction of truth and religion; as the subject is too vast, he promises to treat it in a special paper. 1) De ira Dei, announced in this way, is the only monograph on that subject left by the ancients. 2) Its interest lies above all in the fact that the author does not consider, and hardly knows, the discussion carried on about the problem among Greek theologians. 3) Nor does he merely intimate that >>mostpeople>>- we must suppose that the words refer even to the Christians - shared the belief which he combats; his real adversaries are quidam philosophorum, viz. the Stoics and the Epicureans, as it appears already from the opening lines (1,1): Animadverti saepe, Donate, plurimos id existimare, quod etiam nonnulli philosophorum pi,taverunt, non irasci deum, quoniam vel benefica sit tantummodo natura divina nee cuiquam nocere praestantissimae atque optimae congruat potestati [the opinion of the Stoics] vel certe nihil curet omnino, ut neque ex beneficentia eius quicquam boni perveniat ad nos neque ex maleficentia quicquam mali [the opinion of the Epicureans]. Lactantius restricts himself to the consideration of these two schools; 4 ) they are represented in his survey (2,9) of four possibilities of which one must be true: (1) (2) (3) (4)

Aut aut aut aut

ira tribuenda est deo et gratia detrahenda, utrumque pariter detrahendum, ira demenda est et gratia tribuenda, utrumque tribuendum.

After dismissing summarily (Chap. 3) the first hypothesis as being without adherents he takes up the second opinion, that of the Epicureans 1 ) Div. inst. II. 17,5 Sed seponatur interim nobis hie locus de ira dei disserendi, quod et uberior est materia et opere proprio latius exequenda. 2 ) M. Pohlenz, Vom Zorne Gottes (Gottingen 1909), p. 50. I am indebted to

valuable monograph for much information. Pohlenz, p. 50. 4 ) De ira 2,7 sq. Nunc vero contra eos disserimus qui ... prava de summo deo sentiunt. Aiunt enim quidam (sc. Epicurei) nee gratificari eum cuiquam nee irasci, sed securum et quietum inmortalitatis suae bonis perfrui. B. Alii vero (sc. Stoici) this 3


iram tollunt, gratiam relinquunt deo: naturam enim summa virtute praestantem ut non maleficam, sic beneficam esse debere. Ita omnes philosophi de ira consentiunt, de gratia discrepant.






(Chap. 4), and the third, that of the Stoics (Chap. 5); as the philosophers are shown to be mistaken he concludes the truth to be in the last possibility: 6,r Unum i'llud extremum superest in quo solo possit veri'tas inveni'ri, quod a philosophis nee suseeptum est umquam nee aliquando defensum, eonsequens esse ut iraseatur deus, quoniam gratia eommovetur. This view has to be embraced by the Christians (nobis): In eo enim summa omnis et eardo religionis pietatisque versatur. As to Epicurus Lactantius bases his criticism on the first of the XV(!tat c56~m.,partly quoted in Chap. 4,2: 'Ex hoe' inquit 'beatus est et ineorruptus (sc. deus), quia nihil curat neque ipse habet negotium neque alteri exhibet'.1) He is more likely to have derived his information from Cicero' s translation of the sentence 2) than from Epicurus himself,3) since he owes a great deal to Cicero' s discussion in the first book of De natura deorum. In combating Epicurus the Christian writer again and again takes sides with Cotta, Cicero's spokesman for the Academics. He accepts the view that the Epicurean God, being deprived of movement and action, must be without beatitudo,4 ) and that the Epicurean conception of the Divine in reality means a denial of the Divine. 5 ) He

1) 2)

Cf. 8,4 Quad si negotium deus nee habet nee exhibet ..• Cic. Nat. dear. I. 45 'Quad beatum aeternumque sit, id nee habere ipsum negotii

quicquam nee exhibere alteri: itaque neque ira neque gratia teneri, quad quae talia essent imbecilla essent omnia'. lb. I. 85 Itaque in illis selectis eius (sc. Epicuri) brevibusque sententiis quas appellatis 'l'V(!lac; 66foc; haec, ut opinor, prima sententia est: 'Quad beatum et immortale est, id nee habet nee exhibet cuiquam negotium'. 3 ) Diog. Laert. X. 139 To µaudeiov ual l1.rp0ae-rov oiln, avro neayµara l!xei naeexei, ware oiJre oeyai;: oilre xaeiat avvexerm· ev da0evei yde mi.v oil-re ll.-1.i.qi -ro-rowiirov. 4 ) Cf. De ira 4,2 (Epicurus deum) virtutis fecit expertem; 4,5 Quae igitur in deo potest esse beatitudo, si semper quietus et inmobilis torpet, etc . ..,. Nat. dear. I. I ro Videamus nunc de beato. Sine virtute certe nullo modo: virtus autem actuosa, et deus vester nihil agens, expers virtutis igitur: ita ne beatus quidem. 6 ) De ira 4,6 Qui ergo totam vim, totam substantiam deo tollit, quid aliud dieit nisi deum omnino non esse? (7) Denique Marcus Tullius a Posidonio dictum refert 'id Epicurum sensisse, nullos deos esse, sed ea quae de dis locutus sit depellendae invidiae causa dixisse: itaque verbis illum deos relinquere, re autem ipsa tollere' ..,. Nat. dear. I. 123 Veriits est igitur nimirum illud, quad familiaris omnium nostrum Posidonius disseruit in libro quinto de natura deorum, nullos esse deos Epicuro videri quaeque is de dis immortalibus dixerit invidiae detestandae gratia di,o:isse Epicurus re tollit, oratione relin~uit deos (cf. I. 8~)·



even follows Cotta in exempting Epicurus from the charge of being deliberately amphibigous. 1) Upon the whole Lactantius here is more favourable to Epicurus than to the Stoics, for Epicurus has seen that anger and charity are connected, and, consequently, as in his opinion anger and the faculty of doing harm are alien to the Divine, it must be destitute also of charity and grace. This is logical, but Epicurus does not draw the necessary conclusion: if that be so, there is no Providence, no God. Thus Lactantius arrives at the same conclusion as the Academic inquit critic whose final words are quoted with approval: 8,3 >>Deus~ Cicero >>sitalis est, ut nulla gratia, nulla hominum caritate teneatur, valeat. Quid enim dicam 'propitius sit'? Esse enim propitius potest nemini~ ..,,..Nat. deor. I. 124 Deinde si maxime talis est deus, ut nulla gratia, nulla hominum caritate teneatur, valeat. Quid enim dicam 'propitius sit'? Esse enim propitius potest nemini, quoniam ut dicitis omnis in imbecillitate est et gratia et caritas. All this discussion depends, as I have shown, chiefly, or solely, on Cicero.2) Lucretius comes in only once, in Chap. 8,1, where his para1 ) De ira 4,8 Hie vero si aliud sensit et aliud locutus est, quid aliud appellandus est quam deceptor biling1tis malus et propterea stultus? Sed non erat lam versutus Epicurus, ut fallendi studio is ta loqueretur . . . sed ignorantia veritatis erravit ..,. Nat. deor. I. 85 In hac ita exposila senlentia sunt q1~iexistiment, quod ille inscitia plane loquendi fecerat, fecisse consulto; de homine minime vafro male existimant. 2) I draw attention also to the following passages: 8, 1 Dissolvitur autem religio, si credamus Epicuro ilia dicenti (follows a quotation of Luer. II. 646-o51); 8,6 Haec dum sentit Epicurus, religionem funditus delet; cf. Cic. Nat. deor. I. 121 Epicurus vero ex animis hominum extraxit radicitus religionem, quum dis immorlalibus et opem et gratiam sustulit. A possible objection to this verdict is answered in conformity with Cicero; compare 8,3: At enim naturam excellentem honorari oportet. Quis lionos deberi potest nihil curanti et ingrato? an aliqua ratione obstricti esse possumus ei qui niliil liabeat commune nobiscum? and Nat. dear. I. II6 At est eorum (sc. deorum) eximia quaedam praestansque natura, ut ea debeat ipsa per se ad se colendam allicere sapientem. An quicquam eximium potest esse in ea natura, quae sua voluptate laetans nihil nee actura sit umquam neque agat neque egerit? Quae porro pietas ei debetur, a quo nihil acceperis? aut quid omnino, cuius nullum meritum sit, ei deberi 13, 14 and 17) the argupotest? Even in the following chapters (especially 9-II, ment to a great extent is drawn from De natura deorum. The parallels are listed by W. Kutsch, In Lactantii de ira dei librum quaestiones philologicae (KlassischPhilologische Studien, herausgcgeben von E. Bickel und C. Jensen. Heft 6. Leipzig I9J3), pp. 48-,56.


IDieeinwande, die Lact. gegen die atomenlehre vorbringt ... , sind allem anschein nach nur auf seinem eignen boden gewachsen, es sind entgegnungen, wie sie eine populare betrachtungsweise schnell zur hand hat•>. 2) Pohlenz, op. cit., pp. 48 sq.: ,>Man kann sich kaum des Eindrucks erwehren, es liege die bewusste, vielleicht auf pers/inlicher Abneigung beruhende Absicht vor, den Lehrer stillschweigend an allen Punkten zu korrigierell». 3) lb. p. 49 n. r: >>Auchtritt an keiner Stelle die Polemik so scharf hervor, dass ein Zweifel unmoglich ware•>.


had any knowledge of Amobiu_s' apology. It is not mentioned in his survey of his Latin predecessors (Div. inst. V. 1,22 sqq.) nor elsewhere; none of the reputed parallels (listed by Brandt in his Index, CSEL, XXVII, fasc. II, p. 245) can be considered as a sufficient proof of dependence. 1) This silence on the part of Lactantius has puzzled scholars and has caused many to call in question, quite arbitrarily, Jerome's reference to the master-pupil-relationship between Arnobius and Lactantius. 2 ) Unfortunately it is a controversial point when Arnobius' Adversus nationes was written - and published. 3) In my opinion the chances are that Arnobius wrote at about the same time as Lactantius, the one in Africa, the other in Nicomedia and some part of Europe. This would account for the fact that the latter made no reference to the apologetic work written by his former teacher,


) I refer above all to Wilhelm Harloff, Untersuchungen zu Lactantius (Thesis, Borna-Leipzig 19n), pp. 35 sqq., note 54. Even Pohlenz rejects without further notice two of Brandt's four instances. C.£. 1'ficka p. 152 sq. 2 ) The latest study of the question is by E. F. Micka, The Problem of Divine Anger in Arnobius and Lactantius (Gath. Univ. Stud. in Christ. Ant. IV, Washington 1943), pp. 145-147. 8) See McCracken, op. cit., I, pp. 7 sqq.

Chap. 4. The other apologists.


As to the other apologists, Lucretius' influence is by far less extensive and unequivocal; it seems to me to have been more or less exaggerated by Italian scholars such as Carlo Pascal, Francesco Dalpane, Emanuele Rapisarda and Iolanda Tomaselli Nicolosi.1) It is in itself of no consequence that Minucius Felix and Cyprian neither mention Lucretius nor quote him verbatim, because this is in keeping with their literary method in general. But it may admit of some doubt whether the cases of agreement which have been brought forward are always sufficiently convincing. This is true above all in the case of Cyprian. One of the instances alleged by Pascal2) (Ad Demetr. 3) is a commonplace about the world's growing old and exhausted that coincides with the leading idea in Luer. but in other respects is too different to be considered II. n44-n74, a proof of literary indebtedness. Cyprian's final remark (p. 353,16 Hartel): Haec sententia mundo data est, haec Dei lex est, ut omnia orta occidant et aucta senescant et infirmentur f ortia et magna minuantur et cum infirmata et deminuta fuerint finiantur, is least of all conclusive. In fact, »questa dottrina affatto lucreziana►>, which Pascal compares with Luer. V. 235-246, is a literal quotation of Sallustius' Iugurtha 2,3: Omnia orta occidunt et aucta senescunt' .3) The other instance, De mortalitate 14 (p. 305,14 Hartel), is more worthy of consideration: the description of the plague in Carthage corresponds in many details to the famous description of the plague in 1) Cf. e. g. Dalpane, op. cit., p. 429: »Gli apologeti cristiani dell' Africa, da Minucio a Lattanzio ... manifestano tutti, ove piu ove meno, gli stessi caratteri dell'imitazione Lucreziana,>. 2) Carlo Pascal, »Lucrezio e Cipriano». Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica XXXI (r903), 555-557). 8) The imitation has escaped the notice of both Pascal and Hartel. The passage is quoted also by Jerome (see below p. 239) and alluded to by Minucius Felix, Oct. 34,2 Quis ignorat, omnia quae orta sunt occidere?


Athens which ends Lucretius' last book (VI. n38-r286), shown by placing the passages in question side by side: De mart. 14: Hoe quad nunc corporis vires solutus in fluxum venter eviscerat, quad in f aucium vulnera canceptus medullitus ignis exaestuat, quad adsidito vamitu intestina quatiuntztr, quad oculi vi sanguinis inardescunt,

quad quorundam vel pedes vet atiquae membrarum partes contagio marbi:dae pietredinis amputantur,

quad per iacturas et damna corparum prorumpente tanguare vet debititatur incessus vel audities abstruitur vet caecatur aspectus, ad documentum proficit fidei.

as will by

Luer. VI: 1200 N igra praluvie alvi.

n47 sq. Sudabant etiam fauces intrinsequas atrae sanguine.

n46 sq. Gerebant . . . aculos sit/ fusa luce rubentes. 1206 sqq. In nervos huic morbus et artus ibat et in partis genitalis corparis ipsas. Et . . . vivebant f erra privati parte virili et manibus sine non nulli pedibusque manebant in vita tamen et perdebant lumina partim. n56 sq. Animi prorsum >It seems highly probable>>,he says (p. 540), >>thatthe exposition in Chap. 53>>(on the question how the soul leaves the body at death)>>is directed against Lucretius who gives a particularly circumstantial account of the slow disintegration of the soul at death (III. 526-527)>>. About the other passages he says (p. 46*): ►>Perhaps some details in the chapters on sense-perception (eh. 17, cf. p. 246)4 ) and on the doctrine of avaµvrwu; (eh. 24, cf. p. 306) also derive from him; cf. the note on 37,5 ►>. The result to which I have come differs from that of earlier students, who held Lucretius to have exercised a great influence on the apologists prior to Arnobius and Lactantius. In my opinion this influence is unquestionable only in the case of Tertullian; as to Minucius Felix and Cyprian it is uncertain or at any rate slight. In this respect Arnobius and Lactantius have a position apart in Christian as well as in secular literature. I hope I have shown sufficiently in my previous exposition that there is no reason for believing either Arnobius or Lactantius to have been an Epicurean before being converted and to have retained as a Christian a special liking for the Epicurean poet with whom they were once of 1) The imitation has been noticed, independently, by Dalpane (pp. 419 sq.) and M. Akerman, Ober die Echtheit der letzteren Halfte von Tertullians Adversus Iudaeos (thesis, Lund 1918), pp. 36 sq.; cf. also Borleffs, loc. cit. 2 ) Cf. Dalpane, p. 420; Tomaselli Nicolosi, p. 67. 3 ) The last line is quoted literally by Lact. De opif. 3,1 (see above p. 56). 4 ) Cf. also Dalpane, pp. 418 sq. Giiteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





the same mind. Nor can their raging at Epicurean philosophy be considered the rage of a neophyte turning more vehemently against his old favourite ideas than against those to which he before was more or less indifferent. But if neither of the apologists was ever among the followers of Epicurus and looked upon Lucretius with the eyes of a fellow-apprentice, why are they so occupied with the Epicurean poet? Both Arnobius and Lactantius were in essentials strongly antiEpicurean. Does it mean that Epicureanism was still a living force in the intellectual life of their age? 1) No less a scholar than Hermann Usener, the foremost expert on the fate of Epicureanism in antiquity, was of the opinion that it still flourished during the third and at the beginning of the fourth century. 2 ) He advances two reasons in support of his opinion: Pro primo: >>AmplaIlsgi rpvasw; commentatione refutandum sibi Epicurum sumpserat Dionysius Alexandriae episcopus (a. 249-265) ►>. However this may be, the conditions in the Hellenistic East at that time are certainly not applicable to those in the Latin West. Pro secundo: >>Nequehercule quo eruditionem venditaret, sed quod valere errorem christianae veritati infestum videbat Lactantius, tarn saepe tamque acriter in Epicureas opiniones invehitur, qui librum de ira dei tan tum non in Epicureos intendib>. 3) I think we have to take care not to draw inferences about the prevalence of the old philosophical systems from the polemics to be found in Christian writers. For among those who concerned themselves with the philosophers, and especially among the apologists, it was a firm tradition inherited, no doubt, from secular literature to state and to discuss all important tendencies of thought. Doxographical learning was simply a part of the requisite equipment of the apologist. It is well known how much space it takes up in Tertullian and Minucius Felix, although neither of them was by profession a teacher like Lactan1

) In Augustine's time it was certainly dead. Cf. August. Epist. II. u8: Quos (sc. Epicureos et Stoicos) iam eerie nostra aetate sic obmutuisse conspicimus, ut vix iam in scholis rhetorum commemoretur tan/um quae fuerint illorum sententiae. 2 ) Epicurea, p. LXXV. 3 Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, ) E. Zeller, III: r (3 Aufl. Leipzig r88o), p. 378, n. 2, expresses himself more cautiously: »Weniger sicher ist das Zeugnis des Lactant. Inst. III, 17, der freilich die grosse Verbreitung des Epikureismus bezeugt, und ihn als noch fortlebend zu behandeht scheint, von dem wir aber doch nicht gewiss wissen, ob er dabei nicht blos Aelteren (wie Cic. s. o. 372,3) folgb>.


tius, who in this capacity of his could not be out of contact with the world of thought of the philosophers. In fact, every page of Lactantius shows that he was fairly well acquainted with the leading philosophers, although his knowledge of the Greeks seldom proves to be first-hand but was derived from Latin authors. 1) Nay more, in his writings pagan elements come out much more prominently than the Christian ones. 2) De opificio Dei looks like a secular treatise on philosophy, so well is the Christian propaganda disguised. The first part of De ira Dei is aimed almost exclusively against the Epicureans. In the three first books of Divinae institutiones, which deal with pagan religion and philosophy, Lactantius makes a point of not quoting the Scriptures. 3) This is in harmony with the remarkable programme for apologetic writings which he lays down in Div. inst. V. I,II sqq. and with the criticism he bestows (ib. § 26) upon Cyprian because he used arguments appealing only to the faithful and rejected a priori by an unbeliever. In Lactantius' opinion the philosophers had to be defeated with their own weapons; 4) both the false religions and every philosophy would collapse, si fuerit omnibus persuasum cum hanc solam religionem tum etiam solam veram esse sapientiam (ib. V. 4,8). In conformity with these principles, Lactantius plays off the philosophers against each other, as it suits his own intentions. 1>Tantot, il emploie Platon et Epicure a prouver contre Aristote que le monde a eu un commencement, et Epicure a prouver contre Aristote et Platon qu'il aura une fin. Tantot, sur la question de la creation, il donne raison alternativement a Platon contre les epicuriens, aux stoiciens contre Democrite, a Ariston contre Aristippe, etc.>> (Pichon, p. 93). No preference is given to this or that school. With the turn of the kaleidoscope they enter into new combinations and are alternately a subject for approval and disapproval. No school is entirely wrong (docemus nullam sectam f uisse tam deviam neque philosophorum quemquam tam inanem 1)

See Pichon, pp. 220 sqq. Ci. Pichon, p. 89: *On serait volontiers tente de ranger Lactance parmi les philosophes plutot que parmi les theologiens ... I1 est trop evident que ce n'est pas un pur philosophe ... , mais c'est encore moins un adversaire irrcconciliable de la philosophie>>. 3) Div. inst. IV. 5,3 (cited above p. 63 n. 1). 4) Div. inst. III. 1,2 Ut ipsi philosophi suis armis potissimum, quibus ptacere sibi et confidere solent, opprimerentur a nobis. 2)


qui non viderit aliquid ex vero, Div. inst. VII. 7,2), none is entirely right (nulla extitit philosophia quae ad verum propius accederet, ib. § 7): Christianity alone is the true philosophy and the supreme truth,1) but every single part of the truth is to be found already in the philosophers: Particulatim veritas ab iis tota conprehensa est (ib.); totam veritatem et omne divinae religionis arcanum philosophi attigerunt (§ 14). Considering this attitude I think we are not justified in inferring from Lactantius' polemics against such and such a school that it still prevailed in his time, as Usener concluded concerning the Epicureans. 2 ) It is, I am afraid, equally preposterous to set about conjecturing which system he had a liking for before his conversion. 3 ) As far as I can see, there is nothing to show that he ever adhered to a definite school; he is more likely to have been, rather vaguely, a sympathizer with philosophical idealism without giving preference to this or that system, an eclectic as he appears in his writings. There is also unmistakably a tendency to scepticism, although he does not carry it to such lengths as Arnobius. 4) In one respect, however, he agrees with the latter: he denies the possibility of knowledge about the phenomena of nature and is no less hostile to natural science. 5 ) I emphasize this fact, which has been set in a proper light by Geffcken; 6 ) in my Cf. Div. inst. V. 4,8. Usener's opinion is echoed in Brandt's statement (Lactantius und Lucretius, p. 246): >>Eswar im altertum der letzte litterarische kampf gegen den Epikureismus, als Lact. wie die andern philosophenschulen, so auch diese niederzuwerfen unternahm. wenn es aber nachher still wurde von Epikuros, so hat Lact. hochstens etwa den anteil daran, dass durch ihn Epikurs lehre noch einmal in ihrem unversohnlichen gegensatz zum Christentum gezeigt worden war, die eigentlichen ursaehen jenes verstummens lagen vielmehr in der volligen umwandlung, die sich mit der christlichen kirche hinsichtlich ihrer stellung und macht unter Constantin d. gr. vollzog,,. 3 ) Cf. above pp. 49 sqq. 4 about Areesilas and the ) I refer to the discussion, Div. inst. III. 4,II-6,20, Academics. •) The main passage is Div. inst. III. 3,4 sqq.: Nam causas naturalium rerum disquirere aut scire velle sol utrumne tantus quantus videtur an multis partibus maior sit quam omnis haec terra, etc.; § 6 Si nobis in ea re scientiam vindicemus quae non potest sciri, nonne insanire videamur qui adfirmare id audeamus in quo revinci possimus? Quanta magis qui naturalia, quae sciri ab homine non possunt, scire se putant, furiosi dementesque sunt iudicandi ! 6 Zwei griechische Apologeten (Sammlung wissenschaftlicher Kom) J. Geffcken, zu griechischen und romischen Schriftstellern. Leipzig und Berlin 1907), 1)




opm1on it is a key to a right understanding towards Lucretius.

of Lactantius'



Natural science is not only a folly, it means the extinction of religion. Quae religionis eversio naturae nomen invenit.1) This thesis is to be found in a context of extreme interest, Div. inst. III. 28,3 sq.: Non enim tantum religionem adserere noluerunt (sc. philosophi), verum etiam sustulerunt, dum specie f alsae virtutis inducti conantur animos omni metu liberare. Quae religionis eversio naturae nomen invenit. (4) Illi enim cum aut ignorarent a quo esset mundus effectus aut persuadere vellent nihil esse divina mente perfectum, naturam esse dixerunt rerum omnium matrem, quasi dicerent omnia sua sponte esse nata: quo verbo plane inprudentiam suam confitentur. Natura enim, remota providentia et potestate divina, prorsus nihil est. The philosophi aimed at here are evidently those combated in the preceding chapter, viz. the Stoics and the Epicureans. It is, I think, unnecessary to enter into details and to point out what is said with reference to the former and the latter or to both in common; my chief object is to draw the reader's attention to some features which seem to suggest that the passage was written with a view to the proem of Lucretius' first book. To deliver mankind from the fear of gods,2) to crush religion, 3) to prove nature to be the mother of everything, 4) to dispel terror and darkness of mind by >>theaspect and the law of nature>>5 ) - these are the main themes of the proem and the aim of De rerum natura, and these are all to be found in the apologist and gave rise to his verdict: Quae religionis eversio naturae nomen invenit. That the proem actually was in his

pp. 293 sq. »Lactanz ist in der Tab, says Geffcken, >>trotzseines Wissens der erste und nachdriicklichste Vertreter jener antiwissenschaftlichen romisch-christlichen Richtung, die zuletzt den mittelalterlichen Naturforscher auf den Scheiterhaufen brachte,>. 1) Quoted by Geffcken (p. 294) with the words: »Er stellt den gewaltigen, unheimlich folgenschweren Satz auf,>. 2) Luer. I. 62 sqq., no sq. 8 ) lb. 78 sq. Quare religio pedibus subiecta vicissim obteritur, nos exaequat vicloria caelo. ') lb. 55 sq. Rerum primordia pandam, unde omnis natura creel res, auclet alatque. •) lb. 146 sqq. Hunc igitur terrorem animi lenebrasque necessest ... discutiant ••• naturae species ratioque. These lines form, in Munro's words, »the keystone of epicurean physics>>,



mind, is suggested also by the fact that the image of religion )>showing her head from the quarters of heavem> (I. 64) is imitated only one page before (III. 27, 10, see above pp. 62 sq.). To conclude, Lactantius' knowledge of Epicurean philosophy was founded chiefly on Lucretius; 1 ) he makes no difference between the philosopher and the poet, 2) and he resorts to the latter so frequently only in order to combat Epicureanism. Thus I am of the same opinion as Hadzsits who expressed himself in the following manner: >>Lucretius owed his importance to Lactantius because of views that seemed false and dangerous to the Christian apologisb (op. cit., p. 218). I can also subscribe to the judgment of Antonietta Bufano, 3) the latest scholar who has spoken on this question: »Lucrezio non ha valore per Lattanzio, se non come esponente autorevole della filosofia epicurea: come personalita a se stante non lo interessa affatto>>. But I cannot agree with the Italian authoress when she pronounces Lactantius destitute of any appreciation for Lucretius as a poet and, moreover, of any sense of poetry. 4 ) Insensible to poetry (>>insensibilead ogni espressione di poesia») - is that a verdict applicable to an author who introduced literal quotations from the poets into his prose to a greater extent than any Latin prosewriter had done since Cicero? Was be himself insensible to the charm of carminum dulci modulatione currentium, when he warned of their danger (Div. inst. V. 1,10)? Quite contrary to this opinion I think we mu~t credit the apologist with a fine sense of poetry, witness, among other instances, Div. inst. V. 5, where the myth of the golden age is related in a most charming way by means of splendid lines from Cicero's and Germanicus' Aratea, from the Georgics and the Aeneid and the Metamorphoses. And, be it noted, those quotations serve a double purpose: they are a literary adornment at the same time as 1 ) I agree in the main with Brandt who says (Lact. u. Luer., p. 231): •>Dasmeiste Epikureische material hat Lact, aus Lucretius geschopft, wahrend Cicero verhaltnismassig wenig nach dieser seite benutzt isb; only Cicero's importance, especially as to De ira Dei, has in my opinion been underrated. See above pp. 71 sq. 2) Cf. De opif. Dei 6, I (quoted above p. 56); Brandt, loc. cit. 8 Bufano, •>Lucrezio in Lattanzirn>. Giornale italiano di filologia, ) Antonietta IV (1951), 335-349. 4 p. 349 ~Lattanzio non si e affatto occupato di Lucrezio, ne in quanto ) lb. uomo, ne in quanto poeta»; p. 340 •>Lattanzio dimostra di avere un'anima fredda ~ insensibile alla poesia•>,





they give information about facts and thoughts. I think the matter stands thus even in the case of Lucretius. Lactantius could have drawn from him all what he needed in order to combat Epicureanism without quoting him literally. The fact that he so frequently and willingly adopted the very wording of De rerum natura suggests that he appreciated its poetic merits, while combatting its doctrine. I have anticipated this view in the preceding when answering the question why the apologist did not scruple to apply to Christ what Lucretius says in praise of his master (above p. 69). Arnobius' attitude substantially was the same and is to be explained in the same way. Epicurean physics and natural science were an abomination even to him, and he as well based his knowledge and criticism of it on Lucretius. Only his literary method was different. As distinct from Lactantius he never made use of literal quotations from poetry. In spite of that he was not less impressed with the poet; I refer not only to his eulogy of Christ, an imitation of Lucretius' eulogy of Epicurus (above pp. IJ sqq.), but also to the profound influence that the poet exercised upon him both in matter of style and thought. According to Jerome Lactantius was a pupil of Arnobius'. In my opinion there is no reason why we should reject this statement, as some scholars do. 1) Thus we have not far to look for Lactantius' interest in Lucretius: it may easily be ascribed to his being influenced by his teacher. As to Arnobius, I should like to suggest an explanation that possibly deserves to be taken into consideration. Jerome supposed his schoolfellow Rufinus to have read at school a commentary on Lucretius, and in his own writings he himself turns out to be acquainted with the poet.2) There is, I think, every reason to believe that Lucretius was among the authors read and commented upon in the grammar school. This school-tradition seems to have been especially strong in Africa; otherwise we could hardly account for the fact that Lucretius above all was in favour with African writers, from the archaizing movement of the second century to the grammarians of the fourth and fifth centuries (Nonius Marcellus and Priscianus). The curved line which denotes Lucretius' influence through literature culminates in the beginning of the fourth century in. two Christian apologists, connected with 1) C:f. McCracken, I, pp. 12 sqq. and 246, n. 81 sq. 2 ) Hier. Adv. Rufin. I. 16 (see below pp. 175, 275).



each other by the ties of master-pupil-relationship. It was Lucretius' fate to be used more intensily by adversaries than by adherents: the Poem of Nature that left no room for Divine Providence and should deliver mankind from the fear of gods became the main object of attack to propagandists of a new God and a new faith.




Chap. 1. Introductory remarks The attitude of Jerome towards pagan literature is a subject for severe criticism in the polemical pamphlets which Rufinus, the friend of his childhood, directed against him in about 400 A. D. 1) Rufinus reports Jerome's account of the famous vision he had during his first stay in the East (about 374):2) having been brought in his vision before the tribunal of the Judge and having heard the Judge pronounce: Ciceronianus es, non Christianus, Jerome took solemn oaths: Domine, si umquam habuero codices saeculares, si legero, te negavi. Some 26 years later Rufinus reminds Jerome of his oaths and charges him with perjury, referring to his constant habit of quoting pagan authors: Relegantur nunc, quaeso, quae scribit, si una eius operis pagina est quae non eum iterum Ciceronianum pronuntiet, ubi non dicat: 'Sed Tullius noster, sed Flaccus noster, sed Maro' .3) The counts of the indictment are specified as follows: Sed in omnibus /ere opusculis suis multo plura et prolixiara testimonia de his suis quam de prophetis nostris vel apostolis ponit. Puellis quoque et mulierculis scribens, quae non utique nisi de nostris scripturis aedificari et cupiunt et debent, exempla eis Flacci sui et Tullii vel Maronis intexit. 4) There is no doubt that Rufinus, carried away by his intemperate zeal, exaggerates unreasonably both the frequency and the length of Jerome's quotations from pagan literature as compared with those from the Bible. Here statistics give full evidence. Arthur Stanley Pease 5) has examined the frequency of reminiscences of secular writers in Jerome's letters, taking as his basis the first two volumes of Hil• berg's edition in the Vienna Corpus. 6 ). According to Pease, Hilberg Apologia adversus Hieronymum. I-II (PL 21, 541-624). 2) Hier. Epist. 22, 30, 1-6. 3 ) Apol. adv. Hier. II. 7 (column 588). 4 ) Ib., column 589. 6) »The Attitude of j erome towards Pagan Literature,>. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, L (1919), 150-167. 6 ) Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, LIV (1910) and LV (1912). 1)



indicates 284 reminiscences in 1223 pages, or an average of one in 4.3 pages. As to Biblical texts, the quotations and allusions are innumerable; at my estimate, Hilberg indicates no less than 450 such passages in 100 pages of the letters,1) or an average of one in 0.2 pages. In this connection it must be remembered that Jerome applies quotations from pagan writers more freely in the letters than in the commentaries on the Bible, where for obvious reasons he does not use them to any great extent, apart from the prologues. For the prologues are to be compared with the letters; they are often compounded from all kinds of quotations and reminiscences, forming what German scholars , call a >>Citatennest►>. Thus Jerome's attitude in this respect is far from being uniform or consistent in all his writings: the kind of literature to which a writing belongs plays an important role. Besides, there are other factors too which may be taken into consideration. Jerome was, as Pease (p.161) has pointed out, >>greatlyinfluenced by the clwracter, and still more by the culture, of those to whom he wrote, and to the sophisticated he allowed himself a freedom from which he abstained when addressing the more easily scandalized simplicity of the monks at Bethlehem>>. Further we may ask how far it is true that Jerome's attitude towards the classics was subject to fluctuations during his long life, a theory which Pease has put forward and tried to prove. \Ve are here concerned with a problem which is fundamental for a right understanding of Jerome's complex personality and which, on account of the range of his influence, is important also for the history of civilization. The conflict between Christian faith and the cultural heritage from the classics is reflected in Jerome more distinctly than , 1 in other Latin fathers, none excepted unless perhaps Augustine. Oscillating between aversion and adhesion to the classics Jerome never succeeded in getting over the internal conflict or in reaching a stable equilibrium. Unlike so many other champions of the old church, he was not a convert; he was a Christian from the very beginning,2) but he was brought up in the atmosphere of the classical heritage, still cherished and dominant in school-education, and it impregnated his mind too 1)

CSEL, LIV, pp. 607-708. He was however not baptized before the age of about twenty, in accordance with the usage of this time. Cf. F. Homes Dtidden, The Life and Times of St Ambrose (Oxford 1935), I, p. 58, 2


LATIN l>bothare sometimes practised together by the same writer, especially if he treats subjects where primarily information concerning facts is wanted. But upon the whole they can be considered as characteristic features of two opposite tendencies in literature>>. Jerome, like Augustine, made use of the former method to an extent not customary among Christian writers. His literal quotations can be divided into two 1) Cf. Stanislaus von Sychowski, •Hieronymus a1s Litterarhistoriker. Eine quellenkritische Untersuchung der Schrift des h. Hieronymus 'De viris illustribus•~. Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, herausgegeben von Dr. Knopfler, Dr. Schrors, Dr. Sdralek. II. Baud, II. Heft (Munster i. W., 1894), p. 19: ~Der erste Teil, welcher mit Ausnahme weniger Kapitel fast ganz aus Eusebius' Kirchengeschichte ausgeschrieben ist, aber dazu noch mit vielen Fehlem, Entstellungen, Abkiirzungen und willkiirlichen Erweiterungen, sowie auch stellenweise in einer fehlerhaften V-bersetzung reproduziert, wahrend selbstandige Zusatze von Wert nur ganz selten vorkommen, hat nur den relativen historischen Wert, den eine mangelhafte V-bertragung fiir die des griechischen unkundigen J ahrhunderte leistete. Absolut betrachtet ist er sachlich wertlos. Denn fast alle Nachrichten, die Hieronymus hat, sind uns besser und viel zuverliissiger in der von ihrn benutzten Quelle erhaltem. 2 Bickel, Diatribe in Senecae philosophi fragmenta. Vol. I. Fragmenta de ) Ernst matrimonio (Leipzig, 1915). 3 I refer to my paper: >>Methods of Citation in Post) For a fuller discussion Classical Latin Prose,>. Eranos XLV (1947), n4-128, and to Chap. 6 B (pp. 298 sqq.), 4 ) Ib. p. IIg.

l;A'tIN FA'tHitRS



groups: (I) the name of the author quoted is mentioned or hinted at in such a way that the passage clearly gives itself out to be quoted; (II) verbal quotations from poetry (a hemistich, a line or even several lines) are inserted without any introduction, and reveal themselves only by their metrical form. It is matter of course that quotations belonging to the first group have been identified almost without exception, while those belonging to the last group - not to speak of all kinds of paraphrase and other borrowings - are more likely to escape attention. I have tried to the best of my ability to discover the classical elements woven into the texture and I am bold enough to think that I have found a good number of hidden and hitherto unnoticed quotations and imitations. However, I am fully convinced that there are still many hidden treasures awaiting a successful explorer. Besides producing fresh evidence I have made it my business to examine not only the origin of the profane elements but also the use made of them. I hold it advisable to follow both lines at the same time, even if they aim in different directions: in one case at establishing the extent of the author's book-knowledge, in the other at illustrating his literary intentions and methods. The most intriguing problem which we are confronted with is this: how do we have to interprete the contradictory views as to the classics to be found in Jerome's works? Are they or are they not in conformity with his practice? If we believe Jerome himself, no secular author entered into his hands in the course of fifteen years after his famous dream. >>Ifby chance>>, he says in the commentary on Galatians, ►>any influence from them (scil. the secular authors) creeps into my citations, such cases are but misty recollections, as it were of a dream long past». 1) Is he right here? Did the dream really affect his attitude towards pagan literature? Arthur Stanley Pease has endeavoured to answer the question by analysing the letters. 2) According to him the frequency of citation" diminishes in the period following the vision (374), but rises again from 386. Thus Jerome's attitude varied from admiration to strong, though ✓✓ temporary, aversion to the classics, and from that stage again to broader understanding and esteem. Or, to put it in Pease's own words 1) Jn Gal. lib. UI praef. pp. 485-486 (PL 26,427); cf. below p. 321. translation of the passage is taken over from Pease, pp. 155 sq. 1) In the paper quoted above p. 91 n. 5,

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





(p. 167): >>Hisprogress was the familiar succession of narrowly conservative and unquestioning upbringing, radical disillusionment and revolt, and true and ripe liberalism>>. In my opinion this is a hasty inference, deduced from scanty material and with questionable method. To begin with, Pease restricts himself to considering the letters, more exactly, the letters contained in the first two volumes of Hilberg's edition. But even with this limitation, the texts examined are insufficiently uniform to allow statistics about the frequency of citation. For some letters are in fact theological treatises and are not to be compared with letters in a more strict sense, and even the real letters are by no means uniform, because Jerome adapted his style, as Pease himself has pointed out (pp. 160 sq.), to the mind and the culture of those to whom he wrote. Another objection, and a more weighty one, to Pease's method bears upon his division of the letters into groups. As only a few letters were written before the dream, the first group covers only 20 pages in Hilberg's edition, while the second group (the letters dating from 374 to about 386) covers 324 pages. The third group is not defined from a chronological point of view; it is formed of 324 pages in order to correspond in size to the second. The remaining 231 pages of Hilberg's second volume are referred to the fourth group. This division is not homogeneous and is quite arbitrary; consequently the conclusions founded on such a basis must be considered as unwarranted. 1) It is still an open question whether Jerome's attitude towards reading and quoting the classics changed during the course of his long literary activity. The present examination embraces all existent writings of Jerome's 2)

1 of reminiscences is according to Pease as follows: group I: ) The frequency an average of once in r. 6 pages, group II: once in 7. 7 pages, group III: once in 5. I pages, group IV: once in 4. 7 pages. 9 as the basis of my study the following editions: ) I have taken Epistulae. Ree. Isidorus Hilberg. (CSEL, LIV (1910), LV (1912), LVI (1918). Vindobonae. Commentarii in Hieremiam. Ree. S. Reiter. CSEL, LIX (1926). Vindobonae. Tractatus sive homiliae. Ed. G. Morin. Anecdota 1'.faredsolana, III: 2-3 (Maredsoli 1897-1903). As to the other writings: Patrologiae cursus completus. Series latina prior. Accurante 1.-P. Migne. Parisiis. Tom. XXII (1864), XXIII (1865), XXIV (1865), XXV (1865), XXVI (1866), XXVII (1866), XXVIII (1865), XXIX



and follows them in chronological order. Though I have taken pains to collect the available material as carefully and completely as possible, I must ask the reader to be indulgent towards any omissions, inadvertencies and mistakes. Instances which are to be added to Liibeck's lists, whether they have been noticed by myself or by others, will be marked by an asterisk. In references and abbreviations I follow the system adopted by the Thesaurus linguae latinae. The chronology of Jerome's writings is often problematical. I follow the chronological order as established by F. Cavallera;1) on that point Cavallera's biography represents a considerable advance on the other great biography, written by G. Griitzmacher. 2) The first period of Jerome's authorship comprises his first stay in the East and his last stay in Rome (374-385). His activity in Bethlehem can be divided, from a literary point of view, into three parts, the divisions being marked by the publication of De viris illustribus (392 or 393), which gives the terminus ante quem for many writings whose date cannot be defined more closely, and by the end of the Origenist controversy (the publication of the third book Adversus Rufinum, 402). Thus the second period extends from 386 to about 393, the third from 393 to 402, the fourth from 402 to Jerome's death in 419.

(1865), XXX (1865). I ask the reader to notice the year of publication, as the pagination unfortunately differs in later reprints. Rufinus' Apologia adversus Hieronymum is also quoted after Migne's edition, PL XXI (1878). 1) Ferd. Cavallera, Saint Jerome. Sa vie et son a;uvre. Premiere partie, T. 1-11 (Louvain 1922). Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense. Etitdes et docitments. Pase. 1-2. Cf. especially II, pp. 153-165: Regesta Hieronymiana. 2) Georg Griitzmacher, Hieronymus. Eine biographische Studie. I-III (Leipzig, 1901-1908).

Chap. 2. The writings 374-385 The earliest writings we possess are letters (1-9, n-17), dating from the first years of Jerome's stay in the East (about 374 to 377), possibly with one exception to which we shall return at once. Two letters (1 and 2) or four (1-4) were written before the supposed date of the vision, 374, the others in the next few years. The possible exception is Epist. 1 (De septies percussa), an edifying account of a miracle, written before Jerome left Italy according to Griitzmacher,1) during his first year in the East according to Cavallera. 2) A peculiar fact that strikes me may perhaps help to solve the question. In Epist. 1, 2, 1 sq. Jerome exemplifies the difficulty of his literary task by a rhetorical amplification, built upon the metaphorical use of terms denoting sailing in stormy weather. He does not forget to apply a reminiscence of Virgil: Nunc mihi evanescentibus terris 'caelum undique et undique pontus', nunc unda tenebris inhorrescens ... -Aen. III. 192 sq. N ec iam amplius ullae apparent terrae, caelum undique et undique pontus; ib. 195 (= V. n) Inhorruit unda tenebris. The same passages in the third and the fifth Book of the Aeneid are quoted in the following letters: Epist. 2, 4 Nunc me novis diabolus retibus ligat, nunc nova inpedimenta proponens 'maria undique' circumdat 'et undique pontum' (a contamination of Aen. V. 9 Maria undique et undiqite caelum, and Aen. III. 193 Caelum undique et undique pontus); Epist. 3, 3, 1 a description of his voyage: 'Tune mihi caeruleus supra caput adstitit imber' (Aen. III. 194), tune 'maria undique et undique caelum'...,..ib. V. 9; *3, 4, 4 (description of a desolate island where a monk was living) Totam circa insulam /remit insanum mare et sinuosis montibus inlisum scopulis aequor reclamat ...,..Georg. III. 261 sq. Scopulis inlisa reclamant aequora.3 ) The recurrence of the same lines seems to me to indicate that the three letters are closely connected in time, and that when writing them 1) 2)


Griitzmacher, I, pp. 53 sq. Cavallera, II, pp. 13 sq. Noticed by Hilberg.



Jerome retained a lively recollection of the sea and the experiences of a sea-voyage, his voyage to the East; it is only too natural that new and strong impressions should evoke literary reminiscences in a young man so preoccupied with the study of literature. Of all poets Virgil came nearest to Jerome's heart. This is shown by numerous other quotations, although the poet's name is not mentioned in these letters: Epist. I, IO, 2 'Canitiem inmttndam perfuso pulvere turbans' - Aen. XII. 6n; 1} I, 15, 3 'Verum haec ipse equidem spatiis exclusus iniquis praetereo atque aliis post me memoranda relinquo' - Georg. IV. 147 sq.; 7, 4, I Huie ego, ut ait gentilis poeta, omnia etiam tuta timeo - Aen. IV. 298 Omnia tuta timens; 14, 2, I Gladius ... obvia quaeque metit - Verg. Aen. X. 513 Proxima quaeque metit gladio; 14, 3, 2 Non est nobis ferreum pectus nee dura praecordia, non ex silice natos Hyrcanae nutriere tigrides ..,.Aen. IV. 366 sq. Duris genuit te cautibus horrens Caucasus Hyrcanaeque admorunt ubera tigres; *ib. Aiunt: 'cui nos servituros relinquis?' - Aen. IV. 323 Cui me moribundam deseris? 14, 3, 3 Dicant . .. et grammatici: 'in te omnis domus inclinata recumbit' - Aen. XII. 59; *14, 4, I Et tu frondosae arboris tectus umbraculo molles somnos . .. carpis? - Georg. II. 470 M ollesque sub arbore somni; 2 } 14, 4, 2 Hostis (sc. diabolus), cui 'nomina mille, mille nocendi artes' -Aen. VII. 337 sq. It deserves to be noticed that the glorification of monasticv life in Epist. 14 by no means made Jerome desist from quoting the pagan poet. He even falls back upon him when he describes the orthodox fanaticism of Eastern monks, which gave him so much trouble that he retired from the life of a hermit; Epist. 17, 2, 1 Adversus barbariam istius loci versu cogor clamare vulgato (- Verg. Aen. I.539541):

'Quod genus hoe hominum? quaeve hunc tam barbara morem permittit patria? hospitio prohibemur arenae; bella cient primaque vetant consistere terra'. He states the reason for the citation as follows: Quae idcirco de gentili poeta sumpsimus, ut qui Christi pacem non servat, pacem saltim discat ab ethnico. 1) Jerome, quoting from memory, has slightly changed the wording: Canitiem immundo perfusam pulvere turpans. 2 ) Noticed by Hilberg.



The quotations from Virgil are twice as numerous as those from all other poets together, Horace,1) Terence, 2) Turpilius,3) Lucilius 4) and Persius. 5 ) Turpilius and Lucilius are not quoted except in this first period. The same is true of Florus: a phrase in Vergilius orator an poeta? is used in Epist. 4 and 56 ), a quotation from the epitome occurs in Vita Pauli. 7 ) A passage in Epist. 3 is revealed, owing to a later quotation, as a literal citation from an unknown controversia. 8) Valuable historical information about papyrus and other writing materials, perhaps originating from Varro, is contained in Epist. 7 and 8.9)

1) Epist. *3, 3, I Innocentium enim, partem animae meae, repentinus /ebrium ardor abstraxit (cf. ib. 17, 3 ,2)..,. Hor. Carm. II. 17,5 sq. A, te meae si partem animae rapit maturior vis (cf. C. Weyman, Wochenschr. /. klass. Philol., XXVII (19m), 1004); 6, 2, r Nam ut ait Flaccus in satura (Sat. I, 3, 1-3): 'Omnibus hoe vitium est cantoribus, inter amicos' rogati ut numquam cantent, 'iniussi numquam desistant'; 6, 2, 2 Non timebo hominum iudicium habiturus iudicem meum: 'Si fractus inlabatur orbis, inpavidum ferient ruinae'..,. Carm. III. 3, 7 sq.; 16, 2, 1 (to pope Damasus): Verum, ut ait gentilis poeta: 'caelum, non animum mutat, qui trans mare currit'..,. Epist. I. II, 27; IO, 2, I Ut merito quivis Horatiano de nobis possit sale ludere: 'et gemino bellum Troianum orditur ab ovo'..,. Ars 147; IO, 3, 3..,. Epist. I. 2, 69-70 (see below p. rn5). 2 ) Ib. 1, 14 0 vere 'ius summum summa malitia!'..,. Ter. Haut. 796. 3 ) lb. 8, 1, 1 Turpilius comicus tractans de vicissitudine litterarum: 'Sola' inquit 'res est quae homines absentes praesentes faciat'..,. Turpil. Inc. fab. frg. 1 Ribbeck. 4 ) Ib. 7, 5 Secundum illud quoque de quo semel in vita Crassum ait risisse Lucilius: 'Similem habent labra lactucam asino cardus comedente'..,.. Lucil. 1299 Marx. This is the only quotation from Lucilius. Jerome does not owe it to Cic. Tusc. III. 31 (thus Liibeck p. II6), for Cicero only tells the anecdote, but does not quote the verse. 6 ) Ib. 14, 3, 3. Cf. Pers. Sat. 3, 18 (Liibeck p. 197). 6) *Epist. 4, I, 2 'Nascentem amicitiam ... foederare' dignetur; *5, I Ne nascentes amicitias ... divellat. Quin potius foederemus eas. Hilberg and Thes. VII. 1, 27 refer to Flor. Verg. p. 184, I Rossbach: Nascentem amicitiam foederabamus. 7) Cf. below p. 105. 8 ) *Epist. 3, 6 Obsecro te, ne amicum, qui 'diu quaeritur, vix invenitur, difficile servatur', ... mens amittat. Cf. In Mich. 6, 5-7 p. 517 (PL 25, 1278) Legi in cuiusdam controversia: 'Amicus diu quaeritur, vix invenitur, difjicile servatur'. 9 ) Epist. 7, 2, 2 Jerome complains of the shortness of a letter he received and adds: Chartam defuisse non puto Aegypto ministrante commercia. Et si aliqui Ptolomaeus maria clausisset, tamen rex Attalus membranas e Pergamo miserat, ut penuria chartae pellibus pensaretur; unde pergamenarum nomen ad hanc usque diem tradente sibi invicem posteritate servatum est; 8, 1, 1 Rudes illi Italiae homines . , ,





In the dream, Jerome was accused of being a Ciceronian, not a Christian. Not a few reminiscences of Cicero resound in the letters written shortly afterwards:

Epist. I, 2, I Super onerariam navem rudis vector inponor et homo, qui necdum scalmum in lacu rexi, Euxini maris credor fragori. *ib. 6, I, I Antiquus sermo est: 'Mendaces faciunt, ut nee vera dicentibus credatur',

ib. 7, I, 2 after receiving a letter sic gavisus sum, ut illum diem Romanae f elicitatis, quo primum Marcelli apud N olam proelio post Cannensem pugnam superba Hannibalis agmina conciderunt, ego vicerim. ib. 8, I, I Rudes illi ltaliae homines, quos cascos Ennius appellat, qui sibi, ut in Rhetoricis Cicero ait, victu f ero vitam requirebant. ib. 8, I, 2 Recentem amicitiam scindis potius quam dissuis, quod prudenter Laelius vetat.

Cic. De or. I. I74 Citius hercitle is, q·ui duorum scalmorum navicielam in portu everterit, in Eitxino Ponto Argonautarum navem gubernarit. Cic. Div. II. 146 Cum mendaci homini ne verum quidem dicenti credere soleamus (Hilberg compares Arist. in Diog. Laert. V. I, II). Cic. Brut. I2 Atque itt post Cannensem illam calamitatem primum Marcelli ad Nolam proelio populus se Romanus erexit ... , sic post rerum nostrarum ... casus nihil ante epistulam Bruti mihi accidit quod vellem. Cic. Tusc. I. 27 Priscis illis, quos cascos appellat Ennius. Cic. Inv. I. 2 Fuit quoddam tempus, cum in agris homines passim bestiarum modo vagabantur et sibi victit f ero vitam propagabant. Cic. Lael. 76 Tales amicitiae sunt remissione usus eluendae et, ut Catonem dicere audivi, dissuendae magis quam discindendae.

ante chartae et membranarum usum aitt in dedolatis ex ligno codicellis aut in corticibus arborum mutua epistularum adloquia missitabant. Hilberg refers the first passage to Plin. Nat. XIII. 70: Mox aemulatione circa bibliothecas 'Yegum Ptolemaei et Eumenis supprimente chartas Ptolemaeo idem· Varro membranas Pergami tradit repertas, Postea promiscue patuit usus rei. Evidently the two passages have a common source. I think it is most probable. that Jerome, as well as Pliny the Elder, derived his knowledge from Varro.



ib. 10,2,1 'Quorsum' ais 'ista tam alto repetita principio?' 16,1,1 Quorsum ista tam longo repetita prooemio? ib. 10, 3, 1 Doctissimi quique Graecorum de quibus pro Flacco agens luculente Tullius ait: 'I ngenita levitas et erudita vanitas'. ib. 14, 10, 1 Sed quoniam e scopulosis locis enavigavit oratio.

Cic. De or. III. 91 Quorsum igitur haec spectat, inquit, tam longa et tam alte repetita oratio? Cic. Pro Fiacco frg.


Cic. Tusc. IV. 33 Ex quibus quoniam tamquam ex scopulosis (scruplosis MSS) cotibus enavigavit oratio.

One passage in the exhortatory letter to Heliodorus needs a fuller discussion. Jerome urges his friend to leave his relations and to follow the banner of the cross as an hermit: Epist. 14, 2, 3 Licet parvulus ex calla pendeat nepos, licet sparso crine et scissis vestibus ubera quibus nutrierat mater ostendat, licet in limine pater iaeeat, p e r e a l e a tu m per g e pat rem, siceis oculis ad vexillum crucis vola! The point in question recalls, as Henri Bornecque has seen,1) Seneca's *Controversiae I. 8, 15, where a father tries to hinder his son, qui ter fortiter f eeerit, from going again to the wars: Iniciam manus, tenebo, novissime ante limen exeuntis cadaver hoe sternam: ut ad hostem pervenias, pat rem c ale a. We also meet with two reminiscences of the Deelamationes maiores going under Quintilian's name: 14, 2, 1 Quid faeis in paterna domo, delicate miles? Ubi vallum, ubi fossa, ubi hiems aeta sub pellibus? Deel. 3, 16 Sub pellibus aetam hiemem. Ferienda sit fatigato fossa, pro vallo portisque vigilandum; 14, 3, 2 Non est nobis ferreum peetus nee dura praeeordia ..,.Deel. IO, 2 Namque isti ferreum peetus et dura praecordia. To sum up. In the letters discussed Jerome proves himself to be a man well read in Latin literature, even in remote authors, a man rather extravagant in his literary ambition, eager to impress his readers with his style, with witty remarks, with commonplaces and exempla in conformity with the ideal prevailing in the rhetor school. He shows no 1 ) Henri Bornecque, Les declamations et les dt!clamateurs d' apres St!neque le Pere, (Lille 1902), p. 123.





dislike for enriching his style by open or covert borrowings from secular authors. Only two of the letters 1) are without this ornament. Taken all together there are at least 35 reminiscences in 69 pages, or an average of once in 2 pages. During his stay in the East, Jerome for the first time made his appearance before the public, partly with works of his own, partly with translations from the Greek. Vita Pauli (PL 23, 17-30) is usually considered as his first work. It is less a biography than a romance of monastic life, introducing a new and extremely popular kind of literature. >>Itis the Christian rheton>, says Griitzmacher, >>whodeclaims on v the subject of renouncing the world>>. In the dedicatory letter Jerome assures the reader that he has striven to write in a lower style: Propter simpliciores quosque multum in deiciendo s;im,one laboravimus (Epist. IO, 3, 3). But he doubts whether he has succeeded, for he adds, using a reminiscence of Horace: Sed nescio quomodo, etiam si aqua plena sit, tamen eundem odorem l~goena serv;t quo, dum rudis esset, imbuta est.2 ) In fact the style of Vita Pauli is sometimes rather exuberant, corresponding to the extravagancies of the tale. 3) Nor is it devoid of classical ornaments. The meeting of the two hermits is reported (PL 23, 25) with the aid of two Virgilian lines (Aen. II. 650 and VI. 672):

'Talia perstabat memorans fixusque manebat'. 'Ad quem responsum paucis ita reddidit heros'. Other reminiscences are met with: 4 (col. 20) Verum quid pectora humana non cogit auri sacra fames? ....,Aen. III. 56 sq. Quid non mortalia pectora cogis auri sacra fames? *r6 (col. 28) Fluctuans itaque vario mentis aestu ... dicebat .,..ib. XII. 486 Vario nequiquam fluctuat aestu. What Florus says about Mithradates, Epit. I. 40, 7: Aderat, instabat, saevitia quasi virtute utebatur, is imitated: 4 (col. 20) Aderat, instabat, crudelitate quasi pietate utebatur. To the same period we may perhaps assign D i a l o g u s c o n t r a 1) Epist. II and 13. Both of them aie written to women, the former ad virgines Haemonenses, the latter ad Castorinam materteram. 2) *Hor. Epist. I. 2, 69 sq. (Noticed by Hilberg). Cf. p. 102 n. 1 above. 3) The strong ingredients (religious ecstasy, sensual covetousness, credulity in fables) of which this book is composed, give an interesting insight into the author's state of mind. Cf. Griitzmacher, I, pp. 160 sqq.



Lucifer an o s (PL 23, 163-192), the first of Jerome's polemical 1 writings. ) Agreeably to the dogmatic subject, Jerome does not show off his acquaintance with the classics; there are only a few borrowings from Sallustius, Virgil and Cicero: 1 p. 171 Caninam facundiam exercuerit ..,.Sall. Hist. frg IV. 54 Maurenbrecher Canina, ut ait Appius, facundia exercebatur;2) 19 p. 192 Aliud in corde clausum esse, aliud in labris proferri ..,.Sall. Cat. ro, 5 Aliud clausum in pectore, aliud in lingua promptum habere,·3) *20 p. 192 Ipse quoque 'caput horum et causa malorum' Arius presbyter..,. Verg. Aen. XI. 361; 22 p. 196 Interque nitentia culta lappaeque et tribuli et steriles dominantur avenae. Quid faciat agricola? Evellat lolium? Sed tota pariter messis evertitur. Quotidie industria rusticana aves sonitu abigit..,,..Verg. Georg. I. 153 sq. Lappaeque tribolique interque nitentia culta in/ elix lolium et steriles dominantitr avenae; v. 156 et sonitu terrebis aves; 22 p. 196 Hine in effossa horrea mures frumenta comportant (cf. Georg. I. 181 sq.), hinc ferventi agmine segetem formica populatur (cf. Aen. IV. 402-407); 4 p. 173 Verum desine, quaeso a communibus locis (- *Cic. Acad. prior. II. 80; see below pp. 262 sq.). The years Jerome spent in the East determined the bent of his interests and studies, and prepared him for the important role he was to play as the foremost intermediary between the East and the West. What he aimed at and carried out was, as he says himself, to expound the Scriptures and to communicate to the Latin world the learning of the Hebrews and the Greeks. 4 ) In the desert he began the study of 1 ) Cavallera, II, pp. 18 sq. dates it to 377 to 379, Griitzmacher to the stay in Rome, 382-385. The diatribe against Arian bishops, II p. 183 (PL 23, 174), is more applicable to the East than to the ,vest, and seems to favour the opinion of an early dating. It runs as follows: Revera de Platonis et Aristotelis (sic Liibeck p. 18 n. 2, Aristophanis MSS and edd.) sinu in episcopatum alleguntur. Quotus

enim quisque est, qui non apprime in his eruditus sit? Denique ex litteratis quicumque hodie ordinantur, id habent curae, non quomodo scripturarum meditllas ebibant sed quomodo aures populi declamatorum flosculis mulceant. Accedit ad hoe, quod Ariana haeresis magis cum sapientia saeculi facit et argumentationum rivos de A ristotelis fontibus mutuatur. According to Griitzmacher I, p. 203 Jerome hints at Ambrose -

who certainly Cf. Thes. III. tius). 8 ) Quoted also ') Hier. In Ier. 2)

was not an Arian! 252, 59 sqq.; Liibeck p. 121 (referring the borrowing to Lactan-

*In Eph. 3, 8-g lib. III prol.

p. 592 (cf. p. 125 below). (PL 24, 787) Scripturarum sanctarum explanationi

insistere et hominibus linguae meae Hebmeormn Graecor1imque eruditionem tradere.




Hebrew, assisted by a Jewish convertite. In the centres of Hellenic / culture Antiochia and Constantinople, he perfected himself in Greek, and entered into close connection with some of the leading Greek exegetes, Apollinaris of Laodicea and Gregory of Nazianze. The lessons he got from them bore fruit later in his exegetic writings. For the present he restricted himself to introducing Origen, alterum post apostolum ecclesiarum magistrum,1) to Roman readers by translating his homilies on J eremiah, 2) Ezekiel3) and Isaiah. 4 ) A still more important enterprise was the translation of the chronological tables of Eusebius of Caesarea. Notices concerning Roman history, derived from Suetonius' De viris illustribus and other Latin historical works, were inserted, and the account was brought out between 325 and 378.0 ) At the same time (380-381), Jerome tried his hand at treating independently an exegetical question. 6) From our point of view all these works are interesting only inasmuch as they indicate the background against which we have to regard Jerome's attitude towards the classics as it appears in his following writings. A change of scene took place in Jerome's life towards the end of 382. He returned to Rome with two oriental bishops on the occasion of a synod, and soon gained favour with pope Damasus, who made the talented monk his secretary and encouraged his literary activity. Owing to this patronage, to his familiarity with the Greek world, to his reputation for learning, eloquence and holiness Jerome before long occupied such a position in the capital that he, if we believe his words, was thought of as a worthy successor of the pope. 7) A turn of the tide ensued when Damasus died (December 384). To his surprise Jerome found himself a subject for hatred on the part of the clergy and of


In Ier. et Ezeck. pro!. 741-742 (PL 25, 6rr). PL 25, 6u-724. 8 ) lb. 25, 723-826. 4 24, 937-972. ) lb. 5 ) Fundamental is Th. Mommsen, >>'Ober die Quellen der Chronik des Hieronymus~, Gesammelte Schriften, VII (1909), pp. 606 sqq. Cf. Schanz, op. cit., IV: l, p. 446. 6 ) Epist. 18 A and B. 1 ) Epist. 45, 3, I Antequam domum sanctae Paulae nossem, totius in me urbis studia consonabant. Omnium paene iudicio dignus summo sacerdotio decernebar; beatae memoriae Damasi os meus sermo erat; dicebar sanctus, dicebar humilis et disertus. 9)



the people. He had only himself to blame for it. His want of consideration of people who thought otherwise, his spiteful criticism of church affairs and not the least of the clergy, his excessive zeal for asceticism and the ideals of monastic life could not but contract enmity. The fact that his propaganda for ascetic and monastic life met with success among leading ladies in the Roman aristocracy made the cup run over. Jerome found it impossible to stay in Rome any longer. In August 385 he embarked for the Orient. Before long his most devoted adherents, Paula and her daughter Eustochium, followed suit. The principal work due to Damasus' encouragement is the revision of the old Latin translations of the Gospels after the original text and of the Psalter after the Septuagint text. Three exegetical treatises are written in reply to requests of the pope. 1) Two other works written in Rome bear on virginity, Jerome's leading idea: the polemical pamphlet against Helvidius, D e p e r p e t u a v i r g i n i t a t e b. M a r i a e (PL 23, 193-216), and the long treatise to E us to chi um on the maintenance of virginity (Epist. 22). In these writings Jerome for the first time proclaims in point of principle his attitude towards pagan literature. In a letter to Damasus, where he expounds the parable of the prodigal son, the husks, siliquae, are interpreted alternatively in the following way, Epist. 21, 13, 4: Possumus autem et aliter siliquas interpretari. Daemonum cibus est carmina poetarum, saecularis sapientia, rhetoricorum pompa verborum. H aec sua omnes suavitate delectant et, dum aures versibus dulci modulatione currentibus capiunt, animam quoque penetrant et pectoris interna devinciunt. V erum ubi cum summo studio fuerint ac labore perlecta, nihil aliud nisi inanem sonum et sermonum strepitus suis lectoribus tribuunt: nulla ibi saturitas veritatis, nulla iustitiae refectio invenitur. Studiosi earum in fame veri, in virtutum penuria perseverant. Jerome here adopts the antithesis eloquentia - veritas, prevailing among Christian writers; while paying a tribute to the formal beauty of pagan poetry,







and 35. The last one is caused by a letter where Damasus J erome's literary idleness, Epist. 25, I, 1: Dormientem te et

longo iam tempore legentem potius quam scribentem quaestiunculis ad te missis e:rcitare disposui. When Jerome was exposed to this censure, he had already, in one and a half years, accomplished all the writings mentioned above. Plainly, Damasus demanded a great deal of a man like Jerome.



philosophy and oratory he rejects them as being devoid of truth, which, it is implied in the words, is a Christian prerogative. Nevertheless he makes certain restrictions, alluding to the captive woman in Deut. 21,10-13, who had to have her hair and her nails cut short before being married to an Israelite, Epist. 21, 13, 5 sq.: Haec si secundum litteram intellegimus, nonne ridicula sunt? Atqui et nos hoe faeere solemus, quando philosophos legimus, quando in manus nostras libri veniunt sapientiae saecularis: si quid in eis utile repperimus, ad nostrum dogma eonvertimus, si quid vero superfluum, de idolis, de amore, de cura saecularium rerum, haee radimus, his calvitium indicimus, haee in unguium morem ferro acutissimo deseeamus. This is a true relation of the attitude towards the philosophers which in practice was struck by many Fathers and not the least by Jerome himself. However he feels a doubt whether it is consistent with the warnings against idolatry issued by the apostle (r. Cor. 8,9-rr), ib. § 8: Nonne tibi videtur sub aliis verbis dicere, ne legas philosophos, oratores, poetas, ne in eorum lectione requiescas? Nee nobis blandiamur, si his, quae sunt scripta, non eredimus, cum aliorum conscientia vulneretur et putemur probare, quae, dum legimus, non reprobamus? Therefore he returns to the severity of censure he at first proclaimed, disapproving of ecclesiastics who appreciated pagan poetry, ib. § 9: At nunc etiam sacerdotes dei omissis evangeliis et prophetis videmus comoedias legere, amatoria bucolicorum versuum verba cantare, tenere Vergilium et id, quad in pueris necessitatis est, crimen in se facere voluntatis.1) Cavendum igitur, ne captivam habere velimus uxorem, ne in idolio recumbamus; aut, si certe fuerimus eius amore decepti, mundemus eam et omni sordium horrore purgemus. In Epist. 22, the exhortation to Eustochium, written in the spring of 384, Jerome is still more severe. He cautions the Christian virgin not to indulge in rhetoric and poetry. 2) Inspired by a Pauline anti1 ) I draw attention to the fact that the reading of the classics, blameworthy if nndertaken of one's own accord, is said to be necessary for boys. In reality, the Christians did not dream of changing the traditional school education based on the study of pagan literature and of creating a Christian school. Nothing testifies better to the strength of the classical tradition and to the indispensability of the ancient heritage. Even the rigorism of Tertullian must yield to them; cf. De idol. 10

Quomodo repudiamus saecularia studia, sine quibus divina non possunt? B) Epist. 22, 29, 6 Nee tibi diserta multum velis videri aut lyricis festiva carminibus

metro ludere.



thesis 1 ) he emphasizes the incompatibility of calicem Christi and calicem daemoniorum by opposing the foremost classical authors to the Scriptures, ib. 22, 29, J: Quid facit cum psalterio Horatius? Cum evangeliis Maro? Cum apostolo Cicero?2 ) In this connection Jerome inserts the famous account of his dream where he was prosecuted before the Judge and punished for being a Ciceronian, not a Christian, and was not released before he engaged himself never to read a pagan author on peril of denying Christ if he did so.3) I shall not enter here on a discussion of the various interpretations to which this dream has given rise among scholars; the question has to be left open until we have examined J erome's actual attitude towards secular literature as it appears in his works. 4 ) Do the works written in Rome correspond in practice to the principles Jerome laid down? In the letter to Eustochium no pagan author is mentioned, not a single line quoted; as to the other writings the same is true ,vith only a few exceptions. On the other hand there are not a few reminiscences of a less conspicuous nature, most of them relating to the poets. I begin with Epist. 22, restricting myself to the most remarkable instances: *22, 6, 6 lnpossibile est in sensum hominis non inruere notum medullarum calorem..,..Verg. Aen. VIII. 389 sq. Notusque medullas intravit calor (Hilberg); *22, 8, I Si experto creditur ..,..ib. XI. 283 Experto credite;6 ) 22, 27, 3 Ne ad te obvia praetereuntium turba consistat et digito monstreris ..,..Hor. Carm. IV. 3, 22 Quod monstror digito praetereuntium; 22, 29, 6 Delumbem matronarum salivam ..,. Pers. I,104 Summa delumbe saliva; 22, 32, 2 Anus quaedam annis pannisque obsita..,.. Ter. Eun. 236 Pannis annisque obsitum. 6 ) In *22, 27, 4: Ille est optimus, qui quasi 1 ) 1 Cor. 8, rn Quae enim communicatio luci ad tenebras? qui consensus Christo et Belial? 2 mentioned are those whom Jerome himself admired and quoted ) The authors most of all; cf. Rufin. Adv. Hier. II. 7 (quoted above p. 91). - The point in question seems to have been taken over from Tert. De praescr. haer. 7 Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis? quid Academiae et Ecclesiae? quid haereticis et Christianis? Cf. also Hier. Adv. Pelag. I. 14 Quid Aristoteli et Paulo? quid Platoni et Petro? 8 22, 30, 1-6 (partly quoted above p. 91 et 93), ) Epist. •) See below pp. 322 sqq. 6 49 sqq. ) Cf. Thes. IV. u43, 8 p. 692 (to be added to Lilbeck p. II2). ) Also *In Soph. 1, 15-16



in pulehro eorpore rara naevorum sorde respergitur, two Horatian passages are combined: Sat. I. 3,68 sq. Optimus ille est, qui minimis (sc. vitiis) urgetur, and ib. I. 6,66 sq. Velut si egregio inspersos reprendas eorpore naevos.1 ) One passage, *22, 2, 2 Nulla in hoe libello adulatio, adulator quippe blandits inimieus est, may be traced back to Sen. Epist. 45,7 Adulatio quam similis est amieitiae! ... Venit ad me pro amieo blandus inimieus. 2 ) This is not without interest. For although Jerome pledges his word for having read Seneca, and although he is supposed to have drawn freely from Seneca's De matrimonio in the pamphlet Adversus J ovinianum, 3) no reminiscences of the existing philosophical writings have as yet been pointed out. Those reminiscences occurring in the letter where Jerome relates his dream are set in their proper light only if we consider the stylistic character of the letter in question. When he disclaims categorically all ambition as regards the style - in hoe libello ... nulla erit rhetoriei pompa sermonis, 22, 2, 2 - he deceives his readers deliberately. For the style of Epist. 22 is as refined and rhetorical as ever it can be. 4) Jerome is under the spell of rhetorieorum pompa sermonum however he may brand them as daemonum cibus (Epist, 2r, r3, 4). At heart he was and remained a rhetor. The worst habits of the rhetor school present themselves in the polemical pamphlet where Jerome attacks Helvidius, a layman who disowned the belief in the permanent virginity of the Virgin Mary and joined issue with the excessive glorification of maidenhood in relation to the married state. The sophistry of the arguments, the rude indelicacy with which sexual matters are depicted, the self-righteous tone and the insults showered upon the antagonist, all concur to place De per pet u a virgin it ate b. Mari a e (PL 23, 193-216) on a very low level. Proud of his superiority in rhetorical training Jerome


The first passage has not been noticed by Hilberg. Imitated also Adv. Pelag. I. 26 p. 723, see below p. 266. 3 ) Cf. Lubeck pp. 205 sqq. and below pp. 150 sqq. ') Griitzmacher (I, p. 251) says rightly: •>DiesesBiichlein ist eine ... gliinzende Leistung seines stilistischen Talents ... Tulitrhetorischer Unwahrheit giebt er vor . , . alles rednerische Gepriige ... vermieden zu haben. Und gerade dies ist mit der feurigsten Rhet~rik geschrieben und in formeller Beziehung bis ins Einzelne durchgefeilb. 1)



scoffs at Helvidius' shortcomings in this respect;1) here reminiscences sometimes come in well: *c. 1 Ut discat aliquando reticere qui numquam didicit loqui..,.. Quint. Inst. VIII. 5, 18 (quotation from an unnamed author) 'Quid, quod miser, cum loqui non posset, tacere non poterat?2) *22 Caninam facundiam ..,..Sall. Hist. frg IV 54.3) Another invective comes from Tertullian. 4 ) Further there are a few borrowings of Ciceronian phrases: 17 Quoniam iam e cautibus et confragosis locis enavigavit oratio .- Cic. Tusc. IV. 33 Quoniam tamquam ex scopulosis cotibus enavigavit oratio; 5) ib. *Fonte veritatis omisso opinion um rivulos consectamur .- Cic. Acad. post. I. 8 E fontibus potius hauriant quam rivulos consectentur; De orat. II. n7. Among Jerome's correspondents during his Roman sojourn the first place belonged to Marcella, a lady of rank who long ago had devoted herself to asceticism and now under Jerome's guidance became absorbed in the study of Scriptures. Ten letters out of the sixteen written to her reply to exegetical questions. In his correspondence with Marcella Jerome did not hesitate to recommend the reading of Demosthe-

1 ) Cf. c. 1 Hominem rusticanum et vix primis quoque imbutum litteris; 16 Praetermitto vitia sermonis, quibus omnis liber tuus scatet. On the other hand Jerome takes


of his superiority,


he clears himself from such intentions


Non campum rhetorici desideramus eloquii, non dialecticorum tendiculas nee Aristotelis spineta conquirimus: ipsa scripturarum verba ponenda sunt); he owns himself to be indulging in rhetorical extravagances, c. 22: Rhetoricati s•rmus et in morem declamatorum paululum lusimus. Cf. also In Iovin. I. 13 (PL 23, 241) Non est huius loci nuptiarum angustias describere et quasi in communibus locis rhetorico exsultare sermone. Plenius super hac re contra Helvidium et in ea libm quem ad Eustochium scripsi arbitror absolutum. 2 ) The passage quoted is perhaps to be ascribed to a lost part of Cicero's In Pisonem, as Hier. *Epist. 69, 2, 5: Pisoniano vitio, cum loqui nesciret, tacere non potuit, seems to indicate (thus Gessner, quoted by Spalding in his edition of Quintilian). Cf. also In Mich. lib. II praef.; Epist. 61, 4, 1; 109, 2, 4; 130, 2

17, 2. 3


Cf. C. Sallusti Crispi Historiarum reliquiae. Ed. B. :Maurenbrecher,


I, p. 176 (Lipsiae 1891); Lubeck p. 121.

') C. 1 Homo turbulentus ... qui ut ait ille loquacitatem facundiam existimat et maledicere omnibus bonae conscientiae sign um arbitratur .,. Tert. A dv. H ermog. I Homo ... turbulentus qui loquacitatem facundiam existimet ... et maledicere singulis officium bonae conscientiae iudicet. ") Cf. Liibeck p. 145.




nes and Cicero1) and to insert literal quotations of poets: Epist. 27, 3, I Verum ne Flaccus de nobis rideat - 'amphora coepit institui: currente rota cur urceus exit?' ...... Hor. Ars poet. 2I sq.; ib. 40, 2, 3 Jam te cum Persia cantabo formosum (---Pers. 2,37 sq.):

'Te optent generum rex et regina, puellae te rapiant: quicquid calcaveris tu, rosa fiat'. For the rest I admit that classical reminiscences are rarely to be met with: *Epist. 28,7 Origenes, cuius nos maluimus in hac disputatione dumtaxat inperitiam sequi quam stultam habere scientiam nescientum ...... Ter. Andr. prol. 20 sq. Quorum aemulari exoptat neglegentiam potius quam istorum obscuram diligentiam (Hilberg); *29, I, I Epistolare officium est ... quodammodo absentes inter se praesentes fieri _,.Turpil. Inc. Pers. jab. fr. I (Hilberg); 2}* 33, 3 De turdorum salivis non ambiguimus ...... 6, 24 Nee tenuis sollers turdarum nosse salivas (Eiswirth p. 2 n. 9); 40, 2, I Numquid unus in orbe Romano est, qui habeat 'truncas inhonesto vulnere nares?' ..,.Verg. Aen. VI. 497; 46, 9, 2 Certe, si etiam praeclarus orator reprehendendum nescio quem putat, quod litteras Graecas non Athenis, sed Lilybaei, Latinas non Romae, sed in Sicilia didicerit ...... Cic. Div. in Caec. 39 Si litteras Graecas Athenis, non Lilybaei, Latinas Romae, non in Sicilia didicisses. A few reminiscences of Virgil are to be found in the letters to Damasus: 20, 5, 2 Dices 'osianna' sive ut nos loquimur 'osanna' media vocali littera elisa, sicut facere solemus in versibus, quando 'mene incepto desistere victam' (Verg. Aen. I. 37) scandimus 'men incepto'; *ZI, 2, 5 Quae autem potest maior esse clementia, quam ut filius dei hominis filius Verg. Eel. 4,6I Matri nasceretur, decem mensum fastidia sustineret ...... longa decem tulerunt fastidia menses (Hilberg), 3 ) and also in two letters Aen. IV. to Paula, *30, I4, I Cui omnia, etiam quae tuta sunt, timeo ...... 298 Omnia tuta timens (Hilberg); ib. *39, 8, I Itaque dum spiritus hos artus regit ...... Aen. IV. 336 Dum spiritus hos regit artus (Hilberg). 1 ) Epist. 29, 1, 3 Rem grandem celerius dicta quam debeo, licet de scripturis sanctis disputanti non tam necessaria sint verba quam sensus, quia, si eloquentiam quaerimus, Demosthenes legendus aut Tullius est, si sacramenta divina, nostri codices, qui de Hebraeo in Latinum non bene resonant, pervidendi, 2 ) Cf. above p. 102 n. 3. B) I remark that Jerome applies to the unborn child what Virgil says about the mother.

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





A most valuable piece of scholarship is contained in Epist. 33 where Jerome communicates catalogues of Varro's (Chap. z) and Origen's (Chap. 4) writings. According to F. RitschP) and A. Klotz 2) the Varronian catalogue goes back to a list made by Varro himself, while G. L. Hendrickson 3) denies that it is from the hand of Yarro. At any rate, scholars agree that it is not a work of Jerome's.

F. Ritschl, •>Die Schriftstellerei des Marcus Terentius Varro,>, Rhein. Mus, VI (1848), 481-560 (= Opuscula, III, pp. 419-505). 2 ) A. Klotz, ~Der Katalog der varronischen Schriftem, Hermes, XLVI (1911), 1-17. 3 ) G. L. Hendrickson, ~The provenance of Jerome's catalogue of Varro's works•>, Classical Philology, VI (1911), 334-343. 1)

Chap. 3. Literary work in Bethlehem 386-393 In August 385 Jerome left Rome for ever. Next year he settled down in Bethlehem, and now he entered upon a literary activity which lasted unremittingly until his death (419). The limit of the first period is determined by the publication (in 392 or 393) of De viris illustribus, where Jerome gives a survey of all his previous writings. Unhappily we cannot take it for granted that he enumerates them in strictly chronological order, and for the most part there are no dues to the exact date of each writing. In the first few years of this period we certainly have to place the It is a translation of Didymus' De spiritu sancto (PL 23, rog-162). cause celebre because of Jerome's criticism of Ambrose. In A. D. 381 the bishop of Milan published a work in three books concerning the Holy Spirit.1) As is well known, Ambrose's writings are not very original: they are largely compilations, being derived from Greek authorities. 2) In the treatise under debate Ambrose borrowed freely from a work on the same subject written by Didymus of Alexandria. 3) Three years later Jerome, then in Rome, set about translating Didymus' work; the translation was finished and published only after his settling down in Bethlehem. In the acrimonious preface Jerome breaks out in taunts against Ambrose (PL 23, ro8): Et ut auctorem titulo fatear: malui alieni operis interpres exsistere quam, ut quidam faciunt, informis cornicula alienis me coloribus adornare. Legi dudum cuiusdam libellos de spiritu sancto et iuxta comici sententiam 'ex Graecis bonis Latina vidi non bona'. The insidious way of attacking a person without mentioning his name is cha• racteristic of Jerome's polemics; that quidam and cuiusdam refer to AmDe spiritu sancto libri III (PL 16, 731-850). Cf. M. Schanz, Geschichte der romischen Literatur, IV: 1 (2. Aufl., Miinchen, 1914), p. 363: •>Seine Abhii.ngigkeit von den Quellen, besonders von Philo und Basilius. ist eine ausserordentlich starke». 8) E. Stolz, »Didymus, Ambrosius, Hieronymus», Theologische Quartalschrift, LXXXVII (1905), 371 sqq. Cf. also Dudden, I, p. 197. 1)




brose stands to reason, even if we did not have Rufinus' word for it,1) and has been recognized by all competent judges. 2) Jerome contrasts two methods of proceeding: he himself is translating Didymus, whose name appears in the title, while the other plagiarizes him in a work ostensibly his own. 3) After a spiteful criticism of Ambrose 4) and a high-pitched glorification of Didymus the prefacer comes to this conclusion: Certe qui hunc (sc. Didymum) legerit, Latinorum furta cognoscet et contemnet rivulos, cum coeperit haurire de f ontibus. The passage is compounded of literary allusions used as a weapon. The comicus is Terence, and the passage in view is Eunuchus, prol. 8: 'Ex Graecis bonis Latinas f ecit non bonas'. 5) Besides there are two 1 ) Rufinus, Apol, adv. Hier. II. 24 (PL 21, 602 sq.) quotes Jerome's preface in full and states repeatedly that Jerome alluded to Ambrose (Chap. 23, Chap. 25, thrice). 2 ) Cf. Schanz, IV: r, p. 482; Griitzmacher, II, p. 75; Cavallera, I, pp. 134 sq.; Homes Dudden, I, p. 197; Courcelle, p. ro9; Gustav Bardy in A JJ;Ionument to Saint Jerome. Essays on some aspects of his life, works and influence. Edited by Francis X. Murphy (New York, 1952), pp. gr sq., rag sq.; Paul Autin, Essai sur saint Jerome (Paris, 1951), p. 93. The attempt of the Benedictines at exculpating Jerome (cf. Vallarsi ad locum) is a curious example of self-deception. 3 ) In my opinion Schanz (1. c.) has got a wrong notion of the whole passage when he combines it with another statement in the preface (pontifex Damasus qui me ad hoe opus primus impulerat): •Papst Damasus (366-384) wiinschte, wie die Vorrede besagt, von Hieronymus eine Untersuchung liber den hl. Geist (sic!). Der Kirchenlehrer konnte diesem Wunsche nicht wohl aus dem ,vege gehen, aber da er flihlen mochte, dass seine spekulative Kraft fiir eine solche Aufgabe nicht ausreichte, entschloss er sich zu einer Uebersetzung eines Werkes des Alexandriners Didymus•. There is every reason to believe that Jerome himself took the initiative (thus Cavallera, I, p. 134 n. 2); he announces his design to Damasus in A. D. 384, Epist. 36, r, 4: Didymi de spiritu sancto librum in manibus habeo, quem translatum tibi cupio dedicare; cf. also the beginning of the preface: Cum in Babylone (sc. Romae) versarer, ... volui garrire aliquid de spiritu sancto et coeptum opusculum eiusdem urbis pontifici dedicare. Against this the words: Damasus qui me ... impulerat, have no weight; at most they imply that the pope encouraged Jerome to write; cf. the letter to Damasus, 1. c.: Ne me aestimes tantummodo dormitare, qui lectionem sine stilo somnum putas. However this may be, Jerome was certainly glad to take cover under the authority of Damasus when striking a blow at Ambrose. 4 ) Nihil ibi dialecticum, nihil virile atque districtum, quad lectorem vel ingratis in assensum trahat, sed totum flaccidum, molle, nitidum atque formosum et exquisitis kine inde coloribus pigmentatum. 6 (PL 25, 860). ) Also In 0s. lib. II prol.





covert and, it would seem, unnoticed borrmvings. Informis cornicula alienis me coloribus adornare alludes to *Horace, Epist. I 3, 19 f.: M oveat cornicula risum furtivis nudata coloribus', and Contemnet rivulos, cum coeperit haurire de fontibus to *Cicero, De or. II. n7 Tardi ingenii est rivulos consectari, fontis rerum non videre.1)What Jerome says is bad enough, but his malice appears in its proper light only if the reader recognizes the context which the writer had in mind: the crow deprived of the borrowed plumes excites ridicule (moveat risum), and it is stupid (tardi ingenii) to overlook the sources for the streamlet. A similar case occurs in the preface to the translation of Origen's homilies on Luke (PL 26, 229-230). When Jerome got knowledge of Ambrose's commentary on Luke (Expositio evangelii secundum Lucan), published in A. D. 388 (or 387), he left off working at the Quaestiones hebraicae and translated, encouraged by his female followers who disapproved of the new commentary, Origen's homilies on Luke. Without mentioning Ambrose by name he hints at him in the following way: Praesertim cum a sinistro oscinem corvum audiam crocitantem et mirum in modum de cunctarum avium ridere coloribus, cum totus ipse tenebrosus sit. This is reminiscent of *Horace, Carm. III. 27,II sq.: Oscinem corvum prece suscitabo solis ab ortu; only the ill-omened croak from the left 2) is substituted for the auspicious omen from the east. Thus the chances are that Jerome was indebted to Horace for both of the hardly flattering epithets which he bestowed upon Ambrose and which were duly recognized by Rufinus. 3) Next to these translations we may place Vita Ma l chi (PL 23, 55-64), a romance of monastic life, written after a long silence in order to exercise the tongue, corroded by rust, 4) No secular authors

1) This passage is to be added to the quotations listed by Liibeck, p. 131. 2 ) Cf. Hor. ib. v. 15 sq. Teque nee laevus vetet ire pieus nee vaga eornix; Plaut. Aul. 624 Non temere est quad corvos cantat mihi nune ab laeva manu. a) Apol. adv. Hier. II. 22-25; cf. especially Chap. 25: Audistis, quomodo quem ante corvum dixerat et totum tenebrosum nunc iterum corniculam dicat, alienis se pennis vel coloribus depingentem, etc. ') Vita Malchi I p. 41 (PL 23, 55) Ego qui diu tacui ... prius exerceri cupio in parvo opere et veluti quandam rubiginem linguae abstergcre.



are mentioned; but there are unequivocal traces of, at least, three authors. Most striking is the parallelism between the following passages: Vita Malchi 9 p. 47: Si iuvat Dominus miseros, habemus salutem; Si despicit peccatores, habemus sepulcrum.

*Seneca, Troades 510-512; Fata si miseros iuvant, habes salutem; f ata si vitam negant, habes sepulcrum.



George E. Duckworth, who has pointed out the similarity 2), remarks appropriately: >>TheStoic fatalism of Seneca has been restated in Christian terms, but the balanced phraseology, the repetition of the verbs iuvare and habere, of the nouns miseros, salutem, sepulcrum prove without question that Jerome has the passage of Seneca in mind. The similarity is all the more interesting since Luebeck has no references whatsoever in his collection of classical authors to the tragedies of Seneca>>.For the rest the classical borrowings are restricted to a sentence from Ps. Quint. Deel. mai. 13, 2: 'Sic quoque latentem me invenit invidia' (c. 6 p. 44),3) and reminiscences of Virgil: *8 p. 46 Inter spem et metum medii ..- Aen. I. 218 Spemque metumque inter dubii; *9 p. 46 Mens mali praesaga ..-Aen. X. 843 Praesaga mali mens; 7 p. 45 Aspicio formicarum gregem angusto calle fervere ... Illae ·oenturae hiemis memores ... ...,.Aen. IV. 402 sqq. Formicae ... hiemis memores ... calle angusto ... fervet. Vita Hilario n is (PL 23, 29-54), another romance of the same kind, has two quotations from Sallustius, prol. (PL 23, 29): Eorum qui fecere virtus, ut ait Crispus, tanta habetur quantam eam verbis potuere extollere praeclara ingenia ...,.Sall. Cat. 8, 4; *ib. Ut facta dictis exaequentur ..,..Cat. 3, 2 Facta dictis exaequanda sunt. Alexander's utterance at Achilles' tomb is rendered in this way: 'Felicem te' ait 'iuvenis, qui magno frueris praecone meritorum', H omerum videlicet significans. This is a good instance of paraphrase technique, as hardly a word is left unchanged in the passage imitated, Cic. Arch. 1)

The words are »spoken by Andromache to Astyanax as she conceales him from Ulysses by hiding him in the tomb of Hector» (Duckworth). 2 »Classical Echoes in St. Jerome's Life of Malchus», ) George E. Duckworth, The Classical Bulletin XXIV (1947/48), p. 29. As to the passages »which sound like echoes from Terence's Adelphoe>> Duckworth himself allows that they are not likely to be reminiscences. 8) See below pp. I 3 I sq.




24: 'O fortunate' inquit 'adulescens, qui tuae virtutis Homerum praeconem inveneris'. In this period Jerome put himself forward as an exegete. 1) With that he set out on an enterprise to which a large part of his prodigious literary work was to be devoted. It is a matter of discussion which of the commentaries opens the long series, their precise dates being uncertain. Griitzmacher (I, p. 62) places the commentaries on four Pauline epistles, viz. those to Philemon, the Galatians, the Ephesians and Titus, in 386 or 387, before the commentary on Ecclesiastes, while Cavallera (II, p. 27) puts them after In ecclesiasten. Without taking up a position in reference to the chronology, I find it most convenient to · begin with the commentaries on the Pauline epistles and to discuss In eccles. only together with the other writings concerning the Old Testament. The short commentary In Philemonem (PL 26, 635-656) yields nothing from our point of view, but the three books I n G a l a t a s (PL 26, 331-468) are all the more profitable. In the preface to Book III Jerome makes his excuses to the readers for the want of elegance in his Latin style, and asks them to consider that he is writing a commentary, not a panegyric or a declamation. 2) Such excuses are conventional among Christian writers, and are usually connected, as here, with references to the proletarian sphere where Christianity arose, to its rejection of sapientia mundi, to the victory over the philosophers and the grammarians won by the peasants and the fishermen. 3 ) Therel) An earlier production is the lost commentary on Obadiah (about 374-375); the existing commentary In Abdiam was substituted for it in 396. 2) Jn Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486 Sit responsum me non panegyricum aut controversiam scribere sed commentarium, id est, hoe habere propositum, non ut mea verba laudentur, sed ut quae ab alio bene dicta sunt ita intelligantur ut dicta sunt. 'The leading representatives of each type of literature are mentioned afterwards: Si quis eloquentiam quaerit vel declamationibus delectatur, habet in utraque lingua Demosthenem et Tullium, Polemonem et Qiiintilianum. By the latter, here as In Is. lib. VIII praef. p. 328, Jerome means the Declamationes XIX maiores (ed. Lehnert. Leipzig 1905), which don't originate from Quintilian; as to quotations from them cf. Lubeck p. 219. S) Loe. cit. pp. 485-486 Ecclesia Christi non de Academia et Lycaeo sed de vili plebecula congregata est. Ib. Ubi enim sapiens, ubi grammaticus, ubi causarum naturalium scrutatores? Ib. pp. 487-488 Quotusquisque nunc Aristotelem legit? quanti Platonis vel libros novere vel nomen? Vix in angulis otiosi eos senes recolunt. Rusticanos vero et piscalores nostros lotus orbis loquitur, imiverrns mimdus sonat.



fore, their simple words have to be expounded in a simple language. These principles of style are quite conventional, however it may be in practice. The interesting thing is what Jerome has to say about himself. He apologizes for the imperfection of his style, which has declined, he says, for three reasons: the necessity of dictating instead of writing, which leaves no room for meditation or for polishing of the diction, 1 ) his pursuit of learning Hebrew, which has destroyed omnem sermonis elegantiam et Latini eloquii venustatem,2) and the deliberate suspension of his reading of the classics, to which Paula and Eustochium (to whom the commentary is dedicated) can testify: Nostis enim et ipsae, quod plus quam quindecim anni sunt, ex quoin manus meas numquam Tullius, numquam Maro, numquam gentilium litterarum quilibet auctor ascendit. This is an obvious allusion to the oath Jerome took in his dream. 3) He continues (pp. 485-486): Et si quid forte inde, dum loquimur, obrepit, quasi antiqui per nebulam somnii recordamur. A similar statement is met with in the preface to Book II. The context is very curious. Giving a survey of the history of the Galatians, Jerome mentions that M. Varro, cunctarum antiquitatum diligentissimtts perscrutator, and his followers have recorded many memorable things about this people. 4 ) However he prefers to quote Lactantius, stating the reason for it in the following way: Sed quia nobis propositttm est incircumcisos homines non introducere in templum Dei - et ut simpliciter f atear, multi iam anni sunt quod haec legere desivimus - Lactantii nostri, quae in tertio ad Probum volumine de hac gente opinatus sit, verba ponemus. Thus Jerome, alluding to Ezekiel, 5) 1 ) lb. p. 485-486 Accito notario aut statim dicta, quodcumque in buccam venerit, aut si paululum voluero cogitare melius aliquid prolaturus tune me tacitus ille reprehendit, frontem rugat et se frustra adesse toto gestu corporis contestatur. As far as l know, there is no more vivid picture of dictating and shorthandwriting in Latin literature. 2 infatigabili studio, ) lb. Quad autem profecerim ex linguae illius (sc. Hebraicae) aliorum iudicio derelinquo; ego quid in mea amiserim, scio. 3 22, 30, r-6 to Eustochium (quoted above pp. 91 et 93). If we ) Epist. assign the dream to the early years of J erome's first stay in the East (about 374375), we may suppose the commentary on the epistle to the Galatians to have been written about 389-390. 4 Gal. lib. II praef. pp. 425-426. ) In ') Ezech .. 44, 9 Haec dicit Dominus Deus: 'Omnis alienigena incircumcisus corde et incircumcisus carne non ingredietur sanctuarium meum'. The editors have not noticed the allusion.





pretends that he has his reasons founded on principle for not quoting a pagan author. This is hypocrisy - there is no other word for it. For Varro is mentioned on the same page as an authority,1) and there is every reason to believe that most of the information about geography and ethnology communicated in the preface was drawn, directly or indirectly, from him. 2) Jerome can even less be exculpated from blame on the assumption that the principle of not introducing the uncircumcised into the sanctuary is related to literal citation only, not to paraphrase. For literal citations are by no means uncommon in this commentary. It is a trifle annoying that the quotation from Lactantius 3) - who is substituted for the uncircumcised Varro happens to contain a literal quotation from Virgill 4) Moreover three passages of poetry are inserted literally: Jn Gal. 3, l p. 417 Dicitur f ascinus proprie in/ anti bus nocere ... unde et quidam e gentibus (Verg. Eel. 3, ro3):

'N escio quis teneros oculus mihi f ascinat agnos'. 4, 15-16 p. 462 Eleganter sententiam terminavit (sc. Paul), dicens: 'Ergo inimicus vobis factus sum veritatem dicens vobis?' ... Similis est huic illa sententia nobilis apud Romanos poetae (Ter. Andr. 68):

'Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit. 5)

5, 19-21 p. 508 Pulchre quidam de neotericis, Graecum versum transferens, elegiaco metro de invidia lusit: 'Iustius invidia nihil est, quae protinus ipsum auctorem rodit excruciatque animum'. 1) Loe. cit. pp. 425-426 Massiliam Pkocaei condiderunt, quos ait Varro (Migne has Varo) trilingues esse, quod et Graece loquantur et Latine et Gallice, etc. 2) Cf. Lubeck pp. 123 sqq. In view of Jerome's habit of keeping back his main source, the most probable thing is, as I see it, that the Varronian elements are drawn from an innominate author drawing on Varro. 3) Lact. frg. 1 (CSEL, XXVII, fasc. 1, p. 155). ') >>Quodsignificare voluit poeta, cum ait: 'Tum lactea calla auro innectuntur' (- Verg. Aen. VIII. 660 sq.), cum posset dicere candida>>. · &) Quoted also Adv. Pelag. I. 26 (Lubeck ur) and *Anecdota Maredsolana, III:2, p. 407,20. Augustine, in a letter to Jerome (Hier. Epist. 116, 31, 2), calls the line

vulgare proverbium.



An allusion to the much quoted Horatian line, Sat. I. 10, 72 sq.,1) is found *5, 26, p. 517: Interpretamur scripturas, saepe vertimus stilum, quae digna lectione sunt scribimus. Although Virgilian lines are only twice quoted in full, the following hints give to understand how much the poet was in Jerome's mind: r. 4 p. 378, a periphrasis of the number 30: Tot ... numeros saeculorum quot Aeneia fetus scropha generavit (cf. Aen. VIII. 43 sq.); *lib. II praef. pp. 425-426 Praetermitto Carthaginis conditores 'Tyrios et Agenoris urbem' (- A en. I. 338); ib. Certe, quad negari non potest, Romani de Aeneae Asiani hominis stirpe generati sunt. Talking of polishing the style, lib. III praef. 485-486, he reminds his reader of what was related about Virgil (cf. Suet. Vit. Verg. p. 59 Reifferscheid): Quad de Vergilio quoque tradunt, quia libros suos in modum ursorum fetum lambendo figuraverit. 2 ) Latin prosewriters are mentioned or quoted in the commentary In Galatas as the following list will show:

3, r p. 416 Graecos leves apud C. Caesarem suggillat Tulliits, dicens: 'aut levium Graecorum aut immanium barbarorum'. ib. Et pro Fiacco 'ingenita' inquit 'levitas et erudita vanitas'. 3 ) 5, 22 p. 5ro Gaudium ... Stoici quoque, qui distinguunt inter verba subtilius, aliud quid esse aestimant quam laetitiam. Gaudium quippe esse aiunt .elationem animi super his quae digna sunt exultantis, laetitiam vero eflrenatam animi elationem quae modum nesciat.


Cic. Lig.


Cic. Flacc. frg.



Tusc. IV. 13 Nam cum ratione animus movetur placide atque constanter, tum illud gaudium dicitur; cum autem inaniter et effuse animus exultat, tum illa laetitia gestiens vel nimia dici potest, quam ita definiunt (sc. Staid): sine ratione animi elationem.

Cf. below p. 128 Cf. Lubeck 225. 3 ) The passage is quoted in the same wording Epist. 10, 3, 1: Doctissimi quique Graecorum, de quibus pro Flacco agens luculente Tullius ait: 'Ingenita levitas et erudita vanitas', and Lubeck (p. 136 sq.) therefore seems to be right in ascribing it to a lost part of Cicero's speech, 2




5, 26 p. 515 Qitantas autem habeat definitiones et significantias gloria, et philosophorum innumerabiles libri et Ciceronis duo volitmina, quae de gloria scripsit, iudicio sunt. 5, 26 p. 516 Ut autem et nos nobis fingendorum nominum licentiam praesumamus, 'rebus quippe novis', ut ait quidam, 'nova fingenda sunt nomina'. 1)

*ib. p. 517 Videas plerosque, qitad etiam Tullius ait, libros suos de contemnenda gloria inscribere et causa gloriae proprii nominis titulos praenotare. 5, 16 p. 500 Non perficere desiderium eius (sc. carnis) ... sed spiritu refrenare et secttndum sententiam historici 'animi imperio, corporis servitio magis vivere'. 5, 19-21 p. 509 Pulchre quidam non ignobilis orator, cum ebrium de somno describeret excitatum, ait: 'N ec dormire excitatits nee vigilare ebrius poterat'.



Cic. Acad. post. I. 25 (about the necessity of forging new Latin words equivalent to the philosophical terms of the Greeks): Id quidem commune omni um f ere est artium; aut enim nova sunt rerum novarum f acienda nomina aut ex aliis transf erenda. Cic. Tusc. I. 34 Quid? nostri philosophi nonne in iis libris ipsis, quos scribunt de contemnenda gloria, sua nomina inscribunt? Sall. Cat. I, 2 Animi imperio, corporis servitio magis utimur.

Unidentified sia?)

(from a controver-

After finishing In Galatas Jerome set about I n E p h e s i o s (I III. PL 26, 467-590), working in such haste that he sometimes dictated a thousand lines in one day. 2) The work is not very original; Jerome followed, besides Apollinaris and Didymus, above all Origen,3) taking over many of his heresies, as Rufinus did not fail to point out 1) Cf.* Jn Ezech. 16,10 p. 154 (p. 238 below). 2) 3)

Lib. II praef. p. 586. Lib. I praef. pp. 543-544.

Cf.. Griitzmacher,

II, pp. 37 sqq.



in his polemical pamphlet.1) It is noteworthy how often and sharply Jerome declaims against the philosophers, physicians and dialecticians, perhaps being influenced by his sources. 2) Even the poets come in for their share. 3) As the work was compiled in great haste from Greek commentaries, direct citations from Latin literature are few and far between. Talking of Stoic monotheism (Zenon), Jerome quotes two Virgilian passages which were in the good graces of the Latin Fathers, 4, 5-6 p. 6n: Quem (se. Zenonem) secutus Vergilius ait (*Georg. IV. 221 sq.): 'Deum namque ire per omnes terrasque tractusque maris',

et (Aen. VI. 724-727): 'Principio caelum ac terras camposque liquentes lucentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet'. Besides, Horace and Sallust are mentioned once each: 5, 20 p. 653 Hie crucem suam tollens sequitur Salvatorem (Luc. 9.33), quem nee orbitas nee damna debilitant, quem ut Flaccus in lyrico carmine ait (Hor. Carm. III. 3. 7 sq.): 'Si fractus illabatur orbis, impavidum f erient ruinae'.

5, 33 p. 662 'A nimi' quippe, ut ait Crispus, 'imperio, corporis servitio magis utimur' (Sall. Cat. 1, 2). 1

Apot. adv. Hier. I. 25 sqq. Cf. e. g. 4, 13 sqq. p. 617 (Sapientes saeculi) omni calliditate erroris laqueos com.ponentes nos decipere et vincere festinant; ib. p. 618 Dialecticae quoque, immo diaboli arte; 4, 17 sqq. p. 621 Nonne vobis videtur in vanitate sensus et obscuritate mentis ingredi, qui diebus ac noctibus in dialectica arte torquetur, qui physicus perscrutator oculos trans caelum levat et ultra profundum terrarum et abyssi quoddam inane demergitur, qui iambum struit, qui tantam metrorum silvam in suo studiosius corde distinguit et congerit; 5, 3-4 p. 640 against a Cynic; ib. Porro stultiloquium esse existimo non solum eorum qui aliqua narrant turpia ... sed etiam eorum, qui sapientes saeculi putantur et de rebus physicis disputantes dicunt se arenas littorum, guttas oceani et caelorum spatium terraeque punctum liquido comprehendisse. 2



3 )

Cf. 4, 17 sqq. p. 621 quoted in the preceding





The following list will show that there are not a few hidden quotations:

*1, 4 p. 547 Unde et nos 'propter paupertatem linguae et rerum noRufinus quotes the vitatem'. passage, Apol. in Hier I. 25. ib. p. 548 Et sicut quidam ait, quod sit Graecorum et sermo latior et lingita f elicior ... *1, 5 p. 551 Septuaginta interpretes transtulerunt, 'rebus novis nova verba fingentes'. 1, 9 p. 554 Sapientiam et prudentiam esse diversas Stoici quoque opinantur dicentes: 'S apientia est rerum divinarum humanarumque cognitio, prndentia vero tantum mortalium'. Cf. In Is. 5, 2r p. 83 (p. 234 below).

*r, r3 p. 560 Quatisque fuerit liquor, qui novae testae infusus est, talem diu testa et odorem retinet et saporem. *3, 8-9 p. 592 Mendacii est reatus 'aliud in pectore clausum habere, aliud in lingua promere'. *4, r6 p. 619 Finge aliquem venire tantae scientiae medicum, qui iuxta fabulas ethnicorum Aesculapium possit imitari et in novam figuram novumque nomen V irbium suscitare. *ib. Parvulus crescat et occulto aevo in per/ ectam adolescat aetatem.

Luer. I. 139 Propter egestatem linguae et rerum novitatem.


Cic. Acad. post. I. 25 (quoted already In Gal., seep. r23 above). Cic. Off. I. 153 Illa sapientia quam aorpiavGraeci vacant - priedentiam enim, quam Graeci >theother cattle of philosophers>>are represented as spokesmen for sensual enjoyments. 6 ) Plato, Aristotle, Zeno and Carneades are also summoned to give evidence. 7 ) It would however be preposterous to conclude from such passages that Jerome ever formed an intimacy with these authors; on the contrary we have to remember what Rufinus says about his disposition for throwing dust into the eyes of his readers by means of boastful references to Greek philosophers. 8) 1) Qui (sc. sapphirus) talis est, ut possit illud Aristophanicum dicere cum Socrate: deeofJa-r:w, etc. Cf. Liibeck p. 18. 2 ) Griitzmacher, II, p. 45. 8 2 sqq. p. 691; 2, 15 p. 728; 2, 9 p. 735 sq.; 2, 10-II p. 737. ) Cf. 1. 4 (PL 23, 1061). Cf. Cavallera, II, p. 27. ) In Eccles. praef. pp. 381-382 6 ) Ib. p. 391 (col. 1072) and 486 (col. n62). 6 Et haec, inquit, aliquis loquatur Epicurus et Aristippus ) Ib. p. 461 (col. u38) et Cyrenaici et ceterae pecudes philosophorum. Cf. Griitzmacher, II, p. 55. 7 Lege Platonem, Aristotelis revolve versutias, Zenonem et ) Ib. 475 (col. u53) Carneadem diligentius intuere, et probabis verum esse quod dicitur. 8) Cf. p. 94 n. 1 above.





All the more extensive is the use made of Latin authors. Only Cicero and Horace are mentioned by name: p. 430 Tullius pecuniosos primitus eos dictos refert qui plura habuissent peculia, id est pecora .Cic. Rep. II. 16 Tum erat res in pecore ... ex quo pecuniosi ... vocabantur; p. 409 Secundum illud Horatianum (Epist. I. r, 99 sq.):

'Diruit, aedificat, mutat quadrata rotundis, aestuat et vitae disconvenit ordine toto'; 1) p. 430 Flacci quoque super hoe concordante sententia qu,i ait (Epist. I. 2, 56): 'Semper avarus eget'. For the rest, lines and sentences of Virgil, Terence and Sallustius are introduced in a less obvious way by references to poeta, comicus or nobilis historicus: p. 388 ut ait poeta (Verg. Aen. III. 284):

'Interea magnum sol circumvolvitur annum', et alibi (Verg. Georg. II. 402): 'Atque in se sua per vestigia volvitur annus', sive quad et lunae lucentem globum et astra Titania 2) 'spiritus intus alit totamque infusa per artus mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet' (-Verg.

Aen. VI. 726 sq.);

p. 448 De qua et poeta gentilis (Verg. A en. IV. 569 sq.): 'V arium et mutabile semper f emina'; p. 452 Est enim magna afflictio generis humani, quia, ut ait poeta gentilis (Verg. Aen. X. 501):

'N escia mens hominum f ati sortisque futurae' aliud sperat aliudque evenit; p. 460 Postquam mortui fuerint homines, a corde viventium excidant et nee dilectionem quis in eos habeat nee odium, secundum illud poetae (Verg. Aen. XI. 104): 'N ullum cum victis certamen et aethere cassis';

1) Jerome quotes the lines in reverse order. 2) This is a paraphrase of Verg. Aen. VI. 725: Lucentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra.


p. 469 Qui ergo sapiens est, semper de futuro cogitat, quod ducit ad dextram. Qui vero insipiens, de praesenti, quod positum in sinistra. Quae quidem secutus idem philosophus et poeta ait (Verg. Aen. VI. 541 sqq.):

'Dextera quae magni Ditis sub moenia ducit,1) hac iter Elysium nobis; at laeva malorum exercet poenas et ad impia Tartara mittit'; p. 390 Huie quid simile sententiae et comicus ait (Ter. Eun. prol. 41): Nihil est dictum, quad non sit dictum prius; 2 ) p. 430 Et nobilis historici (sc. sententia), quod avaritia neque inopia neque copia minuatur ..- Sall. Cat. II, 3 Avaritia ... neque copia neque inopia minuitur. 3) Thus, not less than ro lines are quoted literally from Virgil, 3 from Horace and I from Terence. To these must be added the hidden quotations betraying_ themselves only by their metrical form, and still less recognizable reminiscences. A full Horatian line is inserted in this way on p. 405: Videbit quanta libros labore componat, quomodo 'saepe stilum vertat, iterum quae digna legi sunt scripturus' (Hor. Sat. I. ro, 72 sq.).4) Another instance, hitherto unnoticed, is found on *p. 395: Contrariis contraria intelliguntur. Et 'sapientia prima est stultitia caruisse'. Stultitia autem carere non potest nisi qui intellexerit eam. This is a literal quotation from Horace, Epist. I. I, 41 sq.:

Virtus est vitium fugere et sapientia prima stultitia caruisse. It cannot be mere chance that three of the four quotations from Horace which we meet in this commentary belong to the first book of the Epistles and, more expressly, to the first two epistles. We may infer that Jerome retained a particularly lively recollection of this book at the time when he wrote his commentary, 5 ) and we have to 1)

Verg. D. q. Ditis magni s. m. tendit. Ter. Nullumst iam dictum quad non dictum sit prius. 8 ) Also Hier. Epist. 108, 10. ') For other allusions to this line cf. Lubeck p. 163; to add *In Gal. 5,26 p. 517 and *In Abd. 20-21 p. 386 (PL 25, II70), p. 282 below. •) The same is true of the polemical pamphlet Adversus lovinianum, written in 393. Cf. p. 144 below. 2)





take this into consideration when we raise the question whether, in the fifteen years after his dream, Jerome still continued to read the classics.1) In expounding Eccles. 10, 7: Vidi servos in equis, Jerome borrowed the following expression (p. 471): Vias publicas mannis terant, from Horace's mockery of the opulent ex-slave, Epod. 4, 14: Et Appiam mannis terit.2) Reminiscences of this kind are certainly to be found more often than I am able to prove. I make a list of those which have caught my eye: *p. 434 Ex quo sibi queat apud posteros memoriam comparare et non vitam silentio transire velut pecudes. *p. 441 Una atque eadem solis operatio liquef acit ceram et siccat littum, et pro substantia sua liquescit cera et siccatur lutum. 3) *p. 442 Ex diversis niundus iste contrariis subsistat, calidis et frigidis, siccis et humentibus, duris et mollibus. *p. 468 I nvicem se virtutes sequi et, qui unam habuerit, habere omnes.

Sall. Cat. I, I Summa ape niti decet ne vitam silentio transeant velut pecora. Luer. VI. 962 Principio terram sol excoquit et facit are; ib. 965 Denique cera liquefit in eius pasta vapore. Ov. Met. I. 19 sq. (description of Chaos): Frigida pugnabant calidis, umentia siccis, mollia cum duris. Cic. Off. II. 35 Cum inter omnes philosophos constet ... , qui unam haberet, omnes habere virtutes. 4)

We can pass quickly over the translations of Eusebius' works on biblical onomastics and topography, 5 ) in order to arrive at Qua e s-


See pp. 320 sqq. below. Noticed by Martinaeus; Lubeck p. 161. 3 ) Cf. * Epist. 120, 10, 12. 4 ) A favourite doctrine of the Stoics; cf. Diog. Laert. VII. 125; Stob. Eel. eth. II p. IIO, 6 ) Two reminiscences from Sallustius' Jugurtha are found in Nam. hebr. praef. p. 1-2 (PL 23, 815) Ut tacere melius iudicaverim quam reprehensiane quid dignum scribere..,..Sall.* Jug. 19, z De Carthagine silere melius puta quam parum dicere (cf. Hier. Epist. 53, 9, 3 Super quo tacere melius puto quam pauca scribere); ib. pp. 3-4 Non qua studium insalenter extollam-*Iug. 4, z Ne per insolentiam quis existumat 2)

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





t ion e s he bra i c a e in genes i m (PL 23, 983-1062), a fruit of Jerome's studies of Hebrew. It is a new enterprise;1) we do not know whether or not it was followed by other similar researches upon the Old Testament. In some parts extensive use is made of Josephus' Antiquitates Iudaicae; 2 ) references are also made to Varro, Si[si]nnius Capito and Phlegon. 3) Virgilian lines are quoted at 10, 7 p. 319: Saba a quo Sabaei, de quibus Vergilius (Georg. II. n7): 'Solis est turea virga Sabaeis', et alibi (Aen. I. 416 sq.): 'Centumque Sabaeo ture calent arae'; and at 31, 7-8 p. 355 Necui autem in sex annis decem pariendi vices incredibiles videantur, lege Vergilium qui dicit (Georg. II. 150): 'Bis gravidae pecudes'. If references to secular authors, unless founded on facts, are rarely to be met with in this work, it is consonant with the warning Jerome expresses in the preface that the reader ought not to expect eloquence and oratorical splendour. In the preface, however, he makes up for the loss. It is a cento, composed of open or hidden quotations. I reproduce it in full.

Quaest. hebr. in gen. praef. pp. 301-302 (PL 23, 983 sqq.). Qui in principiis librorum debebam secuturi operis argumenta proponere, cogor prius respondere maledictis, Terentii quippiam sustinens, qui comoediarum prologos in de/ensionem sui scaenis dabat. Urgebat enim eum Luscius Lanui-

*Ter. Andr. prol. 5 sqq. Nam in prologis scribundis operam abutitur, non qui argi,mentum narret sed qui malevoli veteris poetae maledictis respondeat.

memet studium meum laudando extoUere. Notes from Sallustius are put in, Nom. hebr. p. rn4 Syrtim, angustiam sive tribulationem, melius autem Sallustius a tractu ait nomen impositum (- lug. 78, 4 Syrtes a tractu nominaiae); De situ et nom. loc. hebr. p. 202 Sallustius auctor certissimus asserit lam Tigris quam Euphratis in Armenia fontes demonstrari .,.. Sall. Hist. frg IV. 77 Maurenbrecher. 1 Opus novum et tam Graecis quam Latinis usque ) Cf. Nam. hebr. praef. r-2 ad id locorum (Vallarsi prefers temporum) inauditum. 2 A quota} Cf. Liibeck, p. 33 sqq. Onomastica sacra, ed. P. de Lagarde, p. VIII. tion from Alexander Polyhistor is taken over from Josephus (Lubeck, p. 30 sq.). 3 ) Nom. hebr. p.319. Cf. Liibeck, p.123 (on Varro). pp.2oosq. (onSinniusCapito), pp. 52 sq. (on Phlegon).



nus, nostro Luscio similis, et quasi publici aerarii poetam f urem criminabatur. H oc idem passus est ab aemulis et Mantuanus vates, ut cum quosdam versus H omeri transtulisset ad verbum, compilator veterum diceretur. Quibus ille respondit magnarum esse virium clavam H erculi extorquere de manu.

Sed et Tullius, qui in arce eloquentiae Romanae stetit, rex oratorum et Latinae linguae illustrator, repetundarum accusatur a Graecis. Non mirum ergo, si contra me parvum homunculum immundae sues grunniant et pedibus margaritas conculcant, cum adversus doctissimos viros et qui gloria invidiam sitperare debuerant, livor exarserit. V erum hoe illis merito accidit, quorum in theatris, curia, contione, pro rostris eloquentia pertonabat. Semper enim in propatulo f ortitudo aemulos habet, 'feriuntque summos fulmina montes'. Me vero procul ab urbibus, foro, litibus, turbis remotum 'sic quo-


The expression

is imitated




*Ter. Eun. prol. 23 sq. Exclamat fur em, non poetam f abitlam dedisse. Suet. Vit. Verg. p. 66 Reifferscheid: Asconius Pedianus ... pauca admodum ei (sc. Vergilio) obiecta proponit ... quod pleraque ab H omero sumpsisset, sed hoe crimen sic de/endere assiutum ait: 'Cur non illi quoque eadem furta temptarent? V erum intellecturos f acilius esse H erculi clavam quam Homero versum subripere' (Lubeck p. 226). *Quint. Inst. XII. II, 28 Jam Cicerone arcem tenente eloquentiae.1) From Corn. Nep. Vit. Cic. or a commentary on Cicero (Lubeck p. 128 n. 1). [*Matth. 7, 6 Neque mittatis margaritas vestras ante porcos, ne forte conculcant eas pedibi-tssuis.]

Hor. Carm. II.

10, II


Ps. Quint. Deel. mai. 13, 2 In hoe ego vitae meae secreto remo-

See p. 296 below.

132 que', ut Quintilianus tem invenit invidia'.


ait, 'laten-

Unde lectorem obsecro, 'Si quis tamen haec qtwque, si quis captus amore leget', ut in libris hebraicarum quaestionum ... non quaerat eloquentiam, non oratorum leporem. pp. 303-304 De Adamantio (scil. Origine) autem sileo, cuius nomen, 'si parva licet componere magnis', meo nomine invidiosius est.

tus a tmnultu civitatis ignobile aevum agere procul ab ambitu ... constitui ... Quid prodest? Sic quoque me latentem invenit invidia.1)

Verg. Eel. 6, 9 sq.

*Verg. Georg. IV. 176

The revision of the Septuagint text of some parts of the Old Testament and, first and foremost, the translation of other parts from the original text are without doubt Jerome's greatest achievements during the period we are concerned with. Allusions to secular literature are only seldom admitted into the prefaces. 2) 1)

Cf. p. u8 above. In the revised Septuagint texts we ·meet the following eases: Par. praef. (PL 29, 423 sqq.), the third Book of the Aeneid and Cicero's Brutus are mentioned, and Pliny quoted: 'Optima enim quaeque', ut ait Plinius, 'malunt contemnere et invidere plerique quam discere' (according to Liibeck p. 212 the passage is not to be found in either of the two Plinys); Job. praef. (PL 29, 64), a reminiscence of Sallustius occurs: Magis utile quid ex meo otio Christi ecclesiis venturum ratus quam ex aliorum negotio..,. Jug. 4, 4 Maiusque commodum ex otio meo quam ex aliorum negotiis rei publicae venturum. The prefaces to the books translated from the original text afford still less: Is. praef. (PL 28, 825) on the arrangement of the text of Demosthenes and Cicero per cola et commata; Job praef. (PL 28, u41): metrical form in the 0. T. is illustrated by reference to Flaccus, Pindarus, Alcaeus and Sappho; Psalm. praef. (PL 28, u87): Dicam tibi illud Horatianum: 'In silvam ne ligna /eras' (Sat. I. 10, 34); Dan. praef. (PL 28, u58) contains a recollection of Jerome's rhetorical studies: Ego adulescentulus post Quintiliani et Tullii lectionem ac /lores rhetoricos; ib. a quotation from Virgil: Adhortante me quodam Hebraeo et illud mihi crebrius in sua lingua ingerente, 'labor omnia vincit improbus' (Georg. I. 145 sq.). 2)





1 33

Another fruit of J erome's studies of the Old Testament is the commentaries to five of the minor prophets, Nahum, Micah, Zephaniah, Haggai and Habakkuk. They are not very original, being derived mainly from two sources, the Hebrew exegetes (the historical elements), and the lost commentaries of Origen (the tropological comments). 1) The first four commentaries are dedicated to Paula and Eustochium, and Jerome was exposed to censure - which he answers in the preface to Zephaniah 2 ) - for working for his lady friends, not for men. The last one, In Habacuc, is dedicated to bishop Cromatius. Griitzmacher is possibly right in assuming that Jerome worked more superficially in the commentaries destined for his female admirers than in that destined for the learned bishop, but he is mistaken when he says that the last commentary has more references to secular literature than the others. 3) The number of quotations and reminiscences is in point of fact much higher in the commentary In M ichaeam. I begin with the commentaries where the influence of the classics is slightest. In Sop ho n i am (PL 25, 1401-1454) has no quotations, only some reminiscences in phraseology: *r, 15-16 p. 692 Senes pannis annisque obsitos ..,..Ter. Eun. 236 Pannis annisque obsitum; 4) *2, 5-7 p. 701 (Cretenses) sonant aere Corybantio ..,..Verg. Aen. III. III Corybantiaque aera. In Ag g a e um (PL 25, 1453-1484) has one quotation:5) I, I p. 738 Quem (sc. imparem numerum) mundum esse gentilis quoque poeta novit dicens: 'Numero deus impare gaudet' .,..Verg. Eel. 8, 75. In Nahum (PL 25, 1289-1334) has two citations from Vir1)

Griitzmacher, II, pp. u4 sqq. In Soph. praef. pp. 67r-674. Jerome, who usually had an unfavourable opinion of womankind, gives here a list of women of distinction, where the venerable women of the Scriptures are placed together with those admired by the secular philosophers, viz. Aspasia, Sappho and Themista, and with Roman ladies, Cornelia Gracchorum and the daughter of Cato and wife of Brutus. 3) Griitzmacher, II, p. rr2: >>Esist gewif3 auch nicht zufallig, dass Hieronymus im Habakukkommentar haufiger als in den fiir seine Freundinnen bestimmten Kommentaren die profane Literatur beriicksichtigt». 4 ) Quoted also Epist. 22, 32, 2 Anus quaedam annis pannisque obsita (Liibeck p. II2). 6) *2. 2r sqq. p. 774 a person is nicknamed A llecto, an allusion to the fury, described by Virgil, Aen. VII. 324 sqq. With *r, r p. 738: Lolio magis avenisque fecunda est (sc. terra), we may compare Verg. Eel. 5, 37 Infelix lolium et steriles nascuntur avenae. Cf below p. 267. 2)



gil: 2, r-2 p. 549 Necessitate compellor quasi inter saxa et scopulos imminente naufragio, sic inter historiam et allegoriam orationis meae cursum flectere . .. Siquidem iuxta fabulas poetarum (Verg. Aen. III. 420 sq.): 'Dextrum Scylla latus, laevum implacata Charybdis obsidet', si saxa fugimus, incurrimus in profundum, si contortos vertices evitamus, in saxa deferimur; 3, I sqq. p. 565 Quattuor scilicet perturbationes, de quibus et philosophi disputant et Maro non tacet, dicens {Verg. Aen. VI. 733): 'Hi cupiunt metuuntque dolentque gaudentque' .1) The commentary In Ha b a c u c (I-II, PL 25, 1333-1402) is by no means richer in citations when we consider its size, but it differs from the others in the respect that, with one or two exceptions,2) the citations are made from prose-writers. In order to throw light upon Hab. 2, 9: Lapis de pariete clamabit, two passages from Sallustius and Cicero are alleged (p. 617): Quod ut significantius fiat, ponamus litteraturae quoque saecularis exempla. Crispus loquitur in historiis (Sall. Hist. frg II, 64 Maurenbrecher): 'Saguntini fide atque aerumnis incliti prae mortalibus, studio maiore quam opibus, quippe apud quos etiam tum semiruta moenia, domus intectae parietesque templorum ambusti manus Punicas ostentabant'. Simile quid et Tullius ad Caesarem pro Marcello (Cic. Marcell. 10): 'Parietes, me dius fidius, ut mihi videtur, huius curiae tibi gratias agere gestiunt, qttod brevi temp ore f utura sit illa auctoritas in his maiorum suorum et suis sedibus'. These passages are certainly not quoted from memory: Jerome must have had the two books at hand and looked round in them. It is just the contrary as to lib. II praef. pp. 631-632: Sardanapalus ... turpior vitiis quam nomine, which is a 1)

Cf. Index locorum. 2, 19-20 p. 269 we meet the often quoted Virgilian lines, Aen. VI. (cf. Liibeck p. 186): 2


726 sq.

'Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus, mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet'. "Lib. I praef. p. 589-590 contains a hidden quotation: Nee in morem insanientium feminarum 'dat sine mente sonum'..,... Verg. Aen. X. 640.





paraphrase of Cic. Rep. III frg. 4: Sardanapalus ille vitiis multo quam nomine ipso deformior.1) In the commentary In Micha ea m (I-II, PL 25, 1207-1290) there are two sections where borrowings from secular literature are so numerous that they fit into one another like the tesserae of a mosaic. The one is the exposition of Mich. 7, 5-7 p. 516 sqq. Of course, we are here often concerned with commonplaces, and I don't pretend that all the parallels given in the following list are to be regarded as proofs of indebtedness. Commenting upon Mich. 7, 5: Nolite credere amico, Jerome says among other things:

p. 516 Interrogatus quidam, quid esset amicus, respondit: 'Alter ego'. Quad si Pythagoreorum nobis opponitur exemplum, qui se vades invicem tyranno dederant ... p. 517 Amici divitum multi, a pauperibus autem etiam qui videntur esse discedunt. ib. Legi in cuiusdam controversia: 'Amicus diu quaeritur, vix invenitur, difficile servatur' .2) Scripsit Theophrastus tria de amicitia volumina, omni eam praef erens caritati, et tamen raram in rebus humanis esse contestatus est. Est et Ciceronis de amicitia liber, quem Laelium inscripsit; in quo illud, quad apud nostros praecipitur, ut sit nobis amicus quasi vinum vetus, et in suavitate bibamus illud, paene eisdem verbis positum est.

Cf. *Cic. Lael. Bo V erus amicus ... est ... is, qui est tamquam alter idem. Cf. Cic. Off. III. 45, Tusc. V. 63, Val. Max. IV. 7 ext. 1 Unidentified.


Compare Eccli. (Iesu Sirach) 9, 15 Vinum novum amicus novus; veterascet, et cum suavitate bibes illud, and Cic. Lael. 67 Veterrima quaeque (sc. amicitia) ut ea vina quae vetustatem f erunt esse debet suavissima.

1) Cf. In Am. r, r p. 223 Sardanapalus de quo insignis orator: 'Turpior' inquit 'vitiis quam nomine'. Liibeck, p. 152, 1) Cf. Epist. 3, 6.


Amicitia pares aut accipit aut facit; ubi inaequalitas est et alterius eminentia, alterius subiectio, ibi non tam amicitia quam adulatio est. Unde et alibi legimus: 'Sit amicus eadem anima'. Et lyricus pro amico precans: 'Serves' inquit 'animae dimidium meae'.


Hor. Carm. I. 3, 8.

In the following exposition of Mich. 7, 5-7 tions:

p. 518 Sed et poeta sublimis, non H omerus alter, ut Lucilius de Ennio suspicatur, sed primus Homerus apud Latinos: 'Varium et mutabile semper femina'. p. 519 Terentius in Hecyra: 'Quid est hoe?omnes socrus oderunt nurus'. 1)

we find further cita-

Lucilius is mentioned instead of *Hor. Epist. II. l, 50 Ennius ... alter Homerus. Verg. Aen. IV. 569 sq. Ter. Hee. 201 Itaque adeo uno animo omnes socrus oderunt nurus.

The store is not exhausted yet. To begin with there are some isolated cases: r, 16 p. 447 Et comicus in Heautontimorumeno: 'Visa est' inquit 'vere, quod dici solet, aquilae senectus' ..,.Ter. Haut. 520 sq.; 7, 14 sqq. p. 528 De his qui odio generis humani vitam appetunt solitariam, qualem Timonem fuisse Athenis legimus .,,..Cic. Lael. 87 Si quis asperitate ea est et immanitate naturae, congressus ut hominum fugiat atque oderit, qualem fuisse Athenis Timonem nescio quem accepimus. What is more, the preface to Book II, an acrimonious diatribe against Jerome's critics and adversaries, is built up entirely from reminiscences and hidden quotations, mostly from Terence, but also from the Scriptures, many of which have remained unnoticed. Some lines are inserted unaltered, others slightly changed to fit into the fabric. The whole is

1 ) Jerome is mistaken here and Adv. Iovin. I. 49 about the wording of Terence's line. Cf, Liibeck, p. II4.





1 37

a fine specimen of tesselated work, illustrative of Jerome's literary technique when he allows himself time in elaborating his diction, and also of his unscrupulous furta. The best way of showing this will be, I think, to put the text and the passages imitated side by side in two columns. In Mich. lib. II praef. p. 480: Semper invidis respondemus, quia non cessat invidia, et librorum nostrorum exordia aemulorum maledicta confutant, qui vulgo iactant me sterilis ieiunique sermonis quasdam ineptias scribere et, cum loqui nesciam, tacere non posse. Itaque obsecro vos, o Paula et Eustochium, ut ad huiuscemodi latratus claudatis aures et inf anti am, ut dicunt, meam orationibus adiuvantes impetretis mihi iuxta apostolum adapertionem oris mei, ut de scripturis loquenti adaptari possit: 'Dominus dabit verbum evangelizantibus virtute multa'. Moneo autem tauros ping,iies, qui circumdederunt me, 'ut quiescant et desinant maledicere, male/ acta ne noscant sua',

'quae proferentur post, si pergent laedere'.

1) Cf. above p. rr2 n. 3·

*Ter. Andr. prol. 5 sqq. In prologis scribundis operam abutitur ... qui malevoli veteris poetae maledictis respondeat. *Quint. Inst. VIII. 5, 18 (quotation from an unnamed author): Quid, quad miser, cum loqui non posset, tacere non poterat.1)

*Eph. 6, 19 Ut detur mihi sermo in apertione oris mei cum fiducia notum f acere mysterium evangelii. Psalm. 67,


Psalm. 21, 13 Circumdederunt me vituli multi; tauri pingues obsederunt me. Ter. Andr. prol. 22 sq. Dehinc ut quiescant porro moneo et desinant maledicere, male/ acta ne noscant sua. *Ter. Eun. prol. 18 Quae prof erentur post, si perget laedere.



Nam quad dicunt Origenis me volumina compilare et contaminari non decere veterum scripta, quad illi maledictum vehemens esse existimant, eandem laudem ego maximam duco, cum illum imitari volo, quem cunctis prudentibus et vobis placere non dubito. Si enim criminis est Graecorum bene dicta transferre, accusetur Ennius et Maro, Plautus, Caecilius et Terentius, Tullius quoque et ceteri eloquentesviri, qui non solum versus sed multa capita et longissimos libros ac f abulas integras transtulerunt. S ed et H ilarius noster furti reus est, quad in psalmos quadraginta f erme millia versuum supradicti Origenis ad sensum verterit. 'Quorum omnium aemulari exopto negligentiam, potius quam istorum obscuram diligentiam'. V erum iam temp us est alterum in Michaeam librum cudere et renascentia hydrae capita ,}onaArpcontundere prophetali.

Ter. Andr. prol. 16 Contaminari non deeere f abulas. Ter. Ad. prol. 17-19 Quod illi maledictum vehemens esse existimant, eam laudem hie ducit maxumam quom illis placet qui vobis univorsis et populo placent.

*Ter. Andr. pro!. 18 sq. Qui quom hunc accusant, N aevium Plautum Ennium accusant, quos hie noster auctores habet.

Ter. Andr. pro!. 20 sq. Quorum aemulari exoptat neglegentiam potius quam istorum obscuram diligentiam. Cf. Sacerd. gramm. VI. 505, 28 ,}6naA011,id est Herculis clavam.

The first period of Jerome's literary activity in Bethlehem is terminated by the publication of De viris inlustribus in A. D. 392 or 393. It gives us a valuable landmark as the last chapter contains a list of Jerome's previous writings; unfortunately we cannot be sure of their being enumerated in chronological order. By this work Jerome introduced a new and in the sequel much productive kind of literature, the literary history of Christianity. At the suggestion of the praefectus praetorio Dexter he made a brief survey of all Christian authors, taking Suetonius' De viris intustribus as his




1 39

model.1) The list contains 135 items; it begins with the apostle Petrus and finishes with Jerome himself. The idea was a happy one, witness the long succession of similar works 2) and the great reputation which this work has enjoyed 3 ) until it was unmasked, at the same time, by S. von Sychowski, J. Huemer and C. A. Bernoulli. 4) Although a novelty in the Christian world, the enterprise was far from being original. Jerome mentions as his predecessors the Peripatetic Hermippus, Antigonus Carystius, Satyrus and Aristoxenus among the Greeks; among the Latins Varro, Santra, Nepos, Hyginus and Suetonius, ad cuius nos exempla provocas; he is bold enough to have hopes of competing with Cicero's Brutus. He is however, he says, at a disadvantage in comparison with the ancients, because he has no guide but himself, quamquam et Eusebius Pamphili in decem ecclesiasticae historiae libris maxima nobis adiumento fuerit. This, certainly, does not set Jerome's indebtedness to Eusebius in a proper light. Owing to the researches mentioned it admits of no doubt whatever that in the first part of his work. Jerome simply plagiarizes Eusebius' History of the Church: 69 of the 78 chapters are but excerpts from Eusebius (and, for the first writers, from the Bible); as an accessory source Eusebius' Chronica, which Jerome translated some twelve years before, has been used, especially in matters of chronology. 5) Considering this character of the work and, not the 1 ) Hier. Vir. ill. prol. Hortaris, Dexter, ut Tranquil/um sequens ecclesiasticos scriptores in ordinem digeram et, quod ille in enumerandis gentitium litterarum libris fecit inlustribus viris, ego in nostris hoe faciam, id est ut a passione Christi usque ad quartum decimum Theodosii imperatoris annum omnes qui de scripturis sanctis memoriae aliquid tradiderint tibi breviter exponam. 2 ) Nine sequels to Jerome's book were written before the end of the Middle Ages; cf. Sychowski (title below n. 4), pp. 8 sq. 8 ) See Sychowski, pp. rr-18. ') S. von Sychowski, »Hieronymus als Litterarhistoriker. Eine quellenkritische Untersuchung der Schrift des H. Hieronymus 'De viris illustribus'•>. Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, herausgegeben von Dr. Knopfler, Dr. Schriirs, Dr. Sdralek. II. Band, II. Heft (Munster i. W., 1894). Part of this work (pp. 1-44) has been published separately as a thesis (Monasterii Guestf., 1894). J. Huemer, Wien. Stud. XVI (1894), 121 sqq. C. A. Bernoulli, Der Schriftstellerkatalog des Hieronymus. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur (Freiburg i B. und Leipzig

1895). 6) See Bernoulli,

pp. 163-174.


least, the faults, disfigurations, shortenings, arbitrary enlargements and translation errors which it contains, Sychowski arrives at the conclusion that it is of no value as a historical source. This verdict (quoted in full above p. 96 n. 1) is completed by the following remark (op. cit., p. 19): >>Hieronymushat mit dem ersten Teil hochstens insofern etwas Verdienstvolles geleistet, als er die bei Eusebius an verschiedenen Stellen zerstreuten Nachrichten iiber Schriftsteller und deren Schriften gesammelt, zusammengestellt und in eine leicht iibersichtliche Form gebracht hat. Einen anderen, als diesen, noch dazu sehr zweifelhaften Wert hat dieser Teil nicht. Zweifelhaft, sage ich, ist dieser Wert; denn was niitzen die in schonster Ordnung zusammengestellten Angaben iiber Autoren und deren Geistesprodukte, wenn man sie wegen ihrer Unzuverliissigkeit und der auf Schritt und Tritt uns begegnenden Irrtiimer nur mit einem berichtigenden Kommentare benutzen kann, der iiberall auf die Quelle, aus welcher diese Angaben geschopft sind, zuriickgreifen muss? 1) Ist es nicht lohnender, der unerlasslichen Forderung wissenschaftlicher historischer Methode zu geniigen und auf die Urquelle zuriickzugehen, dort die zerstreuten Nachrichten noch einmal selbst zu sammeln und richtig zusammenzustellen, statt der abgeleiteten Quelle, der Schrift des Hieronymus, fast nur Ungenauigkeiten, Fehler, falsche Titel von Schriften u. s. w. zu entnehmen?>> There is not much to say in addition to Sychowski's straightforward and undisputable criticism which has paved the way for an unprejudiced understanding not only of De viris illustribus but also of Jerome's way of working in general. The supposition that Jerome by his own reading was acquainted with the authors mentioned 2) has become untenable, as his knowledge proves mostly to be derived exclusively from Eusebius, and so far his reputation for immense learning, based, not the least, on De viris illustribus, has suffered a loss. The same Jerome who once charged Ambrose with literary theft 3 ) is not very sollicitous to inform the reader of his relation to Eusebius; on 1 v. Sychowski and Bernoulli reproduce the text, the former with a ) Both commentary (pp. 74-194), the latter with underliuings which at a single glance show which elements are alien to the original source (pp. r-46). 2 Hennianensis (t A. D. 571), Pro ) It occurs for the first time in Facundus defensione trium capitulorum IV. 2 (PL 67,619): Hieronymus ... vir admodum

doctus, qui etiam tantae fuerat lectionis, ut paene omnes sive in Graeco sive in Latino eloquio divinarum scripturarum tractatores legeret (quoted by Sychowski, p. 12 n. r). 8 ) See above pp. n5 sqq.





the contrary, he covers his indebtedness by means of small additions, changes and personal remarks. 1) This weakness for putting on scholarly airs is, as we shall see, a characteristic feature of Jerome's. The careless and unsatisfactory use rnade of the main source suggests that the work was written in great haste. We know from incidental remarks that this was the case in other books too and we may infer that J erorne's way of working and using sources in these works did not differ much from what has been established as to De viris

illustribus. Among the ecclesiastical authors Jerome took in not only heretics,2) but also, as a kind of honorary members, three Jews (Philo, Iosephus and Iustus) and - Seneca, the Stoic philosopher. 3) This is due to Jerome's tendency: the pagan critics, who held the Church to be without philosophers and orators and characterized the Christian faith as rustica simplicitas, had to learn how rnany and how distinguished writers the Church had produced. 4) The same tendency underlies the honorary epithets which are generously conferred to Christian writers and their woorks. 5)

1) Cf. Sychowski, pp. 22 sqq., 60 sqq. 2 ) Augustine, Epist. 40,6, disapproved of it. 3) The reason for introducing Seneca in catalogo sanctorum ( Vir. ill. 12) was the correspondence between Seneca and the apostle Paul, a Christian forgery. A new edition was published in 1938 by Ch. W. Barlow: Senecae epistulae ad Paiilum et Pauli ad Senecam quae vocantur (Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome. Vol. X). 4) Vir. ill. prol. Discant ergo Celsus, Porphyrius et Iulianus, rabidi adversum Christum canes, discant sectatores eorum, qui putant ecclesiam nullos philosophos et eloquentes, nultos habuisse doctores, quanti et quales viri eam fundaverint, exstruxerint, adornaverint, et desinant /idem nostram ritsticae tantum simplicitatis arguere suamque potius imperitiam recognoscant. 6) See Sychowski, pp. 30 sq.; Bernoulli, pp. 223 sq.

Chap. 4. Polemical A.

and other writings


The controversy with Iovinianus

During the first seven years in Bethlehem Jerome had broken off all intercourse with Rome, absorbed in monastic life and in writing commentaries on the Scriptures. This self-chosen isolation did not last for ever. When an opportunity arose, Jerome did not fail to reappear before the Roman public in his old part of the foremost champion of virginity. Afterwards he became implicated in the bitter Origenist controversy, where he played a leading part, raising himself up as the champion of orthodoxy. In a period of ten years, from Adversus Iovinianum (393) to Apologia adversus Rufinum (40I and 402) the polemical pamphlets occupy the first place in his literary work. The two books Ad versus I o v in i an um (PL 23, 22I-353) were due to suggestions made by Roman brethren, as is stated in the opening lines, I. I: Pauci admodum dies sunt, quod sancti ex urbe Roma fratres cuiusdam mihi I oviniani commentariolos transmiserunt rogantes, ut eorum ineptiis responderem et Epicurum Christianum evangelico atque apostolico vigore conterrerem.1) J ovinianus, although himself a monk, had roused opposition to the excessive rigidness of the ascetic movement; among other things he asserted that virgins, widows and married women had the same merit if they did not differ in other

1 ) I can hardly bring myself to think that Jerome was asked to 'frighten' the Christian Epicurus. In place of conterrerem I propose to read contererem, 'to crush him', a metaphor originating from Gen. 3, 15 (about the Serpent): lpsa conteret caput tuum (cf. further e. g. Hier. Epist. 30, 14, 2 Ut dominus Jesus conterat satanam sub pedibus nostris; In 0s. lib. II praef. p. 52 Necesse est, ut ... Amafionios et

Rabirios nostri temporis ... evangelico calces pede hydramque et scorpium iuxta fabulas poetarum aduras cauterio, solea conteras). The parallel passage, Epist. 54, 18, 3: Scio me ante hoe ferme biennium edidisse libros contra Iovinianum, quibus venientes e contrario quaestiones ... scripturarum auctoritate contrivi, is in favour of my conjecture, as well as the rhythmic clausula vigore contererem.




1 43

respects. Because of these doctrines he was excommunicated in Rome in 390 and in Milan in 391. Some years later, probably in the first part of 393, Jerome >>seizedthe opportunity of giving the final blow, on the field of literature, to the heretic already condemned by the bishops Siricius and Ambrosius►>. 1) Griitzmacher, the protestant theologian, has a very low opinion of this work; Cavallera, Jerome' s catholic biographer, estimates it very highly. According to the latter it is ►>le plus considerable (traite) qu'il eut compose jusqu'alors►>, ►>l'reuvre la plus brillante et l'une des plus soignees de saint Jerome►>. 2 ) The scholar who is not affected by theological interests or dogmatic prejudices must admire, from a literary point of view, Jerome's brilliant qualities as a writer, but at the same time he cannot but take offence at the low standard of polemics and at the repulsive traits of character which in this work are only too conspicuous. 3) >>NeitherAugustine nor Ambrosius nor Siricius reproached Iovinianus for shameful behavioun>, says Griitzmacher; >>onlyJerome dragged his name down in the dirt>>as he always did in his polemics. Being unable to see any but bad motives in his adversaries he charged them with all kinds of faults and loaded them with insults and spiteful words. The first book opens with a malicious criticism of Iovianus' style. I quote it in full (I. 1): Quos (sc. commentariolos Ioviniani) cum legissem, et omnino non intelligerem, coepi revolvere crebrius et non verba modo atque sententias sed singulas paene syllabas discutere, volens prius scire quid diceret et sic vel probare vel redarguere quad dixisset. V erum scriptorum tanta barbaries est et tantis vitiis spurcissimus sermo confusies, ut nee quid loquatur nee quibus argumentis velit probare quad loquitur potuerim intelligere. Totus enim tumet, totus iacet: attollit se per singula et quasi debilitatus coluber in ipso conatu frangitur. Non est contentus nostro, id est humano more loqui, altius quiddam aggreditur.

'Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus' (Hor. Ars. poet. 139). 'Quad ipse non sani esse hominis non sanus iuret Orestes' (Pers. Sat. 3,rr7 sq.) Griitzmacher, II, p. 148. 2) J,oc. cit., I. p. 157. a) Griitzmacher duly recognizes passes them by in silence. 1)







1 44


Praeterea sic involvit omnia et quibusdam inextricabilibus nodis universa perturbat, ut illud Plautinarum litterarum ei possit aptari: 'Has quidem praeter Sibyllam leget nemo' .. .1) Nam divinandum est. Furiosas Apollinis vates legimus et illitd Vergilianum (Aen. X. 640): 'Dat sine mente sonum'. Heraclitum quoque cognomento axon,wov sudantes philosophi vix intelligunt. Sed quid ad nostrum 2) cuius libros multo difficilius alyµarlO'-CrJV, est nosse quam vincere? Quamquam et in victoria non parva sit dif fi'cultas. Quis enim super are queat, cuius assertionem penitus ignoret? Nothing in this paragraph reveals that it was written by a Christian or against a Christian. We listen to an antique rhetor, proud of his own ability, mocking superciliously at the shortcomings of his adversary. We are confronted with conceptions and topics, familiar to the school of rhetoric, with names belonging to pagan mythology and literature, with quotations dexterously chosen and applied. The whole of it is a masterpiece of malicious irony. Four poets, Horace, Persius, Plautus and Virgil, are quoted at the outset in rapid succession. A great many poetical lines and reminiscences come in well in the sequel also. We shall pay attention to them first, before proceeding to examine the mass of other fragments of secular learning and literature which are worked into this pamphlet. While declaiming against the pleasures of the board Jerome adduces Horace: II. 12 Inridet Horatius appetitum ciborum, qui consumpti relinquunt paenitentiam: · 'Sperne voluptates, nocet empta dolore voluptas' (Epist. I. 2, 55). Et cum in amoenissimo agro in morsum voluptuosorum hominum se crassum pinguemque describeret, lusit his versibus (ib. I. 4, 15 sq.): 'Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises, cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum'. To those who preferred married life to virginity he holds out Virgil's words about Dido, II. 36: Vergilianum consilium est (Aen. IV. 172): 'Coniugium vocat, hoe praetexit nomine culpam'. 1




This is a free paraphrase of Plaut. Pseud. 25 sq.: Hasquidem pol credo, nisi Sibulla legerit, interpretari alium posse neminem. Thus Bickel with l\18S.





1 45

When he musters antiquity in order to prove that even then virginitatem semper tenuisse pudicitiae principatum, two instances fetched from Virgil are inserted into his list, I. 41: Harpalicem quoque virginem Thraciam insignis poeta describit (Aen. I. 316 sqq.) et reginam Volscorum Camillam, quam Turnus, cui auxilio venerat, laudare volens non amplius habuit quad diceret, nisi virginem nominaret:

'O genus Italiae virgo' (Aen. XI. 508). Especially numerous are the reminiscences of Persius and Terence. It cannot be a mere chance that Adv. Iovin. in addition to the literal quotation of Persius already mentioned contains three more passages all of which recall the first satire of Persius: I. 47 A ut si bona fuerit et suavis uxor, quae tamen rara avis est..,,..Pers. 1, 46 Quando haec rara avis est;1) II. 21 Protensus est aqualiculits .- ib. 1, 57 Pinguis aqualiculus protenso sexquipede extet;2 ) II. 22 Quid prodest luscum vocare luscum ..,,.. ib. 1, 128 Et lusco qui possit dicere 'lusce'. In this connection we have to examine the two letters to Pammachius and Domnion, Epist. 49 and 50, written shortly after Adv. Iovin. on account of the criticism it gave rise to. We find there two or three other borrowings from Persius: Epist. 49, 15, 6 Qui eodem die post coitum communicant et iuxta Persium 'noctem flumine purgant' ..,,.. Sat. 2, 16 Et noctem flumine purgas; Epist. 50, 4, 3 In tantam opinionem ib. 1, 29 sq. venit eloquentiae, ut soleant dicta eius cirratorum esse dictata ..,,.. Ten cirratorum centum fuisse dictata pro nihilo pendas; 3) perhaps also 50,5,2 Possum remordere, si velim, possum genuinum laesus infigere; cf. Pers. 1, n5 Et genuinum fregit in illis. 4) Thus, not less than six or seven reminiscences of Persius, or more than one third of those listed by Liibeck, occur in the documents referring to the fight with Iovinianus. I think we may safely conclude that Jerome at that time intentionally renewed his acquaintance with the Stoic poet, the sharpest satirist of Roman literature. And now to Terence. We have seen that in the previous period 1) Thes. II. 1441, 56 sqq. gives four other instances: Iuv. 6, 165; Hier. Adv. Pelag. II. u; De virg. Mar. 20; In 0s. praef. Jerome is more likely to quote Persius whom he knows than Juvenal whom he quotes only once (cf. below p. 181). 2) Cf. Thes. II. 365, 83 sqq. 8 ) Thes. III. u88, 56 sqq. ') Liibeck, p. 196.

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:




Terence was often made use of and that one particular preface, In Mick. lib. II praef., is virtually built up upon reminiscences of the comicus. Therefore we are not astonished to find that the pamphlet against Iovinianus contains more reminiscences of Terence than of any other poet. Two of them occur in one and the same chapter; I. 48 Ut scias illud verum esse Terentii, quod consulto ambigue extulit: 'Quid est hoe? Omnes socrus oderunt nurus..,.. Ter. Hee. 201 Itaque adeo uno animo omnes socrus oderunt nurus;1) ib. Et noster comicus fortunatum putat, qui uxorem numquam duxerit..,.. Ter. Ad. 43 sq. Quod fortunatum isti putant, uxorem, numquam habui. 2) A literal quotation of Eun. 732: Verbum hercle hoe verum erit: 'Sine Cerere et Libero friget Venus', occurs II. 7: Unde et comicus: 'Sine Cerere' inquit 'et Libero friget Venus' (also Epist. 54, 9, 5). To the three comedies which are here hinted at must be added Andria: I. 28 Atqui hoe periculum in memet fieri grave est..,..Andr. 566 At istuc periclum in /ilia fieri grave est. Whether the proverbial expression par pari referam I. 36 (also Adv. Pelag. I. 13) originates directly or not from Ter. Eun. 445 par pari referto, is impossible to say. Jerome follows the disposition of his adversary, answering in their proper turns his four theses. 3) As to the demonstration, he lays down the following principles, I. 4: Adversus singulas propositiones eius script u r arum vel maxime nitar test i m on ii s, ne querulus garriat se eloquentia magis quam veritate superatum. Quod si explevero et illum utriusque instrumenti nube oppressero, assumam ex em p la s a e c u l a r i s quoque l i t t e r a t u r a e, ad quam et ipse provocat. Doceboque etiam inter philosophos et egregios in republica viros virtutes voluptatibus, id est Pythagoram, Platonem et Aristidem Aristippo, Epicuro et Alcibiadi ab omnibus solere praeferri. In fact Jerome makes little use of pagan topics in dealing with Iovinianus' second and fourth theses (II. 1-4; 18-38), but he resorts to them all the more in discussing (Book I) the first thesis (viz. that virgins, widows and married women have the same merit, if they do not differ in other respects), and the third thesis (viz. that fasting is not a more meritorious action than taking food with thanksgiving). Two bulky parts, I. 41-49 and 1

Cf. In Mich. II. 7, where the line is quoted in the same incorrect form. See Bickel (title below p. 147 n. 2), p. 73. 3 ) Adv. Iovin. I. 3 Proponam breviter adversarii sententias, etc.; I. 4 Sequar vestigia partitionis expositae. )







II. 6-r4,

contain mere extracts from antique learning; in no other work of Jerome's are pagan topics massed together to such an extent. From a scholarly point of view these chapters are most valuable. Firstly we are here provided with many pieces of information which we do not get elsewhere. Secondly we are favoured with a unique opportunity of seeing Jerome at work and of forming a correctlyfounded conception of his literary procedure. Before entering upon I. 4r-49 where the question of sources is controversial, as the works referred to are in most cases lost, we shall pay attention to II. 6-r4 where the principal sources still remain in our hands, and the use made of them can be studied in detail. Jerome here gives an account, rich in matter, of fasts in antiquity and of the customs of various peoples, especially concerning food. His chief informant is the Neo-Platonic philosopher Porphyrius whose work De abstinentia (Ileet anoxfis lµtpvxwv) he plagiarizes throughout, cutting out and putting together pieces from different parts of the work, sometimes even translating word for word. J erome's unscrupulous robbery of Porphyrius, duly recognized long ago, has been studied carefully by Liibeck and Bickel. The former makes a list of parallels which, although far from exhaustive, fills up nine pages. 1) The latter gives a masterly analysis of the question, and also a critical edition (badly needed as regards Jerome's treatises on the whole) of the chapters under discussion, with minute information about the sources. 2 ) As a result of these researches, Jerome's way of working is shown 1)

Lubeck, op. cit., pp. 67-75. E. Bickel, Diatribe in Senecae philosophi fragmenta. Vol. I. Fragmenta de matrimonio. Lipsiae r9r5. See especially Chap. V De Porphyrio Ilsei ay)lelas scriptore (pp. r29-220); the Appendix (pp. 395-420): Eruditio saecularis libri II Adversus Iovinianum, contains the edition of II. 5-14. - This fundamental book is not even mentioned by Jerome's biographer Cavallera. It is characteristic of the lack of philological interest which diminishes the value of Cavallera's work. ·rn spite of its great merits Cavallera's biography is not an unprejudiced historical study. It can be thoroughly appreciated only if one accepts the extreme catholic point of view from which it has been written. It follows that I cannot subscribe to a judgment which has a conspicuous position and because of that may be influential. In the last edition of P. de Labriolle's well-known Histoire de la litterature latine chretienne (3e ed., Paris r947, T. II, p. 495) the reviser, G. Bardy, writes: >>L'ouvrage fondamental sur saint Jerome n'est plus celui de Griitzmacher ... mais !'ample etude de Cavallera». 2)


to be that of a plagiarist and a skilful mosaic artist. Among the excerpts from Porphyrius are interspersed borrowings from many other pagan authors, as well as quotations from the Bible and from Christian writers. The greatest part of his information is derived from Greek sources. 1) Xenophon is mentioned and imitated twice in Chap. 13 (for the rest a cento from Porphyrius) and once in Chap. 14,2) Galenus several times. 3) Tertullian's De ieiunio has left many traces in this part and still more in the purely Christian parts of Book II. 4) A few other incidental or uncertain cases could be added. 5) As to other authors mentioned the matter stands thus that all that Jerome reports - names, book titles and data - are to be found in Porphyrius. If there could be any doubt about Jerome's dependence, it is definitively removed by the fact that the quotations are the same and in both authors follow in the same order, as the list below will show: Hier. Adv. Iovin. II Chap. 13 Dicaearchus in libris antiquitatum et descriptione Graeciae ... ib. Theophrastus ib. Chaeremon Stoicus (the parallels above are quoted in full by Bickel p. 84). 1

Porphyr. De abstin. IV Chap. 2 Lltxa{aexo~ TOV aexaiov

{3lov -rij; •E).MCJo; acprJyovµevo; Chap. 4 0e6cpeacrro; Chap. 6 Xaie~µwv a-rwtx6;


to the quotations already mentioned from Terence (Eun. 732, ) In addition see above p. 146) and Horace (Epist. I. 2, 55 and I. 4, 15 sq., above p. r44) only .one Latin author, Sallust, is quoted: II. ro Unde et historicus: 'Animae', inquit, imperio, corporis servitio magis utimur; alterum nobis cum dis, alterum cum beluis commune est' .,.. Sall. Cat. r, 2 Animi imperio - commune est. I. 28 - Sall. Cat. II, 3 (see p. 293 below). 2 ) Cf. Liibeck, pp. 24 sqq., 7r; Bickel, pp. 87 sqq., 418. 3 ) Chap. 6 (p. 398, 2-4 Bickel), II (pp. 410, ro-4II, 5 B). For the use of Galenus cf. Liibeck, pp. roo-104; Courcelle, pp. 74 sq. (>>Galien est sa seule source en matiere medicale,>). 4 ) Bickel, p. 420, with reference to Fr. Schultzen, »Die Benutzung der Schriften Tertullians 'De monogamia' und 'De ieiunio' bei Hieronymus Adversus Iovinianum ►> (Neue Jahrbiicher fur deutsche Theologie, T. III, 1894, p. 497). 5 of those general references to literature which we are so ) A good instance often met with in Jerome, and which in no way imply a real knowledge of those mentioned is II. 6: Legat qui vult Aristotelem et Theophrastum prosa, Marcellum Sidetem et nostrum Flavium hexametris versibus disserentes, Plinium quoque Secundum et Dioscoridem et ceteros tam physicos quam medicos.


Chap. 14 Josephus in secunda Iudaicae captivitatis historia et in octavo decimo antiquitatum libro et contra A ppionem duobus voluminibus, .. (Cf. Bickel ad loc., p. 416). ib. N eanthes Cyzicenus et Asclepiades Cyprius ... ib. Eubulus qitoque qui historiam M ithrae multis voluminibus explicat ... ib. Bardesanes vir Babylonius ... ib. Euripides ... ib. Xenocrates philosophus . . ,



Chap. II , Iworpro; lv T>. In Epist. 33, perhaps written in Rome before Jerome could have access to the library at Caesarea where Origen's opera omnia were collected, he makes a list of Origen's works amounting to about 800 items. As the books included with only a few exceptions are mentioned in Jerome's other writings the chances are that Courcelle has hit the exact mark in supposing that the catalogue in reality gives those works of which Jerome was in possession. In the writings before 393 Jerome's admiration for the Alexandrian finds eloquent expression. Origen is to him the second teacher of the Church next to the Apostles; 4 ) by his work he has surpassed all other Fathers, Greek and Latin; in the homilies on the Canticles he has surpassed himself. 6) Right up to 393 Jerome never finds fault with Origen 1 ) Hom. Orig. in Ier. et Ezech. prol. pp. 741-742 (PL 25, 612) Scio te cupere, ut omne genus transferam dictionis; praemisi causam, cur facere non passim. Hoe tamen spondeo, quia ... , non dicam cuncta, quia hoe dixisse temerarium est, sed permulta sum translaturus, ea lege ... ut ego vocem praebeam, tu notarium. 2 ) In Mich. lib. II praef. p. 480 Nam quad dicunt Origenis me volumina compilare

(the whole passage is quoted above pp. 137 sq). 3 preface to the translation of Ilsel aexwv(Hier. ) Courcelle, p. 89. Cf. Rufinus' Epist. 80, 2, 2): Qui cum ultra septuaginta libellos Origenis, quos homileticos appel-

lavit, aliquantos etiam de tomis in apostolum scriptis transtulisset ... 4 (PI, 25, 61r) Hominem iuxta ) Hom. Orig. in Ier. et Ezech. prol. pp. 741-742 Didymi videntis sententiam alterum post apostolum (all. apostolos) ecclesiarum magistrum; Nom. Hebr. praef. pp. 3-4 (PL 23, 8r6) Origenem quern post apostolos ecclesiarum magistrum nemo nisi imperitus negabit. 6 ) Epist. 33, 5, 1 Videtisne et Graecos pariter et Latinos unius labore superatos? Quis enim umquam tanta legere potuit, quanta ipse conscripsit? Hom. Orig. in Cant.





or charges him with heresy,1) although he relates many of his heterodox doctrines which Rufinus later on was quick to point out. He suddenly changed his attitude when a certain Atarbius in 393 called upon him and Rufinus to damn Origen's heterodoxy. 2) Jerome complied and became more and more implicated in the dogmatic controversy, taking sides with Epiphanius, while Rufinus stood firm and took up a position on Johannes' side. The vicissitudes of this conflict, during which Jerome came near to being banished, have no place here. 3) Jerome's first literary contribution to it was a translation of Epiphanius' letter to Johannes (Epist. 5r) which was published against his wish. 4 ) Johannes charged Jerome with not rendering the text correctly. The matter caused a sensation even in Rome, and Jerome was obliged to explain his principles of translation in a letter to Pammachius (Epist. 57 De optima genere interpretandi). Whether Johannes' indictment was just or not we cannot know, as the original text is not extant. But J erome's principles are sound. He disapproves of literal translation, 5 ) making an exception for Scrip-

pp. 499-500 (PI, 23, II73) Origenes, cum in ceteris libris omnes vicerit, in Cantico canticorum ipse se vicit (cf. Cic. De or. III. 3). Cf. also Quaest. Hebr. praef. pp. 303-304 (PI 23, 986) Cuius (sc. Origenis) nomen, »si parva licet componere magnis>>, mep nomine invidiosius est (see above p. 132). 1 ) Cf. Cava11era, II, pp. 115-127: Note Q. Saint Jerome et Origene. Cavallera concludes, p. 120: »Jusqu'en 393 ... Jerome n'a rien ecrit de defavorable a Origene. Si parfois ii se separe de lui, non seulement il ne songe pas a !'accuser d'heresie, mais au contraire il declare que ce n'est qu'un pretexte de gens envieux•>. 2 ) Cf. Griitzmacher, III p. 3: >>Dass Hieronymus auch in der Periode, in der er den Origenes pries, nie bewusst heterodox war und dass er nie absiehtlieh fiir irgend welche Heterodoxien des Origenes durch seine Ubersetzungen hatte Propaganda machen wollen, diirfen wir ihm durchaus glauben. Das angebliche Umsatteln des Hieronymus im Origenistischen Streite besteht lediglich darin, dass iltm die Heterodoxien des Origenes jetzt zum Bewusstsein kamen, und er sie nun aufs schiirfste verdammte. Das Unerfreuliche und Unredliche dabei ist nur, dass er es so darstellt, als ob er immer so iiber Origenes geurteilt und seine Ketzereien perhorresziert habe,>. 8 ) I refer to Cavallera, I, pp. 193-286. 4) Epist. 57, 2, 2. 6 ) He applies (Epist. 57, 5, r) to his critics a quotation from Terence: 'Faciuntne intellegendo ut nikil intellegant' (Andr. pro!. 17), and adds: Dum alienam inperitiam volunt coarguere, sitam produnt.


tures, ubi et verborum ordo mysterium est; 1) otherwise he lays down as a rule non verbum e verbo, sed sensum exprimere de sensu, having Cicero for his authority (ib. chap. 5, 2): Habeoque h1,ius rei magistrum Tullium, qui Protagoram Platonis et Oeconomicum Xenophontis et Aeschini et Demosthenis duas contra se orationes pulcherrimas transtulit. Quanta in illis praetermiserit, quanta addiderit, quanta mutaverit, ut proprietates alterius linguae suis proprietatibits explicaret, non est huius temporis dicere. Sufficit mihi ipsa translatoris auctoritas. After this follows a long quotation from De optima genere orationis, 13-14, where, among other things, Cicero says about his translations of the two speeches: N ec converti ut interpres, sed ut orator, sententiis isdem et earum formis tam quam figuris, verbis ad nostram consuetudinem aptis. In quibus non pro verbo verbum necesse habui reddere, sed genus omnium verborum vimque servavi. Non enim me ea adnumerare lectori putavi oportere, sed tamquam adpendere. Jerome attaches so much importance to Cicero's authority that he adds another quotation from the same work. 2 ) He proceeds further to cite other secular writers (Chap. 5, 5): Sed et Horatius, vir acutus et doctus, hoe idem in Arte poetica erudito interpreti praecipit (v. 133 sq.): 'N ec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres'. Terentius Menandrum, Plautus et Caecilius veteres comicos interpretati sunt: numquid haerent in verbis ac non decorem magis et elegantiam in translatione conservant? Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi uaiwCr;Ua11vacant. Jerome was guided by the classics in translating the Chronica of Eusebius - he refers to his preface (Euseb. Citron. can. ed. Schone II. p. I, 8; 2, 3) - and in his other translations. 3) By this he introduced 1 ) This is consonant with the practice of the old versions of the Bible, but Jerome is the first one to formulate the principle. I refer in general to F. Blatt's paper >>Remarqucs sur l'histoire des traductions Latines>> (Classica et 1vlediaevalia, I, 1938, 217-242, especially pp. 220 sqq.) 2 ) Epist. 57, 5, 4 Rursumque in calce sermonis: 'Quorum ego', ail (scil. Cicero, De opt. gen. orat. 23), 'orationes, si ut spero ita expressero virtutibus utens illorum omnibus, id est sententiis et earum figuris et rerum ordine, verba persequens eatenus, ut ea non abhorreant a more nostro, quae si e Graecis omnia conversa non erunt, tamen ut generis eiusdem sint, elaboravimus'. 3 ) Cf. chap. 5, 6 Unde et ego doctus a talibus, etc.; 6, r Hoe /antitm probare voluerim me semper ab adulescentia non verba, sed sententias transtulisse.





no novelties - proofs are to be found in the preface of Evagrius to the translation of Vita Antonii and the translations made by Hilarius. Later on, when Rufinus made use, in a rather excessive way, of the same freedom as a translator Jerome turned against him. 1) The irony of this is not unparallelled in his life. There are many other classical topics and reminiscences in this letter although the main part of it deals with quotations from the Scriptures. We meet again a thrice-quoted line of Juvenal (1, 15): Chap. 12, 2 Ergo frustra tanto tempore studuimus et 'saepe manum ferulae subduximus'; further allusions to Ennius, 2) Virgil, 3) Cicero, 4) Livy 5) and Quintilian.6) The letter ends with a hint at the Philippics of Demosthenes and Cicero. 7) By the irony of events Jerome was blamed in the West for being an Origenist while he stood up against Origenism in the East. Egone hereticus? he answers the calumniator, the same Vigilantius against whom he later directed a violent libel. 8 ) Et cur me, quaeso, heretici non amant (Epist. 61, 1, 3)? Origenes hereticus: quid ad me, qui illum in plerisque hereticum non nego (ib. 2, 1)? Jerome here takes up the line of defence he was going to follow in the sequel (ib. z, z): At idem et scripturas in multis bene interpretatus est et prophetarum obscura disse1 ) Cf. e. g. Adv. Rufin. I. 3.7. II. rr. etc. Griitzmacher remarks (III, p· rr): >>Er (sc. Hieronymus) hat diese Ubersetzungsgrundsatze, die er hier aufstellt, allerdings im spateren Streit mit Rufin bei der Ubersetzung von verleugneb. 2 ) *Epist. 57, 2, 2 Cum haec epistula per multorum ora volitaret; cf. Enn. Epigr. II, p. 215 Vahlen: Volito vivas per ora virum (probably taken over from Cicero; cf. Vahlen). 3) *lb. 12, r Ut ex uno crimine intellegantur et cetera ..,..Verg. Aen. II. 65 sq. Crimine ab uno disce omnes (Weyman, Woch. f. klass. Philol. XXVII, rgm, mm). 4 ) *lb. 12, 4 Haec non est illius culpa ... sed magistrorum eius, qui iltum magna mercede nihil scire docuerunt. Hilberg compares Cic. Phil. II. 43 At quanta merces

Ihei aexwv

rhetori data est? ... Duo milia iugerum ... rhetori adsignasti ... ut populi Romani tanta mercede nihil sapere disceres. 6 ) Ib. 3, 2. As to the historical exempla (about the treacherous teacher in Falcrii and the treacherous physician of Pyrrhus) Hilberg refers to Livy V. 27 and Periocha XIII. 6 ) *lb. 12, 2 Egredientes de portu statim impegimus ..,.. Quint. Inst. IV. r, 61 Et pessimus certe gubernator, qui navem, dum portu egreditur, impegit (Hilberg). 7) lb. 13, 2 Optoque si fieri potest, etsi adversarii saevierint, commentarios potius scripturarum quam Demosthenis et Tullii Philippicas scribere. 8 ) Contra Vigilantium (A. D. 406. PL 23, 353-368). See below pp. 245 sq.



ruit et tam novi quam veteris testamenti revelavit maxima sacramenta. Si igitur quae bona sunt transtuli et mala vel amputavi vel correxi vel tacui, arguendus sum, cur per me Latini bona eius habeant, ignorent mala? True to his habit Jerome treats the opponent as an ignoramus (Chap. 4, 1): Si libet exercere ingenium, trade te grammaticis et rhetoribus, disce dialecticam, sectis instruere philosophorum, ut cum omnia didiceris saltem tune tacere incipias; quamquam stultum faciam magistro cunctorum magistros quaerere et ei modum inponere, qui loqui nescit et tacere non potest.1) All attempts at mediation being without success Johannes approached Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria with an account of the controversy, the so-called Apologia. 2 ) Jerome answered with a polemical pamphlet, C o n t r a I o h a n n e m Hi e r o s o l y m i ta n u m (PL 23, 371 412), which certainly deserves no prize for moderation. 3 ) Johannes' confession of faith reminds Jerome, he says (chap. 2), of the rhetorical school: Putes eum non expositionem fidei sed f iguratam controversiam scribere. Quad iste nunc appetit, olim in scholis didicimus. N ostra adversum nos dimicat armatura. Johannes' Origenistic doctrines 1 ) The last words are a much used tag borrowed from Quint. Inst. VIII. 5, 18 Cum loqui non posset, tacere non poterat. See above p. 112. - Ironically Vigilantius is compared with Chrysippus (3, 1) and with Cato (3, 3). ") Reconstructed from the extracts in Jerome's Contra Johannem by C. P. Caspari, Ungedruckte, unbeachtete und wenig beachtete Quellen zur Geschichte des Tau/symbols und des Glaubensregels (Christiania 1866), I, pp. 166-172. 3 ) Cf. Cavallera, I, p. 223: ,>Seuls l'exasperation et l'emportement de la lutte peuvent en excuser le ton ... Ces apostrophes virulentes nous causent quelque malaise. Tout en rendant justice au zele de Jerome et a son orthodoxie, on eprouve un sentiment penible a le voir accuser avec tant d'acharnement cet Origene dont il avait si souvent chante Jes louanges et vante la doctrine, plus encore, a constater qu'il ne met aucune bonne volonte dans l'interpretation des textes et que, dans sa partialite contre l'eveque, ii s'obstine, en echenillant sa profession de foi, a decouvrir un sens pervers et des intentions criminelles aux expressions les moins sujettes a cautiom. Griitzmacher (III, p. 18 sq.) lays stress also upon the literary merits of the pamphlet: ~Sie ist wie alle Streitschriften des Hieronymus voll von Bosheiten. Aber die historischen Partien sind geradezu glanzend geschrieben. Gewiss har er bisweilen iibertrieben, aber er besitzt doch die grosse Gabe, plastisch zu schildern. Wir sehen die beiden Kampfhahne, Epiphanius und Johannes, in lebendiger Anschaulichkeit vor uns. Wie spannend weiss er kleine Einzelziige, die den Wstorischen Bericht wirkungsvoll beleben und die handelnden Personlichkeiten mit einem Schlaglicht charakterisieren, in die Darstellung einzustreuem.





are derived from heathendom (Chap. 19): Pertrahuntur in medium vestra mysteria et de gentilium fabulis dogma contextum Christianis auribus publicatur. Hoe quad vos miramini, olim in Platone contempsimus. Contempsimus autem, quia Christi stultitiam recepimus.1) He is compared by his followers with the most illustrious names of antiquity (Chap. 4): Licet te fautores tui disertiorem Demosthene, acutiorem Chrysippo, sapientiorem Platone contendant et tibi ipsi forte persuaserint. Jerome himself evokes the famous orators in order to deride the eloquence of his adversary (Chap. 12): Nunc est mirari Demosthenem, qui pulcherrimam orationem contra Aeschinem multo tempore dicitur exarasse. Frustra suspicimus Tullium; refert enim Cornelius Nepos 2) se praesente iisdem paene verbis quibus edita est eam pro Cornelio seditioso tribuno defensionem peroratam. En Lysias noster, en Gracchus et, ut aliquid de neotericis inferam, Q. Aterius qui 'ingenium in numerato habebat', ut sine monitore tacere non posset, de quo egregie Caesar Augttsltts: 'Quintus' inquit 'noster sufflaminandus est'. This is a quotation from Sen. Contr. IV praef. 7: Itaque divus Augustus optime dixit: 'Haterius noster suf flaminandus est'. By a slip of the memory Jerome applies to the same Haterius another dictum of Augustus which according to Seneca the Elder, Contr. II. 5, 20, had reference to L. Vinicius: De hoe eleganter dixit divus Augustus: 'L. Vinicius ingenium in numerato ha bet'. There are no other genuine quotations in this pamphlet, but not a few reminiscences are woven into the texture, as the following list will show:

r. Natura hominum prona est ad clementiam. 3. Scribitnt saeculi litterae 'animantium caeca esse iudicia', quas tu forsitan sacris voluminibus occupatus omnino neglexeris.

*Sen. Bene/. VI. 29, 1 Naturam per se pronam ad misericordiam, humanitatem, clementiam. From a lost work of Cicero; cf. to In Os. lib. III praef. (below p. 219).

l) Cf. chap. 32 Argumenta vero illa ... non sunt tua: de gen/ilium fonte manarunt. Eadem enim opponunt nobis ethnici. Qui Christianum esse le dicis, gentilium arma depone. 2) Lubeck, p. 122: »E Cornell Nepotis libro 'De vita Ciceronis' scripto desumpta





5. Vetus narrat historia: Quidam cuni diserte diceret /erreturque impetu ac volubilitate verborum causamque omnino non tangeret, prudens auditor et iudex: 'Bene' inquit, 'bene, sed qua istud tam bene'? 6. Nunc vero quasi auribus lupum apprehenderis, nee tenere pates nee audes dimittere. 12. Gorgiam Leontinum cuncti philosophi et oratores lacerant, quad ausus sit publice sella posita polliceri responsurum se, de qua quisque re interrogare voluisset.

34. A pollonius Tyaneus scribitur, cum ante Domitianum staret in consistorio, repente non comparuisse. 37. Hoe satis imperite: in portu, ut dicitur, naufragium. 39. 0 testimonium pro se, nee Catani creditum.


Ter. Phorm. 506 sq. Immo, id quad aiunt, auribus teneo lupum; nam neque qua pacto a me amittam neque uti retineam scio. Cic. De or. I. 102 sq. Semper inrisisse eorum hominum impudentiam, qui cum in schola adsedissent, ex magna hominum frequentia dicere iuberent, si quis quid quaereret. Quad primum f erunt Leontinum f ecisse Gorgiam, qui permagnum quiddam suscipere ac profiteri videbatur, cum se ad omnia, de quibus quisque audire vellet, esse paratum denuntiaret. Cf. Lubeck, p. 129 sq. Philostr. Vit. Apoll. Tyan. VIII. 5. Cf. Lubeck, p. 97.

Ps. Quint. Deel. mai. 12, 23 In portu naufragium f ecimus. Cf. Plut. Cato min. 19 (Thes, Onomast. p. 268, 52 sqq.).

The mediation of Theophilus was at length crowned with success. Jerome answered his exhortation to peace in a long deferential letter (Epist. 82).1) In the beginning of 397 peace was concluded; Jerome and 1) No classic authors are mentioned in Epist. 82, only a line of Ennius is paraphrased, 3, 2: Antiqua sententia est: 'Quem metuit quis, odit; quem odit, perisse cupit' (probably taken over from Cic. Off. II. 23 'Quem metuum, oderunt; que,m

quisque odit, periisse expetit').





Rufinus shook hands in the Resurrection church at Jerusalem. This however more likely meant that personal dissension and questions of prestige were settled than that an agreement was reached about the dogmatic controversy. In reality everyone maintained his old position as to Origenism. 1) The quarrel entered on a new phase when Rufinus, who had returned to the West, in 398 translated Ilsgl, aexwv, the most controversial of Origen's works. In the preface 2) he pointed out Jerome as his foregoer, saying that his brother and colleague had made everybody desirous to read Origcn whom he had praised so grandiloquently in his writings. Nothing could be said against this statement; it corresponded to wellknown facts. Nor was it a lie when Rufinus characterised Jerome's proceeding in the following way (Epist. So, 2, 2): In quibus (scil. Origen's works) cum aliquanta offendicula inveniantur in Graeco, ita elimavit omnia interpretando atque purgavit, ut nihil in illis, quad a nostra fide discrepet, Latinus lector inveniat. Rufinus was perfectly within his rights when he took Jerome as his pattern in his own translation (ib. 2, 3): Hunc ergo etiam nos, licet non eloquentiae viribus, disciplinae tamen regulis, in quantum possumus, sequimur, observantes scilicet, ne ea, quae in libris Origenis a se ipso discrepantia inveniuntur atque contraria, proferamus. Jerome's Roman friends, Pammachius and Oceanus, were scandalized at Rufinus' translation and sent Jerome extracts from it which had been handed over to them before the work was published. 3) They called by which on Jerome to make a new, literal translation of Ilsgi aexwv the alterations made by Rufinus should be revealed. 4 ) Jerome complied. 1 ) Cf. Cavallera, I, p. 227, n. r: ►>On a ecrit que Jean de Jerusalem aurait achete la paix par !'immolation de ses convictions et sacrifie l'origenisme. C'est une affirmation gratuite, parfaitement dementie par la conduite ulterieure de Rufin, qui fit sa paix en meme temps que lui, et par !'attitude de Jean !ors de la nouvelle phase de querelle, ou il resta passifa. I think Cavallera is right against Griitzmacher who exaggerates the role Jerome played (III, p. 17 sq.): »Der Friede wurde geschlossen, nicht weil Hieronymus nachgab, sondem weil Johannes den Origenismus preisgab. Hieronymus blieb Sieger in diesem Kampfe>>. 2 ) Hier. Epist. 80. 9 ) J erome's unscrupulous friend Eusebius, later Bishop of Cremona, seems to have had a hand in this and other cases of foul play, so frequent in this quarrel. See Cavallera, I, p. 234. 4 ) Epist. 83. They added threateningly: Purga ergo suspiciones hominum et

convince criminantem, ne, si dissimulaveris, consensisse videaris.



He renounced his own principles of translation 1) and set about the task. In Epist. 84 to Pammachius and Oceanus Jerome explains his attitude against Origen, 2) but even in this he does not forget his favourite classics. A Ciceronian passage is put into the mouth of the adversaries, *Chap. 4, I: Quid igitur faciam? ... Iurem? Ridebunt et dicent: 'Dami nobis ista nascuntur' ..,..Cic. A cad. prior. II. So Sed desine, quaeso, cammunibus locis; dami nabis ista nascuntur. 3) This is not the place, he says Chap. 6, I, rhetoricum iactare sermonem. Non mihi dives Ciceronis lingua sufficiat, non fervens Demasthenis aratia animi mei pas sit inplere f ervorem, si velim hereticorum fraudulentias prodere. The supposed interpolations in Origen's writings are compared with an historic exemplum, IO, 2: Quasi ad Mithridatis litteras omnis veritas uno die de voluminibus illius raderetur; Hilberg refers to the slaughter of the Roman citizens in Asia Minor in 88 B. C. as related by Cicero, *Imp. Pomp. 7: Qui (sc. Mithridates) uno die tota in Asia ... uno nuntio atque una significatione litterarum cives Romanos omnes necandos trucidandosque denotavit. Origen is exculpated twice by means of Horatian lines: Chap. 8, 2 Quodsi quis I udas zelotes oppasuerit nobis errores eius, audiat libere: 'Interdum magnus dormitat Homerus, verum operi longa fas est ignoscere somnum' ..,..Hor. Ars 359-360; 4) Chap. 2, 3 Mordetur et Lucilius, quad incomposito currat pede, et tamen sales eiits leposque laudantur ..,..Hor. Sat. I. IO, I-4 Nempe inconposito dixi pede currere versus Lucili ... At idem, quad sale multo urbem defricuit, charta laudatur eadem. As to Virgil, this letter contains only one quotation: *Chap. 3, 5 Credite experto ..,..Aen. XI. 283 Experto credite (Hilberg). In Rufinus' preface there was nothing that could give rise to a rupture. The same is true of Jerome's letter to him (Epist. 8I). 5) However 1 ) Now he proclaims (Epist. 84, 12, 2): Mutare quippiam de Graeco non est vertentis, scd evertentis. 2 84, 2, 2 Laudavi interpretem, non dogmatisten, ingenium, non /idem, ) Epist. philosophum, non apostolum. 3 is quoted in full *Adv. Pelag. I. 17. ) The passage 4 alters the wording to fit in with his aim, writing interdum magnits ) Jerome instead of qitandoque bonus and ignoscere instead of obrepere. 6 in this case is in my opinion well) I agree with Cavallera, whose judgment balanced and impartial. »Rufin n'avance rien>>,he says (I, p. 240) >>quine soit rigoureusement vrah. >>C'esten ami que Rufin ecrit sa preface ... Les menage-



Rufinus never received this moderate letter; Pammachius and Oceanus neglected to hand it over to him. On the other hand they strove to give a wide diffusion to Jerome's apologetic letter (Epist. 84) where Rufinus plainly was designated as a heretic. 1) Jerome's Roman friends, not least Marcella and Eusebius, started a vehement anti-Origenist campaign and tried to influence the Pope. At the same time Theophilus of Alexandria suddenly changed his opinion and made a synod condemn Origenism. Even Pope Anastasius took steps to the same purpose. No wonder that Rufinus felt threatened and that he suspected Jerome of being the instigator of the machinations set going by his Roman friends. Whatever his responsibility Jerome was transported by the victory won by Theophilus (Epist. 86) and translated into Latin his anti-Origenist writings. Rufinus began the fight by writing a pamphlet, Apologiae in Hieronymum libri II (PL 21, 541-624). Before it had been published Jerome got knowledge of it and answered immediately (A. D. 401) in two books to which a third one was later added. It was perfectly clear to Rufinus that he challenged a man who was no less unscrupulous as a controversialist than he was unsurpassed as a writer. He was wise to emphasize his own illiteracy and want of stylistic skill, 2) and to set them off against the rhetorical mastership of his adversary. 3) What made Rufinus a dangerous opponent was his ments dont Jerome usa dans sa premiere rcponse, pour ne point paraitre detruire la reconciliation a laquelle il s'etait sincerement rattache, montre bien qu'a son avis, meme apres la preface de Rufin, elle n'avait point subi d'atteinte irreparable» (I, p. 241). Epist. 81, r, 4 contains an allusion to Plaut. Aul. 195: Haec apud te

potius amice expostulare volui quam lacessitus publice desaevire, ut animadvertas me reconciliatas amicitias pure colere et non iuxta Plautinam sententiam altera manu lapidem tenere, panem offerre altera. However Jerome voices his feelings in a sentence which is a veiled threat: r, 3 Poteram et ego, qui saepissime figuratas controversias declamavi, aliquid de veteri artijicio repetere et tuo te more laudare. It was later carried into effect in the Apologia adversus Rufinum. 1) Epist. 84, r Quia eadem Alexandriae et Romae et in toto paene orbe boni homines super meo nomine iactare consuerunt et tantum me diligunt, ut sine me heretici esse non possint ... 2 ) Cf. e. g. I. z Nos omissa omni ironia et ,,J:r,;oxelawx;tergiversatione, quae Deo exsecrabilis est, licet incomptis verbis et oratione incomposita respondebimus, veniam imperitiae nostrae a legentibus concedendam non immerito praesumentes. 3) I. 3 Veniam etiam ipse (sc. Hieronymus) nobis concedat, si forte aliquid aut asperius aut incomptius dicimus, quia imperitum kominem ad respondendum laces-



intimate knowledge of Jerome's and Origen's writings, owing to which he was able to produce full and irrefutable evidence of Jerome's being under the influence of, or at least being unaware of, Origen's unorthodox opinions. The hatred that had replaced the old friendship made Rufinus keen-sighted as to the less attractive features of Jerome, and he pilloried them in cold blood, the self-righteousness, the implacability, the disposition towards acting the bully, finding faults, abusing those who did not share his opinion and characterizing them as heretics. 1) One of the counts in the indictment is Jerome's attitude towards the classics (II. 6 sqq.). Rufinus points out that Jerome is inconsistent, oscillating between aversion and devotion to h i s Cicero, h i s Horace, h i s Virgil, and charges him with perjury because of the oath he took in his dream. 2) Rufinus himself represents the narrow-minded hostility to pagan literature that distinguished early monasticism. In his pamphlet he never quotes a pagan author except a line of Terence which he found in Jerome and maliciously turned against his antagonist, putting the following words into his mouth, I. 43: I pse (scil. Origenes) nobis prodidit, unde est totum quicquid nos loquimur, quicquid scribimus, quicquid dicti putatur eruditi, et quod 'de Graecis bonis Latina facimus non bona'.3 ) Jerome's weakness for boasting of his knowledge of literature, especially of Aristotelean didactics, gives rise to a counter-attack on the sivit, quem seiret non posse per multam artem et eloquentiae copiam id agere, ut is quem laesum vellet ac vulneratum, nee vulneratus videatur esse nee laesus. Hoe ergo eloquentiae genus ab ipso requiratur ... Qui vero obieetas depellere a se maculas cupit ... , non quam eleganter et ornate sed quam vere respondeat, cogitavit. 1 levi rumusculo commotus velut ) Cf. e. g. I. 3 Ad eulpandum seu vituperandum quis censor aecurrit; I. 31 Sed pareamus iam ... quamquam ipse pareat nemini et non tam ratione dictorum quam flagella linguae quos libitum fuerit verberet. Et si quis ei minus adulabitur, continua haereticus ... designetur; ib. Demus ergo veniam ei, qui dare veniam neseit; II. 29 Vide quia nusquam cura veritatis ac fidei, nusquam religionis ac iudicii contemplatio, sed sola male loquendi et lacerandi fratres exercita libido versatur in lingua, sola in corde humana contentio, sola invidia et livor in mente; II. 43 Evidenter ostendimus ex more huic esse, ut bonis omnibus deroget et in hoe se putet aliquid esse, si opinatos quosque viros et qui aliquid nominis in litteris habuerint reprehendat. Among other things Rufinus refers to J erome's criticism of Ambrosius (see above pp. rr5 sqq). 2 ) Cf. above p. 91. 3 Didym. spir. praef. ) Ter. Eun. 8. The line is applied to Ambrosius in Hier. (see above p. n6), quoted by Rufinus, Apo!. in Hier. II. 24.





part of Rufinus. The latter is indignant because Jerome had the impious Porphyrius as his introducer to logic1) and contrasts this with his oath, II. 42: Saeculares libros, pro quibus sedenti segue verberanti pro tribunalibus Christo dixerat: 'Si umquam legero vel habuero gentilium codices, te negavi', nunc non solum legere vel habere, verum etiam omnem suae doctri'nae iactantiam in hi's eum gerere demonstravi, £n tantum ut eti'am Per I sagogen impiissimi Porphyrii inductum se esse glorietur ad logicam. 2 ) Jerome's defence, Apologia ad versus Rufi nu m I-III (PL 23, 4I5-5I4), confirms that Rufinus had a sharp eye for Jerome's weak points. It is not for me here to enter upon this unpleasant subject, 3 ) nor to take up a position in reference to the charges of mendacity, forgery and theft which the antagonists showered upon each other. 4) I confine myself to the points which bear upon the classical heritage. Rufinus hit the mark by forging the nickname rhetor noster (Apol. in Hier. I. rn), so self-complacently does Jerome display his oratorial 1 Epist. 50, r, 3 Frustra ergo Alexandri verti commentarios; nequiquam ) Hier. me doctus magister per slaa.ywy~v Porphyrii introduxit ad logicam. 2 likes to bring his irony into play on the subject of Porphyrius; cf. ) Rufinus I. 30 Quocumque te converteris, haerebis. Non dico nullus subtrahendi te aditus datur, sed ne respirandi quidem paululum fit copia. Sic tibi A lexandri tui A ristotelici commentarii profuere? Sic Porphyrii slaa.ywy1? Sic te tot et tantorum philosophorum Graecae et Latinae, insuper et I udaicae erudition is excoluit disciplina, ut in istas angustias tam inextricabiles devenires? II. 13 Lacerationibus eius, ad quad opus quotidie stilum eius Porphyrius exacuit, non obviemus. II. 20 Isti sunt omnes sales tui de A lexandri et Porphyrii et ipsius Aristotelis acumine congregati. Haec est omnis illa iactantia, qua te a prima aetate usque ad senectam in grammaticorum et rhetorum et philosophorum scholis ac disciplinis praedicas esse versatum, ut ... 3) M. Schanz, Gesch. d. ram. Lit., IV (2. Aufl. Miinchen 1914), p. 478, rightly says about Book I-II: •>An Bosheit und Gehassigkeit wird sich dieses Produkt nicht leicht iiberbieten lassem; about Book III: >>Auchdieses Elaborat strotzt von Gehassigkeiten und Bosheitem. Griitzmacher, III, pp. 70 sqq., keeps a balanced judgment; in his own words (p. 88) Jerome's bitter persecution of Rufinus, even after his death, is >>einZeichen einer unendlich kleinlichen Natur, die sich zwar dialektisch und wissenschaftlich, aber nicht moralisch iiber ihren Gegner zu erheben weiss>>. 4 ) Cf. Griitzmacher, III, p. 82: >>Wirvermogen nicht zu entscheiden, ob Rufin oder Hieronymus mit seinen Beschuldigungen im Recht war, jedenfalls lassen sie uns in ein Gewebe von Intriguen einen Blick tun, in dem der eine Gegner dem andern Diebstahl und Falschung als etwas ganz landlaufiges zutraute>>. J. Brochet, Saint Jerome et ses ennemis (These, Paris 1905), is much in favour of Jerome.

1 74


superiority. He sets off Rufinus' illiteracy - e. g. III. 6 Imperitiam tuam non tam stultus eram, ut reprehenderem, quam nemo potest fortius accusare quam tu ipse, dum scribis. Sed volui ostendere condiscipulis tuis, qui tecum non didicerunt litteras, quid per triginta annos in oriente profeceris, qui avyyeaipsv~ ayeaµµaro~ procacitatem disertitudinem ... arbitrari~ - he points out the vitia sermonis although this is said not to be customary among the Christians,1) and alternately scorns Rufinus' style and praises it hyperbolically. 2 ) Unde, Jerome asks himself (I. 30),

tibi tanta verborum copia, sententiarum lumen, translationum varietas, homini, qui oratoriam vix primis labris in adulescentia degustasti? The answer Jerome gives to this question reveals from whence he himself derived his oratory. The source is Cicero: Aut ego /allor aut tu

Ciceronem occulte lectitas. Et ideo tam disertus es mihique lectionis eius crimen intendis, ut solus inter ecclesiasticos tractatores eloquentiae flumine glorieris. Nor does Jerome in practice deny being a Ciceronian. Even his first chapter (I. 1) contains two quotations, from Acad. post. I. 2: Olim pueri legimus: 'Intemperantis esse arbitror scribere quidquam (this word is added by Jerome), quod occultari velis', and from the outlines of an unpublished speech: Unde et Tullius in commentariis causarum pro Gabinio: 'Ego' inquit 'cum omnes amicitias tuendas semper putavi summa religione et fide tum eas maxime, quae essent ex inimicitiis revocatae in gratiam, propterea quod integris amicitiis o/ficium praetermissum imprudentiae vel, ut gravius interpretemur, negligentiae excusatione defenditur; post reditum in gratiam, si quid est commissum, id non neglectum, sed violatum putatur nee imprudentiae sed perfidiae assignari solet'. In I. 16 Jerome gives a regular lesson in the theory of style 8 ) and passes in review the great names of classical literature.


After charac-

II. IO Scio inter Christianos verborum vitia non solere reprehendi. After scourging the vitia sermon is in I. I 7- quamquam tu ... grammaticorum et oratorum praecepta contempseris, parvipendes vnt!efla-r:apost anfractus 1-eddere, asperitatem evitare consonantium, hiulcam fugere dictionem, etc. - Jerome again and again enters upon particulars, cf. II. 6. II. g. II. ro. II. 11. III. 6. III. ro. 2) Cf. e. g. II. II about the translation of lll'ei dexwv: Mira eloquentia et Attica /lore variata; III. 6 Fulmen eloquentiae tuae atque doctrinae omnes tractatores ferre non possumus et ingenii acumine perstringis oculos nostros; III. 24 Eloquii tui maiestate; III. 25 Miror quoniodo ... stili eius elegantiam nescio quis imperitus posse/ imitari. 3 I. 15: Docebo senex, quad puer didici, multa esse genera dictionum. ) Announced




1 75

terizing Chrysippus, Antipater and the four Attic orators 1) he makes a survey of Cicero's rhetorical treatises: Lege ad Herennium Tullii libros, lege Rhetoricos eius aut, quia illa sibi dicit inchoata et rudia excidisse de manibus, 2) revolve tria volumina De oratore, in quibus introducit eloquentissimos illius temporis oratores, Crassum et Antonium, disputantes, et quartum Oratorem, quem iam senex scribit ad Brutum; tune intelliges aliter componi historiam, aliter orationes, aliter dialogos, aliter epistolas, aliter commentarios. The final words do not render accurately the contents of Cicero's treatises; what Jerome has in mind are commentaries, as to which, he argues, the author is not responsible for the opinions held by others that he reports. To this end he also refers to the scholarly commentaries on classical writers: Puto quad puer legeris Aspri in Vergilium et Sallustium commentarios, Vulcatii in orationes Ciceronis, Victorini in dialogos eius et in Terentii comoedias, praeceptoris mei Donati aeque in Vergilium et aliorum in alias, Plautum videlicet, Lucretium, Flaccum, Persium atque Lucanum. Argue interpretes eorum, quare non unam explanationem secuti sint et in eadem re, quid sibi vel aliis videatur, enumerent. Except Donatus, who is quoted three times, 3) these commentators are not mentioned elsewhere and we cannot know whether or not Jerome made use of them. 4) I return to Cicero and list below a few passages which seem to be derived from him, although some of them are more or less proverbial:

I. 17 Ne veteri proverbio 'sus Minervam docere' videar; III. 33 Ut impleretur in te Graecum proverbium et 'sus doceretMinervam'.

Cic. Acad. post. I. 18 Etsi non 'sus Minervam', ut aiunt, tamen inepte, quisquis Minervam docet.

1) Ib. Chrysippus et Antipater inter spineta versantur. Demosthenes et Aeschines contra se invicem fulminant. Lysias et Isocrates dulciter fluunt. Mira in singulis diversitas, sed omnes in suo perfecti sunt. Jerome seems to speak as if he were familiar with the authors mentioned; in reality, >>ilsait Jes noms, mais sembJe ignorer Jes reuvres,>; cf. Courcelle, pp. 52 sq., Liibeck, pp. 54-56. •) A quotation from Cic. De or. I. 5 (about Libri rhetorici = De inventione): Quae pueris aut adulescentulis nobis ex commentariolis nostris incohata ac rudia exciderunt. B) In Gal. lib. III praef.; Quaest. hebr. in gen.; In Zach. lib. III praef. ') Another commentator, Caper, is mentioned II. 9: Nisi forte quaestionem et querimoniam id ipsum significare putat, quia in Capri commentariis huiusmodi /igitram reperit. Cf. Liibeck, p. 221.


*I. 17 Ne illud quidem Socraticum nosse debuerat: 'Scio quod (Migne erroneously qu,id) nescio'. To the passages quoted by Lubeck, pp. 140 sq., may be added *Epist. 57, 12, 4 (Hilberg). I. 30 Sed quoniam de confragosis et asperis locis enavigavit oratio. ib. Crassum quem semel in vita dicit risisse Lucilius. *ib. Dialectica me elementa docuerunt; quid significet Mlwµa, quod nos 'pronuntiatum' possumus dicere.

III. 5 Ex quo apparel iuxta inclyti oratoris elogium te voluntatem habere mentiendi, artem fingendi non habere. *III. 25 Quo non erumpet semel effrenata audacia?

Cic. Acad. prior. II. 74 Dubitari non possit, quin Socrati nihil sit visum sciri posse; excepit unum tantum, 'scire se nihil se scire', nihil amplius. Cic. Tusc. IV. 33 Ex quibus quoniam tamquam ex scrnplosis cotibus enavigavit oratio. Cic. Tusc. III. 31 M. Crassi illius veteris, quem semel ait in 01nni vita risisse Lucilius. Cic. Tusc. I. 14 Omne 'pronuntiatum' (sic enim mihi in praesentia occurrit, td appellarem wµa; utar post alio, si invenero melius. 1) Unidentified


Cic. Catil. I. 1 Quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia?2)

Jerome is a Ciceronian in a much deeper sense than such tiny reminiscences could imply. I am not thinking of his indebtedness to Cicero for the vigour, movement and elegance of his style. What I have in mind is the amount of factual information which he owes to Cicero, and which he is obliged to admit in this very pamphlet. In III. 39 he cites a passage in the letter to Pammachius and Oceanus, Epist. 84, 6, 1 ) As Cicero says, he for once rendered d.!;{wµa by 'pronuntiatum' (elsewhere he used 'ecfatum', Acad. prior. II. 95, and 'enuntiatio', De jato 1; 20; 21), but the new coinage was not accepted; as far as I know, it occurs only in Jerome (who evidently imitates Cicero) and in Gell. Noel. Att. XVI. 8 and Ps. Apul. Herm. p. 265, both of whom refer to Cicero (the former discussing the Latin words corresponding to d.!;lwµa). 2 from Orat-iones in Catilinam. There is however ) Lubeck lists no reminiscences another, indubitable, instance: *Epist. 109, 2, 5 Sed 'abiit excessit evasit erupit' ..,,.. Cic. Catil. II. 1 (Hilberg).




2,1) which had given rise to satirical remarks on the part of Rufinus, jesting at Jerome's habit of making a show of his learning, Apo!. adv. Hier. II. 7: lam vero Chrysippum et Aristidem, Empedoclem et cetera Graecorum a-uctorum nomina, ut doctus videatur et plitrimae lectionis, tamquam fumos et nebulas lectoribus spargit. Denique inter cetera etiam Pythagorae libros legisse se iactat, quos ne exstare quidem eruditi homines asserunt. Jerome finds himself under the necessity of making an acknowledgment as to the sense of the words (Epist. 84, 6, 2) quod in Pythagora et Platone et Empedocle legeram. His explanation runs thus: De dogmatibus eorum, non de libris locutus sum, quae potui in Cicerone, Bruto ac Seneca discere.2) In the following chapter (III. 40) he is still more explicit: In quo igitur erravi, si adulescens dixi me ea putasse in apostolis, quae in Pythagora et Platone et Empedocle legeram? Non ut tu calumniaris et fingis, in Pythagorae et Platonis et Empedoclis libris, sed quae in illis fuisse legeram et aliorum me scripta eos habuisse docuerunt. Let this be as it may (the text-interpretation is certainly not attractive to a philologist): Jerome allows, and that is the principal thing, that he had no first-hand knowledge of the works of classical Greek philosophers, but derived his knowledge of them from secondary sources. His principal informants are said to be Cicero, Brutus and Seneca. This acknowledgment must always be kept in mind when we concern ourselves with Jerome's sources, and it can often be proved to be true. Evidence is to be found in the chapters under discussion (Book III, chap. 39 and 40). Talking of Pythagoras, Jerome first refers in general terms to Cicero: Lege pro Vatinio oratiunculam et alias, ubi sodalitiorum mentio fit. Revolve dialogos Tullii. Then he alleges Pythagoras' Xevafi. naeayyO.µa-ra, incised on public monuments in magna Graecia and commented upon in literature: In quae latissimo opere philosophus commentatus est I amblichus, imitatus ex parte M oderatum virum eloquentissimum et Archippum ac Lysidem, Pythagorae auditores. Quorum Archippus et Lysides in Graecia, id est Thebis scholas habuere, qui memoriter tenentes praecepta doctoris ingenio pro libris utebantur, a quibus illud est (a long quotation in Greek follows). This certainly Cf. above p, 94 note r, where the passages in question are already quoted. 2) In this connection we have also to think of Cicero's translations, mentioned II. 25: Nisi forte putandus est Tullius Oeconomicum Xenophontis et Platonis Protagoram et Demosthenis pro Ctesiphonte orationem afflatus rhetorico spiritu transtutisse. 1)

Goteb, Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





is >>throwingdust into the eyes of the readers>>,as Rufinus has it. For the quotation is not derived from any one of those mentioned; on the contrary Jerome, as it wonld seem, does not know their names (except that of Iamblichus) except through Porphyrius' De vita Pythagorae. 1 ) And the reports of Pythagorean doctrines which fill up the remaining part of Chap. 39 and the first part of Chap. 40 are taken over, with one possible exception, from the same source. The parallels are listed by Lubeck (pp. 64-67); for the sake of brevity I generally reproduce only the first and the last word of each item:

III. 39 Paulin de Nole et saint Jerome►►, Revue des tftudes latines, XXV (1947), 250-280, and by R. Eiswirth, op. cit. (Beilage. Zur Frage der Prioritlit der Hieronymusbriefe 53 und 58), pp. 73-96.



him in scriptural studies and monastic life in the Holy Land. The carefully elaborated letter abounds in classic quotations and borrowings, many of them originating from authors of whom elsewhere few or no traces are to be found in Jerome's writings. Such is the case with Pliny the Younger, with Philostratus, with the mimographer Publilius Syrus. The same letter of Pliny is quoted twice in Epist. 53, I, 3: Ad Titum Livium lacteo eloquentiae fonte manantem 1) visendum de ultimo terrarum orbe venisse Gaditanum quendam legimus; et quem ad contemplationem sui Roma non traxerat, vel unius hominis fama perduxit ..,. Flin. Epist. II. 3, 8 Numquamne legisti Gaditanum quendam Titi Livi nomine gloriaque commotum ad visendum eum ab ultimo terrarum orbe venisse statimque ut viderat abisse? ib. z, z Habet nescio quid latentis evseyelar; viva vox et in aures discipuli de auctoris ore transfusa fortius insonat. Unde et Aeschines cum Rhodi exularet et legeretur illa Demosthenis oratio, quam adversus eum habuerat, mirantibus cunctis atque laudantibus suspirans ait: 'Quid si ipsam audissetis bestiam s'ua verba resonantem'? ..,.Plin. Epist. II. 3, 9 sq. Praeterea multo magis, ut vulgo dicitur, viva vox adficit ... nisi vero falsum putamus illud Aeschinis, qui cum legisset Rhodiis orationem Demosthenis admirantibus cunctis adiecisse fertur: rl M, el avrnv rnv 0rJeiov ~xovaau; 2) Besides these, only one passage in Pliny' s letters has left traces in Jerome: IV. 7, 3 Sicut aµa0la µev 0eaaor;, Aoyiaµor;be oxvov ([JB(!Bl, ita recta ingenia debilitat verecundia, perversa confirmat audacia. The Greek sentence comes from Thucydides, and as Jerome hardly knew him except by name, he might have borrowed it from Pliny: Epist. 73, IO Illud veris1) Cf. Quint. Inst. X. 1, 32 Illa Livii lactea ubertas. Jerome has taken over other epithets and pregnant characteristics from Quintilian's survey in this very chapter. Horace is simply alluded to as lyricus in conformity with Quintilian, Inst. X. 1,96 Lyricorum idem Horatius /ere solus legi dignus, Lucanus as poeta ardens or ardentissimus (Epist. 123, 16, 4; In Is. 56, 3; In Ezech. 44, g sqq.); cf. ib. go Lucanus ardens. Horace (Epist. II. 1, 50) calls Ennius alter Homerus; Jerome applies the epithet to Virgil (Epist. 121, 10, 5 Vergilius alter Homerus apud nos; cf. In Mick. 7, 5-7 Poeta sublimis, non Homerus alter, ut Lucilius de Ennio suspicatur, sed primus Homerus apud Latinos); cf. Quint. 1. 1. § 85 sq. \Vhen Jerome talks of Ciceronis fluvios (Epist. 125, 12, 1) or mare illud eloquentiae Tullianae (Epist. 147, 5), it recalls Quint. 1. 1. § 109: Non enim 'pluvias', ut ait Pindarus, 'aquas colligit, sed viva gurgite redundat'. The selection of philosophers (Epist. 49, 13, 3, see p. 158 n. 2) coincides with Quint. § 81 sqq. 2 ) Jerome cannot derive this from Cic. De or. III. 213 because of the different form of the utterance. Cf. Kunst, p. 212.





simum ... quad apud Graecos canttur: 'Imperitia confidentiam, eruditio timorem ereat'.1) The two letters in question (53 and 73) date from A. D. 395 and 398. At that time Jerome without doubt held Pliny's letters in his hands, whether or not he had read them before. The same is true about Philostratus. The main points of De vita Apollonii are recapitulated in Epist. 53, I, 4 (see below); one item which might originate from there is to be found in Adv. Joh. 34 (PL 23, 404). Thus the only quotations from Philostratus belong to A. D. 395 and 396. From Publilius Syrus there is only one indubitable quotation (v. 628 ed. Wolfflin), Epist. 53, II, 2 Antiquum dictum est: 'Avaro tam deest, quad habet, quam quad non habet' (also ib. rno, IS, 2, see above p. r56). It admits however of some doubt whether Jerome read the mimographer himself. For the sentence is quoted both by Seneca rhetor and Quintilian (above p. r56 n. I) with whom he was acquainted, and the Senarius: 'Aegre reprehendas, quad sinas consuescere', which he states that he read at school (Epist. rn7, 8, I), cannot be ascribed for certain to Publilius Syrus. The quotations from Pliny and Philostratus in Epist. 53 form part of a series of exempla announced in the following way (c. I, 2): Legimus in veteribus historiis quosdam lustrasse provincias, novas populos adisse, maria transisse, ut eos, quos ex libris noverant, coram quoque viderent. Thus Paulinus has to consider: I. the travels of Pythagoras and Plato (mentioned by Cicero, e. g. Fin. V. 87=cf. Kunst, pp. I9I sq.); II. the Gaditanus who went to Rome in search of Livy (- Flin. Epist. II. 3, 8, see above); III. the travels of Apollonius (see above); 2 ) IV. the travels of the Apostle Paul.3) The story of Aeschines' reciting Demosthenes' oration - whereby the power of the viva vox is glorified - leads over to another line of thought: Jerome emphasizes the indispensability of instruction and learning to a right understanding of the Scriptures, ut intelligeres te in scripturis sanctis sine praevio et monstrante semitam non posse ingredi Liibeck, pp. 23 sq.; Courcelle, pp. 67 sq. 2) Courcelle, p. 66 n. r. As Courcelle points out, Hilberg is wrong in considering the last sentence of Chap. 2: Scripsit super hoe plenissime octo voluminibus Philostratus, as an interpolation. a) Chap. 2, 1 Quid loquar de saeculi hominibus, cum apostol1ts Paulus ... 1)



(6, 1). Not to mention those, he says, who pursue the artes liberales and the medicine, even every kind of craftsmen absque doctore non possunt esse, quod cupiunt. The placing together of those two categories is to be explained thus, that the writer anticipates two Horatian lines (Epist. II. 1, II5 sq.), which are added as a conclusion:

'Quod medicorum est, promittunt medici, tractant fabrilia fabri'. Jerome continues (7, 1): Sola scripturarum ars est, quam sibi omnes passim vindicent:

'Scribimus indocti doctique poemata passim' (ib. n7). H anc garrula anus, hanc delirus senex, hanc soloecista verbosus, hanc universi praesumunt, lacerant, docent, antequam discant. Having dedicated himself to the study of the Scriptures Jerome becomes incensed against those of his brethren, qui si forte ad scripturas sanctas post saeculares litteras venerint et sermone composito aurem papuli mulserint, quicquid dixerint, hoe legem dei putant nee scire dignantur, quid prophetae, quid apostoli senserint, sed ad sensum suum incongrua aptant testimonia, quasi grande sit et non vitiosissimum dicendi genus depravare sententias et ad voluntatem suam scripturam trahere repugnantem. The wrong application and interpretation of incongrua testimonia, which is characteristic of those qui ad scripturas sanctas post saeculares litteras venerint, bears on two different kinds of proceeding exemplified by quotations from Virgil (7, 3): Quasi non legerimus Homerocentonas et Vergiliocentonas ac non sic etiam M aronem sine Christo possimus dicere Christianum, quia scripserit (Eel. 4, 6 sq.); 'Jam redit et virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna, iam nova progenies caelo demittitur alto', et patrem loquentem ad /ilium (Aen. I. 664): 'Nate, meae vires, mea magna potentia solus', et post verba salvatoris in cruce (Aen. II. 650): 'Talia perstabat memorans fixusque manebat'. Puerilia sunt haec et circulatorum ludo similia, docere quod ignores, immo ut cum Clitomacho loquar, nee hoe quidem scire, quad nescias.






The belief in Virgil as a Messianic prophet, so prevalent in the Middle ages, grew from the beginning of the fourth century (Oratio Constantini in Eusebius' Vit. Const. IV. 32).1) While to Augustine the fourth eclogue was a Messianic prophecy, 2 ) Jerome has more discernment and historic sense: he revolts against the idea of making Virgil a Christian without Christ. He likewise reacts against the Vergiliocentones, an odd kind of poetry, patched up merely of Virgilian lines and halflines. The first Christian specimen is the Cento Probae,3) written by a noble lady who was married to the praefectus urbi A. D. 351. It has escaped notice that Jerome actually had Proba's poem in his thoughts. I emphasize a few points which at the same time throw light upon the preposterousness of such a poetry. If we compare Marc. I, II 'Tu es filius meus dilectus, in te complacui' and the corresponding passage in Proba (v. 403) which Jerome quotes: 'Nate, meae vires, mea magna potentia solus', we have no need of further evidence to understand that the beauty of Virgilian diction is incompatible with the sublime simplicity of the Gospel. Add to this that the application of the line to the Lord must create discomfort for a Christian reader who remembers that in the Aeneid those words are addressed by Venus to Cupid. Jerome's last instance also comes from Proba. After relating the last words of Christ upon the cross, Proba (v. 624) applies the phrase which in Virgil follows Anchises' speech (Aen. II. 650): 'Talia perstabat memorans fixusque manebat'. Jerome's first letter to Paulinus of Nola, if we accept Cavallera's chronology, is Epist. 58, written about 394 or 395. His aim is to confirm the novice in monastic life. Let the philosophers imitate Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, let the poets compete with Homer and Virgil, Menander and Terence, the historians with Thucydides and Sallust, Herodotus and Livy, the orators with Lysias and the Gracchi, Demosthenes and Tullius, or, to talk of our religion, the bishops and presbyters take as their pattern the apostles and apostolic men: in our way of life we have to follow Paulus, Antonius and other pioneers of monasticism (5, 2 sq.). Jerome has read Paulinus' panegyric of Theodosius 1)

Cf. D. Comparetti,

Virgil im Mittelalter.


von H. Diitschke, Leipzig

1875, pp. 93 sqq. 2) Cf. Harrison Cadwaller Coffin in The Classical Weekly, XVII



1 74•

a) Edited by C. Schenk! in CSEL, Vol. XVI:



1888), pp. 569 sqq.



and praises the style, radiant with Tulliana puritas; his ardent desire is to win this man of talents over to the study of Scriptures: 0 si mihi liceret istius modi ingenium . . . per . . . excelsa ducere scripturarum, si contingeret docere quae didici et quasi per manus mysteria tradere prophetarum, nasceretur nobis aliquid, quod docta Graecia non haberet (8, 3). Although Jerome apparently holds the imitation of the classics to be opposed to the ideals of monasticism, neither he himself, already a veteran in monastic life, nor Paulinus, the neophyte, renounces in practice the literature which was the love of their youth. In Epist. 58 Jerome musters all his rhetorical skill and adorns his style with flowers from classical poetry and oratory. Instead of writing briefly and to the point that Judas hanged himself he relates the fact (Chap. I, 3) more expressively in a Virgilian line (Aen. XII. 603): 'Et nodum informis leti trabe nectit ab alta'. It is rather amusing, in view of Jerome's disapproval of Vergiliocentones, that the same line is applied to Judas' suicide in the cento De ecclesia, v. 73 (CSEL, Vol. XVI: I, p. 625). A warning is given under cover of quotations from Persius and Lucanus (7, 2): Noli 'aspicere ad phaleras' (--- Pers. 3, 30 ad populum phaleras!) 'et nomina vana Catonum' (- Lucan. I. 313 et nomina vana Catones): 'Ego te' inquit 'intus et in cute novi' (- Pers. ib.). An exhortation (rr,2) is strengthened by Horace's words (Sat. I. 9, 59 sq.): 'Nil sine magno vita labore dedit mortalibus'. Declining years and the approach of death are depicted (rr, 2) on the model of Georgics (III. 67 sq.): Antequam 'subeant morbi tristisque senectus et tabor et durae rapiat inclementia mortis'. One sentence, 9, 1: 'Qui esse vult nuculeum, frangit nucem', is borrowed from Plautus, Cure. 55 E nuce nuculeum qui esse volt, frangit nucem. Not a few points are taken over from Cicero and Quintilianus: 58, 2, 3 Non Hierosolymis fuisse, sed Hierosolymis bene vixisse laudandum est. 4, I 'Quorsum', inquies, 'haec tam longo repetita principio'?

Mur. 12 Non Asiam numquam vidisse, sed in Asia continenter vixisse laudandum est. De or. III. gr Tum Crassus: 'Quorsum igitur haec spectat' inquit 'tam longa et tam alte repetita oratio'?



7, 1 Tu considera ne ... secundum dictum prudentissimi viri liberalitate liberalitas pereat. 7, 2 Haec non sus, ut aiunt, Minervam, sed ... amicum amicus monui. *8, 1 (about the panegyricus Theodosii) Cumque in primis partibus vincas alias, in paenultimis te ipsum superas. 8, 2 I acet enim, ut ait quidam, · oratio, in qua tantum verba laudantur.


Off. II. 52 Largitioque quae fit ex re familiari, f ontem ipsum benignitatis exhaurit: ita benignitate benignitas tollitur. A cad. post. I. 18 Nam etsi non sus Minervam, ut aiunt, tamen inepte, quisquis Minervam docet. De or. III. 3 Sic esse tum iudicatum ceteros a Grasso semper omnes, illo autem die etiam ipsum a se superatum (Kunst, pp. 194 sq.). Quint. Inst. VIII prooem. 31 Nee intelligunt iacere sensus in oratione, in qua verba laudantur.

The literary quality and the frequent use of classical quotations which distinguish the letters to Paulinus and were evidently intended to impress the recipient stand out also in those of didactic and moralizing character (Group 2, amounting to 65 pages), viz. Epist. 52 to Nepotianus, containing instructions for the clergy, Epist. 54 to Furia about the countenance of widowhood, and Epist. 107 to Laeta about the education of a young girl. Epist. 52 is written to a young presbyter, Nepotianus, the nephew of Heliodorus, a friend from Jerome's youth, now bishop of Altinum. Here a warmth of heart breaks through which we usually miss in Jerome; the asceticism and censoriousness are modified, the tone is dispassionate, the judgment matured, the form elaborated. In short, this letter ranks as one of the best in Jerome's correspondence. It opens with a series of quotations from Virgil illustrating the infirmity of old age, 52, 1, 2: Nunc iam cano capite et arata fronte ad instar boum pendentibus a mento palearibus1)

'frigidus obsistit circum praecordia sanguis' (Georg. II. 484). Unde et in alio loco idem poeta canit: 'Omnia fert aetas, animum quoque' (Eel. 9, 51), 1 ) _,..

Verg. Georg. III.

53 A mento palearia pendent.


et post modicum: 'N unc oblita mihi tot carmina, vox quoque Af oerim iam fugit' (Eel. 9, 53-54). Other Virgilian quotations are to be found in Chap. 5, 3: Obsecro itaque te 'et repetens iterum iterumque docebo' (- Aen. III. 436)1) and 9, 3: Sed et genus adrogantiae est clementiorem te videri velle quam pontifex Christi est. 'Non omnia possumus omnes' (Eel. 8, 63). Alius in ecclesia oculus est, alius lingua, etc. A reminiscence of Ter. A ndr. 22 sq.: Dehinc ut quiescant porro moneo et desinant maledicere, is inserted in Chap. 17, 2: Quos (sc. maledicos) obsecro, quiescant et desinant maledicere. Cicero, of course, is the principal authority. Chap. 3, 5-6 contains exempla of philosophers and poets who even at an advanced age carried on their literary work; the whole passage (T. I. pp. 417, 14-418, 15 Hilberg) is built up upon excerpts from Cicero's Cato M aior. As in Adv. I ovin. II. 13 (above pp. 148 sq.) and Adv. Ru/in. III. 39 sq. (pp. 178 sq.), where he depends entirely on Porphyrius, Jerome is anxious to disguise his indebtedness by putting together excerpts from different parts of the original. His own contribution is limited to the arrangement of the facts taken over, as will be shown in the two columns below. 2)

Epist. 52, 3, 5-6. Plato octogesimo et uno anno scribens est mortuus;

I socrates nonaginta et novem annos in docendi scribendique labore conplevit; taceo ceteros philosophos, Pythagoram, Democritum, Xenocratem, Zenonem, Cleanthum, qui iam aetate longaeva in sapientiae studiis floruerunt:

Cic. Cato Maior. 13 Placidaaclenis senectus, qualem accepimus Platonis, qui uno et octogesimo anno scribens est mortuus, qualem I socratis, qui eum librum qui Panathenaicus inscribitur quarto et nonagesimo anno scripsisse se dicit vixitque quinquennium postea. 23 Num philosophorum principes, Pythagoram, Democritum, num Platonem, num Xenocratem, num postea Zenonem, Cleanthum, .. coegit in suis studiis obmutescere senectus?

1 Jerome here (and Adv. Ru/in. I. 31) ) Virgil has iterumque iterumque, but drops the first - que, evidently because the double - que is alien to prose style. 2 are listed also by Liibeck, p. 147. ) The parallels


ad poetas venio, Homerum, Hesiodum, Simonidem, Stesiehorum, qui grandes natu eygneum neseio quid et solito duleius vicina morte cecinerunt. Sophocles, cum propter nimiam senectutem et rei f amiliaris neglegentiam a filiis aceusaretur amentiae, Oedipi f abulam, quam nuper scripserat, recitavit iudieibus et tantum sapientiae in aetate iam fracta specimen dedit, ut severitatem tribunalium in theatri f avorem verteret.

Nee mirum, cum etiam Cato, Romani generis disertissimus, censorius iam et senex, Graecas litteras nee erubuerit nee desperaverit diseere. Certe Homerus refert, quad de lingua N estoris iam vetuli et paene deerepiti dulcior melle oratio fluxerit.




ib. num Homerum, Hesiodum, Simonidem, Stesichorum (Cicero mentions the poets before the philosophers). Sophocles ad summam seneetutem tragoedias fecit; quad propter studium cum rem neglegere f amiliarem videretur, a filiis in iudicium vocatus est, ut ... illum quasi desipientem a re f amiliari removerent iudices. Tum senex dieitur eam fabulam, quam in manibus habebat et proxime scripserat, Oedipum Coloneum, recitasse iudicibus quaesisseque, num illud carmen desipientis videretur. Quo recitato sententiis iudicum est liberatus. 26 Et ego (sc. Cato) feci, qui litteras Graecas senex didici.


31 Videtisne, ut apud Homerum saepissime Nestor de virtutibus suis praedicet? ... Etenim, ut ait H omerus, 'ex eius lingua melle duleior f luebat oratio' (Hom. Il. I. 249).

The series of exempla derived from Cato Maior is preceded by one whose origin is open to doubt. Talking of the benefits that learned studies bestow upon old age Jerome refers {Chap. 3, 4) to an unnamed philosopher: Unde et sapiens ille Graeciae, cum expletis centum et septem annis se mori cerneret, dixisse fertur dolere, quad tune egrederetur e vita, quando sapere coepisset. This seems to be an allusion to Gorgias whom Goteb. Univ. Ai'sskr. LXIV:





Cicero (1. 1. § 13) mentions after Plato and Isocrates: Leontinus Gorgias centum et septem complevit annos neque umquam in suo studio atque opere cessavit. Qui cum ex ea quaereretur, cur tam diu vellet esse in vita: 'Nihil habeo', inquit, 'quad accusem senectutem'. The discrepancy between the two dicta, is easily accounted for if we suppose with Kunst (p. 199) that Jerome by a slip of memory ascribed to the philosopher of 107 in Cato M. 13 what Cicero relates about Theophrastus in Tusc. III. 69: Theophrastus moriens accusasse naturam dicitur, quad cervis et cornicibus vitam diuturnam ... , hominibus ... tam exiguam vitam dedisset; quorum si aetas potuisset esse longinquior, /uturum /uisse, ut omnibus per/ectis artibus omni doctrina hominum vita erudiretur. Querebatur igit1ir se tum, cum illa videre coepisset, extingui. A long quotation from Cicero's lost speech Pro Quinto Gallio is inserted in 8, 3;1) reminiscences of Ciceronian phraseology are frequent. 2) The source of the pulchrum elogium about Cicero, 8, 3: 'Demosthenes tibi praeripuit, ne esses primus orator, tu illi, ne solus', has not been established, 3) nor that of illud philosophi, II, 3: 'Hoe non est osculum porrigere, sed propinare'. The same is true of the well-known dictum, 7, 3: 'Ego te', inquit, 'habeam ut principem, cum tu me non habeas ut senatorem?' which Cicero (De or. III. 4), Valerius Maximus (VI. 2, 2} and Quintilian (Inst. VIII. 3, 89; XI. I, 37) ascribe to L. Crassus, but Jerome to the orator Domitius. 4 ) As to I 1, 4: Pulchre dicitur apud Graecos, sed nescio, utrum apud nos aeque resonet: 'Pinguis venter non gignit sensum tenuem', Jerome is likely to have got his knowledge of the


Cf. I. Hilberg, Wiener Studien XXVII, 1905, 93 sq.; E. Hauler, ib. pp. 95 (Kunst, p. 165). 2 ) E. g. 4, r Quorsum haec lam longo repetita principio? - De or. III. gr 'Quorsum igitur haec spectat' inquit 'tam longa et tam alte repetita oratio?' 8, 1 Noto te declamatorem esse et rabulam garrulumque,· cf. *Or. 47 Non enim declamatorem aliquem de ludo aut rabulam de fora ... quaerimus (Kunst, p. rgo); 13, r Cave ne hominum rumusculos aucuperis; cf. Cluent. 105 Imperitorum hominum rumitsculos aucupati (Thes. II. 1239, 56 sqq.); 17, 2 Nullum laesi, nullus saltim descriptione signatus est, neminem specialiter meus sermo pulsavit: genera/is de vitiis disputatio est. Qui mihi irasci voluerit, prius ipse de se, quad talis sit, confitetur - Imp. Pomp. 37 Ego autem nomino neminem; quare irasci nemo potuerit, nisi qui ante de se voluerit confiteri (cf. Kunst, p. 190). 3 p. 165 n. 4, thinks of a Vita Ciceronis. ) Kunst, 4) Cf. Kunst, pp. 2n sq. )








line naxeia yaan)e At:n-rovov -rbau 116011 from Galenus. 1) Hippocrates' oath is alluded to, Chap. 15, 2.2) The praises of widowhood in Epist. 54 to Furia match the praises of virginity in Epist. 22 to Eustochium. Furia belonged to the Roman aristocracy and was closely related to Eustochium. Jerome does not shrink from strong colours when he tries to withhold the young widow from complying with her father's wishes and marrying again. Foreseeing that the Roman aristocrats who did not like to be deprived of heirs will feel highly incensed at his interference, 3) he depicts their wrath, 2, l, in Horace's words (Ars poet. 94): 'Iratusque Chremes tumido desaeviet (delitigat Hor.) ore'. He makes the nurses advise against Furia's resolution, 5, I, in the same way as Anna did against Dido {Verg. Aen. IV. 32-33): Saepe illud obganniunt:

'Solane perpetua maerens earpere iuventa nee dulces natos Veneris nee praemia noris'? As always he tilts against the married women; a good instance is Chap. 5, 3 where some spiteful lines of Persius (r, 32-33;35) are adopted:

Videas plerasque rabido ore saevire et tineta facie, viperinis orbibus, dentibus pumicatis earpere Christianos. Hie aliqua, 'cui circa humeros hyacinthina laena est, rancidulum quiddam balba de nare locuta perstrepit ac tenero supplantat verba palato'. After the Apostle Paul Terence (Eun. 732) is called to give evidence, of the danger of taking wine, 9, 5: Cum etiam comicus, cuius finis est humanos mores nosse atque describere, dixerit: 'Sine Cerere et Libero friget Venus'. Less conspicuous reminiscences of Virgil are met with in 13, 5: Etiam quae tuta sunt pertimescam - Aen. IV. 298 Omnia tuta timens; *ib. (about Furia's sister) Cerneres in parvo corpuseulo ingentes animos (Hilberg compares Georg. IV. 83 about the bees: Ingentes animos angusto in pectore versant); *14, 2 (about Furia's father) I am incanuit caput, 1 ) See Lubeck, p. 103; Courcelle, p. 75 n. 5. Jerome is not aware that the line is quoted from a comedy, Com. Att. fragm. ed. Kock, III. p. 613 fr. 1234.

Courcelle, p. 74 n. 4· Epist. 54, z, 1 Consurgent proceres et adversum epistulam meam turba patricia detonabit, me magum, me seductorem clamitans et in te1•ras ultimas asportandum. 2)



tremunt genua, denies cadunt 'et frontem obscenam rugis arat' - Aen. VII. 4I7 (Hilberg). Among elements of antique learning we may further notice two historical exempla, 4, 2: Exh£buit Ciceronis filius patrem in eloquentia? Cornelia vestra ... Graccos suos se genuisse laetata est? and a summary of Galenus' Ileel vytetvwv. 1) Talking about step-mothers, IS, 4, Jerome reminds himself of some branches of literature: Omnes comoediae et mimographi et communes rhetorum loci in novercam saevissimam declamabunt. In Epist. rn7 to Laeta Jerome advises another grand lady, married to a son of Paula's, how to educate her daughter. The mother had decided to make the daughter take the vows; this is postulated in Jerome's scheme of education. It is a terrible scheme bearing the impress of ascetic fanaticism, regardless of a child's nature, aimed at suppressing even the most innocent joy of life. From childhood the girl has to live under the severe rules of a convent; distrusting the mother's ability to realise this scheme Jerome suggests, on behalf of Paula, the grandmother, and Eustochlum, the paternal aunt, sending the tender child to the convent in Bethlehem. The reading of Scriptures naturally plays a large part in J erome's educational system. Beginning with the books of Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Job the girl has to pass on to the Gospels and the other books of the New Testament and from there go on to the Prophets and the remaining books of the Old Testament, last of all to the Canticles. Among the Fathers she has to read Cyprianus, Athanasius and Hilarius, Chap. I2, 3: Illorum tractatibus, illorum delectetur ingeniis, in quorum libris pietas fidei non vacillet; ceteros sic legat, ut magis iudicet quam sequatur. Profane literature seems to be excluded from the course. 2) The Christian virgin should have an exclusively Christian education. 3 ) 1 ) 9, 4 Aiunt medici et qui de humanorum corporum scripsere naturis praecipueque Galenus in libris, qi1orum titulus est Ilsei vy1ffvwv puerorum et iuvenum ac per!ectae aetatis virorum mulierumque corpora insito calore fervere et noxios esse his aetatibus cibos qui calorem augeant, etc . ..,.. Galen. Ileei vyieivwv I. II. V. 5 (Lu-

beck, pp. 103 sq.). 2 ) Cf. Chap. 4, r Cantica mundi ignoret, adhuc tenera lingua psalmis dulcibus

inbuatur. 8

took another view: being in charge of boys in his mo) As to boys Jerome nastery he himself taught them the profane classics. See below pp. 325 sq.




In one respect however Jerome leaves the traditional art of teaching unchanged. His method of elementary instruction is that recommended by Quintilian. Chap. 4 is nothing but a paraphrase of I nstitutio oratoria, Book I, Chap. I. Only Jerome, as we have pointed out with regard to Cicero, changes the order of his pattern. Although the parallels are listed by Liibeck (pp. 213-216), I think they deserve fuller discussion. According to Quintilian (I. r, 24 sq.) it is important for children, when they learn to read, to become acquainted with the form of the letters before they learn their names and order in the alphabet; to this end he recommends giving them ivory letters as playthings. Jerome, otherwise so unwilling to let children play, follows suit: Epist. ro7, 4, 2 Fiant ei litterae vel buxeae vel eburneae et suis nominibus appellentur. Ludat in eis, ut et lusus eius eruditio sit,

et non solum ordinem teneat litterarum, ut memoria nominum in canticum transeat, sed ipse inter se crebro ordo turbetur et mediis ultima, primis media misceantur, ut eas non sonu tantum sed et visu noverit.

Quint. Inst. I. 1, 26 Non excludo autem, id quad est notum, irritandae ad discendum in/ antiae gratia eburneas etiam litterarum formas in lusum aff erre, vel si quid aliud, qua magis illa aetas gaudeat, inveniri potest, quad tractare, intueri, nominare iucundum sit. § 25 Quae causa est praecipientibus, ut etiam, cum satis affixisse eas (scil. litteras) pueris recto illo qua primum scribi solent contextu videntur, retroagant rursus et varia permutatione turbent, donec litteras qui instituuntur facie norint, non ordine.

Jerome's advice on the art of writing is also derived from Quintilian:

§ 3 Cum vero coeperit trementi manu stilum in cera ducere, vel alterius superposita manu teneri regantur articuli vel in tabella sculpantur elementa, ut per eosdem s11lcosinclusa marginibus trahan-

§ 27 Cum vero iam ductus sequi coeperit, non inutile erit eas tabellae quam optime insculpi, ut per illos velut sulcos ducatur stilus. Nam neque errabit, quemadmodum in ceris (continebitur enim utrin-


tur vestigia et foras non queant evagari.

que marginibus neque extra praescriptum egredi poterit) et celerius ac saepius sequendo certa vestigia firmabit articulos neque egebit adiutorio manum suam man·u superimposita regentis.

He further agrees with Quintilian on the importance of stimulating the pupils by means of rewards, praise and mutual competition; likewise he has a keen eye for the danger of making the studies hateful by demanding too much: § 3 Syllabas iungat ad praemium

et, quibus illa aetas delectari potest, munusculis invitetur. Habeat et in discendo socias quibus invideat, quarum laudibus mordeatur. Non est obiurganda, si tardior sit, sed laudibus excitandum ingenium; et vicisse se gaudeat et victam doleat. 4. Cavendum in primis, ne oderit studia, ne amaritudo eorum percepta in in/ antia ultra rudes annos transeat.

§ 20 Lusus hie sit: et rogetur et laudetur et numquam non f ecisse se gaudeat, aliquando ipso nolente doceatur alius, cui invideat; contendat interim et saepius vincere se putet et praemiis etiam, quae capit illa aetas, evocetur.

ib. Nam id in primis cavere oportebit, ne studia ... oderit et amaritudinem semel perceptam ultra rudes annos reformidet.

Even a detail about uniting syllables into words is taken over, but, typically enough, applied to biblical words: § 4 Ipsa nomina, per quae con-

suescet paulatim verba contexere, non sint fortuita, sed certa et coacervata de industria, prophetarum videlicet atque apostolorum, et omnis ab Adam patriarcharum series de M atheo Lucaqtte descendat, ut dum aliud agit futurae memoriae praeparetur.

§ 34 Illud non poenitebit curasse, cum scribere nomina puer ... coeperit, ne hanc operam in vocabulis vulgaribus et forte occurrentibus perdat. Protinus enim potest interpretationem linguae secretioris, quas Graeci yJwaa~i; vacant, dum aliud agitur, ediscere et inter prima elementa consequi rem postea proprium tempus desideraturum.




1 99

What Jerome says about the teacher (§ S M agister probae aetatis et vitae atque eruditionis est eligendus) seemingly has nothing corresponding in Quintilian, as the latter does not have private tuition in view, but it is implied in the historical exemplum which Jerome appropriated: § 5 Nee, puto, erubescit doctus vir id f acere vel in propinqua vel in nobili virgine, quod Aristoteles / ecit in Philippi filio, ut ipse librariorum vilitate initia ei traderet litterarum . . . I pse elementorum sonus et prima institutio praeceptoris aliter de erudito, aliter de rustico ore profertur.

§ 23 An Philippus Macedonum rex Alexandra filio suo prima litterarum elementa tradi ab Aristatele, summo eius aetatis philosopho, voluisset aut ille suscepisset hoe officium, si non studiorum initia et a per/ ectissimo quoque optime tractari et pertinere ad summam credidisset?

In the above I have left out one sentence: Non sunt contemnenda quasi parva, sine quibus magna constare non possunt. The formulation is Jerome's, the thought is Quintilian's. The latter states the reason for including elementary instruction in his handbook in the following way, *I. prooem. 5: Ego cum existimem nihil arti oratoriae alienum, sine quo fieri non posse oratorem fat endum est, nee ad ullius rei summam nisi praecedentibus initiis perveniri, ad minora illa sed, quae si negligas, non sit maioribus locus, demittere me non recusabo.1) It is obvious that Jerome had this passage in his mind when he pointed the sentence in question. Jerome lays stress no less than Quintilian upon a good pronunciation and correct speech: § 6 Unde et tibi (sc. Laetae) est providendum, ne ineptis blanditiis f eminarum dimidiata dicere filiam verba consuescas et in auro atque in purpura ludere, quorum alterum linguae, alterum moribus officit, ne discat in tenero, quod ei postea dediscendum sit.

§ 4 Ante omnia ne sit vitiosus sermo nutricibus ... Et morum quidem in his haitd dubie prior ratio est, recte tamen etiam loquantur. § S Non assuescat ergo, ne dum in/ans quidem est, sermoni qui dediscendus sit.

1) The same thought is repeated I. I, 21: Quo magis impetranda erit venia, si ne minora quidem illa verum operi, quod instituimus, necessaria praeteribo.



Graccorum eloquentiae multum ab in/ anti a sermo matris scribitur contulisse, Hortensiae oratio in paterno sinu coaluit.

Di/ /£cutter eraditur, quod rudes animi perbiberunt. Lanarum conchylia quis in pristinum candorem revocet? Rudis testa diu et saporem retinet et odorem quo primum imbuta est.

§ 6 Gracchorum eloquentiae mul-

tum contulisse accepimus Corneliam matrem ... et Hortensiae Q. filiae oratio apud triumviros habita legitur non tantum in sexus honorem. § 5 Et natura tenacissimi sumus eorum, quae rudibus annis percepimus; ut sapor, quo nova imbuas, durat nee lanarum colores, quibus simplex ille candor mutatus est, elui possunt.

The comparison with the sense of taste found in the model brings on the association of an often quoted Horatian line, Epist. I. 2, 69 sq.: Quo semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem testa diu. We learn again by this instructive instance how easily reminiscences of poetry turn up even when Jerome is preoccupied with prose. Finally Jerome pays attention to the servants who are said sometimes to set a bad example: § 7 Graeca narrat historia Alexandrum, potentissimum regem orbisque domitorem, et in moribus et in incessu Leonidis, paedagogi sui, non potuisse carere vitiis, quibus parvulus adhue fuerat in/ ectus.

§ 9 Nee minus error eorum (scil. paedagogorum) nocet moribus; siquidem Leonides Alexandri paedagogus ... quibusdam eum vitiis imbuit, quae robustum quoque et iam maximum regem ab illa institutione puerili sunt persecuta.

The borrowings from Quintilian are not limited to Chap. 4; they return in Chap. 9 on the subject of linguistic studies. Jerome takes for granted that the girl must learn Greek. It is characteristic of the class to which she belonged by birth. >>Socialement,le dernier miliem>, says Marrou, >>quiait maintenu ferme la tradition du grec est celui des grandes familles aristocratiques de la ville de Rome, traditionnellement conservatrices, attachees aux vieilles traditions ... le milieu forme par les amis de Macrobe, celui d'ou sort saint Ambroise, ou se recrutent les filles spirituelles de saint Jerome: l'etude du grec s'y est mieux conserve que dans la bourgeoisie provinciale a laquelle appar-





tiennent saint Jerome lui-meme ou saint Augustin, oit la culture est moins poussee, plus utilitaire peut-etre>>.1) In this case, of course, it may be added that Jerome, the exegete, had special reasons for wishing the nun to learn Greek. As to balancing the studies of Greek and Latin he follows Quintilian:

9, l Ediscat Graecorum versuum numerum. Sequatur statim et Latina eruditio; quae si non ab initio os tenerum composuerit, in peregrinum sonum lingua corrumpitur et externis vitiis sermo patrius sordidatur.

Quint. I. l, 12 A sermone Graeco puerum incipere malo, quia Latinum, qui pluribus in usu est, vel nobis nolentibus perbibet; simul quia disciplinis quoque Graecis prius instituendus est, unde et nostrae f luxerunt. 13. Non tamen hoe adeo superstitiose fieri velim, ut diu tantum Graece loquatur aut discat, sicut plerisque moris est. H oc enim accidunt et oris plurima vitia in peregrinum sonum corrupti et sermonis; cui cum Graecae figurae assidua consuetudine haeserunt, in diversa quoque loquendi ratione pertinacissime durant. r4. Non longe itaque Latina subsequi debent et cito pariter ire. Ita fiet, ut cum aequali wra linguam utramque tueri coeperimus, neutra alteri officiat.

Quintilian is not mentioned, however much he contributed to this letter, nor are the poets who are imitated. The only real quotation is a Senarius: 8,r Legi quondam in scholis puer: 'Aegre reprehendas quod sinas consuescere' (cf. above p. 187); otherwise the allusions and reminiscences we have to record are rather slight: ro,3 In coclearum morem suo victitans suco ..,..Plaut. Capt. 80-81 Cocleae in occulto latent, suo sibi suco vivont; 2 ) 3,r Paene lapsus sum ad aliam materiam et currente 1) H.-I. Marrou, Histoire de l'education dans l'antiquite.

:ze ed.

(Paris 1950),

p. 354. ") I,iibeck, pp. 107 sq.; Thes. III. 1396, 40 sqq. The imitation has escaped Hilberg.



rota, dum urceum facere cogito, amphoram finxit manus ...,.Hor. Ars 21-22 Amphora coepit institui: currente rota cur urceus exit? 4, 8 Patrem risibus recognoscat, cf. Verg. Eel. 4, 60 Incipe, parve puer, risu cognoscere matrem; 13, 3 Illam 'primis miretur ab annis' ...,.Aen. VIII. 517 Primis et te miretur ab annis; *13, 4 In parvis corpusculis ingentes animos intueri, cf. Georg. IV. 83 Ingentis animos angusto in pectore versant (Hilberg) .1) A group apart are the necrologies (Group 3), of five letters, amounting to 78 pages. Most elaborated and most interesting is the Consolatio ad Heliodorum, Epist. 60 (A. D. 396), 2) on the decease of his young nephew, Nepotianus, whom Jerome two years before so generously and genially instructed in the duties of a priest (Epist. 52, see above p. 191). In his first letter of this kind, written in Rome in A. D. 384 to Paula (Epist. 39), Jerome set forth quidquid de scripturis super lamentatione dici potest. Now, he says, nobis per aliam semitam ad eundem locum perveniendum est, ne videamur praeterita et obsoleta quondam calcare vestigia (60, 6, 2). The new road Jerome took led him back to the very origin of Christian necrology, to the antique consolatio. He gives it to be understood that he has read quite a number of writers on that subject, Epist. 60, 5, 2: Legimus Crantorem, cuius volumen ad confovendum dolorem suum secutus est Cicero;""'Platonis,'flDiogenis, Clitomachi, Carneadis, Posidonii ad se• ,. dandos luctus opuscula percucurrimus, qui diversis aetatibus diversorum lamenta vel libris vel epistulis minuere sunt conati, ut, etiamsi nostrum areret ingenium, de illorum posset fontibus inrigari. No doubt we are here confronted with a specimen of those boastful references to literature which Rufinus ridiculed: scholars agree that Jerome's knowledge of the Greek Works was due to Cicero. 3 ) This can be proved with a high degree of certainty in spite of the regrettable loss of Cicero's consolatory work. In the opening lines of Chap. 5 Jerome says that his soul, aggrieved 1

) As to 6, 3 Pythagorae litterae eum perducant ad bivium Hilberg compares Pers. 3, 56-------57 which seems to me to be anything but convincing. - I remark by the way that in Chap. 1, 4: Fiunt, non nascuntur Christiani, we miss in Hilberg's edition a reference to Tert. Apol. 18, 4 which Jerome quotes literally. 2 ) Cf. Epist. 77, I, r Quidquid habere virium potui, in illo tune dolare consumpsi. 3 ) Cf. Liibeck, pp. 62 sq. (about Crantor, Clitomachus and Carneades); Courcelle, pp. 54 sq.; Griitzmachcr, I, pp. 122 sq.; Kunst, pp. 119 sqq.


l>Essind dieselben servilen Schmeicheleiem>, Griitzmacher appropriately remarks, >>derensich die heidnischen Lobredner bedienten, die der christliche Lobredner Hieronymus anwendet. Es hat sich nichts geandert, ausser dass einige Bibelspriiche eingeflochten sind,>.1) Against this background of flattery and exhortation the poetic quotations stand out: 6, 2 N ebridius pusio patrem quaerentibus exhibet: 'Sic oculos, sic ille manus, sic ora ferebat' (Verg. Aen. III. 490). Scintilla vigoris paterni lucet in filio et similitudo morum per speculum carnis erumpens: 'Ingentes animos angusto in pectore versat' (Verg. Georg. IV. 83). 7, 8 Audi quid ex persona viduae continentis ethnicus poeta decantet: 'Ille meos, Primus qui me sibi iunxit, amores abstulit; ille habeat secum servetque sepulchro' (Verg. Aen. IV. 28-29). 9, 4 Perspicuum est ... proclivius esse cor hominis a pueritia ad malum et inter opera carnis et spiritus, quae apostolus Paulus enumerat, mediam animam fluctuare nunc haec, nunc illa capientem. 'Nam vitiis nemo sine nascitur; optimus ille est, qui minimis urguetur' (Hor. Sat. I. 3, 68-69), velut si 'egregio inspersos reprehendas corpore naevos' (ib. I. 6, 67). To sum up. There is a striking difference between Groups I and 4 on the one hand and Groups 2 and 3 on the other. In the letters which treat of exegetic problems and also in the mostly short, strictly private letters of a nondescript kind classical topics and quotations are missing or scarce. They are all the more frequent in the didactic or moralizing 1)


II, p.





letters and in the necrologies, as well as in the polemical pamphlets. Not only the contents of the letter but also the social position of the addressee and his degree of education play an important role, as we have seen in the case of Paulinus. As a general rule we can lay down that the more the writer strives to impress the reader by the elegance of his style, whether he addresses himself to an individual or to the general public, the more he makes use of topics and adornments borrowed from pagan literature. The writings of this period clearly indicate that Jerome has changed his attitude towards the classics and tends towards a more unprejudiced and liberal-minded understanding. This new attitude finds eloquent expression in the letter to Magnus, orator urbis Romae, Epist. 70, according to Cavallera written at the end of 397. Jerome here answers a question which in the mouth of a rhetor sounds rather surprising, cur in opusculis nostris saecularium litterarum interdum ponamus exempla et candorem ecclesiae ethnicorum sordibus polluamus. Such a question, he says, suggests that Magnus was more acquainted with Cicero than with the Scriptures. For Moses and the prophets borrowed from pagan literature, Solomon discussed with philosophers and the apostle Paul quoted lines from Epimenides, Menander and Aratus.1) As he did in Epist. 2I, I3, 5 sq. Jerome refers to Deut. 2I, IO-I3 about the captive woman who had to have her hair and nails cut short before marrying an Israelite, and applies it to the attitude which the Christians had to strike towards the saecularis sapientia. 2) Before, in 383, when struggling with this problem, he was in doubt whether a Christian might be allowed to read the philosophers, orators and poets at all: Cavendum igitur, ne captivam habere velimus uxorem, ne in idolio recumbamus; aut, si certe fuerimus eius amore decepti, mundemus eam et omni sordium horrore purgemus (Epist. 2I, I3, 9). Now, in 397, he has a firm conviction and gives expression to it almost defiantly: Quid ergo mirum, si et ego sapientiam saecularem propter eloquii venustatem et membrorum pulchritudinem de ancilla atque captiva Israhelitin facere cupio, si, quidquid in ea mortuum est idolatriae, voluptatis, erroris, libidinum, vel praecido vel rado et mixtus purissimo corpori vernaculos ex ea genera domino Sabaoth (Epist. 70, 2, 5)? Jerome advances in his defence the precedent set by earlier Christian 1) 2


Cf. In Matth. 7, 18-20 See above p. ro9,


40 ••





writers. •Lactantius blamed Cyprian for alleging against Demetrianus the testimony of the prophets and the apostles, quae ille ficta et com-

menticia esse ducebat, et non potius philosophorum ac poetarum, quorum auctoritati ut ethnicus contra ire non poterat (70, 3, 1).1) Magnus is invited to read Origenes, Methodius, Eusebius and Apollinaris who answered Celsus and Porphyrius, the enemies of Christianity: lnvenies nos comparatione eorum inperitissimos et post tanti temporis otium vix quasi per somnium quad piteri didicimus recordari.2) A long succession of Greek Fathers is passed in review, qui omnes in tantum philosophorum doctrinis atque sententiis suos referserunt libros, ut nescias, quid in illis primum admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi an scientiam scripturarum (4, 1). The same is true of the Latin ecclesiastical writers. Tertullian's apologetic works cunctam saeculi continent disciplinam. Minucius Felix - quid gentilium litterarum dimisit intactum? In Arnobius and Lactantius dialogorum Ciceronis b-ccr:oµnv repperies. Victorinus, Cyprianus and Hilarius are also mentioned. Even Iuvencus' remodelling of the Gospel in Virgilian epic form has a place in this survey. It is a counterpart of De viris illustribus, a chapter of Christian literary history, written from a special point of view. Speaking in defence of himself Jerome has at the same time drawn a masterly picture of the process of bringing about a compromise between Christianity and the cultural heritage of the ancients. Jerome meets a possible objection contra gentes hoe esse licitum, in aliis disputationibus dissimulandum. This is wrong, he says. For almost all pagan books are full of learning except those of the Epicureans, 6, 1: Omnes paene omnium libri exceptis his, qui cum Epicuro litteras non didicerunt, eruditionis doctrinaeque plenissimi sunt. It is implied, although not expressed, that the Christian writer cannot do without this literature. In this period Jerome continued his exegetic work with the commentaries on Jonah and Obadiah (A. D. 396), In Ion am (PL 25, n71-1208) and Jn Abdi am (ib. 1149-n70). Lact. Div. inst. V. 4, 3-7. Epist. 70, 3, 2. It may be noticed that Jerome still abides by the fiction that he owes his knowledge of antique learning and literature exclusively to what he learned at school. 1) 2)

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr.






One passage in the former calls for our particular attention (In Ion. 3, 6 sq.). Jerome here looks upon the philosophers in another light than in the letter to Magnus. Plato's words, Rep. V. 18 p. 473 D: Felices fore respublicas, si aut philosophi regnent aut reges philosophentur, are in Jerome's opinion characteristic of the esteem which secular oratory and philosophy enjoy among the pagans. Demosthenes, Cicero, Plato, Xenophon, Theophrastus, Aristotle and the other orators and philosophers are looked upon as kings, their words are accepted as divine oracles, not as human prescripts. The very same people are known by daily experience to be ill-disposed to the Christian faith. Such is the case with the orators too: Quem non inebriavit eloquentia saecularis? Cuius non animos compositione verborum et disertitudinis suae fulgore perstrinxit? Di/ ficile homines potentes et nobiles et divites et his multo difficilius eloquentes credunt Dea .. , simplicitatemque scripturae sanctae non ex maiestate sensuum sed ex verborum iudicant vilitate. The passage echoes a recurrent motive in Christian apology which is all the more remarkable as Jerome otherwise turns against fellowbelievers and heretics, not against pagans. One is almost inclined to think with Gri.itzmacher that he is giving vent to his personal feelings against pagan intellectual circles who despised the intellectual Christians.1) A Virgilian passage, Aen. VIII. rr2-rr4 is quoted as a pattern of brevity, In Ion. I, 8 p. 399: Et notanda brevitas, quam admirari in V ergilio solebamus: 'Iuvenes, quae causa subegit ignotas tentare vias? Qua tenditis'? inquit. 'Qui genus? Unde domo? Pacemne hue fertis an arma'?

Interrogatur persona, regio, iter, civitas, ut ex his cognoscatur et causa discriminis. This, no doubt, is a recollection of the teaching of the grammar school. Pagans, who called in question whether a man could have been kept three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, are asked to read the miraculous stories of Ovid's Metamorphoses, 2, 2 1 ) Griitzmacher, II, p. 201: •>Esspricht ein tiefer, verhaltener Hass aus seinen Worten, wenn er die heidnischen Philosophen schildert ... Nichts schmerzt Hieronymus mehr, als die Erkenntnis, dass die Geistesaristokraten dem Christentum noch immer nicht die wissenschaftliche Gleichberechtigung mit dem Heidentum znerkennen wollett».






p. 406: Legant quindecim libros Nasonis Metamorphoseos et omnem Graecam Latinamque historiam ibique cernent vel Daphnen in laurum vel Phaethontis sorores in populos arbores fuisse conversas, quomodo Iuppiter, eorum sublimissimus deus, sit mutatus in cygnum, in aura fluxerit, in tauro rapuerit et cetera, in quibus ipsa turpitudo j abitlarnm divinitatis denegat sanctitatem. In the preface to In Abdiam Jerome disavows an allegorical commentary on Obadiah which he wrote more than thirty years before, during his first stay in the East. He was not pleased to find that this juvenile work had escaped his book-case and had been published. 1) Nunc ut nihil aliud projecerim, saltem Socraticum illud habeo: 'Scio quad nescio',2) Owing to his book-knowledge he is not in want of precedents, Tertullian, Origen, Quintilian 3) and, above all, Cicero (pp. 361-362): Dicit et Tullius tuus adulescentulo sibi inchoata quaedam et rudia excidisse (De or. I. 5). Si hoe ille tam de libris ad Herennium quam de Rhetoricis, quos ego vel perfectissimos puto, ad comparationem senilis peritiae dicere potuit, quanta magis ego libere profitebor et illud fuisse puerilis ingenii et hoe maturae senectutis. Nevertheless Jerome did not bestow much labour on the new commentary. He dictated it in two nights (p. 386), and he apologizes for the style: Neque enim ea levitate4) et compositione verborum dictamus, ut scribimus. Aliud est, mi Pammachi, saepe stylum vertere et quae memoria digna sunt scribere/') aliud notariorum articulis praeparatis dictare quodcumque in buccam venerit. Finally we have to consider the commentary I n M a t t h a e u m I-IV (PL 26, 15-228). It was dictated in a fortnight before Easter 398 on behalf of Eusebius of Cremona, and there is every sign of its

1) In Abd. prol. pp. 359-360 Litteras saeculi noveram et ob id piitabam me librum legere posse signatum; pp. 361-362 Sperabam in scriniolis latere quod scripseram .. . cum subito de Italia affertur exemplar a quodam iuvene . . . laudante opusculum meum; ib. In/ans eram necdum scribere noveram: titubabat manus, tremebant articuli. 2 ) See above p. r76. 3 ) *Quint. Inst. I prooem. 7. ') I adopt the reading of some MSS levitate ( = laevitate) instead of lenitate; cf. the parallel Epist. 74, 6, 2 Non enim eodem lepore dictamus qua scribimus. B) The passage has to be added to the other quotations (Liibeck, p. 163) from *Hor. Sat. I. 10, 72-73 Saepe stilum vertas ite·rum quae digna legi sunt scripturus.



being made to order and in great haste. 1 ) Jerome cherished no illusions regarding this work, perfectum opus reservans in posterum. 2 ) He is not likely to have made much use of all the commentaries mentioned in the preface, with the exception of Origen's 25 volumes and other of his writings; 3) but he has changed his attitude towards his once so admired model, as Griitzmacher points out: >>Trotz der ausgiebigen Benutzung des Matthauskommentars des Origenes halt sich Hieronymus in diesem Kommentar ganz frei von dessen Heterodoxien, und 4 ohne ihn zu nennen, polemisiert er scharf gegen Origenes>>. ') In contradistinction to the great commentaries on the prophets and the Pauline epistles, In M atthaeum is completely devoid of quotations and other borrowings from classical poetry. 5 ) No Latin prosaist is mentioned; the only literal quotation I have found is *12, 26: Non potest regnum et civitas contra se divisa perstare, sed quomodo 'concordia parvae res crescunt, ita discordia maximae dilabuntur' ..,. Sall. lug. ro, 6 Concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maxumae dilabuntur. 6 )

1) In Matth. prol. (col. 20) At tu (sc. Eusebius) in duabus hebdomadibus imminente iam pascha ... dictare me cogis, ut quando notarii excipiant, quando scribantur schedulae, quando emendentur, quo spatio digerantur ad purum (there must be a lacuna in the text). 2 (col. 21) Si autem mihi vita longior fuerit ... tune nitar implere quad reli) lb. quum est, immo iactis fundamentis et ex parte constructis parietibus pulcherrimum culmen imponam, ut scias, quid intersit inter subitam dictandi audaciam et elucubratam scribendi diligentiam. Jerome apologizes for his style, ib. (col. 22): Obsecro, ut si incomptior sermo est et non solito lapsu fertur oratio, festinationi hoe tribuas, non imperitiae. 3 II, pp. 245 sqq. ) As to the sources I refer to Griitzmacher, 4 ) L. I. p. 248. Cf. ib. p. 250 et passim. 5 hand Iuvencus' versified paraphrase of the Gospels is quoted ) On the other to Matth. 2, II 'Et apertis thesauris suis obtulerunt ei munera, aurum, thus et myrrham'. Pulcherrime munerum sacramenta Iuvencus presbyter uno versiculo comprehendit (I. 250 sq.):

'Thus, aurum, myrrham regique hominique Deoque dona ferunt'. This is the only quotation from a Christian poet - except the Cento Probae to be found in Jerome. The reason for applying it is of comse the conciseness of the line. 6 imitation is not mentioned. ) Cf. Thes. IV. 86, 46 sqq. where Jerome's






For the rest the classical topics are limited to a few historical exempla and references to philosophers. 1) To this period I think we have to assign J erome's homilies discovered and restored to him by Dom G. Morin's successful efforts. 2 ) The style of the homilies differs considerably from that of the other writings owing both to Jerome's principles 3) and to the understanding of the brethren. 4 ) All through he takes up. a hostile attitude towards secular learning; above all he treats the philosophers with disdain and opposes their sordida dogmata and eloquentia to Christian simplicity. 5) The philosophers are the teachers of the heretics. 6 ) But if the heretics are versed in secular learning,7) Jerome gives the brethren to under1) The story about Flaminius (14, II) who executed a man sentenced to death during a banquet seems to be retold according to Livy, XXXIX. 43 (Lubeck, pp. 201 sq.); the tale of the two Pythagoreans, as related in 18, 19-20, has much in common with Cic. Off. III. 45, but the origin is not beyond doubt. The quotations from Plato: 10, 9-10 ..,.. Leg. XII. 2 p. 942 D; 13, 33, ..,..Rep. IV. 15 sqq., are in my opinion likely to have been taken over from Origen. 2 ) Edited in Anecdota Maredsolana, III: 2-3 (~faredsoli 1897, 1903). - As to their dating, see below p. 214, n. 2. 3 ) See below p. 313. 4 ) Tract. de psalm. II9 (Anecd. Mareds. III: 2, p. 225,22) Dico simplicius propter simpliciores. 6 ) Tract. in Marc. 9,1-7 (III: 2, p. 350,12) Voluit Plato, voluit Aristoteles, voluit Zeno stoicorum princeps, voluit et Epicurus voluptatis adsertor dogmata sua sordida sermonibus quasi candidis candidare: sed non potuerunt talia facere vestimenta, qualia Jesus in monte possidet. Tract. de psalm. 131 (III: 2, p. 245,12) Dominus nasciturus in terra non habebat locum. Non invenit locum inter homines, non invenit in Platone, non in Aristotele, sed in praesepe. lb. 86 (III: 2, p. 104,1) Plato .. . non scripsit in populis, sed paucis. Vix enim intelligunt tres homines. Isti vero, hoe est principes ecclesiae et principes Christi, non scripserunt paucis, sed universo populo. lb. 143 (III: 2, p. 286,8) Nolumus eloquentiam Platonicam, sed volumus simplicitatem apostolicam piscatorum. lb. 82 (III: 3, p. 34,1) Calix vero aureus, dogmata philosophorum et eloquentia rhetorum. Quis enim non inductus a philosophis? Quis enim ab oratoribus mundi istius non seductus? Calicem aureum habent extrinsecus splendorem eloquentiae: et intrinsecus venena sunt condita, quae latere non poterant, nisi auri specie celarentur. lb. 93 (III: 3, p. 83,3) and In Esaiam 6, 1-7 (ib. p. no,26) against Epicurus. 6 ) Tract. de psalm. 77 (III: 2, p. 63,25) Ecclesiastici rustici sunt et simplices: omnes vero haeretici Aristotelici et Platonici sunt. Ib. 143 (III: 2, p. 284,4) Si in scripturis tenueris (sc. haereticos), ad Aristotelem fugiunt. Si Aristotelem tenueris, in Platonem transeunt. Cf. further ib. 139 (p. 267,20), 140 (272,9). ') Tract. de psalm. r43 (III: 2, p. 285,23) Ditficile haereticos invenies inperitos: omnes enim haeretici magistri instructi sunt scientia saeculari.



stand that he too is at home in it,e. g. Hom. in I oh. I. r - 14 (III: 2, p. 388,31): Legimus et litteras saeculares, legimus Platonem, legimus ceteros philosophos.1) Apart from generalities he makes however little use of the philosophers. As far as I can see, only one passage can be traced to a definite source, *Tract. de psalm. n5 (III: 2, p. 215,7) Denique tu dicis .... : Si mentiris et verum dicis quod mentiris: ergo mentiris. This is the Chrysippeum sophisma quoted in *Epist. 69,2,4 from Cic. Acad. prior. II. 96 (see above p. 185, n. 2). No poet is mentioned, but two lines are quoted literally. The first one is Ter. Andr. 68: De exodo, in vigilia paschae (III: 2, p. 407,20) Unde et apostolus ait: 'Inimicus vobis f actits sum vera dicens', et proverbium saeculi gentilis quoque poeta exprimens: 'Obsequium' inquit 'amicos, veritas odium parit'. 2) The second one is *Pers. Sat. r,r: Tract. in psalm. 93 (111:2, p. 130,1) Legimus in poeta saeculari: 'O curas hominum, o quantum est in rebus inane!'. The line is repeated in another homily on the same psalm (III: 3, p. 83,20): Mirantur homines philosophorum ac poetarum dicentium: 'O curae hominum, o quantum est in rebus inane!'

1) Cf. also Tract. de psalm. 1.5 (III: 3, p. 22, 13) Nam quantum in memoria mea est, nee apud philosophorum quempiam nee apud rhetorum nee apud poetas nee apud ipsos quidem medicos ... umquam legisse 1ne novi renes pro intellectibus et profunda cogitatione positos. 2 are placed together in the same way in In Gal. 4,15-16 ) The two quotations p. 462 (see above p. 121). - According to Schanz, Geschichte der romischen Literatur, IV: 1 (Miinchen 1914), p. 486, the homilies date from the time 389-413. I am inclined to place them in the nineties, as there are many other points of agreement between them and the writings of that time,

Chap. 5. The writings


A. Commentaries. The stormy Origenist controversy was followed by a few years of calm and literary inactivity, due also to the depression Jerome felt because of the long illness and death (26th January 404) of Paula, his faithful follower and helper. Until 406 he wrote nothing but translations and letters, among which the epitaph on Paula deserves the prize. I shall leave them out of consideration for the present and begin with the principal works, the commentaries. After a ten years' delay Jerome continued the series of commentaries on the minor prophets, and brought it to an end in the autumn of 406 by adding the missing commentaries on Zachariah, Malachi, Hosea, Joel and Amos. He still followed Orig en to a large extent, although he was on his guard against heresies,1) and also many Greek exegetes 2) and, not least, the Hebrews. 3) In Zachariam I-III (PL 25, 1485-16!6) was dedicated to bishop Exsuperius of Toulouse, who had helped Jerome financially, and it was dictated in great haste because Exsuperius' messenger was anxious to return. 4) Jerome complains of the imperfection of the work 1) Cf. Cavallera, II, pp. 123 sqq. Griitzmacher, III, p. 165: ,i:Bs ist iiberhaupt fiir ... alle seine spateren Kommentare charakteristisch, dass er auch nach Beendung des Origenistischen Streites sich immer wieder auf die llenutzung des Origenes gewiesen sah, nur seine, heterodoxe Gedanken enthaltcnden Auslegungen fortan scharf markierte». 2 ) Origen, Hippolytus and Didymus are mentioned In Zach. pro!. pp. 777-778, Origen and Apollinaris In Mat. prol. pp. 941-942, Apollinaris, Origen, Pierius, Eusebius and Didymus In 0s. pro!. As to Joel and Amos nothing is said about the sources. 3 ) Cf. especially In Zach. 6, 9 sq. p. 827 Semet proposui arcana eruditionis

Hebraicae et magistrorum synagogae reconditam disciplinam, eam dumtaxat, quae scripturis sanctis convenit, Latinis auribus prodere. ') In Zach. prol. pp. 777-778 Ob festinationem eius qui reversurus est nultam moram patitur interpretatio, sed velim nolim saltem lucrativis per noctem horis atque furtivis dictare compellor quad tibi dirigam.



which resulted from this haste;1) he gives in this connection an idea of his stylistic ambition, alleging Virgil's example, lib. III praef. pp. 881-882: Quamvis enim elegans sit exercitatumque ingenium et longo usu trita currat oratio, tamen nisi auctoris manu curata fuerit et polita, redolet sordes negligentiae et vel nimio verborum flare luxuriat vel hiulca vocabulis fit vel aspera consonantibus. Unde et de Vergilio traditum est, quad libros suos quasi ursorum fetus lingua composuerit et lambendo fecerit esse meliores.2) Under these circumstances the comparative lack of literary adornment is not to be wondered at. Only the preface to Book II is conspicuous for a series of literary allusions, forming a brilliant prelude, lib. II praef. pp. 825-826: Ab obscuris ad obscuriora transimus et cum Moyse ingredimur in nubem et caliginem. 'Abyssus abyssum invocat in voce cataractarum Dei', 8) et 'gyrans gyrando vadit spiritus et in circulos suos revertitur':4) labyrinthios patimur errores et Christi 'caeca regimus filo vestigia'. 5) Ad hanc difficultatem urget petasatus libri portitor: 'Dimidium f acti qui coepit habet'.6) Quanta magis nos, qui tertiam partem iam confecimus viae, eodem debemus in reliquis labore sudare. As in the other commentaries written at the same time Jerome discusses (In Zach. 1, 18-19 p. 791 sq.) the notion of the four passions, basing himself on Cicero's Tusculans and quoting Aeneis VI. 733; likewise the notion of the four cardinal virtues, with reference to Cicero's

1 Urget me frater Sisinnius incompta et impolita ) lb. lib. III praef. pp. 881-882 transmittere, ut non dicam emendandi sed ne relegendi quidem habeam facultatem. Ille festinat in opus suum, nos in nostro opere minus facimus, dum eruditio incassum vertitur, et quidquid sensu concipimus composito non licet ornare sermone. Rudes igitur non mea culpa sed studio portitoris suscipe libros; ib. lib. II praef. pp. 825-826 Quem (sc. librum) tanta celeritate dictamus, ut paene non sit emendandi spatium. 2 Vit. Verg. p. 59 Reifferscheid. See too In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. ) Cf. Suet. 485-486 (p. 121 above). 3 ) Psalm. 41, 8.

4) 6




*Verg. Aen. VI. 30 Caeca regens filo vestigia. See too In Ezech. lib. XIV praef. p. 562 (p. 240 below). 6) ..,.. Hor. Epist. I. 2, 40. )







De officiis and De virtutibus. The passage will be discussed in a subsequent chapter. 1) Together with Josephus, often quoted, 2) Tacitus is mentioned for once, 14, r-2 p. 913 sq.: Cornelius quoque Tacitus qui post Augustum iesque ad mortem Domitiani vitas Caesarum triginta voluminibus exaravit. As is well known, our information about the size of Tacitus' principal works is due exclusively to this reference. 3 ) The comicus hinted at (8, r6-r7 p. 851): Ne iuxta comicum nodum quaeramus in scirpo, is either Plautus (Men. 247) or Terence (Andr. 94r). The harvest we have brought together is far from rich. 4) The rest is silence. In Malachi am (PL 25, r6r7-r654) is still poorer from our point of view: no quotations, no classical author mentioned, no reminiscences. One would rather assume that Jerome paid regard to the aversion to secular literature which distinguished early monasticism and to the Gallic monks Minervius and Alexander to whom he dedicated the commentary. nut it cannot possibly be so. For according to a letter, written at the same time, Minervius and Alexander were accomplished rhetors, 5) and answering their question about r. Cor. r5, 5r, Jerome does not hesitate to quote Terence and to mention Epicurus. This being the case I must admit myself to be in want of an explanation, all the more so since the three following commentaries, written in the autumn of 406 and dedicated to Pammachius, have quite a different appearance. 1)

Pages 333-4 and 377 n. 3 below. I, 18-19 p. 790; II, 6-7 p. 886; 12, l p. 895. 3) See M. Schanz, Geschichte der romischen Literatur. II: 2, p. 311 (Dritte Auflage, Miinchcn 1913). 4 ) The references to scientific works, 5, 9 sqq. p. 819: Hi qui de volucrum scripsere naturis, and 14, 16 p. 932: Medici et hi qiti de arborum et herbarum scripsere naturis, do not bear on Pliny the Elder but probably on Greek authorities. Perhaps 8, 18-19 p. 851: Rectius arbitrantes nihil omnino quam parum dicere, is a reminiscence of *Sall. Jug. 19, 2 Silere melius puto quam parum dicere. Cf. p. 238 below. 5) Epist. rr9, r, 3 Prudentes estis et eruditi et de 'canina, ut aitAppius, facundia' ad Christi disertitudinem transmigrastis. The secular eloquence is characterized by a reminiscence of Sall. Hist. frg. IV. 51 Manrenbrecher; cf. to C. Luci/. r, p. 171 (p. 106 above). 2)



In O seam I-III (PL 25, 855-992) was written on the recommendation of Jerome's noble patron, Pammachius, senator as well as monk, primum et nobilitate et religione. In the praise Jerome bestows upon him in the prefaces, allusions to secular literature are frequent. I begin with a passage in lib. II praef. pp. 52 sqq.: Ttt a1ttem, Pammachi, qui nos /acere praecepisti hoe, necesse est ut /autor sis imperii tui et 'Ama/ionios ac Rabirios' nostri temporis, qui 'de Graecis bonis Latina /aciimt non bona' et homines eloquentissimos ipsi elingues trans/ernnt, evangelico calces pede hydramque et scorpium iuxta /abulas poetarum aduras caitterio, solea conteras et Scylleos canes ac morti/era carmina Sirenarum surda aure pertranseas. Jerome thinks of Rufinus, and applies to him a quotation from Cic. Acad. post. I. 51) and a Terentian line, Eim. prol. 8. 2) He identifies him, as so often, with the monsters of the pagan myths and urges Pammachius, who actively assisted him in the Origenist controversy, to render them harmless and to resist their allurements. He continues, quoting Livy (Book CXIV, frg. 45 in Weissenborns edition): Optarem illud mihi contingere, quod Titus Livius scribit de Catone, cuius gloriae neque pro/uit quisquam laudando nee vituperando nocuit, cum utrumque summis praediti /ecerint ingeniis. Signi/icat autem M. Ciceronem et C. Caesarem, quorum alter laudes, alter vituperationes supradicti scripsit viri. Finally there are one or two reminiscences of Horace: Postquam ... nos ... pallida mors subtraxerit et alia venerit generatio primisque cadentibus foliis virens silva succreverit; cf. *Carm. I. 4, 13 Pallida mors; *Ars 60 sq. Ut silvae /oliis pronos mutantur in annos, prima cadunt. A more straightforward eulogy of Pammachius is found in the third Book, lib. III praef. pp. 109-110 Quidquid possumus, primum Dea, deinde tibi qui Dei es solvimus illiusque semper versiculi recordamur (Verg. Eel. 3, 86): 'Pollio et ipse /acit nova carmina'. This is a fine compliment: Pammachius is Jerome's patron just as Pollio was Vergil's, and Pammachius, like Pollio, is not alien to the 1) Didicisti enim non posse nos Ama/inii aut Rabirii similes esse, qui nulla arte adhibita de rebus ante oculos positis vulgari sermone disputant, nihil definiunt, nihil partiuntur, nihil apta interrogatione concludunt, nullam denique artem esse nee dicendi nee disserendi putant. That is what Jerome thinks of Rnfinus as a writer. ") Cf. p. I 16 above.






mission of his client. Jerome continues: Cumque apertum fautorem pro iure amicitiae esse te gaudeam, tacit-um eruditionis tuae iudicium pertimesco magisque te laudantem quam adversarios detrahentes metuo. Illis enim aemulatio detrahit /idem et non tam iudices quam acwsatores vocandi sunt. Tu autem, qui diligis, nequaquam personarum sed rerum promis sententiam, quamquam et amor recipiat errorem pulchr·umque sit illud r9eocpgaarov, quad Tullius magis ad sensum quam ad verbum interpretat·us est, TvcpJ.dvTocpiJ.ovvnsei TocptJ.ovµsvov, id est, 'amantiitm caeca iudicia sunt'. Jerome ascribes to Theophrastus a saying that in reality is found in Plato and that he could have got from Galenus as an intermediary. 1) The Ciceronian version, which occurs in the same wording *C. Joh. 3 (PL 23, 373), is not to be found in the extant writings. 2) Quotations from poetry are inserted in the running commentary: 2, 16-17 p. 24 (talking of Semiramis, the builder of Babylon's town wall) De qua insignis poeta testatur (Ov. Met. IV. 57 sq.):

'Quam dicitur olim coctilibus muris cinxisse Semiramis ttrbem'; ib. (talking of Baal) Unde et Dido Sidonia 3) regii generis cum Aeneam suscepisset hospitio, hac patera Iovi vina delibat, 'qua Belus et omnes a Belo soliti' (- Verg. Aen. I. 729 sq.); 4, 15-16 p. 45 (talking of the gadfly, asilus) De quo Vergilius in tertio Georgicornm libro refert (Georg. III. 147-151): 'Cui nomen asilo Romanum est, oestrum Graii vertere vocantes, asper, acerba sonans, quo tota exterrita silvis diffugiunt armenta, furit mugitibus aether concussus silvaeque et sicci ripa Tanagri'; *ib. Dum propheto, 'dum spiritus hos regit artus' (- Verg. Aen. IV.

336). 4) In order to make a comparison easier I pass in review the verse 1)

See I,iibeck, p. 94, note 2. Liibeck, p. 94, note 3; Courcelle, p. 60, note 4· a) Cf. the stock Virgilian epithet Sidonia Dido, e. g. *Aen. I. 446. 613; IX. 266; 2)

XI. 74· ') Quoted in the same hidden way *Epist. 39, 8, r; *Praef. Jos. (PL 28, 506).



quotations which are found in the other commentaries dating from 406. In I o e l (PL 25, 993- ro36) exhibits three Virgilian lines all of which reappear in the writings of the period in question: I, 2-3 p. I70 Iuxta illud Vergilianum (Aen. III. 98):1) 'Et nati natorum et qui nascentur ab ill is'; r, 4 p. I72 (Aen. VI. 733 sq.);2) 3, 7-8 p. 2I0 (Sabaei) unde et tus venire perhibetur, dicente Vergilio (Aen. I. 4r6 sq.). 3)

'Centumque Sabaeo ture calent arae'. In Amos I-III (PL 25, rn37-n50) contains six instances from poetry: 5, 8 sq. p. 288 sq. Jerome explains why names of constellations originating from pagan mythology are used in the Bible text: Quando autem audimus 'Arcturum et Oriona', non debemus sequi f abulas poetarum et ridicula ac portentosa mendacia, quibus etiam caelum inf amare conantur et mercedem stupri inter sidera collocare dicentes (Verg. Aen. III. 5r6 sq.): 'Arcturum pluviasque Hyadas geminosque Triones armatumque auro circumspicit Oriona', sed scire H ebraea nomina, quae apud eos aliter appellantur, vocabulis f abularum gentilium in linguam nostram esse translata, qui non possumus intelligere quad dicitur nisi per ea vocabula quae usu didicimus et errore combibimus. lb. p. 289 Unde et in Regum volumine 'raphaim' Hebraeum Graeci 'Titanas' transtulerunt, quae apud ethnicos celeberrima fab,ula est, ex qua in laudes deorum scribunt ytyav-r:oµaxlar;et tela Typhoea et impositum Encelado Aetnam montem, de cuius motu Trinacria contremiscat.4) 1

Also *In Ezech, 37, 15 sqq. p. 439 (p. 243 below). See p. 332 below. 3 ) Also In Ier. 6, 20 p. 887 (p. 244 below). 4 that Jerome had in mind Claudianus' Gigantomachia (thus ) I do not think Lubeck p. 199 and the old editors) which he is believed to have quoted once in the commentary on Isaiah (see p. 230 below). For he could have got all that he says here from Virgil and his commentators; cf. *Aen. VIII. 298 sq. Typhoeus arduus arma tenens; *ib. III. 578 sqq. Fama est Enceladi semustum fulmine corpus urgeri mole hac ingentemque insuper A etnam impositam ruptis flammam exspirare caminis, et fessum quotiens mu/et latus, intremere omnem murmure Trinacriam. )




lb. pp. 299 sq. an anonymous secular poet is said to be influenced by Amos 5, 8 'Et iustitiam in terra posuit' (the Septuagint text): Ego puto ex hoe loco etiam gentilem poetam furatum fuisse, qui de rusticorum simplicitate et beatitudine edisserens intulit:

'Extrema per illos Iustitia excedens terris vestigia fecit'.1) Lib. III praef. pp. 309-310 Dictandi celeritate ostendi temeritatem meam, ut quod alii 'stylum saepe vertendo' non audent scribere, ego committerem casui, qui semper dictantes sequitur (- Hor. Sat. I. 10, 72 sq. Saepe stilum vertas iterum quae digna legi sunt scripturus). 6, 2 sqq. p. 313 Unde et in saeculari litteratura legimus (Verg. Georg. III. 284):

'Sed fugit interea, fugit irreparabile tempus'. Et in alio loco (Hor. Carm. II.




'Eheu fugaces, Postume, Postume, labuntur anni'. 2) Ciceronian influence can be observed now and then. The exposition of the four passions, In Joel 1, 4 p. 171, is due to *Cic. Tusc. IV. II (see p. 332 below), and the anecdote, ib. 1, 5 p. 173: Recteque illud laudatur Archytae Tarentini, qui cum vilico suo esset iratus: 'Jam te' inquit 'occiderem, nisi iratus essem', seems to originate from Cic. Rep. I. 59. Two of Cicero's works are mentioned in In Amos 5, 3 p. 283: De cuius numeri (sc. VII) sacramentis in Scipionis somnio plenius narrat Tullius et obscurissimus Platonis Timaeus liber est, qui ne Ciceronis quidem aureo ore fit planior. 3) To Cicero's De re publica, of which Somnium Scipionis formed part (lib VI), belongs also another passage, In Amos 1, 1 p. 223 Sardanapalus, de quo insignis orator: 'Turpior' inquit 'vitiis quam nomine' (- Cic. Rep. III fr. 4). 4) 1 ) The verses evidently bear upon LJberidwelling on earth and are influenced by Aratus' version of the myth. Cf. Ov. Met. I. 149 sq. Et Virgo caede madentes ultima caelestum terras Astraea reliquit; Fast. I. 250 Ultima de superis illa (Iustitia) reliquit humum. 2 ) The two quotations are also placed side by side in the commentary on Ezekiel, 1, 8-9 p. 13 (see p. 241 below). 3 ) Cf. In Is. lib. XII praef. p. 492 (see pp. 232 sq. below). 4 ) Cf. In Hab. lib. II praef. pp. 631-632 (see pp. 134 sq. above).



Besides two reminiscences of Sallustius, In Amos prol. pp. 219-220 Agrestes ... casae ... quas Afri appellant mapalia (- *Sall. I ug. 18, 8 Aedificia Numidarum agrestium, quae mapalia illi vacant), ib. Humi arido atque arenoso nihil omninn frngum gignitur (- * Sall. Jug. 48, 3 Arborum quae humi arido atque harenoso gignuntur), 1) we find further a few rhetorical sayings: In Amos lib. II praef. pp. 263-264 Legi in quadam controversia: 'I mbecillitas corporis animi quoque vires secum trahit'; *In Os. 2, 16-17 p. 25 Ignosce obscuritati, quae tribus nascitur modis: aut rerum difficultate aut magistri imperitia aut discentis nimia tarditate'. Thanks to In Ezech. lib. XIII praef. pp. 507-508,2) we can ascribe the passage to the rhetor Victorinus who taught rhetoric in Rome when Jerome was a boy. The most prominent philosophers, orators and poets of antiquity are enumerated in In Amos, 1, 2 p. 224: In ore philosophorum semper Socrates et Plato, Xenophon et Theophrastus, Zeno et Aristoteles, Stoici versantur et Peripatetici. Oratores Lysiam et Hyperidem, Periclem et Demosthenem, Gracchos, Catones, Tullios et Hortensios in caelum laudibus f erunt. Poetae, si epici sunt, H omerum atque V ergilium, si lyrici, Pindarum et Flaccum crebro sermone concelebrant. The selection coincides to a great extent with the names included in Quintilianus' survey of Greek and Latin literature, *Inst. X. 1. All the Greek orators are to be found there (§ 76-82), likewise the philosophers except Zeno and Peripatetici (81-84), while the Latin orators, except Cicero, do not appear in this context. As to the poets, Quintilianus too couples Virgil with Homer (§ 85) and Horace with Pindar (§ 61 Novem vero lyricorum longe Pindaries princeps; 96 At lyricorum idem Horatius /ere solus legi dignus). As J erorne othenvise has taken over epithets and pregnant characteristics from this very chapter of Institutio oratoria (see above p. 186 n. 1), I do not doubt that he depends on it even here. As to the stories about Xenocrates and Polemo (In Os. 1, 2 p. 5), about Socrates and Phaedo (ib.), the reference to Epicurus (In Amos 6, 2 sqq. p. 313) and the long quotation from the physician Xenocrates about the diamond (ib. 7, 1


Cf. Thes. II. See p. 237 evidently quoted from Victorinus' I. r6) cannot be 2


569, Go sqq. below. The wording of the two quotations differs; Jerome from memory. Whether he got his knowledge from lessons or commentary on Cicero's dialogues (mentioned in Adv. R14/in. said.



AND nrn



7 sqq. p. 328 sq.),1) Jerome, in my opinion, is likely to have found the material in his Greek commentaries. On the other hand, he knows Galenus, whom he quotes (ib. 5, 3 p. 283).2) In the commentaries under debate Jerome forswears explicitly any pretension to oratorical style. He characterizes it as ludere, In Os. 2, 16-17 p. 25: Neque enim Hebraeum prophetam edisserens oratoriis debeo declamatiunculis ludere et in narrationibus atque epilogis Asiatico more cantare.3 ) We are warned by experience not to take such affirmations too seriously. The very term ludere is applied to the commentaries in a letter to Augustine, Epist. II5, 3 (written 404-405): In scripturarum, si placet, campo sine nostro invicem dolore ludamus. 4 ) In the same manner we have to consider the disapproval of flowers of rhetoric, In Amos lib. III praef. pp. 309-310: In explanatione sanctarum scripturarum non verba composita et oratoriis f loribies adornata sed eruditio et simplicitas quaeritur veritatis. Rhetoric and truth form an antithesis in great favour with the Christians. For all that Jerome's attitude is far from being consistent and unequivocal. In a brilliant letter, dating from about 404-405, he makes up for the restraint he imposed upon himself while commenting on the Scriptures, by a rhetorical diction, quasi ad scholasticam materiam me exercens ... simulque ut ostenderem obtrectatoribus meis, quod et ego possim quicquid venerit in buccam dicere (Epist. n7, 12, 1). He continues: Unde et de scripturis pauca perstrinxi nee orationem meam, ut in ceteris libris f acere solitus sum, illarum floribus texui. If Jerome ventures to apply the 1)

Cf. Lubeck, pp. 99 sq.

2) See Lubeck, pp. ror sq. »Galien est sa seule source en matiere medicale,>, says

Courcelle, p. 74. 3 ) Cf. ib. rr, I3 p. u8 Cogar contra voluntatem meam saepius de Hebraeae lingi1ae proprietatibus disputare; neque enim rhetorum more sententias repetimus, verba construimus et audientes vel legentes in laudes nostras declamationibus suscitamus, sed quae obscura sunt maxime alienae linguae hominibus explanare nitimiw. 4 ) Augustine took offence at the expression, Epist. 82 ( = Hier. Epist. n6, 2, r) Petis ... ut in scripturarum campo sine nostro invicem dolore ludamus. Equidem, quantum ad me adtinet, serio nos ista quam ludo agere mallem. Quodsi hoe verbum tibi propter facilitatem ponere placuit, ego, fateor, maius aliquid expeto a benignitate virium tuarum prudentiaque tam docta et otiosa, annosa, studiosa diligentia ... ut in magnis et laboriosis quaestionibus non tamquam ludentem in campo scripturarum sed in montibus anhelantem adiuves. Si autem propter hilaritatem quam esse inter carissimos disserentes decet, putasti dicendum esse 'ludamus' ... hoe ipsum edoce, obsecro te, quonam modo, etc.



rhetorical term '/lores' to quotations from the Scriptures, we do not wonder that he introduced '/lores' even from secular writers into his expositions of the Scriptures. Only we cannot help wondering why the frequency of such citations varies so much in commentaries dating from the same period. It is an obvious conclusion that the frequency in the three last writings as compared with the two others is connected with the literary taste and breeding of the dedicatee, and this conclusion seems all the more probable as Jerome's letters to Pammachius 1) are exceptionally rich in quotations and reminiscences from the classics. 2) But in such cases we must proceed with great caution. The Commentary on Daniel (about 407) which also was dedicated to Pammachius (together with Marcella) differs considerably from those discussed. And the following commentaries, In Isaiam and In Ezechielem, although written successively and inscribed to the same person, Eustochium, show a discrepancy that cannot easily be explained. In Daniele m (PL 25, 513-610), the first of the commentaries on the major prophets, holds a position apart. For once Jerome had to face not heresies or discrepancies between ecclesiastical authorities, but pagan criticism. In Book XII Ka-r:axewna11w11 Porphyrius, the ingenious forerunner of modern Bible criticism, put forward the theory that the Book of Daniel was written during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (till 166/165), not during the Babylonian captivity, and that it refers to contemporary history. 3) Jerome hardly read Porphyrius himself; scholars agree that he drew his knowledge from Porphyrius' Christian opponents, Methodius, Eusebius and Apollinarius, whom he mentions in the preface. As their works do not exist, Jerome's dis1

Epist. 48, 49, 57, 66, 84 and 97. E. g. from Terence, Cicero, Horace, Persius, Quintilianus, Juvenal and, above all, Vergil. Cicero is called Tullius tuus (Epist. 49, 1), familiarity with Horace is assumed, ib. 48, 2, 1: Et, ut ipse legisti, 'nescit vox missa reverti' (Hor. Ars 390). 3 ) Jerome recapitulates the contents in the following way, In Dan. praef. pp. 6!7-6!8: Contra prophetam Danielem duodecimum librum scripsit Porphyrius, nolens eum ab ipso cuius inscriptus est nomine esse compositum, sed a quodam qui temporibus Antiochi qui appellatus est Epiphanes fuerit in Iudaea, et non tam Danielem ventura dixisse quam illum narrasse praeterita. Denique quidquid usque ad Antiochum dixerit, veram historiam continere, si quid autem ultra opinatus sit, quia futura nescierit, esse mentitum. )







cussion is valuable,1) but at the same time it gives a dear idea of his inability to deal with an historical problem. He is sometimes impressed by Porphyrius' arguments and makes concessions to him in this or that particular, 2) but he has no grasp of the problem and adheres to the traditional view, oscillating and not despising rhetorical tricks.a) Altogether the commentary does not do Jerome great credit. 4 ) In the long list of historians >>necessaryfor a right understanding of the last part of Daniel►> (praef. pp. 621-622), we meet the names of Callinicus Sutorius, Diodorus, Hieronymus, Polybius, Claudius Theo and Andronicus Alipius, quos et Porphyrius esse secutum se dicit. That little word et is characteristic of Jerome's procedure, as J. Geffcken has pointed out. 5 ) While making a show of learning Jerome in reality got 1

) The fragments are collected by Adolf von Harnack, Porphyrius' »Gegen die Christem, IS Bucher. Zeugnisse, Fragmente und Referate (Abhandlungen der Konig!. preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Kl. Nr r. Berlin 1916). Cf. also Liibeck, pp. 76-85. 2 ) Cf. Griitzmacher, III, pp. 170 sqq. - I observe that Cavallera, usually so inclined to emphasize and praise J erome's writings, does not enter upon the question, restricting himself to a few insignificant references to this commentary (I, pp. 3II sq.). 3 Cuius (sc. Porphyrii) impugnatio testimonium veri) E. g. praef. pp. 619-620 tatis est. Tanta enim dictorum /ides fuit, ut propheta incredulis hominibus non videatur futura dixisse sed narrasse praeterita. 4 ) Cf. Griitzmacher, III, p. 166: »Die kritiklose Nebeneinanderstellung der Meinungen aller dieser Kirchenviiter (sc. Iulius Africanus, Hippolytus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullianus) hat schon auf den afrikanischen Bischof Hesychius den ganz richtigen Eindruck gemacht, dass Hieronymus nur seine eigene Urteilslosigkeit dadurch zu verhiillen strebe>>. Pierre de Labriolle, La reaction paienne, (Paris 1934, IV ed. pp. 267 sq.) quotes the judgment of F. Vigouroux (Les livres saints et la critique rationaliste, t. I, 1886, p. 180): >► Un exegete catholique, que nu! ne soupi;onnera de temerite, lone Porphyre d'avoir 'saisi avec une rare penetration le sens veritable de certains passages'; ii trouve que Jes reponses de saint Jerome 'ne sont pas toujours heureuses', que 'quelquesunes manquent de justesse et d'exactitude' et que 'le savant docteur a parfois donne tort a Porphyre, la meme ou ce dernier avait raison',>. ~) Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig und Berlin 1907), p. 299: ►►So ist dieses et ausserordentlich bezeichnend: wir wissen, dass Hieronymus hier das historische Material ruhig aus seines Gegners Hand genommen und sich selbst mit dem Studium der gleich danach angefiihrten Autoren, des Iosephus, Livius, Pompeius Trogus und Iustin (!) begniigt hat, wissen, dass sein Kommentar ohne den des Heiden, den er vielfach zitiert, nicht denkbar ist». This statement is substantially true.

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr.





his knowledge of Callinicus Sutorius, Polybius and Diodorus from Porphyrius,1) id est, from quotations of Porphyrius which he found in his Christian authorities, and there is every probability that he took over the other Greek historians from the same sources. 2) Only Xenophon, not mentioned in the list, is quoted. 3 ) The reference to Berosus is due to Josephus, 4) from whomJ erome profited so much in historical matters. 5) As to Latin historians, Livy, Pompeius Trogus and Iustinus are mentioned in the preface; there is possibly one quotation from Livy 6) and one from Pompeius Trogus. 7) In short, in spite of its learned appearance this work is a poor compilation. We cannot fail to be impressed unfavourably with the closing words of the preface: Et si quando cogimur litterarum saecularium recordari et aliqua ex his dicere quae olim omisimus, non nostrae est voluntatis sed, ut dicam, gravissimae necessitatis, ut probemus ea, quae a sanctis prophetis ante saecula multa praedicta sunt, tam Graecorum quam Latinorum et aliarum gentium litteris contineri. Could an author give his readers a more erroneous conception of his procedure? For the rest, secular writers are adduced now and then on different matters, viz. the Persian tiara: 3, 2I p. 639 Tiara autem verbum Graecum est et usu versum in Latinum; de quo et Vergilius (Aen. VII. 247): 'Sceptrumque sacerque tiara'. Est autem genus pileoli quo Persarum Chaldaeorumque gens utitur; the word naphta: 3, 46 p. 64I Sallustius scribit in historiis (IV frg. 6I Maurenbrecher) quad naphta sit genus fomitis apud Persas, quo vet maxime nutriantur incendia; the gender of torques: 5, 7 p. 653 Rem f acio ridiculam, ut in expositione prophetarum de verborum generibus quasi grammaticus disputem; sed quia a quodam nihil sciente et omnia pollicente reprehensus sum, cur 'torquem' genere f eminino transtulerim, 8 ) breviter adnotabo, quad Cicero et Maro torquem in genere f eminino, 1)

See Courcelle, p. 64. Courcelle, ib.: »Les nombreux historiens que mentionne Jerome dans la preface de son Commentaire sur Daniel ne lui sont accessibles que par les refutations de l'>. 3 ) In Dan. 5, 1 p. 651; 7, 5 p. 665. ') lb. 5, 1 p. 651 _. Ios. C. A pion. I. 20 (Lubeck, p. 29). •) Cf. Lubeck, pp. 42, 43 sqq., 46 sq., 49 sq. 6 ) In Dan. II, 29-30 p. 715 about the legation of M. Popilins Laenas, cf. Liv. XLV. 12. See Lubeck, p. 202 sq. 7) lb. 5, I p. 651 (Lubeck, pp. 203 sq.). 8 translation of Daniel: ) Torques aurea is to be found three times in Jerome's 5, 7; 5, 16; 5, 29. 2



lStarke Wiederholungen machen die Lekture oft unertraglich,>. It is an exception when Jerome holds himself back, 66, 13-14 p. 8II: De quibus iam dixi. Quorum si lector oblitus est, recurrat ad explanationem pristinam. Melius est enim illum scripta relegere quam nos dicta replicare. 2 ) Lib. I praef. p. 5-6 Magnique laboris et operis est omnem Isaiae librum velle disserere, in quo maiorum nostrorum ingenia sudaverunt, Graecorum dico. Ceterum apud Latinos grande silentium est praeter sanctae memoriae martyrem Victorinum. 3 ) Cf. lib. VI praef. p. 235 Non omnia disserentes sed quid ecclesiastici viri ante nos senserint breviter indicantes. This lack of originality was exposed to censure; lib. XI praef. pp. 451-452 In quibus disserendis quid Africanus temporum scriptor, quid Origenes et Caesariensis Eusebius, Clemens quoque Alexandrinae ecclesiae presbyter et Apollinaris Laodicensis Hippolytusque et Hebraei et Tertullianus senserint breviter comprehendi, lectoris arbitrio derelinquens quid de pluribus eligeret. Itaque quod nos verecundia fecimus iudicandi et eorum honore qui lecturi erant, quibusdam forte non placet, qui non antiquorum opiniones sed nostram sententiam scire desiderant. Quibus facilis responsio est noluisse me sic unum recipere, ut viderer alios condemnare. 4 ) Lib. I praef. pp. 5-6. ") Origen is mentioned 2, 20 p. 46 and 6, 9 sqq. p. 97, Eusebius 13, 3-4 p. 170; 18, 2 p. 199; 18, 7 p. 201; 22, 3 p. 221. For the use of the sources in general, see Griitzmacher, III, pp. 179 sqq. In addition, short references are made to many other Christian authors: 54, 11-12 p. 673 Episcopum Epiphanium qui insigne nobis ingenii et eruditionis suae reliquit volumen quod inscripsit Ilsel ).[0wv (ib. pp. 673 sq. a long anonymous quotation from this work, cf. Vallarsi ad lac.); 64, 4-5 p. 761 Irenaeus; lib. XVIII praef. pp. 767-768 Tertullian, Victorinus, Lactantius, Irenaeus, Dionysins, Apollinaris; lib. VIII praef. p. 328






This would explain the comparative scarcity of quotations and borrowings from pagan authors which is noticeable in this commentary. Jerome here seems to be more absorbed in the subject-matter and to pay less attention to the style than usually. Let us listen to what he says in some of the prefaces: lib. II praef. p. 46 Sensum potius scripturarum quam compositae orationis verba perquirens; lib. VIII praef. p. 328 Certe nos studiosis scribimus et sanctam scripturam scire cupientibus, non fastidiosis et ad singula nauseantibus. Qui si /lumen eloquentiae et concinnas declamationes desiderant, legant Tullium, Quintilianum, Gallionem, Gabinianum et, ut ad nostros veniam, Tertullianum, Cyprianum, Minucium, Arnobium, Lactantium, Hilarium. Nobis propositum est Isaiam per nos intelligi et nequaquam sub Isaiae occasione nostra verba laudari. Such utterances may be rather conventional, but they are confirmed here by the fact that sentences and other quotations of a purely ornamental character which play such a part in other writings are conspicuous by their almost complete absence. In eighteen prefaces there is only one example of a sententia;1 ) in addition I can mention a secondhand quotation from Hesiod. 2) Of the Latin poets, Horace, Virgil and Lucan are mentioned by name, once each. Talking of idols Jerome seizes on Horace's and Virgil's mockery: 44, 6 sqq. p. 528 Super quo et Flaccus scribit in satira, deridens simulacra gentium (Hor. Sat. I. 8, 1-4):

'Olim truncus eram ficuln[e]us, inutile lignum, cum faber incertus scamnum f aceretne Priapum maluit esse deum. Deus inde ego, furum aviumqite maxima formido'. Tertullian, Cyprianus, Minucius, Arnobius, Lactantius and Hilarius are praised as masters of style (see above). 1 ) Lib. XVI praef. p. 667, see p. 232 below. 2 ) 3, 3 p. 50 Et Graeci poetae laudabilis illa et admiranda sententia est: 'Primum esse beatum qui per se sapiat, secundum qui sapientem audiat; qui autem utroque careat, hunc inutilem esse tam sibi quam omnibus' ..,..Hesiod. Op. et dies, 293 sqq.:

Ovw,; µ& :na'Pdeicrro,;,o,;avro,; :ndna vofian 295 eafJM,; o'av udusivo,;, o,; d:n6vn :ntfJrirat· o,;oe ue µ~r' avro,; voen µ~r' 11.i.J..ovdu6vwv iv fJvµq, {Jd)J.rirat, 6 o' avr' dxe~ro,; dv~eLiibeck (pp. II sq.) and Courcelle (p. 50) think that Jerome borrowed the quotation from Clem. Paedag. III. 8; in my opinion, he is more likely to have found it in a commentary on Isaiah.




46, 1-2 p. 544 Simulacra bestiarum et brutorum animantium, quae maxime in Aegypto divino cultui consecrata sunt. De quibus Vergilius (Aen. VIII. 698):1)

'Omnigenumque deum monstra et latrator Anubis'. The quotation from Lucan occurs in a discussion of geography: 66, 18-19 p. 817 Iberia, hoe est Hispania, ab lbero flumine, unde et hodie Hispaniarum regio appellatur Celtiberia. De quibus pulchre Lucanus (Phars. IV. 10): 'Gallorum Celtae miscentes nomen Iberis', quos nos poss1,mus Gallohispanos dicere. Horace and Lucan are quoted once more, 2, 8 p. 36 Pulchre autem illud comma versiculi: 'Semper avarus eget', (- Hor. Epist. I. 2, 56) aliis verbis propheta significavit dicens: 'Et non est finis thesaurorum eius' (Is. 2, 8); 56, 3 p. 657 Ergo in eunuchis nequaquam illi intelligendi sunt, quos ardens poeta describens ait (Lucan. X. 133 sq.): 'Nee non infelix ferro truncata iuventus atque exsecta virum'. Persius (2, 16) is quoted anonymously: 66, 7 p. 815 Adulteria et omnem libidinum turpitudinem simplicibus aquis abluere se putantes, quibus illud aptabitur: 'Et noctem flumine purgant'. 2) Talking of Psal. 138, 7: 'Qua vadam a spiritu tuo aut a facie tua quo fugiam?' the exegete revives a line which, if scholars are right in ascribing it to Claudian, 3) is the only quotation from this poet: 27, l p. 361 Pulchre quidam poeta in Gigantomachia de Encelado lusit: 'Quo fugis, Encelade? quascumque accesseris oras, sub deo semper eris'. Even Virgilian reminiscences are rarely met with: 21, 13 sqq. p. 217 De quibus (sc. Agarenis) puto et poetam dicere (Verg. Aen. IV. 42 sq.): 'Lateque vagantes4) Barcaei'; 57, 16 p. 680 Cuncta habent notitiam Dei, 1 2 3 4

) ) ) )

2, 2

The line occurs again In Ezech. 8, ro p. 86 (pp. 242 sq. below). Cf. Epist. 49, IS, 6 Iuxta Persium 'noctem flumine purgant'. Cf. Liibeck, p. 199. The reading vagantes occurs also in J erome's other quotations (Epist. r26, and 129, 4, 3) and in some late MSS of Virgil instead of furentes.






quem iuxta Stoicos insignis poeta (de)scribens ait (Verg. Aen. VI. 724727:1) 'Principio caelum ac terras camposque liquentes lucentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet'. 66, 20 p. 824 De Britannis, Hispanis Gallisque extremis hominum Morinis et ubi bicornis finditur Rhenus (a paraphrase of Verg. Aen. VIII. 727: Extremique hominum Morini Rhenusque bicornis); 66, 22-23 p. 826 Aiunt physici et quorum curae est de caelestibus disputare lunam non habere proprium lumen sed solis radiis illustrari. Ab ea enim semper orbis parte completur et fulget, a qua soli vicinior est, nee umbra terrae obscuratur, quad et poeta uno versiculo demonstravit (Verg. Georg. I. 396):

'N ec fratris radiis obnoxia surgere luna'. There are also some references to mythology which seem to bear on a definite passage of poetry. Both Virgil (Aen. VII. 761-782) and Ovid (Met. XV. 497-546) told of Virbius, the revivified Hippolytus. In the case of 26, 14 p. 352: Quodque sequitur, 'Nee medici suscitabunt', sensus perspicuus est condemnari fabulas poetarum, qui ab Aesculapio iactant Virbium suscitatum, it is impossible to say whether or not Jerome had one of these passages in mind. But the matter becomes quite clear, I think, when we read shortly afterwards, 26, 19 p. 356: Ros enim Domini, iuxta fabulas poetarum vincens omnes herbas Paeonias, vivificabit corpora mortuorum. For herbas Paeonias is evidently a reminiscence of *Verg, Aen. VII. 769: (Hippolytum) Paeoniis revocatum herbis. Thus Virgil was already at the back of Jerome's mind when Virbius was mentioned before (cf. *Aen. VII. 777 Versoque ubi nomine Virbius esset).2) What Ovid says about the golden age, Met. I. III sq.:

'Flumin«t iam lactis, iam flumina nectaris ibant f lavaque de viridi stillabant ilice mella', 1 ) The passage recurs, as well as Aen. VIII. 698 (p. 230 above), in In Ezech. (p. 242 below). I propose the reading scribens instead of scribens; cf. e. g. 56, 3 p. 657. 2 ) A reminiscence of this line is found also In Eph. 4, 16 p. 619 (p. 125 above).



recurs twice in our commentary, and the similarity goes so far that Jerome is likely to have imitated the poet: *II, 6 sqq. p. 159 Nisi forte iuxta /abulas poetarum aureum nobis Saturni saeculum restituent, in quo ... mulso vino plena current /lumina et de foliis arborum stillabunt mella dulcissima lacteisque /ontibus omnia complebuntur; 30, 26 p. 416 Tune de montibus et collibus iuxta /abulas poetarum et Saturni aureum saeculum lactis rivos /luere et de arborum /oliis stillare mella purissima. The relative scarcity of quotations from poetry will be shown by a comparison between In Isaiam and the immediately following In Ezechielen. The former has an average of 1.3, the latter of S quotations per 100 columns, the former contains 8, the latter 30 Virgilian lines. As it would seem, the prose-writers too are almost absent. There is one literal quotation of an anonymous author, lib. XVI praef. p. 667: Egregia disertissimi oratoris sententia est: 'Felices essent artes, si de illis p. soli artifices iudicarent'.1) Pliny the Elder is mentioned 54, II-12 637: Plinium Secundum, eundem apud Latinos oratorem et philosophum, qui in opere pulcherrimo naturalis historiae tricesimum septimum librum, qui et extremus est, lapidum atque gemmarum disputatione complevit.2 ) Cicero's name appears in a curious context which throws a sidelight on the literary taste of the reading public, lib. XII praef. p. 492: Nullus tam imperitus scriptor est, qui lectorem non inveniat similem sui, mu/toque pars maior est Milesias /abellas3 ) revolventium quam Platonis libros. In altero enim ludus et oblectatio est, in altero di/ficultas et sudor mixtus labori. Denique Timaeum de mundi harmonia astrorumque cursu et numeris disputantem ipse qui interpretatus est Tullius se non intelligere con/itetur. Testamentum autem Grunnii Corocottae Porcelli4) decantant in scholis puerorum agmina cachinnantium. Jerome's knowledge of the Timaeus was evidently due to Cicero's translation, which is mentioned 1) The sentence is ascribed to Fabius, i. e. Quintilianus, Epist. 66, 9, 2: 'Felices' inquit Fabius 'essent artes, si de illis soli artifices iudicarent'. Quint. Inst. XII. 10. 50 (adduced by Hilberg and Thes. II. 698, 7): Iudices artis habeat artifices, is no parallel. 2 Epiphanius is mentioned together with Pliny. The reference ) The Bishop is repeated, In Ezech. 28, II sqq. p. 334. 3 Sechste Auflage ..• ) See W. S. Teuffets Geschichte der romischen Literatur. von W. Kroll und F. Skutsch (Leipzig-Berlin 1916), I, pp. 95 sq. 4 Ree. F. Biicheler. (Ed. V. cur. G. He) Petronii saturae et tiber Priapeorum. raeus. Berolini 1912), pp. 268 sq. - Liibeck, pp. 226 sq.





also in the commentary on Amos, 5, 3 p. 283 Obscurissimus Platonis Timaeus liber est qui ne Ciceronis quidem aureo ore fit planior. Cicero's judgement which Jerome reproduces is to be found in De fin. II. 15: Cum rerum obscuritas, non verborum facit ut non intelligatur oratio, qualis est in Timaeo Platonis. In the matter of philosophy Jerome draws largely from Cicero without acknowledging how much he owes to him. In Is. II, 6 sqq. p. 159 gives a good idea of the Ciceronian influence, and therefore has to be discussed at some length. It runs thus: Audiant a nobis nihil esse bonum nisi virtutem et nihil malum nisi vitium dicente psalmista (Psal. 33, 13-15): 'Quis est homo qui vult vitam et diligit dies videre bonos? Compesce linguam tuam a malo et labia tua ne loquantur dolum. Declina a malo et fac bonum". Divitiae autem,et sanitas corporis et rerum omnium abundantia et his contraria, paupertas, infirmitas et inopia, etiam apud philosophos saeculi nee inter bona reputantur nee inter mala, sed appellantur indifferentia. Unde et Stoici, qui nostro dogmati in plerisque concordant, nihil appellant bonum nisi solam honestatem atque virtutem, nihil malum nisi turpitudinem. The passage quoted from the Psalter is rather a forced proof of the Christian origin of the moral maxim. In reality Jerome all the time has in mind the philosophi saeculi who are said to agree in this respect with the Christians, and whom he plagiarizes throughout, with Cicero as his intermediary. Lubeck (p. 142) rightly refers to Cic. Fin. III. 53, where Cicero forges 'indifferens' as a substitute for the Stoic abtarpoeov,but Lubeck does not see that the whole passage is a mere paraphrase of Fin. III. 49-53. Taking matters in the same order as Jerome, I would call attention to the following points. *§ 51 Cicero mentions valetudo and divitiae among other examples of neorJyµeva. (called praeposita vel praecipua, § 52), and morbus and paupertas among examples of anoneo17yµeva.(reiecta, § 52). They are neither good nor evil: ib. 53 Necesse est nee bonum esse nee malum hoe, quod praepositum vel praecipuum nominamus. Idque ita definimus: quod sit indifferens cum aestimatione mediocri; quod enim ilti &.bta>throw dust into the eyes of his readers>>,as Rufinus has it, by basing his remarks on second-hand knowledge. Such is the case as to Hippocrates, 9 )


Cavallera, II, pp. 52 sq.

") lb. lib. VII praef. pp. 239-240 Lucrativis, immo furtivis noctium horis ... haec ad lucernulam qualiacumque sunt dictare conamur ... Accedit ad hanc dictandi difficultatem, quad caligantibus oculis senectute ... ad nocturnum lumen nequaquam valeamus Hebraeorum volumina relegere, quae etiam ad solis dieique fulgorem litterarum nobis parvitate caecantur. Sed et Graecorum commentarios fratrum tantitm voce cognoscimus. 3 ) Cf. Griitzmacher, III, p. 200 sqq. on Origen's (lost) commentary and his homilies, partly translated by Jerome; pp. 202 sq. on other Christian writers. 4


29, 17 sq. p. 352. Cf. Liibeck, p. 22; Courcelle, p. 69, n. r.







p. 309. Cf. Liibeck, p. 25; Courcelle, p. 69 sq., n. 5. p. 152.

7 }

5, r sqq. p. 49 (Liibeck, p. 47); 5, 10 p. 52; 5, 12-13 p. 53 (Liibeck, p. 33); 22-23 p. u2; 38, r sq. p. 444 (Liibeck, p. 34, n. 1); ib. p. 445; 43, IO sqq. p. 524; 47, 6 sqq. p. 594 (Liibeck, p. 48, n. 3). II,

8) Op. cit., p. 74. 9 ) I, 6-7 p. I r. It is a puzzle why the theory of the four elements is ascribed to Hippocrates, 1, 6-7 p. II: Sunt qui simpliciter in quattuor animalibus iuxta Hippocratis sententiam quattuor arbitrantur elementa mundi monstrari, de quibus constant omnia: ignem, aerem, aquam, lerram. On Jerome's knowledge of Hippocrates cf. Courcelle, p. 74, n. 4.






the historian Nicolaus,1) the poet Oppianus, 2) ancl Xystus Pythagoreus.3) As compared with the Greeks, Latin prose-writers are almost passed over in silence. Only three names are met with, each of them once. Speaking of precious stones Jerome refers to Pliny the Elder, 28, u sqq. p. 334: Super quibus et vir sanctus Epiphanius episcopus proprium volumen mihi praesens tradidit. Et XXXVII liber Plinii Secundi Naturalis historiae post multiplicem omnium rerum scientiam de gemmis et lapidibus disputat. A saying of Victorinus rhetor is quoted lib. XIII praef. pp. 507-508: Illud rhetoris Victorini breviter admoneo, ut obscuritatem voluminum ex tribus rebus fieri scias, vel rei magnitudine vel doctoris imperitia vel audientis duritia. 4) Two works of Cicero are mentioned I, 6-7 p. IZ: Quattuor pertitrbationes de quibus plenissime Cicero in Tusculanis disputat; ib. Virtutes quattuor ... super quibus idem philosophus et orator in tribus ad /ilium officiorum libris disputat. 5) A Ciceronian passage, Or. 4, is referred to in the following way, lib. XII praef. p. 462: 'Prima enim', ut ait sublimis orator, 'quaeque sectanti honestum est etiam in secundis tertiisque consistere'. 1 ) 26, 6 sq. p. 297 Graecas et Phoenicum maximeque Nicolai Damasceni et alias barbarorum aiunt se, qui huic historiae contradicunt, legisse historias. Cf. Courcelle, p. 67, n. 3: >>L'intermediaire est un commentateur d'Ezechieb 2 ) 47, 6 sqq. p. 595 Aiunt autem qui de animantium scripsere naturis et proprietate, qui cU.ievuxd tam Latino quam Graeco didice-re sermone, de quibus Oppianus Cilix est, poeta doctissimus, centum quinquaginta tria esse genera piscium, quae omnia capta sunt ab apostolis. This is a good instance of J erome's boastful references; Courcelle remarks appropriately (op. cit., p. 76): >>Lere11seigneme11t que Jerome pretend tenir d'Oppie11 sur les cent ci11quante trois especes de poissons derive certainement de quelque commentaire chretie11 sur la p@che miraculeuse ou Simon Pierre, selon saint Jean (21, II), prit cent cinquante trois poissons; Jerome n'a fait qu'inserer a cette place, pour donner plus d'autorite au renseignement, la notice sur Oppien qu'il tenait de la Chronique d'Eusebe (Chron. ann. ab Abr. 2188 Oppianus Cilix poeta cognoscitur, qui Halieutica miro splendore conscribit)•>. 3 ) 18, 5-6 p. 206 Pulchre in Xysti Pythagorici sententiolis dicitur: 'Adulter est uxoris propriae amator ardentior'. Jerome got his knowledge from Rufinus' translation, hinted at in the sequel: Quem librum quidam (sc. Rufinus) in Latinam linguam transferens martyris Xysti nomine voluit illustrare. Cf. Courcelle, p. 49. 4) Also quoted in slightly different form In 0s. 2, 16-17 p. 25 (PL 25, 880); cf. p. 222 above. 5) The passage will be discussed in later sections of this book, pp. 334 and 377 n. 3 below.


However, let us not be deceived by this seeming scarceness of borrowings from Cicero and other prosaists. In reality Jerome is far more indebted to them for thoughts, facts and expressions than he openly admits. This will be shown, I hope, by the follovving parallels which, no doubt, could be increased.

*4, 9 sqq. p. 44 Fabis, quibus comedentium venter inflatur et mens opprimi dicitur, in tantum ut Pythagoreis quoque cibus detestabilis sit. *8, I2 p. 88 Porro quad sequitur: 'Dereliquit Domin us terram', quorundam etiam philosophorum sententia est, qui ex siderum cursu atque constantia suspicantur esse in caelestibus pravidentiam et terrena cantemni. *I6, IO p. I54 Rebus enim novis nova fingenda sunt nomina (cf. In Gal. 5, 26 p. 5I6, quoted p. I23 above). *I8, I-2 p. I99 Sic accipi debere quasi proverbium et parabolam, ut aliud in verbis sonet, aliud in sensu teneat. *39, I7 sqq. p. 462 Melius arbitrantes interim nihil quam parum dicere; *lib. XII praef. p. 462 Melius est nihil quam parum dicere.1)

Cic. Div. II. ng Faba quidem Pythagorei utique abstinere, quasi vero ea cibo mens, non venter infletur. Cic. Nat. dear. II. 55 Earum (sc. stellarum) perennes cursus atque perpetui cum admirabili constantia declarant in his vim et mentem esse divinam.

Cic. Acad. post. I. 25 Aut emm nova sunt rerum novarum f acienda namina aut ... Quint. Inst. VIII. 6, 44 At aAIVfjyaeta ... aut aliud verbis, aliud sensu astendit aut ... Sall. I ug. Ig, 2 Silere melius puto quam parum dicere.

It remains to discuss a passage, lib. III praef. p. 80, where the crushing impression caused by the sack of Rome is reflected in the high-pitched emotional style, and to identify the quotations which give its key-note. It runs as follows: Nihil longum est quad /idem habet 1

) Cf. Hier. *Epist. 53, 9, 3 Super quo tacere melius puto quam pauca scribere; *Nam. Hebr. praef. pp. I-2 (PI, 23, 815); *In Zach. 8, 18-19 p. 851.





et omn-is retro temporum series transacta non prodest, nisi forte bonorum operum sibi viaticum praeparaverit, quae semper ad futura, immo ad aeterna respiciunt et nullis terminis coartantur. Vera sententia est: 'Omnia orta occidunt et aucta senescunt'. Et alibi: 'Nihil est enim opere et manu f actum, quod non conficiat et consitmat vetustas'. Quis crederet, ut totius orbis exstructa victoriis Roma corrueret, ut ipsa sitis populis et mater fieret et sepulchrum. To begin with we have to remove a fault (wrong reading or misprint?) which makes the opening line in Migne's text unintelligible. We must read: Nihil longum est quod fine m (instead of /idem) habet.1) A striking parallel is to be found in Adv. Iovin. I. 13 (PL 23, 240): Etiamsi nongentis viveremus annis ut antiqui homines, tamen breve putandum esset, quod haberet aliquando finem et esse cessaret. The thought is not new; it occurs in *Cic. Cato Maior 69: Sed mihi ne diuturnum quidem quicquam videtur, in quo est aliquid extremum, and since Jerome elsewhere, above all in Epist. 52, 2) made frequent use of Cato Maior, he is likely to have got this sentence from the same source. After adding some Christian reflections Jerome puts in two quotations. The first one, 'omnia orta occidunt et aucta senescunt,' is a much quoted sentence in *Sallustius' Iugurtha, 2, 3. 3) The second one: Nihil est enim opere et manu f actum, quod non conficiat et consumat vetustas, is a literal quotation from *Cic. Marcell. 11. 4) Another (and much longer) literal quotation from the same speech, chap. 10, is to be found in the commentary In Habacuc (2, 9, see above p. 134), which was written about 20 years before In Ezech. We may safely conclude either that Jerome possessed a copy of Cicero's Pro Marcello and read it at different times, or that he once had made excerpts from it and used them on different occasions. Passing over to the poets, I begin by analysing the preface to the last book (lib. XIV praef. p. 562), which is a fine specimen of the skilful use of citations. Jerome had been doubtful whether or not he l) Conversely finem has to be corrected to /idem, C. Joh. 4 (PL 23, 375), and fine to fide, ib. 13 (PL 23, 382). See above pp. 192 sqq. The passage has to be added to the testimonia, given by Ahlberg in his edition of Iugurtka (Gothenburg 1915), and also August. Epist. 166 (= Hier. Epist. 131, 14, I): Aiunt omne quad in tempore coepit esse, immortale esse non posse, 2)


quia 'omnia orta occidunt et aucta senescunt'. 4 ) Before conficiat Cicero has aliquando, omitted by Jerome.


should enter upon the chapters on the Messianic temple (Ezech. 40-48) which are treated in Books XII-XIV; the reason for this was that he there had to stand on his own legs, being left in the lurch by earlier commentators.1) Rather late he became aware of having missed a point, and made up for the loss by evoking the Cretan labyrinth as immortalized in Virgilian lines, in order to emphasize the difficulties of his task, lib. XIV praef. p. 562: Quad in principio templi Ezechielis debui dicere, nunc praepostero ordine in fine dicturus siJ.m, illius versiculi memor (Verg. Aen. VI. 27):

'H ic labor ille domus et inextricabilis error'. De quo in alio loco idem poeta decantat (Verg. Aen. V. 588-591): 'Ut quondam Greta fertur labyrinthus in alta parietibus textum caecis iter ancipitemque mille viis habuisse dolum, qua signa sequendi fall eret indeprehensus et irremeabilis error', ita et ego istarum scripturarum ingressus oceanum et mysteriorum Dei, ut sic loquar, labyrinthum ... perfectam quidem scientiam veritatis mihi vindicare non audeo sed nosse cupientibus aliqua doctrinae indicia praebuisse. Jerome adheres to the comparison and continues: Non meis viribus sed Christi misericordia, qui errantibus nobis 'ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens spiritu sancto vestigia'. It has escaped notice that the words put within quotation marks are taken over from the same part of Aeneid VI to which the first quotation belongs, *Aen. VI. 29 sq.: Daedalus ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens filo vestigia. Only Christ is substituted for Daedalus, and the Holy Ghost for the mythical ball of yarn. This application of pagan poetry to Christian conceptions is remarkable, although by no means uncommon. 2) The 1 Diu mihi erit multumque dubitandum, utrum ad ) Lib, XI praef. pp. 405-406 spiritale templum debeam mittere manus an aperte ignorantiam confiteri, praesertim cum et apud Iudaeos et apud nos super interpretatione eius grande silentium sit. The quotations from Sallustius and Cicero at the end of Book XI and in the preface to Book XII (pp. 237, 238 above) refer to this hesitation. 2 III, Chap. 3 (pp. 382-389). ) See Part




last line is used more appropriately in *In Zach. lib. II praef. pp. 825826 (PL 25, I525), where the ball of yarn is said to be given by Christ: Labyrinthios patimur errores et Christi ►>caeca regimus filo vestigia>>. In Ezechielem contains not less than 20 quotations from Virgil, amounting to 30 lines, against 4 quotations from other poets (Terence, Horace, Lucan and an anonymous poet). Only Virgil is mentioned by name, another token of his predominance.I) The quotations come from Georgics I-III, Aeneid I-VI and VIII. Their distribution in the commentary is rather unequal; the first book contains the greater part of them, while four books entirely lack such ornaments. The reason for this is of course the varied character of the contents; whenever Jerome touches upon subjects dear to the poets, he does not omit the opportunity of applying an appropriate citation. This is above all the case when he enters upon the phenomena of nature. Talking about the four seasons he says, 1, 6-7 p. n: De quibus pulchre uno versiculo dictum est: 'Ver, aestas, autumnus, hiems et mensis et annus'. 2)

ib. De quo (sc. anno) alius poeta (Verg. Georg. II. 402): 'Atque in se sua per vestigia volvitur annus'.

The flight of time is illustrated by Virgilian and Horatian lines (quoted together also in In Am. 6, 2 sqq. p. 313), I, 8-9 p. 13 Quad autem tempora labantur et fugiant, brevi versiculo demonstratur (Verg. Georg. III. 284): 'Sed fugit interea, fugit irreparabile tempus'. Et in carmine lyrico (Hor. Carm. II.




'Heu heu, fugaces, Postume, Postume, labuntur anni'.

Apropos of the rainbow two Virgilian verses are inserted, I, 27-28 p. 22: Iris ... nisi in pluvia et in aquosa nube non potest apparere, diver1) Vergilius or illud Vergilianum occurs 8 times; otherwise he is hinted at by such expressions as poeta, illud poeticum, alibi legimus, saecularis sententia est,

brevi versiculo demonstratur, illius versiculi memor. 2) The anonymous poet makes use of a cliche, occurring also in A nth. 389, 49 Sol aestas autumnus hiems, Sol ver quoque gratum, and Dracont. Satisf. 253 Ver aestas autumnus hiems (Thes. I. 1090, 14 sqq.). Giiteb, Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:




sorum colorum et pulcherrimorum et sensim in alios transeuntium. et poeta (Aen. V. 89):


'Mille rapit varios adversa luee eolores'.1) Sed et morem vulgi sequens idem poeta (Georg. I. 380 sq.): 'Cum bibit', inquit, 'areus'. In expounding 32, 7-8: 'Et operiam eaelum et nigreseere faeiam stellas eius; solem nube tegam et luna non dabit lumen suum. Omnia luminaria caeli maerere faeiam super te et dabo tenebras super terram tuam', Jerome (p. 382) reminds his reader of illud poetieum (Georg. I. 468): 'I mpiaque aeternam timuerunt saecula noetem'. A hidden quotation is inserted *r, r3-r4 p. r5: Quomodo igitur 'erebris mieat ignibus aether' (- Verg. Aen. I. 90). Not a few quotations belong to the sphere of philosophy or religion. Because of its comprehensiveness the Virgilian line: 'Hine metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque' (Aen. VI. 733) turns up wherever the four passions are discussed, as here I, 6-7 p. r2. 2 ) Not less appreciated are the famous lines in the same part of the Aeneid, VI. 724-727: 3)

'Principio eaelum ae terras camposque liquentes lueentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet'. They are quoted in the commentary on 40, 28 sqq. p. 486. The dash of Epicureanism in Dido's words, Aen. IV. 379 sq., makes them fit for the context in 9, 9-ro p. 99: Causa autem tantorum scelerum ilia est, quod putaverunt providentiam non esse super terram nee Deum curare mortalia iuxta illud quod alibi legimus:

'Scilicet is superis labor est, ea cura quietos sollieitat'. The pagan worship of animals is discussed 8, IO p. 86 with reference to Virgil: Hoe in delubris idolorum fanisque gentilium hucusque per1 about the wording; the MSS of Virgil have: mille iacit ) Jerome is mistaken (or trahit) varios adverso sole colores. •) Cf. Index locorum. 3 ) Cf. Liibeck, p. 186.



AND 'l'HE cr,.\SSTCS


spicimus, quad omnia genera bestiarum adoret stulta religio. Unde et Vergilius ait (Aen. VIII. 698): 'Omnigenumque deum monstra et latrator Anubis'. Jerome takes advantage of Aen. VIII. 699 to assault the anthropomorphous gods too: Quasi non et iUa sint monstra, quae laudat:

'Contra Neptunum et Venerem contraque Minervam'. Roman sacrificial ritual is hinted at, 44, I7 sqq. p. 547: Vel certe sacerdotes semper operire capita sua debent iuxta illud Vergilianum (Aen. III. 405):

'Purpureo velare comas adopertus amictu'. Without descending into particulars I put together an assortment of reminiscences which testify to the influence Virgilian poetry exercised on Jerome's associations: 27, 7 p. 306 Describitur ergo quid unaquaeque mittat provincia secundum illud Vergilianum (Georg. I. 57 sqq.):

'India mittit ebur, molles sua tura Sabaei, at Calybes duri f errum virosaque Fontus castorea', 30, I sqq. p. 357 Per anticipationem, quae Graece n(!6Ar;'lf)tr;appellatur, iuxta illud Vergilianum (Aen. I. 2 sq.): Lavinaque venit littora; ib. (about Pelusium) Unde et poeta Pelusiacam appellat lentem (- Georg. I. 228 Nee Pelusiacae curam aspernabere lentis); 37, IS sqq. p. 439 Et non solum ipsi habitaturi sint sed et filii eorum ac nepotes iuxta illud Vergilianum (Aen. III. 98):

'Et nati natorum et qui nascentur ab illis'. 40, 5 sqq. (about a visit to the catacombs of Rome) Pedetemptim acceditur et caeca nocte circumdatis illud Vergilianum proponitur (Aen. II. 755):

'Horror ubique animos, simul ipsa silentia terrent'. Sentences of a proverbial character, which in earlier writings form a large part of the quotations, are rarely to be found here. Virgil, Terence and Lucan contribute in this way, each once: *I7, Ig sq. p. r94 Sententia saecularis est: 'Dolus an virtus, quis in haste requirat'? (-Verg. Aen. II. 390); lib. VII praef. pp. 239-240 Olim pueri legimus: 'Nihil



tam facile est, quin difficile fiat, quad invitus facias (-Ter. Haut. 805 sq. Nulla est tam facilis res quin difficilis siet, quam invitus facias); 44, 9 sqq. p. 545 Sed ut ardentissimus poeta testatur: 'Quidquid a multi"s peccatur, inultum est' (-Lucan. V. 260). Before the series of commentaries on the prophets was complete, Jeremiah still remained. Jerome was working at I n ] e r e m £ a m I-VI (PL 24, 705-936) in the years 414 to 416 and wrote six books, up to and including chapter 32, but left the work unfinished, as he plunged into a new battle for orthodoxy, this time against the Pelagians. To the very last Jerome gave evidence of his liking for Virgil: he is the only poet mentioned and quoted, 9 times in 156 columns,1) a higher frequency than I have found in any other commentary. Another circumstance too calls for attention. As we have seen, Jerome very often repeated the same quotation in different works. Such is the case with Verg. Aen. I. 416 sq.: Centumque Sabaeo ture calent arae; quoted at 6, 20 p. 887.2 ) But none of the other Virgilian passages occurring in this commentary is met with elsewhere. It favours the belief that Jerome pursued his reading of Virgil even in his old age. While passing the passages in review the reader may notice the variety of associations that gave rise to the quotations: 4, II - 12 p. 867 'Anoau!Jn'f)fJ'tr; est iuxta illud Vergilianum (Aen. I. 135): 'Quos ego 6,4 -

I Sed motos praestat componere fluctus'. 3)

5 p. 882 apropos of the words: 'Quia longiores factae sunt umbrae

vesperae': secundum illud Vergilianum



82 sq.):

'Et iam summa procul villarum culmina fumant, maioresque cadunt altis de montibus umbrae'. ro, 3-5 p. 9rr Apropos of the worship of demons: Unde et illud Vergilianum est (Aen. III. 120):

'Nigram Hiemi pecudem, Zephyris felz'cibus albam'. II, 5 p. 918 Terram autem lacte et melle manantem hyperbolice debemus accipere pro rerum omnium abundantia, ut est illud (Eel. 3, 89): 1

Book I-IV; the last two books contain no quotations. Cf. Liibeck, p. 177. 3 ) The line was used as a stock example by teachers of rhetoric; see Liibeck, p. 176 n. 2. 2

) )





'Mella fluant illis, ferat et rubus asper amomum', Et iterum (Georg. I. 132): 'Et passim rivis currentia vina repressit'.

13, 26 p. 937 Insaniam ostendit libidinis equarum more quae ad coitum gestiunt, ut est illud Vergilii (Georg. III. 280 sq.): 'Hippomanes, vero quod nomine dicunt pastores, lentum distillat ab inguine virus'.


18, 14 p. 970 The passage reminds Jerome of examples of alleged in solemn protestations: Tale quid et illud V ergilianum sonat (Eel. 1, 59. 60. 63): 'Ante leves ergo pascentur in aethere cervi et freta destituent nudos in littore pisces. quam nostro illius labatur pectore vultus'. Et in alio loco (Aen. I. 607-609): 'In freta dum fluvii current, dum montibus umbrae lustrabunt convexa, polus dum sidera pascet, semper honos nomenque tuum laudesque manebunt'.

Terence and, perhaps, Cicero are quoted each once: 31,9 p. rn61 Iuxta illud: 'Lacrimo gaudio' ..,..*Ter. Ad. 409; 1,n-12 p. 840 Unde et vetus illa sententia est: 'Litterarum radices amarae, fritctus dulces' ..,.. *Cic. frg. inc. J 18 (Muller IV: 3, p. 408).1) Besides, about 60 parallel passages in other secular authors are listed in Reiter's edition (CSEL, LIX, Index scriptorum pp. 476-478); as to Latin authors however, the parallels are too insignificant or uncertain to give proof of dependency. From this period dates also a polemical pamphlet, Contra Vigilantium (PL 23, 353-368), written in A. D. 406. Vigilantius was a Gallic priest who had visited the monastery in Bethlehem and had already provoked Jerome's wrath in the Origenist controversy. 2) His attacks on saint-worship, relics, monasticism and the celibacy of the priests caused a new outburst of rage on the part of Jerome who in this unplea1)


Cf. Otto p. 195. Se above p. 165.



sant product surpasses himself in rancour and abuse. Fortunately we do not have to dwell on it, as there are few traces of classical influence. Jerome applies to Vigilantius what Cicero says of Verres: 8 p. 395 0 portentum in terras ultimas deportandum! - *Cic. V err. act. II, I. 40 0 scelus, o portentum in ultimas terras exportandum! For the rest some mythological monsters and the tale of Cacus as related by Virgil (Aen. VIII. 193 sqq.) are hinted at, Vigilantius is called mutus Quintilianus, because he was living in a town, Calagurris, of the same name as that where Quintilian was born, and Vigilantius is identified with Mercurium propter nummorum cupiditatem aut Nocturnum iuxta Plauti Amphitryonem, qua dormiente in Alcmenae adulterio duas noctes Jupiter copulavit, ut magnae fortitudinis Hercules nasceretur (ro p. 397).

B. Letters. From the last period date 35 letters, making a total of 450 pages in Hilberg's edition. Five of them (amounting to 160 pages, about a third of the total) treat of exegetic questions: Epist. rr9 to Minervius and Alexander (A. D. 406), 121 to Algasia (407), 120 to Hedybia (407), 129 to Dardanus (414) and 140 to Cyprianus (414). Jerome is less unwilling in this period to insert classical reminiscences and topics into his small exegetic treatises than he was in the preceding ten years' period. We are met with a dozen quotations: Epist. rr9, 1, 3 De canina, ut ait Appius, facundia - Sall. Hist. Frg IV. 54; ib. 'Vixdum dimidium' inquit 'dixeram, iam intellexerat'.,... *Ter. Phorm. 594 (see below p. 272); *120, ro, 12 Unus est solis calor et secundum essentias subiacentes alia liquefacit, alia indurat ... ; liquatur enim cera et induratur lutum; cf. Luer. VI. 962, 965 (see above p. 129); 121, 6, 6 Cicero's translation of Xenophon's Olxovoµix6c; is mentioned; 121, 8, 7 Unde et Tullius de parricidarum suppliciis apud Athenienses Solonem scripsisse negat, 'ne non tam prohibere quam commonere videretur' .- Cic. Rose. Am. 70 Is (sc. Solo) cum interrogaretur, cur nullum supplicittm constitttisset in eum, qui parentem necasset, respondit se id neminem f acturum putasse. Sapienter f ecisse dicitur, cum de eo nihil sanxerit, quad antea commissum non erat, ne non tam prohibere quam admonere videretur; I2I, IO, 3 Qui (sc. Latini) verbum de verbo exprimere conantes obscuriores faciunt eius (sc. Pauli) sententias, veluti herbis crescentibus frugum strangulant ubertatem - *Quint. Inst. VIII prooem. 23 Fidem amittunt prop-




2 47

ter id quad sensus obumbrant et velut laeto gramine sata strangulant (Hilberg); 121, IO, 5 Nee hoe miremur in apostolo, si utatur eius linguae consuetudine, in qua natus est et nutritus, mm Vergilius, alter Homerus apud nos,1) patriae suae sequens consuetudinem, 'sceleratum' frigus appellet .- Verg. Georg. II. 256 Sceleratum .... frigus; 129, 4, 3 Quorum facit poeta eloquentissimus mentionem: 'Lateque vagantes Barcaei' ..,..Verg. Aen. IV. 42 sq.; 2) 129, 4, 4 Iudaee ... in his gloriaris, super his te per diversas provincias ignorantibus iactitas: 'Ad populum phaleras, ego te intus et in cute novi' ..,..Pers. 3, 30. 1'he shortness of life is testified to by Virgil: 140, IO, 2 Quamvis aetas hominum longa videatur, tamen comparatione aeternitatis brevis sit. Quad et illustris poeta testatur dicens: 'Sed fugit interea, fugit inreparabile tempus' (Verg. Georg. III. 284), et iterum: 'Rhaebe, diu, res si qua diu mortalibus ulla est, viximus' (Verg. Aen. X. 86r sq.). Another utterance about life is due to Cicero: Epist. 140, r6, 3 Unde et illud egregie dictum est: Nullum tam senem esse et sic decrepitae senectutis, ut non se adhuc uno plus anno vivere suspicetur ..,..Cic. Cato M. 24 N emo enim est tam senex, qui se annum non putet posse vivere. Among the letters dating from the last period the e p it a p h o n P a u 1 a (Epist. 108, A. D. 404) stands incomparably first. For nearly twenty years Paula and her daughter Eustochium to whom the epitaph is dedicated had stood faithfully by Jerome in Bethlehem. Jerome contrasts her new life with that to which she was designed by birth: I, I Nobilis genere, sed multo nobilior sanctitate, potens quondam divitiis, sed nunc Christi paupertate insignior, Gracchorum stirps, suboles Scipionum, Pauli heres, cuius vocabulum trahit, Maeciae Papiriae, matris A/ricani, vera et germana progenies, Romae praetulit Bethlhem et aura tecta fulgentia in/ ormis luti vili'tate mutavit. 1'he same note is struck in the versified epitaph inscribed on her tomb. It calls for our attention as being the only poem by Jerome though we can hardly share his own estimation as expressed in Horace's words: 33, l 'Exegi monumentum aere perennius' (Hor. Carm. III. 30, 1), quad nulla destruere possit vetustas. I ncidi elogium sepulchro tito, etc. By a rhetorical stratagem Jerome manages to set forth Paula's 1) 2)

Cf. Hor. Epist. II. r, 50 Alter Homerus (about Ennius). See above p. 230.


ancestry on the mother's side from the Scipiones and the Gracchi, on the father's side from Agamemnon - while declining to begin his eulogy in the traditional way with praise of the ancestors.1) Emphasizing the contrast between Rome and Bethlehem he praises Paula from another point of view (3, 4): Quanta se plus deiciebat, tanto magis a Christo sublevabatur. Latebat et non latebat. Fugiendo gloriam gloriam merebatur, quae 'virtutem quasi ,umbra sequitur' (- *Cic. Tusc. I. ro9). But he is conscious that he breaks a rule 2 ) and returns to the domestic circle (4, 1): Tali igitur stirpe generata iunctaque viro Toxotio, qui Aeneae et Juliorum altissimum sanguinem trahit. Of course he here remembers Virgil: Unde etiam Christi virgo, /ilia eius, Eustochium Julia nuncupatur et ipse 'Iz,lius, a magno demissum nomen Iulo' (Aen. I. 288). Virgil comes in again in the account of Paula's route to the East: 2 V enit M ethonen ibique ref ocilato paululum corpusculo 'et sale tabentis artus in litore ponens' (Aen. I. 173), per Maleas et Cytheram 'sparsasque per aequor Cycladas et crebris freta concita3) terris' (ib. III. 126-127) post Rhodum et Lyciam tandem vidit Cyprum. While mentioning Ioppe Jerome associates the place both with Biblical history and pagan mythology: 8, 2 I oppen quoque, fugientis portum I onae et - ut aliquid perstringam de fabulis poetarum - religatae ad saxum Andromedae spectatricem. Even the tale of Paula's religious life contains classical quotations although it might seem not to be the place for such adornment: 18, 1 Semper virtutes sequitur invidia 'feriuntque summos fulgura montes' (Hor. Carm. II. ro, rr-12); 20, 4 (after a quotation of r Cor. 4, 21) Ne ... praeberet locum avaritiae, quae nullis expletur opibus et, quanto amplius habuerit, pltls requirit et 'neque copia neque inopia mi1metur' 7,

1) Epist. rn8, 3, 1 Alii altius repetant et ab incunabulis eius ... matrem Blesillam et Rogatum proferant patrem; ... nos nihil laudabimus, nisi quad proprium est et de purissimo sanctae mentis Jonte profertur. 2 rn8, 3, 4 Sed quid ago? N arrandi ordinem praeteYm-ittens ... non servo ) lb. praecepta dicendi. Cf. Epist. 130, 3, 1 Rhetorum disciplina est abavis et atavis et omni retro nobilitate ornare, quern laudes. 3 ) Jerome no doubt read concita which is the reading of the old MSS of Virgil. This seems however to be an old mistake; I prefer with Bentley consita (codd. dett. Verg.),






(......Sall. Cat. II, 3 Avaritia ... neque copia neque inopia minuitur);I) 4 Et vere iuxta philosophorum sententiam µw6rrrr:sr;aesrat, vnsefJo).al xa.xlai reputantur, 2 ) quad nos una sententiola exprimere possumus: 'Ne quid nimis'. 3) Finally Aesop is alluded to: 15, 1 Ne ..• fingere puter et cornicem Aesopi alienis coloribus adornare. I remark by the way that one passage can be traced back to Minucius Felix, though this seems to have escaped notice: 26, 5 Non debeo silentio praeterire, quanta exultaverit gaudio, quad Paulam, neptem suam ... , audierit in cunis et crepitaculis balbutiente lingua alleluia cantare aviaeque et amitae nomina dimidiatis verbis frangere; cf. Min. Fel. Oct. 2, 2 Non possum exprimere sermonibus, quanta ... gaudio exultaverim, citm ... ; ib. 2, I adhuc annis innocentibus et adhuc dimidiata verba temptantibus, loquellam ipso offensantis linguae fragmine dulciorem.4) The epitaph (46 pages in Hilberg's edition) was dictated in two nights; the author therefore excuses his style (Chap. 32): Inculta oratio votum scribentis absque ulla elegantia et verborum lepore testatur. This is the conventional manifestation of modesty on the part of an author; in fact Jerome mustered all his rhetorical skill to honour his faithful friend by a worthy monument. The epitaph recalls by its colouring and loftiness a Byzantine image of a saint on a golden ground. In the sack of Rome by Alaric in 410 Jerome lost two of his most faithful friends, Pammachius and Marcella. The news paralysed him with grief. 5) On Pammachius he wrote no necrology, on Marcella not until two years later: 6) Epist. 127 to Principia De vita sanctae Marcellae. After hinting incidentally at Marcella's nobility the necrologist dwells 21,

Lubeck, p. u8; Hilberg does not remark on the imitation. Hilberg refers to Bonitz' Index Aristotelicus s. v. µwdrr;r, and vnE(!(:Jo):ry. 3) Both quotations recur in Epist. 130, II, 1 sq. where the last one is traced back to a double origin: Unde et unus de septem sapientibus: 'Ne quid' ait 'nimis'. Quad tam celebre factum est ut comico quoque versu expressum sit (Ter. Andr. 61). ') Minucius Felix in his turn seems to reflect Luer. V. 230: Almae nutricis blanda atque infracta loquella (see above p. 79). 6 ) Cf. In Ezech. lib. I praef. pp. 1-2 (PL 25, 15) Et ecce siibito mors mihi Pammachii atque J',,farcellae, Romanae urbis obsidio, multorttmque fratrum et sororum dormitio nuntiata est. Atque ita consternatus obstupui, ut nihil aliud diebus ac noctibus nisi de salute omnium cogitarem. 6) Epist. 127, 1, 2 Nam ut hucusque reticerem et biennium praeterirem silentio, non fuit dissimulationis, ut male aestimas, sed tristitiae incredibilis, quae ita meum obpressit animum, ut melius iudicarem tacen inpraesentiarum quam nihil dignum illius laudibus dicere. 1) 2)



on her virtues, her zeal for studying the Scriptures and for monastic life, her activity in the Origenist controversy and, not least, her fearlessness before the Gothic pillagers. I pass over for the present the parallel drawn between Rome and the ruin of Troy 1) and confine myself to mentioning the other quotations from secular literature, viz. 6, z Praeceptum satirici: 'Vive memor leti, fugit hara, hoe quad loquor inde est' ..,..Pers. 5, 153; 5, z Quibus rectissime illitd Ennianum aptari potest: 'Utinam ne in nemore Felio' (Enn. M edea exul. Frg. 1, 1 R.); 6, 1 Laudans illud Platonicum, qui philosophiam meditationem mortis esse dixisset (Plat., Phaed. p. 64 A). The last quotations however are likely to have become known to Jerome through Cicero; the Ennian line occurs e. g. Inv. I. 91 (cf. Lubeck, pp. 109 sq.), the Platonic passage Tusc. I. 74: Tota enim philosophorum vita, ut ait idem, commentatio mortis est (Lubeck, pp. 59 sq.). Another well-defined group is formed by the ascetic exhortatory letters. I do not think they can be characterized with greater accuracy than in Grutzmacher's words which I take the liberty of reproducing: 2) »Gerade aus seiner letzten Lebensperiode sind uns eine stattliche Reihe solcher Episteln erhalten, die uns seine schriftstellerische Begabung von der glanzendsten Seite zeigen. Wir begreifen es, warum Erasmus, der Herausgeber der W erke des Hieronymus, diesem die Palme als Mann der Feder unter den Kirchenvatem zuerkannt hat. \Var doch Hieronymus, wie ihn Ebert genannt, in der Tat der Urahn der Humanisten. Der Fliigelschlag der Phantasie und das Gaukelspiel des Witzes beleben diese seine Briefe und verleihen ihnen immer wieder trotz ihres typischen Charakters individuelle Zuge)>, In Epist. IIJ to a mother and a daughter in Gaul we get an interesting picture of manners. The two women lived apart keeping house for a priest. To begin with Jerome refused to interfere, but he was persuaded by the son and brother who reminded him of his old intrepidity as a moralizer: r, z 'Nimiitm' ait 'formidulosits; ubi illa quondam constantia, in qua multo sale urbem defricans Lucilianitm quippiam rettulisti?' ...-Hor. Sat. I. ro, 3 sq. At idem (sc. Lucilius) ... sale multo urbem defricitit. For the rest the style is so vivid and lively that there is no need for it to be adorned by citations. 3} Jerome enjoyed himself in dictating this 1) 2



See below p. 259. Griitzmacher, III, p. 241. Whether the following passage: Epist. nS, z,



scriberem scirem-




letter (in one night!), quasi ad scholasticam materiam me exercens ... simulque ut ostenderem obtrectatoribus meis, quad et ego passim, quicquid venerit in b·uccam, dicere. Unde et de scripturis pauca perstrinxi nee orationem meam, ut in ceteris libris f acere solitus sum, illarum floribus texui (12, 1-2). He makes up for the loss in Epist. 122 (A. D. 407) to Rusticus De paenitentia-quasi per pulcherrima scripturarum Prata discurrens (4, 1). The citations from the Bible fill far more space than Jerome's own exhortations. The only allusion to secular literature is 4, 3: 'Dux femina facti' (Verg. Aen. I. 364): Rusticus ought to model himself on his wife. A different note is struck in Epist. n8 (A. D. 407) to a wealthy Dalmatian, Iulianus. Having lost his wife and two daughters within a short interval he is compared with Job who submitted to all disasters (2, 4), conplens in se illud de sapiente praeconium: 'Si fractus inlabatur Iulianus orbis, inpavidum ferient ruinae' (Hor. Carm. III. 3, 7-8). generously subsidized churches and cloisters, but Jerome demands more of him, referring to the Gospels and to the pagan philosophers: 5, 2 Contemnis aitrum: contempserunt et multi philosophi, e quibus unus, ut ceteros sileam, multarum possessionum pretium proiecit in pelagus: 'Abite' dicens 'in profundum, malae cupiditates, ego vos mergam, ne ipse merger a vobis' .1 ) Jerome continues: Philosophus, gloriae animal 2) et popularis aurae vile mancipium, totam semel sarcinam deposuit, et tu te putas in virtittum culmine constitutum, si partem ex toto of/eras? Another allusion to the philosophers occurs in Chap. *3, 3: (Diabolus) novit alia esse, quae extrinsecus sint et a philosophis quoque mundi abta>Tumpater omnipotens fecundis imbribus aether coniugis in gremium laetae descendit et omnis ma gnus alit magno commixtus corpore f etus>>. As to the Lucretian lines, I. 936-938, quoted in chap. 3, 7, I refer to my discussion below pp. 274 sq. In the preface to the dialogue Adversus Pelagianos Jerome strikes the same note as in the opening lines of the letter to Ctesiphon, pointing out the connection between the Pelagian and the Stoic doctrine, praef. I, p. 693: Pollicitus sum me ad cunctas eorum qui &.n&.0siav praedicant quaestiunculas responsurum. Nulli enim est dubium quin Stoicorum et Peripateticorum, hoe est veteris Academiae, ista contentio sit, quad alii eorum asserant n&.0YJquas nos 'perturbationes' possumus dicere: aegritudinem, gaudium, spem, timorem, eradicari et extirpari posse de mentibus hominum, alii frangi eas, regi atque moderari et quasi infrenes equos quibusdam lupatis coerceri. Quorum sententias et Tullius in Tusculanis disputationibus explicat. I would call attention to the little et before Tullius: in reality Cicero is J erome's only informant wherever this question is brought up for discussion;1) our passage thus gives a good parallel to the seemingly harmless et Porphyrius in the commentary on Daniel.2) I have made it my study, not to analyse, from an historical point of view, the lines of thought we meet in the dialogue, but to examine to what extent it is composed of literary borrowings, thoughts and expressions, traceable to a definite source. I shall first discuss at some length a few passages that give a good idea of the role the pagan ingredients play in the argument. 1) 2)

See Part III, chapter See p. 225 above.

r, pp. 331-346.



Jerome makes the Pelagian say, I. 19 p. 714: Et quomodo legimus: 'Qui unam habuerit, omnes videtur habere virtutes'? The orthodox speaker answers: Hoe quod legisse te dicis, ubi scriptum sit, nescio, and receives the reply: Ignoras hanc philosophorum esse sententiam? He is quick at repartee: Sed non apostolorum. Neque enim mihi curae est quid Aristoteles, sed quid Paulus doceat. This is effective as a characterization: the former has the pagan philosophers for his authority and quotes their doctrine as if it were a passage in the Bible, the latter recognizes no other authority than the Scriptures. As to the doctrine, it is possible, although by no means certain, that Jerome got his knowledge . of it from *Cic. Off. II. 35: Cum inter omnes philosophos constet . ..... qui unam haberet, omnes habere virtutes. 1) In the sequel the orthodox speaker turns against another well-known Stoic doctrine: In hoe enim delirant Stoici, paria contendentes esse peccata,2) and contrasts it with the Scriptures where levia cum levibus et gravia cum gravibus comparantur. He continues: N ec f erula dignum vitium gladio vindicandum est nee gtadio dignum scelus ferula coercendum. In the same way Horace, *Sat. I. 3, 96 sq., objects to the Stoic dogma: Quis paria esse /ere placuit peccata, laborant, cum ventum ad verum est, etc., and lays it down as a rule of conduct that punishment ought to be proportionate to the seriousness of the fault (ib. n9 sq.):

Ne scutica dignum horribili sectere f lagello. Nam ut f erula caedas meritum maiora subire verbera, non vereor. It seems to me not unlikely that Jerome had this passage in mind. Another time it is the Pelagian who accuses his opponent of being influenced by the philosophers, I. 14 p. 707: H aec argumentatio tortuosa

est, ecclesiasticam simplicitatem inter philosophorum spineta concludens. Quid Aristoteli et Paulo? Quid Platoni et Petro? Ut ille enim princeps philosophorum, ita hie apostolorum fuit. The spokesman for orthodoxy makes a recrimination which may be called a delayed echo of the old conflict beween philosophy and rhetoric: Rhetoricaris et, dum mihi obiicis philosophiam, ad oratorum castra transcendis. Verum audi quid idem dicat orator tuus: 'Desine communibus locis; domi nobis ista nas1) 2


Cf. p. 129 above. Cf. e. g. Cic. Acad. pi·ior. II. 133 Placet Stoicis omnia peccata esse paria.





cuntur'. - 'Orator tu1,s' is of course Cicero; the passage so dexterously quoted is *Acad. prior. II. 80. 1 ) The Pelagian answers: Nulla hie eloquentia est, null us oratorum tumor, quorum definitio est 'dicere ad persuadendum accommodate', sed puram puro sermone quaerimus veritatem. The definition is Cicero's, *De or. I. 138: Primum oratoris officium esse dicere ad persuadendum accommodate (cf. ib. I. 260). The spokesman for orthodoxy, with whom Jerome evidently identifies himself, now and then falls back on arguments provided by the philosophers, that is to say, Cicero. A remarkable example will be found in I. 9 p. 702, which deals with the question: what never will be, is it possible? The chapter contains a long literal excerpt and two lesser borrowings from Cicero's De fato, which the writer without doubt had before his eyes. The texts are placed side by side below: Adv. Pel. I 9 Inter Diodorum et Chrysippum, valentissimos dialecticos, neel bvvarnv ista contentio est. Diodorus id solum posse f ieri dicit, quad aut sit verum aut verum futurum sit, et quidquid futurum sit, id fieri necesse esse. Quidquid autem non sit futurum, id fieri non posse. Chrysippus vero et quae non sunt futura, posse fieri dicit, ut frangi hoe margaritum, etiam si id numquam futurum sit.

Cic. Fat. 12 Causam in qua tibi (sc. Chrysippo) cum Diodoro, valente dialectico, magna luctatio est. ib. 17 Illam Diodori contentionem quam neei bvvarnv appellant. lb. 13 Ille enim (sc. Diodorus) id solum fieri posse dicit, quad aut sit verum aut futurum sit verum, et quicquid f uturum sit, id dicit fieri necesse esse, et quicquid non sit futurum, id negat fieri posse.

Tu (sc. Chrysippus), et quae non sint futura, posse fieri dicis, ut frangi hanc gemmam, etiamsi id numquam futurum sit.

What God demands, is it possible or not? This question is treated in I. 21 p. 716 sq. The orthodox speaker asserts the opinion that nobody can fulfil what God demands although it is possible. He unfolds 1 ) Jerome repeats himself; compare the parallel *C. Luci/. 4 p. 173: Rhetoricaris et a disputationum spinetis ad campos liberae declamationis excurris. Verum 'desine, quaeso, a communibus locis'. Cf. also *Epist. 84, 4, r lurem? jrid~b1mt et difen/: 'IJomi nobis is/a nasptntur' (I-Iilberg).


his views by referring to the artes: Deus possibiles dedit humano generi (or ingenio?) omnes artes, quippe quas plurimi didicerunt . .. verbi gratia grammaticam, rhetoricam, pMlosophiae tria genera: physicam, ethicam, logicam; geometriam quoque et astronomiam, astrologiam, arithmeticam, musicam, quae et ipsae partes philosophiae sunt; medicinam etiam, quae in tria dividitur: Myµa, µi0o6ov, iµnetelav; iuris quoque et legum scientiam. Quis nostrum, quamvis sit ingeniosus, poterit omnia comprehendere, cum eloquentissimus orator de rhetorica et iuris scientia disputans dixerit: 'Pauci unum possunt, utrumque nemo'. Lubeck (p. 150) is right to compare Cic. Off. II. 67: Cum autem omnes non possint, ne multi quidem, aut iuris periti esse aut diserti, but the wording originates from Cicero's *Pro Murena 46: Unum sustinere pauci possunt, utrumque nemo, where the words bear upon the impossibility of prosecuting and standing for consulship at the same time. The speaker proceeds to discuss the qualities which are demanded of a bishop in I Tim. 3, 2 sqq.: Oportet episcopum esse irreprehensibilem, etc., and says among other things, I. 22 p. 718: Primum quod dixit, 'irreprehensibilis', aut nullus aut rarus est. Quis est enim qui non quasi in pulchro corpore aut naevum aut verrucam habet? The comparison comes from Horace, *Sat. I. 6, 66 sq.; talking of his character, vitiis mediocribus ac paucis mendosa, alioqui recta, Horace adds:

Velut si egregio inspersos reprendas corpore naevos.1) In order to prove how much human beings differ from each other Jerome chooses his examples from two spheres of activity where he feels equally at home, the declamations of the rhetorical school and the exegesis of Scriptures, I. 23 p. 719 sq. The words again are attributed to the orthodox speaker: In ipsis controversiis, in quibus quondam pueri lusimus, non omnes similiter vel in prooemiis vel in narrationibus vel in excessibus vel in argumentis aut exemplorum copia et epilogorum dulcedine se agunt, sed eloquentiae suae alia atque alia in parte dissimiles sunt. De viris magis ecclesiasticis loquar. Multi super evangelia bene disserunt sed in explanatione apostoli impares sui sunt. Alii cum in instrumento novo optime senserint, in psalmis et veteri testamento muti sunt. Here Jerome is at his best, showing his unrivalled sensitivity and 1 )

This passage and *Epist. 22, 27, 4 (noticed by Hilberg) are to be added to the imitations listed by Liibeck, p. 162,





judgment in matters of literature. Arriving at his conclusion he does homage obliquely to his favourite poet: Hoe totum dico quod 'non omnia possumus omnes' (----Verg.Eel. 8, 63). In the preface (2, p. 695) Jerome denies having written his polemical pamphlets out of envy, and aims a blow at Rufinus, still a subject for implacable hatred, although deceased for many years. Jerome's irony, as so often, bears upon Rufinus' style: Num invidemus ei, quia respondimus, et tanta in eo eloquentiae fuere flumina, ut me a scribendi atque dictandi studio deterrerent? The same point is used in Epist. 47, I, 2 where Jerome answers a Gallic nobleman who had praised his style in high terms: Quotus igitur ego vel quantus sum, ut eruditae vocis merear testimonium, ut mihi ab eo palma eloquentiae deferatur, qui scribendo disertissime deterruit, ne scriberem? I think we may trace the point in question back to Cicero's famous judgment about Caesar's Commentarii, *Brut. 262: Dum voluit alias habere parata, unde sumerent, qui vellent scribere historiam, ineptis gratum fortasse fecit, qui volent illa calamistris inurere: sanos quidem homines a scribendo deterruit.1) In the following list I put side by side other reminiscences of Cicero, referring to statements, thoughts or phrases:

I. 28 p. 726 Tu ipse qui Catoniana no bis in/ laris superbia et Milonis humeris intumescis.

*II. I p. 741 Multa quidem de scripturis sanctis memoriter copioseque dixisti.

(The traditional idea of Cato censorius). Cic. Cato M. 33 Olympiae per stadium ingressus esse Milo dicitur, cum humeris sustineret bovem. Cic. Nat. dear. I. gr Enumerasti memoriter et copiose philosophorum sententias (the adverbial expression occurs only here, if we believe Thes. IV. 916, 31).

I) Cicero in his turn appropriated the point from Posidonius, answering a request of Cicero's; cf. Ad Att. II .. r, 2: Ad me rescripsit iam Rhodo Posidonius se, nostrum illitd vn6µv11µa (sc. about Cicero's consulship) cum legeret, quod ego ad eum, ut ornatius de iisdem rebus scriberet, miseram, non modo non excitatum esse ad scribendum sed etiam plane deterritum. Cf. on the relation between the two passages and their connection with Hirtius' preface (Bell. Gall. VIII. 5) Hans Drexler, >>Parerga Caesariana», Hermes LXX (r935), pp. 228 sq.; Karl Barwick, Caesars Commentarii und das Corpus Caesarianum (Philologus, Supplementband


Heft 2, r938,

PP· r23 sq.).



*II. 6 pp. 748-749 Jerome gives a full discussion of the four perturbationes, referring to Cicero: Quinque Tusculanarum quaestionum Ciceronis libri his disputationibus re/erti sunt. III. 1 p. 782 Eundem semper vultum habere non possumus, quod de Socrate /also philosophi gloriantur.

III. 17 p. 802 Ah, nimium disertus esse coepisti, ut non dicam eloquens ... A ntonius orator egregius, in cuius laudibus Tullius pertonat, 'disertos se' ait 'vidisse multos, eloquentem adhuc neminem'.

See p. 336 below.

Cic. Tusc. III. 3r Hie est enim ille voltus semper idem, quam dicitur Xanthippe praedicare soZita in viro suo /uisse, eodem semper se vidisse exeuntem ilium domo et revertentem (cf. p. 235 above). Cic. Or. r8 M. Antonius, cui vel primas eloquentiae patrum nostrorum tribuebat aetas, vir natura peracutus et prudens . . . . 'disertos' ait 'se vidisse multos, eloquentem omni no neminem'.

In addition to Cicero another philosopher is hinted at, I. 27 p. 723: Pulchreque adulator apud philosophos definitur 'blandus inimicus'. Without doubt Jerome here depends on *Seneca, Epist. 45, 7: Adulatio quam similis est amicitiae! . .. Venit ad me pro amico blandus inimicus. This imitation (cf. also Epist. 22, 2, 2) is noteworthy, as I have pointed out before (p. III), because it confirms, what hitherto could only be supposed, that Jerome was familiar with Seneca's philosophical writings. I pass over to the poets. We have already discussed two imitations of Horace: *I. r9 p. 714- Sat. I. 3, 96 and r20 (see p. 262 above) and *I. 22 p. 718 .....Sat. I. 6, 66 sq. (see p. 264 above), and have to add Ill. 19 p. 805 Unde supersedendum huic labori censeo, ne dicatur mihi illud Horatii (- Sat. I. ro,34): 'Jn silvam ne ligna'. 1) It can hardly have happened by a mere chance that all these imitations refer to the first Book of Satires; there is every probability that this book was freshly remembered by the author. It is an obvious conclusion that it is the same in the case of Terence. 1


Lubeck (p. 163) gives two other qnotati01is,



Three proverbial sayings are put together in I. 24 p. 721: Nugaris nee meministi illius proverbii: 'Actum ne agas', et in eodem caeno volittaris, immo laterem lavas. All of them are to be found in Phormio, the first one in v. 4r9: 'Actum' aiunt 'ne agas', the second one in v. 780: In eodem luto haesitas (the line is quoted correctly Adv. Pelag. I. II p. 703 Tergiversaris; 'in eodem luto haesitas', and elsewhere 1)), and the third one in v. r86: Loquarne? Incendam. Taceam? Instigem. Purgem me? Later em lavem. There is furthermore a quotation from Andria: I. 26 p. 723 Unde et apostolus loquitur . .. et comicus: 'Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit' ..,..Ter. Andr. 68.2) The following parallels give evidence of the Virgilian influence: *I. r3 p. 705 (talking of the parable in Matth. r3, 25) Frumento bona, dum nescimus, 'lolium avenasque steriles' sator nocturnus interserit. 3)

Georg. I. 154 (cf. Eel. 5, 37) I nf elix lolium et steriles dominantur avenae.

I. 23 p. 720 H oc totum dico quad 'non omnia possumus omnes' (cf. p. 265 above).

Eel. 8, 63 Non-omnes.

I. 25 p. 72r Quid interest, utrum te tacentem an loquentem superem, et iuxta Protei fabulam vigilantem capiam an dormientem?

Cf. Georg. IV. 317 sqq. (the fable of Aristaeus and Proteus.

III. 4 p. 785 Quod si paululum se remiserit (sc. homo), quomodo qui adverso f lumine lembum trahit, si remiserit manus, statim retrolabitur et f luentibus aquis quo non vielt ducitur, sic humana condicio ...

Georg. I. 201-203 Non aliter quam qui adverso vix flumine lembum remigiis subigit, si bracchia forte remisit, atque illum in praeceps prono rapit alveus amni.

Cf. Lubeck, p. II4. To add *Epist. 143, 2, I. Quoted also In Gal. 4, 15 sq. p. 462 (see p. 121 above). a) Although lolium and avena frequently are co-ordinated (cf. Thes. II. 1308, 33 sqq.), we have to recognize a reminiscence of Virgil on account of thr,;:e fo,,;:ts; 1)




III. rr p. 793 Sequar propositionem tuam, 'numquam hodie effugies, veniam quocumque vocaris',

Eel. 3, 49 Numquam~vocaris.

The last one of Jerome's polemical writings, like the first one, the Altercatio Luciferiani et orthodoxi, is written in the guise of a dialogue. The reason for it is announced in the preface as follows, Adv. Pelag. prol. I p. 694: Hie liber ... Socraticorum consuetudinem servabit, ut ex utraque parte quid dici possit exponat et magis perspicua veritas fiat, cum posuerit unusquisque quod senserit. To begin with, the attempt proves a success: in the first part of Book I there is a real discussion with quick and sharp returns. But the author is unable to realize his literary scheme all the way through; before long he relapses into his usual talkativeness; the discussi_on slackens speed and debouches into the stagnant waters of endless quotation of scriptures. 1 )

r) the plural avenae is rarely to be met with (for the first time in Virgil); 2) avenae steriles is exclusively a Virgilian expression; 3) Jerome paraphrases the whole passage, Georgics I. 153 sqq., in Adv. Luci/. (see p. ro6 above). 1 ) Jerome makes his adversary say ironically {I. 20 p. 7r6): Per scripturarum /qtissimos campos in/renis equi libertate baccharis, Self-applause or self-reproach?

Chap. 6. Aspects and conclusions A. The extent of Jerome's reading. We have examined Jerome's writings in chronological order with a view to the borrowings made from profane Latin authors. It remains for us to pay attention to various aspects of the problem and to get at a conclusion. The first question we have to answer is this: Which Latin authors and works did Jerome know, not by name but by his own reading? From what he says, he possessed alr~ady as a young man a great collection of books, and he could not do without them when he went to the East to enter the life of a hermit.1) Some clues as to his bookknowledge are given by incidental mentions of books he studied at school. The best information is however to be gathered from the quotations and reminiscences disseminated in the writings.

a. The poets of the Republic. According to Lubeck (p. 105), Plautus and Terence, perhaps also Publilius Syrus, 2 ) are the on_lypoets from the age of the Republic whom Jerome can be proved to have read. P 1 a u t u s appears together with Cicero in the account Jerome gives of his dream. 3 ) Because of that, it would seem, Rufinus points out those two as Jerome' s principal models in matter of style, 4 ) which certainly goes too far as to Plautus. There are only two open quotations, neither of them literal: Epist. 81, 1, 4 Iuxta Plautinam sententiam 1) Epist. 22, 30, I Cum ante annos plurimos ... Hierosolymam militaturus pergerem, bybliotheca, quam mihi Romae summo studio ac labore confeceram, carere non poteram. That this library contained profane authors, appears from what is said in the sequel about the dream. 2) Cf. pp. 156 and 187. 3) Epist. 22, 30, 1-2 Itaque miser ego lecturus Tultium ieiunabam. Post noctium crebras vigilias .•. Plautus sumebatur in manibus. 4) Rufin. Apol. adv. Hier. II. 10 Sic dum totus Plautinae et Tullianae cupis eloquentiae sectator videri ...



altera manu lapidem tenere, panem offerre altera1) ..,. Aul. 195 (see above p. 171 n.); Adv. Iovin. I. 1 Illud Plautinarum litterarum..,. Pseud. 25-26 (see above p. 144). The contents of Amphitruo are reported in Adv. Vigilantium 10 p. 397 (PL 23, 364): Libere proclamabis te esse . .. Nocturnum iuxta Plauti Amphitryonem, quo dormiente in Alcmenae adulterio duas noctes Jupiter copulavit, ut magnae fortitudinis Hercules nasceretur. Other passages which testify to the influence of Plautus are Epist. 58, 9, 1 ..,.Cure. 55; Adv. Ru/in. I. 17 (also Adv. Pelag. III. 16) ..,.Aul. 49; Epist. 107, 10, 3 ..,.Capt. 80-81 (see above pp. 190, 180, 201).2) Whether Plaut. Men. 247 or Ter. Andr. 941 is hinted at, In Zach. 8, 16 -17 p. 1546: Ne iuxta comicum nodum quaeramus in scirpo, is impossible to say. Jerome is likely to have read commentaries on Plautus at school, as he supposes his schoolfellow Rufinus to have done (Adv. Ru/in. I. 16). For the rest he mentions Plautus, together with Terence and Caecilius, as a translator of Greek comedies. 3 ) It is remarkable that there are no traces of Plautine influence in the writings until A. D. 393, if we leave out of consideration the isolated mention of Plautus in Epist. 22 (A. D. 384), and that all the instances discussed - with the exception of Adv. Vigil. (A. D. 406) and, perhaps, In. Zach. - date from the years 393-402. It seems to indicate that Jerome was a reader of Plautus in that period, although the facts he relates are commonplaces and the reminiscences rather vague. T e r e n c e much more than Plautus was a favourite with Jerome who knew him well, since he was a pupil of Donatus', whose commentary on Terence he refers to, 4) and from whose teaching he relates a dictum. 6) Terence is to Jerome nobilis apud Romanos poeta (In Gal. 4, 15-16 p. 462), and is ranked among the leading poets whom other poets should take for a pattern, Epist. 58, 5, 2: Poetae aemulentur Homerum, Vergilium, Menandrum, Terentium. Only two of the come1) 1)

Cf. also Epist. 49, 13 1; Adv. Ru/in. III. 38. Other instances listed by Lubeck (pp. 106-108)

are in my opinion doubtful.


Epist. 57, 5.5 Terentius Menandrum, Plautus et Caecitius veteres comicos interpretati sunt; ib. 106, 3,3 Quad et Tullium ... fecisse convincimus et Plautum, Terentium Caeciliumque, eruditissimos viros, in Graecis comoediis transferendis; In Mick. lib. II rraef. 4

p. 480 (see above p. 138).

Adv. Ru/in. I. r6 Puto quod puer legeris ... commentarios . .. in Terentii comoedias praeceptoris mei Donati. 6 ) In Eccles. p. 390 Huie quid simile sententiae et comicus ait: 'Nihil est dictnm, )





dies are named,1) but all of them are quoted or imitated repeatedly. Lubeck (pp. III-IIS) reports 6 passages from Andria, 8 from Eunuchus, 5 from Heautontimorumenos, 4 from Phormio, I from Hecyra and 2 from Adelphoe, many of which, be it noticed, occur more than once. The list can be enlarged by not a few instances. Many Terentian lines are quoted literally or with slight changes owing to the necessity of making them fit in with the context:

Andria prol.


Faciuntne intellegendo ut nil intellegant? .,. Epist. 57, 5, Andria prol.



Quorum aemulari exoptat neglegentiam potius quam istorum obscuram diligentiam - In Mich. lib. II praef. p. 480 Quorum omnium aemulari exopto negligentiam potius quam istorum obscuram diligentiam; *Epist. 49, 15, r Quorum aemulari exopto neglegentiam potius quam aliorum obscuram diligentiam. Andria prol. 22-23: Dehinc ut quiescant porro moneo et desinant male dicere, male/acta ne noscant sua .,. In Mich. lib. II praef. p. 480 Moneo ... 'ut quiescant et desinant maledicere, male/ acta ne noscant sua'. 2) Andria 68: Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit 3 ) - In Gal. 4, 15-16 p. 462 Illa sententia nobilis apud Romanos poetae; Adv. Petag. I. 26 p. 723 Et comicus: 'Obsequium - parit'; *Anecdota Maredsolana, III: 2, p. 407, 20. Eunuchus prol. 8: Ex Graecis bonis Latinas fecit non bonas. .,. In 0s. lib. II praef. pp. 53-54 Amafionios ac Rabirios nostri temporis, qui 'de Graecis bonis Latina faciunt non bona'; Didym. Spir. praef. p. ro6 Iuxta comici sententiam 'ex Graecis bonis Latina vidi non bona'. quad non sit dictum prius' (- Ter. Eun. prol. 41). Unde praeceptor meus Donatus, cum istum versiculum exponeret: 'Pereant' inquit 'qui ante nos nostra dixerunt'. 1 ) In Mich. 1, 16 p. 447 Comicus in Heautontimorumeno; ib. 7, 5-7 p. 519 Terentius in Hecyra. 2 ) Cf. also Epist. 52, 17, 2 Quos obsecro, quiescant et desinant maledicere. 3 ) In Augustine's letter to Jerome, Hier. Epist. n6, 31, 2 the line is called vulgare proverbium.



Eunuchus prol. r8: Quae prof erentur post, si perget laedere: ..,..*In M ich. lib. II praef. p. 480.

Eunuchus 732: Sine Cerere et Libero friget Venus - Adv. Iovin. II. 7 Unde et comicus; Epist. 54, 9, 5 Cum etiam comicus ... dixerit. Phormio 594: Vixdum dimidium dixeram, intellexerat - *Epist. rr9, r, 3 'Vixdum dimidium' inquit 'dixeram, iam intellexerat'. Adelphoe prol. r7-r9: Quod illi maledictum vehemens esse existumant, eam laudem hie ducit maxumam, quom illis placet qui vobis univorsis et populo placent. - In Mich. lib. II praef. p. 480 'Quod illi maledictum vehemens esse existimant, eandem laudem ego maximam duco', cum illum (sc. Origenem) imitari volo, quem cunctis prudentibus et vobis placere non dubito. Adelphoe 409: Oh lacrumo gaudio! ..,. *In I er. 3r, 9 p. ro6r I uxta illud: gaudio'.


Two of the above quotations have become proverbial (Andr. 68 and Eun. 732). Most of the others originate from the prologues of Terence and are to be found in prefaces where Jerome, in the same way as Terence, answers his critics and adversaries. The preface to In Mich. lib. II is substantially a conglomeration of borrowings from the prologues to Andria, Eunuchus and Adelphoe; to the literal quotations already mentioned may be added hints at Andr. 5 sqq., r6, r8 sq. (see above pp. r37 sq.). 1 ) If we consider the frequency, size and literalness of the citations, it is out of the question that they could have been made from memory altogether; we may safely conclude that Jerome now and then ran through the plays of Terence. The fact that some writings are particularly rich in quotations 2 ) also favours the belief 1 ) Another apology of the same kind is the preface to Quaest. hebr. in gen. (see above pp. 130 sqq.) where Jerome, hinting at the prologues to Andria and Eunuchus, recalls how Terence was charged with plagiarism. 1 ) In Mich., Adv. Iovin. (see pp. 145 sq.) andAdv. Pelag. (pp. 266 sq.). Adv. Pelag. I. 24 p. 721 contains in one sentence three sayings which occur in Phormio. It is

!,A'l'lN FA'rHERS

ANb 'l'Hl:atinperitiam sequi quam stultam habere scientiam nescientum (cf. Andr. prol. 20-21, see above p. 271).

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





in the writings from about 387 to 395; we may deduce that Jerome in this period resumed his reading of the comicus. After A. D. 395 no quotations are to be found until 406 (in Epist. u9 and In Os.) and then, with a new interval of ten years, in Adv. Pelag. (A. D. 415). It seems to me to bear out my supposition of reiterated familiarity with the poet. As to the other archaic poets I can be short. Caecilius is mentioned as a translator of Greek comedies (see p. 164), Turpilius and Lucilius are quoted, each once, in early letters (seep. ro2 n. 3 and 4).1) Jerome is not likely to have had first-hand knowledge of Naevius and Ennius; the quotations seem to originate from Cicero.2) We must dwell longer upon Lucretius. Lubeck (pp. u6 sq.) is mistaken about Jerome's relation to the Epicurean poet; 3 ) I think it can be proved beyond all gainsaying by aid of fresh evidence. I begin with Lucretius' famous lines, IV. u-13 (= I. 936-938):

Nam veluti pueris absinthia taetra medentes cum dare conantur, prius oras pocula circum contingunt mellis dulci /lavoque liquore. They are quoted in a letter dating from A. D. 414, Epist. 133, 3, 7:4) Et iuxta illud Lucretii:

'Ac veluti pueris absinthia taetra medentes' cum damus, prius ora circum inlinimus 'd1tlci mellis /lavoque liquore'. The reading of the best MSS has been restored by Hilberg, whereas Lubeck (with Vallarsi) follows the codd. dett. in which the second line has been brought into accordance with Lucretius. The prosaic form 1 ) Other passages where Lucilius is mentioned are due to Cicero and Horace; cf. Liibeck, p. 116, 2 pp. 105 sq. and 109 sq. The passages in question have been ) See Liibeck, discussed above, pp. 103 (Epist. 8, 1, 1), 165 n. 2 (ib. 57, 2, 2), 168 n. 1 (ib. 82, 3, 2), 203 (ib. 60, 5, 1), ib. (ib. 60, 14, 4). 250 (ib. 127, 5, 2; cf. Liibeck, p. no), 234 sq. (In Is. 41, 21 sqq. p. 504). 3) Griitzmacher (I, pp. 114 sq. n. 6) and Pease (p. 151 n. 10) do not agree with Liibeck, without entering into particulars. ') Besides they are hinted at twice, *Adv. Ru/in. I. 7 Veneni calicem circumlinere melle; *Adv. Joh. 3 p. 410 Venenaque erroris circumlinebant melle verborum.




2 75

this line has taken on in Jerome indicates that he quotes from memory and that his memory fails him. Lubeck tries to prove that the quotation was taken over from Quint. Inst. III. 1, 4, but his argument is not happy. It is true that Jerome and Quintilianus have one reading in common, ac veluti (against nam veluti, Luer. IV. II according to OQ),1) but this reading also is attested by Nonius (Compend. doctr. p. 413, 17) and has been adopted by Diels in his edition (Berlin 1923). As to 1. 13 Jerome diverges both from Lucretius' contingunt and from Quintilianus' aspirant; he has inlinimus, which forms part of his free paraphrase. Further he writes, by a new slip of memory, dulci mellis instead of mellis dulci (thus Luer. and Quint.). Another literal quotation is to be found in Epist. 125, 18, 3: Iuxta illud poeticum: 'Prima leo, postrema draco, media ipsa chimaera' - Luer. V. 905 (see above p. 254). There is no doubt that both passages go back to Lucretius without intermediary. Perhaps we had better be cautious and not attach too much weight either to Adv. Rufin. III. 29: Urges ut respondeam de natura rerum. Si esset locus, possem tibi vet Lucretii opiniones iuxta Epicurum vel Aristotelis iuxta Peripateticos vel Platonis atque Zenonis secundum Academicos et Stoicos dicere, or to Adv. Rufin. I. 16: Puto quod puer legeris Aspri in Vergilium et Sallustium commentarios ... et aliorum in alias, Plautum videlicet, Lucretium, Flaccum, Persium atque Lucanum - such boastful references to philosophers and writers do not positively imply real knowledge of their works. I lay all the more stress on the fact that the cases mentioned are not isolated: I have found a few unnoticed reminiscences; one case has been pointed out by Hilberg. As the passages have been discussed above, I list them here without further comment. *In Ephes. 1, 4 pp. 547 sq. Unde et nos 'propter paupertatem linguae et rerum novitatem' ... conabimur non tam verbum transf erre de verbo ..,. Luer. I. 139 Propter egestatem linguae et rerum novitatem. *Epist. 77, II, 2 Aurata tecta templorum reboans in sublime alleluia quatiebat _,. Luer. II. 28 Nee citharae reboant laqueata aurataque templa (Hilberg). *In Eccles. p. 441; *Epist. 120, 10, 12: d. Luer. VI. 962 sqq. (pp. 129, 246). 1)

In the parallel, I, 936, OQ have sed veluti.




Ru/in. I. 30: cf. Luer. VI. 1074 sqq. (p. 182). *Epist. 130, 7, 8: cf. Luer. V. 892 sq. (p. 257).

b. The poets of the Empire. No poet, no classic author altogether came nearer to Jerome's heart than Vi r g i 1, the poeta eloquentissimus,1) insignis poeta,2 ) illustris poeta,3 ) alter Homerus apud nos,4 ) nay poeta sublimis, non Homerus alter ... sed primus Homerus apud Latinos. 6 ) On the other hand Jerome emphasizes just in his favourite poet the incompatibility of pagan and Christian spheres of ideas. 6 ) Virgil is mentioned even oftener than Cicero, and the quotations too, in spite of the different size of the works, outnumber those from the master of Latin prose. Lubeck (pp. 167-191) lists 128 cases, 19 from Eclogues, 29 from Georgics, So from Aeneid. As to the epics, all books are represented by quotations;') in Eclogues a few poems (2, 5, 7) are not. Jerome's familiarity with Virgil is set in a strong light, if we consider the passages where a full line (or more than one line) is quoted literally. They amount to 70 with a total of nearly 150 full lines (the numerous doublets not taken into account); in one third of the cases two or more lines are coupled. About 40 passages not included in Liibeck's lists have been mentioned in my previous exposition. 8 ) In order to facilitate a survey of the additions I list them here, arranging them in the same way as Li.ibeck did. Epist. 21, 2, 5 Decem fastidia sustineret (about Adv. Pelag. I. 13 Lolium que steriles (see p. 267); I, Ip. 738. 1

mensum Christ). avenasIn Agg.

Eel. 4, 6I Matri longa decem tulerunt fastidia menses (Hilberg). Georg. I. 154 Infelix lolium et sferiles dominantur avenae.

Epist. 129, 4, 3. Adv. Iovin. I. 41; In Is. 57, 16 p. 680. 3) In Zach. 1, 18-19 p. 792; In Joel 1, 4 p. 172; Epist. 140, 10, 2. 4 ) Epist. 121, 10, 5. 6 p. 518. ) In Mich. 7, 5-7 6) See below p. 305. 7 ) Liibeck (p. 189) is mistaken in saying: ~E libro IX (sc. Aeneidos) ne verbum quidem laudatun. 1 Cf. Epist. 130, 5, 3..,.. *Aen. IX. 13 Rumpe moras omnes (see above p. 257). 8 of them have been noticed by Hilberg in his edition of the epistles. ) Eight )




Epist. 14, 4, I Et tu frondosae arboris tectus umbraculo molles somnos . . . carpis? Epist. 3, 4, 3 Inlisum scopulis aequor reclamat. Epist. 54, 13, 5 Cerneres in parvo corpusculo ingentes animos. lb. 10 7, 1 3, 4. Quaest. hebr. in gen. praef. pp. 303-304 Cuius (sc. Origenis) nomen, 'si parva licet componere magnis', meo nomine invidiosius est. In Ephes. 4,5-6 p. 6n Quem (sc. Zenonem) secutus Vergilius ait: 'Deum namque ire per omnes terrasque tractusque maris'. In Ezech. r, r3-r4 p. 15 Quomodo igitur 'crebris mi cat ignibus aether'. Vit. Malchi 8 p. 46 Inter spem et metum medii fluctuamus. In Gal. lib. II praef. pp. 425426 Praetermitto Carthaginis conditores 'Tyrias et Agenoris urbem'. In 0s. 2, r6-r7 p. 24 Dido Sinia. Epist. 57, 12, I Ut ex uno crimine intellegantur et cetera. Adv. Ru/in. III. 22 Pellacis Ulissis cursum. In Ezech. 17, l9 sq. 194 Sententia saecularis est: 'Dolus an virtus, quis in haste requirat?' Epist. 130, 5, 5 Haesit vox faucibu~.



Georg. II. 470 Mollesque sub arbore samni (Hilberg). Gearg. III. 261 sq. Scopulis inlisa reclamant aequora (Hilberg). Georg. IV. 83 Ingentis animos angusto in pectore versant (Hilberg). Georg. IV. 176 Si parva licet campanere magnis.

Gearg. IV. 221-222 Deum namque ire per omnia, terrasque tractusque maris. Aen. I. go Crebris micat ignibus aether. Aen. I. 218 Spemque metumque inter dubii. Aen. I. 338 Punica regna vides, Tyrias et Agenoris urbem. Aen. I. 446. IX. 266. XI. 74 Sidania Dido. Aen. II. 65 sq. Accipe nunc Danaum insidias et crimine ab una disce amnes (Weyman). Aen. II. go Pellacis Ulixi. Aen. II. 390 Dalus an virtus, quis in haste requirat? Aen. II. 774 Vax faucibus haesit (Hilberg).


In Sophon. 2,5-7 aere Corybantio.

p. 701 Sonant

Aen. III.


Corybantiaque aera.

Adv. Ru/in. I. 31 Hoe unum denuntio 'et repetens iterum iterumqite monebo' (see above p. 182). In Amos 5, 8 sq. p. 289 Impositum Encelado Aetnam montem, de cuius motu Trinacria contremiscat (see p. 220 n. 4).

Aen. III. 435-436 Proque omnibus unum praedicam et repetens iterumque iterumque monebo. Aen. III. 578-582 Enceladi .. . corpus urgeri mole hac ingentemque insuper Aetnam impositam ... et f essum quotiens mutet latus, intremere omnem murmure Trinacriam.

Epist. 30, 14, r Cui omnia, etiam quae tuta sunt timeo (Lubeck, p. 182, has four other instances).

Aen. IV. 298 Omnia tuta timens (Hilberg).

Epist. 14, 3, 2 Aiunt: 'Cui nos servituros relinquis?'

cf. Aen. IV. 323 Cui me mori-

In 0s. 4, 15-16 p. 45 Dum propheto, 'dum spiritus hos regit artus'. Also Epist. 39, 8, 1 (Hilberg); Praef. Jos. (PL 28, 506).

Aen. IV. 336 Dum spiritus hos regit artus.

In Ezech. lib. XIV praef. p. 562 (Christus) qui errantibus nobis 'ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens' spiritu sancto 'vestigia'. Cf. also In. Zach. lib. II praef. pp. 825-826 Christi caeca regimus filo vestigia.

Aen. VI. 29- 30 Daedalus ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens filo vestigia.

Adv. Ru/in. III. 31 Tit nobis, alter Salmoneus, omnia per q1tae incedis illitstras.

cf. Aen. VI. 585 sqq.

In Agg. 2, 21 sqq. p. 774 a person is nicknamed Allecto.

cf. Aen. VII. 324 sqq.

Epist. 54, 14, 2 Tremunt genua, dentes cadunt 'et frontem obscenam rugis arat',

Aen. VIL 417 Et frontem obscenam rugis arat (Hilberg).

bundam deseris, hospes?




2 79

In Ephes. 4, 16 p. 619 Medicum qui iuxta fabulas ethnicorum Aesculapium possit imitari et in novam figuram novumque nomen V irbium suscitare.

Aen. VII. 761 sqq. about Virbius, especially v. 777 versoque ubi nomine V irbius esset.

In Is. 26, 19 p. 356 Ros enim Domini iuxta f abulas poetarnm vincens omnes herbas Paeonias vivificabit corpora mortuorum.

Aen. VII. 769 about Hippolytus - Virbius: Paeoni:is revocatum herbis.

Epist. 22, 6, 6 Inpossibile est in sensum hominis non inruere notum medullarum ardorem.

Aen. VIII. 389 sq. Notusque medullas intravit calor (Hilberg).

Epist. 130, 5, 3 Rumpe moras omnes (see p. 257).

Aen. IX. 13 Rumpe moras omnes.

Epist. 130, 7, 8 Hie matrum 'gremiis abducere pactas'.

Aen. X. 79 Et gremiis abducere pactas (Hilberg).

In Hab. lib. I praef. pp. 589590 N ec in morem insanientium feminarum 'dat sine mente sonum'.

Aen. X. 640 Dat sine mente sonum.

Vit. Malchi 9 p. 46 Statimque mens mali praesaga putare coepit. Epist. 22, 8, l Si experto creditur; ib. 84, 3, 5 Credite experto (Hilberg). C. Luci/. 20 p. 192 Ipse quoque 'caput horum et causa malorum', Arius presbyter. Vit. Pauli 16 p. II Fluctuans itaque vario mentis aestu.

Aen. X. 843 Praesaga mali mens. Aen. XI. 283 Experto credite.

Aen. XI. 361 0 Latio caput horum et causa malorum; Aen. XII. 486 Vario nequiquam jluctuat aestu.

The passages where Virgil is mentioned are unevenly distributed in ✓ the different periods of Jerome's literary work. In the first period ✓J (until 385) Virgil is never mentioned, which is all the more noticeable as other authors, especially Cicero and Horace, are named 9 times. In the second period (until 393) he is mentioned comparatively seldom (4 times, against e. g. Cicero 6 and Horace 4 times). In the third period (until 402) he is still thrown into the shade by Cicero, who is



mentioned at least 15 times while Virgil is named only in 6 passages. 1 ) But in the last period (from 402) the case is just the reverse: Virgil is mentioned more often (20 times) than all the other classics together (u times). This, however, gives an erroneous conception of Virgil's influence, which even in the first period is greater than that of any other author. Whole lines are quoted repeatedly in the oldest letters and in Vita Pauli; reminiscences of all kinds are frequent in the first letters, but rarely to be met with in writings destined for the public, in which Jerome, in accordance with the austere attitude towards profane authors that he took up in this period, abstained from mentioning pagan writers or quoting them. The frequency of literal quotations increases slowly in the second period, 2) increases still more in the third period, 3) and reaches its height during the last period in the commentaries on Ezekiel (A. D. 410-412) and Jeremiah (A. D. 414416).4) In the latter Jerome's liking for Virgil is more palpable than anywhere else. I have pointed out before (p. 244) one moment that in my opinion is significant. Eight of the nine Virgilian passages which are quoted in In I er. do not occur in the previous writings. I think it suggests to us that Jerome pursued his reading of Virgil even in his old age. We can perhaps arrive at the same conclusion by considering the cases where the same line is repeated in different works. Generally the works in question are separated by a long interval. As an instance I adduce Georg. II. 402 Atque in se sua per vestigia volvitur annus, quoted about A. D. 386-387 (In Eccles. p. 388) and then nearly 25 years later (410-412) in In Ezech. 1,6-7 p. II. Cf. further Aen. II. 755 Horror ubique animo simul ipsa silentia terrent, quoted in Epist. 1 exaggerated considerably when he wrote in A. D. 400 (Apol. ) Thus Rufinus adv. Hier. II. 7): Relegantur nunc, quaeso, quae scribit, si una eius operis pagina est, quae non eum iterum Ciceronianum pronuntiet, ubi non dicat: 'sed Tullius noster, sed Flaccus noster, sed Maro. 2 quotations (amounting to ro lines, see above p. 127 ) In Eccles. has six literal sq.), ascribed anonymously to poeta or poeta genii/is. Full lincs are quoted once in each of the following commentaries: In Gal., In Ephes., In Nahum, In Hab., and in Quaest. hebr. in gen. 3 r8o sqq. about Adv. Ru/in., pp. r88 sqq. about the letters to ) See e. g. pp. Paulinus (Epist. 53 and 58), pp. 204 sqq. about the necrologies. 4 ) See above pp. 241 sqq. and 244 sq.






106, 57, l (between A. D. 393-401) and In Ezech. 40, 5 sqq. p. 468 (410-412). It is true that Jerome often repeats himself, but this is not a satisfactory explanation in cases where more lines are contained in the latest than in the first of two (or more) quotations of the same passage. In Epist. 52, 1, 2 (A. D. 394) Jerome quotes Eel. 9, 5154 in the following way: Unde . .. idem poeta canit: 'Omnia fert aetas, animum quoque', et post modicum: 'Nunc oblita mihi tot carmina, vox quoque M oerin iam fugit'; but in Epist. ro5, 3, 3 (A. D. 403) lines 51-54 are quoted without omission:

'Omnia fert aetas, animum quoque; saepe ego longos cantando puerum memini me condere soles. N unc oblita, etc. In Epist. 54, 5, l (A. D. 394-395) Jerome alleges Aen. IV. 32-33, but in Epist. 123, 13, I (A. D. 409) he adds line 34. Epist. 58, II, 2 (A. D. 394-395) contains a veiled citation of Georg. III. 67-68: Antequam 'subeant morbi tristisque senectus et tabor et durae rapiat inclementia mortis'; in Epist. 60, 14, 4 (A. D. 396) lines 66-68 are quoted literally. In In Is. 46, I-2 p. 544 we are confronted with Aen. VIII. 698, in In Ezech. 8, IO p. 86 also with the following line, 699. Must we not explain such enlargements of previous quotations by supposing that Jerome in the meantime had renewed his acquaintance with the poet or, at least, looked up the passage in question? Next to Virgil, Hor ace is Jerome's favourite poet. Liibeck (pp. 160- 167) lists 45 passages quoted, distributed as follows: Odes 8, Epodes 3, Satires I2, Epistles 22. I, like Hilberg, discount a few passages which seem rather dubious; on the other hand we have to add not a few double quotations and IS imitations not included in Liibeck's lists. Thus the whole number of quotations from Horace amounts to at least 65. For the sake of convenience all additional passages noticed by myself or by others will be listed here.

In Os. lib. II praef. p. 53-54 Pallida mors. In Ephes. 4, 16 p. 619 Parvulus crescat et occulto aevo in perIectam adolescat aetatem.

Carm. I. 4, 13 Pallt'da mors. Carm. I. 12, 45 sq. Crescit occulto velut arbor aevo fama M arcellis.



Epist. 3, 3, 1 Innoeentium enim, partem animae meae, repentinus febrium ardor abstraxit. Epist. 133, 1, 4 Quam ob rem et gravissimus poeta Flaeeus seribit in satira: 'Nam vitiis nemo sine naseitur; optimus ille est, qui minimis urgetur'. Cf. Epist. 22, 27, 4 (see below). Adv. Pelag. I. 19 In hoe enim delirant Stoici paria eontendentes esse peeeata. ib. Nee ferula dignum vitium, gladio vindieandum est nee gladio dignum seelus f erula coercendum. Epist. 22, 27, 4 Ille est optimus, qui quasi in pulchro corpore rara naevorum sorde respergitur.

Adv. Pelag. I. 22 Quis est enim, qui non quasi in pulchro corpore aut naevum aut verrucam habeat? In Gal. 5, 26 p. 517 Interpretamur scripturas, saepe vertimus stylum, quae digna lectione sunt scribimus. p. 386 Aliud est In Abd. 20-21 ... saepe stylum vertere et quae memoria digna sunt scribere. In Eccles. p. 395 Contraria contrariis intelliguntur. Et 'sapientia prima est stultitia caruisse'. Epist. roo, 15, 2 Eget semper, qui avarus est. Epist. IO, 3, 3 Eundem odorem lagoena servat, quo, dum rudis esset, inbuta est.

Carm. II. 17, 5 sq. A, te meae si partem animae rapit maturior vis (Weyman). Sat. I. 3, 68-69 Nam vitiis nemo sine nascitur; optimus ille est, qui minimis urgetur' (Hilberg).

Sat. I. 3, 96 sq. Quis paria esse f ere placuit peccata, laborant, cum ventum ad verum est. ib. 1. 120 sq. Nam ut f erula caedas merit um maiora subire verbera, non vereor. Two lines are combined: Sat. I. 3, 68 Optimus ille est (see above) and ib. I. 6, 66 sq. Velut si egregio inspersos reprendas corpore naevos. Sat. I. 6, 67 (see above).

Sat. I. IO, 72 sq. Saepe stilum vertas, iterum quae digna legi sunt scripturus.

Epist. I. I, 41 sq. Virtus est vitium fugere et sapientia prima stultitia caruisse. Epist. I. 2, 56 Semper avarus eget (Hilberg). Epist. I. 2, 69 sq. Quo semel est imb1tta recens servabit odorem testa diu.




In Ephes. r, 13 p. 560 Qualisque fuerit liquor, qui novae testae infusus est, talem diu testa et odorem retinet et saporem. Didym. Spir. praef. p. ro6 InIormis cornicula alienis me coloribus adornare. In Os. lib. II praef. pp. 53-54 Postquam ... primisque cadentibus foliis virens silva succreverit.


Epist. I. 3, 19 sq. Moveat cornic·ula risum furtivis nudata coloribus. Ars poet. 60 sq. Ut silvae foliis pronos mutantur in annos, prima cadunt ...

Jerome's admiration was due not only to the lyricus but also to the vir acutus et doctus (Epist. 57, 5, 5), the keen observer of life, the unprejudiced moralist and, not least, the satirist, lashing and deriding human follies. What he borrowed from Horace was above all general sentences and reflections of a nature to complete a line of thought and to bring it out into relief.1) The quotations are fairly evenly distributed in all periods. Sometimes they are connected with each other in that two or more quotations in the same work are to be found within a few pages of each other in Horace. In Ecclesiasten (about A. D. 386-387) contains three quotations from the first book of the Epistles, more expressly, from the first two epistles (p. 128). The first book of Adversus Rufinum (A. D. 401) has two quotations from Epist. I, two from Epist. II and two from Ars poetica (pp. 180 sqq.). Adversus Pelagianos (A. D. 415) has three borrowings from the first book of Satires (p. 266). It is out of the question that these coincidences could be owing to a mere chance. They prove without any doubt that Jerome, when he wrote the works in question, sought out the pas~ages in Horace. The other Augustan poets have left no traces with the exception of O v i d. From Epist. 123, 4, 3 'Risit et arguto quiddam promisit ocello' -Am. III. 2, 83 we cannot infer that JeromeknewOvid'samatorypoetry, for the line is characterized as versiculus ille vulgatus. The Metamorphoses are mentioned, one line (IV. 57 sq.) quoted and one passage (I. III sq.) paraphrased. 2 ) To these instances noticed already by Lubeck (pp. 191 sq.) I can only add *In Eccles. p. 442 .,..Met. I. 19-20 (p. 129). 1) 2)

See below pp. 301 sq. See above pp. 253, 219 and 231 sq.


As to the poets of the Post-Augustan age, Jerome knew the three satirists and Lucan. One line of Juvenal is quoted thrice (in writings dating from 393, 395 and 4or).1) Martial is represented by two quotations: Epist. r30, r9, r De qitibus illud trivii 2) est: Non bene olet, qui bene semper olet - Epigr. II. r2, 4, and *Adv. Ru/in. II. r7 Et meus liber, quo tibi accusatus respondeo, si in illo aliquid reprehenderis, non erit meus, sed tuus, a quo reprehendititr - Epigr. I. 38, I-2 Quem recitas, meus est, o Fidentine libellus: sed male cum recitas, incipit esse tuus. The latter comes in well to remove the doubts which could arise as to the former, which in some :M:SSis ascribed to Arbiter. Among the satirists Jerome had a special liking for P e r s i u s. The quotations amount to twenty; to those listed by Lubeck (pp. r95-r98) are to be added Epist. 33,3 De turdorum salivis non ambigimus .,. Sat. 6, 24 Nee tenuis sollers turdarum nosse salivas, and Tract. in psalm. 93 (twice, see above p. 214) 'o curas hominum, o quantum est in rebus inane! .....,Sat. r, r. Not a few quotations are to be found in the letters written in Rome (Epist. 22, 34, 40) and in late letters (r25, r27); the majority belong to the pamphlet against Iovinianus (seep. r45) and to letters dating from the same time (A. D. 393). Finally we have to mention L u c a n, poeta ardentissimus. The quotations (Lubeck, pp. r94 sq.) date, with the exception of Epist. 58, 7, 2 (A. D. 394-395), from the years 408-414 (In Is. 56, 3 p. 657; ib. 66, r8-r9 p. 8r7; Epist. r23, r6, 4; In Ezech. 44, 9 sqq. p. 545); thus it would seem as if Jerome read the poet in his old days. c. The prose writers.

Cicero is dominant among the prose writers just as Virgil is among the poets. A long series of his works pass in review. If there were nothing left of bis literary ceuvre, we could in fact get a fairly good idea of its variety from the references to be found in Jerome. The principal rhetorical writings - among which Jerome counts the anonymous Rhetorica ad Herennium - are enumerated in the pamphlet against Rufinus and mentioned several times. 3) See p. 181. As to the reading, cf. p. 258 n. r. 3 ) Adv. Ru/in. I. 16 Lege 'Ad Herennium' Tullii libros, lege 'Rhetoricos' eius aut ... revolve tria volumina 'De oratore', in quibus introducit eloquentissimos illius temporis, Crassum et Antonium, disputantes, et quartum 'Oratorem', quem iam $~nex scribi( ad Brutum, Cf. further In Abd. praef. pp. 361-J62 Dicit et Tullius 1)





Among Cicero's orations the following are mentioned: Pro Cornelio,1) Pro Flacco,2) Pro Gabinio,3) Pro Q.Gallio,4) Pro Marcello,5) Pro Vatinio, 6) Orationes Philippicae. 7 ) As it appears from the quotations, Jerome knew further about ten other orations: Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino, Divinatio in Caecilium, In Verrem, De imperio Cn. Pompei, Pro Cluentio, In Catilinam, 8) Pro Murena, Pro Archia, Pro Scauro (?), Pro Milone, Pro Ligario. Jerome alludes now and then in general terms to Cicero's philosophical writings 9 ) but is rather sparing of information as to the separate works, though they are among his principal sources. We are met with occasional references to Tusculans, 10 ) De officiis, 11) De re pitbtuus adolescentulo sibi inchoata quaedam et rudia excidisse (- De or. I. 5). Si hoe ille tam de libris 'Ad Herennium' quam de 'Rhetoricis', quos ego vel perfectissimos puto, ad comparationem senilis peritiae dicere potuit, etc. Topica is mentioned in Epist. 50, I, 2 (Ciceronis 1:611:ovi;) and De optima genere oratorum hinted at in Epist. 57, 5, 2 (talking of Cicero's translation of Demosthenes' and Aeschines' orations): Sufficit mihi ipsa translatoris auctoritas qui ita in prologo earundem orationum locutus est (two long quotations follow). When writing his survey of Christian literature Jerome took his pattern from Cicero's Brutus, Vir. ill. praef.: Dominum Iesum Christum precor, ut quad Cicero tuus ... non est facere dedignatus in 'Bruto' oratorum linguae Latinae texens catalogum id ego in ecclesiae eius scriptoribus enumerandis digne ... impleam. Brutus is mentioned also in Paral. praef. (PL 29, 425). 1) Adv. Joh. 12. 2) Epist. 10, 3, 1; In Gal. 3, I p. 416. 3 ) Adv. Ru/in. I. 1 Tullius in commentariis causarum pro Gabinio. ') Epist. 52, 8, 3. 5) In Hab. 2, 9 p. 617. 6 ) Adv. Ru/in. III. 39. 7) Epist. 57, 13, 2. 8 ) Liibeck has no quotations, but see my list below, p. 287, 9) In Gal. 1, 11-12 p. 387 Mittamus eos ad Ciceronis libros, qui de quaestionibus philosophiae praenotantur; Adv. Ru/in. III. 39 Revolve dialogos Tullii; Epist. 70, 5, 2 Quos (sc. Arnobium et Lactantium) si legere volueris, dialogorum Ciceronis im,:oµrw repperies. 10) In Ezech. 1, 6-7 p. 12 Quattuor perturbationes, de quibus plenissime Cicero in 'Tusculanis' disputat; Adv. Pelag. II. 6 (about the four perturbationes animi) Quinque 'Tusculanarum quaestionum' Ciceronis libri his disputationibus referti sunt. The passages will be discussed below pp. 334-336. 11) In Ezech. 1. 1. Super quibus (sc. virtutibus) idem philosophus et orator in tribus ad /ilium 'Officiorum' libris disputat; In Zach. 1, 18-19 p. 792 Quattuor scilicet virtutes, prudentia, iustitia, fortitudo, temperantia, de quibus plenissime in 'Officiorum' libris Tullius disputat, scribens propriuin quoque de quattuor virtutibus librum.


lica,1) Laelius 2) and the lost De gloria,3 ) De virtutt'.bus4) and Consolatio.5) The two first-mentioned are quoted frequently, as are De finibus and Academica; next to them follow Cato Jrfaior and De re publica; De natura deorum, De divinatione, Laelius and De f ato stand at the bottom. Cicero's Consolatio was in all appearance Jerome's main source in Epist. 60. 6) Lubeck (pp. 128-159) lists more than roo quotations (apart from doublets) to which the passages listed below should be added. Adv. Pelag. I. 14 Quorum (sc. oratorum) definitio est 'dicere ad persuadendum accommodate'. Epist. 85, 3, 2 Licet tibi Graeca suf ficiant et non debeas turbidos nostri ingenioli rivos quaerere, qui de ipsis fontibus bibis. Didym. Spir. praet p. 106 (see above p. n7). Epist. 58, 8, I Cumque in primis partibtts vincas alias, in paenultimis te ipsum superas. Epist. 47, 1, 2 Qui scribendo disertissime deterruit, ne scriberem? Adv. Pelag. prol. p. 695. Epist. 52, 8, I Nolo te declamatorem esse et rabulam garrulumque.

De or. I. 138 Primum oratoris officium esse dicere ad persuadendum accommodate. De or. II. n7 Tardi ingenii est rivulos consectari, fontes rerum non videre. Cf. Acad. post. I. 8.

De or. III. 3 Sic esse tum iudicatum ceteros a Crasso semper omnes, illo autem die etiam ipsum a se superatum (Kunst, p. 194 sq.) Brut. 262 (see above p. 265).

Or. 47 Non enim declamatorem aliquem de ludo aut rabulam de foro ... quaerimus (Kunst, p. 190).

1 ) Epist. 49, 19, 5 An forsitan ... Publium Scipionem in sexto 1:11c; no),tulac; de inpari numero proferam disputantes? In Amos 5, 3 p. 283 De cuius numeri (sc. VII) sacramentis in Scipionis somnio plenius nari-at Tullius. 2 Mich. 7, 5-7 p. 517 Est et Ciceronis de amicitia liber quem 'Laelium' ) In inscripsit. 3 ) In Gal. 5, 26 p. 515 Ciceronis duo volumina quae 'De gloria' scripsit. ') See above p. 28 5 n. 1 r. 5 ) Epist. 60, 5, 2 Legimus Crantorem, cuius volumen ad confovendum dolorem suum secutus est Cicero. 8) See pp. 202 sq.



C. Vigil. 8 p. 395 0 portentum in terras ultimas deportandum!

Verr. act. II, I. 40 0 scelus, o portentum in ultimas terras exportandum!

Epist. 84, 10, 2 Et quasi ad M ithridatis litteras omnis veritas uno die de voluminibus eius raderetur.

Imp. Pomp. 7 (Hilberg). above p. 170).

Adv. Ru/in. III. 25 Quo non erumpat semel effrenata audacia?

Catil. I. 1 Quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia?

Epist. 109, 2, 5 Sed 'abiit, excessit, evasit, erupit'.

Catil. II. l Abiit, excessit, evasit, erupit (Hilb erg).

Adv. Pelag. I. 21 Cum eloquentissimus orator ... dixerit: 'Fauci unum possunt, utrumque nemo'. See above p. 264. In Ezech. lib. III praef. p. 80 Et alibi: 'Nihil est enim opere et manu f actum, quad non conficiat et consumat vetustas'. See above p. 239. Epist. 57, 12, 4 Haec non est illius culpa ... sed magistrorum eius, qui illum magna mercede nihil scire docuerunt.

M uren. 46 Unum sustinere pauci possunt, utrumque nemo.

Virg. Mar. 17 Fonte veritatis omisso opinionum rivulos consectamur. In Ephes. 1, 5 p. 551 Septuaginta interpretes transtulerunt, rebus novis nova verba fingentes. In Ezech. 16, ro p. 154 Rebtts enim novis nova fingenda sunt nomina.


Marcell. II Nihil est enim opere et manu factum, quad non aliquando conficiat et consumat vetustas. Phil. II. 43 At quanta merces rhetori data est! ... Duo milia iugerum . .. Sex. Clodio rhetori adsignasti, ut populi Romani tanta mercede nihil sapere disceres? Acad. post. I. 8 Ut ea e fontibus potius hauriant quam rivulos consectentur. Cf. De or. II. rr7 (above p. 286). Acad post. I. 25 Aut enim nova sunt rerum novarum f acienda nomina aut ex aliis transferenda. Cf. Fin. III. 3 Imponendaque nova rebus novis nomina; Nat. deor. I. 44 Sunt enim rebus novis nova ponenda nomina.



Adv. Ritfin. I. 17 Illud Socraticitm ... : 'Scio quad nescio'. Epist. 57, 12, 4 Socraticum illud.: 'Scio quad nescio' (Hilberg). Adv. Pelag. I. 14 Verum audi quid idem dicit orator tuus: 'Desine communibus locis, domi nobis ista nascuntur'. C. Luci/. 4 p. 173 Verum desine, quaeso, a communibus locis. Epist. 84, 4, 1 Iurem? Ridebunt et dicent: 'Dami no bis ista nascuntur' (Hilberg). Epist. 69, 2, 4 Recordatus Chrysippei sophismatis: 'Si mentiris idque verum dicis, mentiris'. Cf. Tract. de psalm n5 (Anecdota Maredsolana, III: 2, p. 215, 7). In Is. 40, 12 sqq. p. 488 Quas f orsitan Democritus cum Epicuro suo atomos appellat. ib. II, 6 sqq. p. 159 (seep. 233). Cf. Epist. n8, 3, 3. Epist. 78, 39, 2 (see p. 184 n. 1). Adv. Ru/in. I. 30 (see p. 176). In Gal. 5, 26 p. 517. Epist. 108, 3, 4 Fugiendo gloriam gloriam merebatur, quae 'virtutem quasi umbra sequitur'. Adv. Iovin. I. 3 Ballista quanta plus retrahitur, tanto fortius mittit.

Epist. 85, 4, 1 Quad in me criminantur .. et quasi Dionysium philosophum arguunt subito mutasse sententiam.

Acad. prior. II. 74 Socrati nihil sit visum sciri posse; excepit unum tantum, scire se nihil se scire. Acad. prior. II. 80 Sed desine, quaeso, communibus locis; domi nobis ista nascuntur.

Acad. prior. II. 96 Si dicis te mentiri verumque dicis, mentiris; dicis autem te mentiri verumque dicis; mentiris igitur' ... Haec Chrysippea sunt (Weyman). Fin. I. 17 (Epicurus) Democritea dicit perpauca mutans ... Ille atomos quas appellat. Fin. III. 49-53. Fin. V. 67. Tusc. I. 14. Tusc. I. 34. Tusc. I. 109 Etsi enim nihil habet in se gloria, cur expetatur, tamen virtutem tamquam umbra sequitur (Hilberg). Tusc. II. 57 Ut enim balistae lapidum ... eo graviores emissiones habent, qua sunt contenta atque adducta vehementius. Cf. Tusc. II. 60 (Hilberg).


In Dan. 13, 8 p. 731 Quad Graeci vocant :ru£0o~, nos 'perturbationem' magis quam 'passionem' rectius interpretamur; In Is. 5, 22 p. 84. See below pp. 333, 334. In Joel 1, 4 p. 171 (sepp. 331 sq.). In Is. 38, 16 sqq. p. 473 Unde stulta Epicuri sententia est, qui asserit recordatione praeteritorum bonorum mala praesentia mitigari. In. Ezech. 8, 12 p. 88 Quorundam etiam philosophorum sententia est, qui ex siderum cursu atque constantia suspicantur esse in caelestibus providentiam. Adv. Iovin. I. 39 Dies me deficiet, si volitero omnia . . . memorare. In Ezech. 4, 9 sqq. p. 44 Fabis, quibus comedentium venter inflatur et mens opprimi dicitur, in tantum ut Pythagoreis quoque cibus detestabilis sit. Epist. 6, 1, 1 Antiquus sermo est: 'Mendaces faciunt, ut nee vera dicentibus credatur'. In Ezech. lib. III praef. p. 80 Nihil longum est, quod finem habet. See p. 238 sq. Adv. Pelag. I. 19 Et quomodo legimus: 'Qui unam habuerit, omnes videtur habere virtutes'? Cf. In Eccles. p. 468.


Tusc. IV. ro Quae Graeci :r,;d0rJ vacant, nobis 'perturbationes' appellari magis placet quam 'morbos'. Cf. ib. III. 7.

Tusc. IV. II. Tusc. V. 74 (Epicurus) una se dicit recordatione adquiescerepraeteritaritm voluptatium . . . Non enim video, quo modo sedare possint mala praesentia praeteritae voluptates. Nat. deor. II. 55 Earum (sc. stellarum) perennes cursus atque perpetui cum admirabili incredibilique constantia declarant in his vim et mentem esse divinam. Nat. deor. III. 81 Dies me deficiat, si velim numerare ... Div. II. n9 Faba quidem Pythagorei utique abstinere, quasi vero eo cibo mens, non venter infletur.

Div. II. 146 Cum mendaci homini ne verum quidem dicenti credere soleamus. Cato M. 69 Sed mihi ne diuturnum quidem quicquam videtur, in quo est aliquid extremum. Off. II. 35 Cum inter omnes philosophos constet ... qui unam haberet, omnes habere virtzttes.

Cicero is to Jerome first and foremost the unsurpassed master of Latin prose, qui in arce eloquentiae Romanae stetit, rex oratorum et LaGiiteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV: z




tinae linguae illustrator. 1) He is called sublimis 2) or praeclarus3) or inclitus orator,4 ) he is praised for his dives lingua 5 ) and aureum os;6 ) the affluence of his oratory is characterized by such epithets as fluvius,7) flumen 8) and mare. 9 ) When complimenting Paulinus of Nola on his style Jerome compares him with Cicero: the panegyric upon Theodosius is >>radiant with Ciceronian purity>>,10 ) in his epistolary style Paulinus almost represents Cicero.11) Jerome's appreciation of Cicero also appears from the ironical question he puts to Rufinus (Adv. Ru/in. I. 30): Unde tibi tanta verborum copia, sententiarum lumen, translationum varietas, homini qui oratoriam vix primis labris in adulescentia degustasti? and the answer he himself gives to it: A ut ego f allor aut tu Ciceronem occulte lectitas. Et ideo tam disertus es. Therefore, if a person wishes for eloquence, he must have for a pattern Cicero and Demosthenes;12) again and again these two are placed side by side as the most distinguished representatives of oratorical art. Jerome's relation to Cicero is illustrated from another point of view by the explanation of his references to Greek philosophers which he found himself obliged to give against the jesting of Rufinus, Adv. Ru/in. III. 39: De dogmatibus eorum, non de libris locutus sum, quae potui in Cicerone, Bruto ac Seneca discere (see above, 94 n. r, 177). 1

likewise Vir. ill. praef. Tullius tuus, ) Quaest. hebr. in gen. praef. pp. 3or-302; qui in arce Romanae eloquentiae stetit. Jerome here with tacit consent adopts a dictum of Quintilian, *Inst. XII. II, 28 (see below p. 296). 2 ) In Ezech. lib. XII praef. p. 462. 3) Epist. 128, 1, I. 4) 5) 6


Ib. 126, 2, 2; 130, I, 2. Ib. 84, 6, r. In Amos 5, 3 p. 283 Obscurissimus Platonis 'Timaeus' liber . .. ne Ciceroni~

quidem aureo ore fit planior. 7) Epist. 125, 12, I Ut post Quintiliani acumina Ciceronisque fluvios alphabetum (sc. Hebraicum) discerem; ib. 130, 6, r Tulliani fluvius ... ingenii. 8 ) In Is. lib. VIII praef. p. 328 Qui si /lumen eloquentiae .•. desiderant, legant Tullium, etc. 9 ) Epist. 147, 5, I Ubi mare illud eloquentiae Tullianae? 10 ) Epist. 58, 8, I Sed et ipsum genus eloquii pressum est et nitidum et, cum Tulliana luceat puritate, crebrum est in sententiis. 11 ) Ib. 85, I, I Voce me provocas ad scribendum, terres eloquentia et in epistolari stilo prope Tullium repraesentas. 12 ) Epist. 29, r, 3 Si eloquentiam quaerimus, Demosthenes legendus aut Tullius est; In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486 Si quis eloquentiam quaerit . .. habet in utraque lingua Demosthenem et Tullium.


This is an admission of great consequence. Jerome pledges his word for having Latin authors as intermediaries, and as Cicero - whom he elsewhere (In Nahum I, 4 p. 538) calls philosophum pariter et oratorem - is mentioned in the first place and, in contradistinction to Brutus and Seneca, is quoted very often, he is likely to have been Jerome's chief informant. Now it is easier to say this than to prove it in full. For it is a matter of course that philosophical doctrines and ideas are usually reported in such general terms that the intermediary source cannot be pointed out beyond all doubt. I think however that we can get a fairly good idea of Jerome's indebtedness to Cicero in this respect by recapitulating some of the facts stated in the previous exposition. To begin with I draw attention to a few cases of terminology. Cicero, as is well known, was face to face with the difficulty of inventing Latin equivalents to Greek philosophical terms. He tried to render a.~{wµa by different words, among them 'pronuntiatum' which seems to have been a failure; Jerome adopts it, *Adv. Ru/in. I. 30 (p. I76). Cicero (Fin. III. 53) coined 'indifferens' for a.&a>Quid quad miser, cum loqui non posset, tacere non poterat?►> (quoted from an unnamed author, perhaps Cicero).

VIII. 6, 44 At a.Unyoela ... aut aliud verbis, aliud sensu ostendit aut ... XII. II, 28 Pollio et Messala qui iam Cicerone arcem tenente eloqitentiae agere coeperunt.

Quintilian is held up as the best representative of concinnae declamationes just as Cicero as the prototype of oratory. 2) Jerome is thinking of the Declamationes maiores, wrongly ascribed to Quintilian, which he read at school. Reminiscences are to be found twice in Epist. 14, dating from 376-377 (p. 104), in Vita Malchi and Quaest. hebr. in 1) The parallel alleged by Liibeck (p. 217), Epist. 57, 6, 1: Ex alia in aliam linguam ad verbum expressa translatio sensus operit et veluti laeto gramine sata strangulat, occurs in the Latin translation of Vita Antonii. 2 ) In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486 Si quis eloquentiam quaerit vel declamationibus delectatur, habet in utraque lingua Demosthenem et Tullium, Polemonem et Quintilianum; In Is. lib. VIII praef. p. 328 Qui (sc. fastidioi,i) si /lumen eloquentiae et concinnas declamationes desiderant, legant Tullium, Quintilianum, Gallionem, Gabinianum.





gen. (pp. 131 sq.), i. e. in writings prior to A. D. 392. 1) The controversia alluded to in Quaest. hebr. in gen. 28, 32-35 p. 353: Quintilianus in ea controversia in qua accusabatur matrona, quae Aethiopem peperit, does not exist in the Pseudo-Quintilian collection, it is to be found in Calpurnius Flaccus, Deel. 2; Jerome's memory seems to have failed him. In contrast to Quintilian S e n e c a r h e t o r is never mentioned. Jerome owes to him a dictum of Augustus about the orator Q. Haterius: Adv. Joh. 12 .,.. Sen. Contr. IV praef. 7, and uses ibid. about the same Haterius another dictum of Augustus (Contr. II. 5, 20) which referred to L. Vinicius (see above p. 167). An additional instance, *Epist. 14, 2, 3 .,.. Contr. I. 8, 15, has been mentioned before (p. 104). If I am not mistaken, another passage too ca_n be traced to Seneca the Elder: *Adv. Jovin. I. 28 Quam rarum sit uxorem sine his vitiis inveniri, novit ille qui duxit uxorem. Unde pulchre Varius Geminus sublimis orator: 'Qui non litigat' inquit 'caelebs est'. It is not unlikely to have been found in a lost book of Controversiae, as Seneca elsewhere communicates many extracts from this orator. Jerome's relation to Seneca the philosopher is rather embarrassing. On the one hand Seneca is said to belong to the Latin intermediaries through whom Jerome got his knowledge of Greek philosophy, on the other his influence is questionable since he is not referred to as a source except in Adversus Jovinianum (see p. 150), and all the references bear upon a work that has been lost, De matrimonio. After the masterly treatise of Bickel there can be no doubt about Jerome's dependency in the main, but unfortunately we cannot check it in detail, nor have scholars yet noticed any reminiscences of existent works of Seneca's. I hope therefore that the parallels I have pointed out are not void of interest: *Epist. 22, 2, 2 Nulla in hoe libello adulatio, adulator quippe blandus inimicus est; *Adv. Pelag. I. 27 Pulchreque adulator apud philosophos definitur 'blandus inimicus' - Sen. Epist. 45, 7 Adulatio quam similis est amicitiae! . . . Venit ad me pro amico blandus inimicus (see pp. III, 266); *Adv. Joh. I Natura hominum prona est ad clementiam.,.. Sen. Bene/. VI. 29, I Naturam per se pronam ad misericordiam, humanitatem, clementiam (see p. 167). That Jerome was also acquainted with the tragedies is shown by the striking similarity between Vita Malchi 9 and Troades 510-512 (see p. n8). 1) Adv. Joh. 37 In portu, ut dicitur, naufragium (also *Adv. Ru/in. III. JZ; cf. Deel. 12, 23) was probably a proverb.



B. The quotations: technique and purpose. After registering and surveying the extent of Jerome' s borrowings from the classics I should like to draw attention to the technique of citation, which is usually neglected in studies of this kind but in my opinion deserves to be taken into consideration. Literal quotation and paraphrase are alike familiar to Jerome, but as a rule they are used with remarkable restraint and dissimilarity. Prose writers are seldom quoted literally, whereas lines and hemistichs from poetry are met with by the hundreds. In fact Jerome quotes poetical lines to an extent unprecedented in other writers, pagan as well as Christian, with the exception of Cicero in his philosophical works, Lactantius and Augustine. This affords us matter for reflection. To begin with we have to dispose of an argument advanced for example by H. Dahlmann apropos of quotations from poetry in prose: 1) »Schon die griechische Stilkritik», he says, >>(vgl.Arist. rhet. 3, 8. Cic. or. 172) verbot das Vorkommen von Versen in der Prosa ausdriicklich, und die Romer sind ihnen darin gefolgt, Cicero: incidere vero omnes (sc. numeros) in orationem etiam ex hoe intellegi potest, quod versus saepe in oratione per imprudentiam dicimus, est id vehementer vitiosum (or. 189, vgl. auch de or. 3, 175), und Quintilian: versum in oratione fieri multo foedissimum est, totum; sed etiam in parte, deforme (inst. or. 9, 4, 72)>>. All the passages alleged by Dahlmann deal with prose rhythm, numerus oratorius, which according to the theoreticians mentioned ought to be distinguished from the metrical form of poetry; therefore a prosaist is open to blame, if, without intention, he combines the words so that they sound like a verse. Now these directions are of little or no consequence for our problem. Firstly we are concerned here not with unintentional lapses in style but with the deliberate exclusion or adoption of quotations from poetry. Secondly the aversion to quoting poetical lines is characteristic not only of rhythmic prose (e. g. the orators after Cicero) but also of non-rhythmic prose (e. g. the historians, Sallustius, Livy, Tacitus). It is simply a constituent of early prose, and because of that Cicero apologizes in Pro Sestio when exceptionally 1) Gnomon XI (1935), 314. Dahlmann is attacking V. Lundstrom, oNya Enniusfragment», Eranos XV (1915), 1-24, who tried to point out unknown Ennian verses in Columella, Livy, Sallustius and Tacitus.




he introduces quotations from the dramatists into a public speech.I) But what about the philosophical writings, filled with quotations, sometimes rather voluminous, from Latin poets and with translations of Greek dramatists? Cicero himself gives the answer. He refers to the philosophical schools at Athens where both Stoics and Academics had a habit of inserting poetical lines in their lectures. 2 ) He follows their lead by adopting the novelty as a means of embellishing the philosophical treatise which he is introducing into Latin literature. 3) Cicero was preceded above all by the Stoics - the fragments of Chrysippus, for instance, have been described as >>averitable treasurehouse of poetical quotations>>. Seneca reports (Epist. rn8, 8 sqq.) the theory, set forth by another head of the Stoa, Cleanthes; I repeat here the comments I have given elsewhere on this most interesting passage: 4 ) >>Ifversified sentences - Seneca is speaking of Publilius Syrus - impress the audience in the theatre, how much more if they are uttered by a philosopher, if his salutary instructions are intermingled with verses, penetrating more effectively into the mind of the inexperienced. Cleanthes used a simile, comparing the effect of a versified sentence with a trumpet- call: 'Nam', ut dicebat Cleanthes, 'quemadmodum spiritus noster clariorem sonum reddit, cum illum tuba per longi canalis angustias tractum patentiore novissime exitu eff udit, sic sensus nostros clariores carminis arta necessitas efficit'. What you say in prose Seneca continues - is less striking, but compressed in the form of poetry, it has the force of a weapon launched by a strong hand>>. Seneca himself follows the Stoics in this as well as in other respects; he inserts into Epistulae morales at least thirty Virgilian lines or halflines without denoting them as being quotations. 5) This practice first reappears on a large scale in Lactantius, whose predilection for See my paper Methods of Citation, pp. 121 sq. Cic. Tusc. II. 26 Versus ab iis admisceri orationi. B) Ib. Itaque postquam adamavi hanc quasi senilem declamationem, studiose equidem utor nostris poetis; sed sicubi illi defecerunt, verti etiam multa de Graecis, ne quo ornamento in hoe genere disputationis careret Latina oratio. 4 ) Methods of Citation, p. 123. 5 ) Cf. V. Lundstrom in Eranos XV (1915), 19 sq. who rightly critici::es E. Norden's statement (Ennius und Vergilius. Leipzig-Berlin, 1915, pp. 54 sq. n. 1): >>Dagegen sind Fa.lie, wo Prosaiker einen ganzen Vers unverandert in ihre Rede aufnehrnen, ohne ihn als Zitat zu kennzeichnen, sehr selten; ich habe in der Erinnerung nur Tacitus, Agr. 9,>. Jerome supplies us with dozens of instances. 1)




poetical quotations is in keeping both with Cicero's dialogues and with popular diatribe, and then in Jerome and Augustine. This is the background. Let us now turn our attention to some technical devices. First of all there are the 'hidden' poetical quotations, interwoven into the texture in such a way that they are part of a sentence and reveal their foreign origin only by the metrical form. An extreme case is In Mich. lib. II praef. where two passages from different Terentian prologues are combined: M oneo autem tauros pingues qui circumdederunt me, ut quiescant 'et desinant maledicere, malefacta ne noscant sua', 'quae prof erentur post, si pergent laedere' (see p. 137). A quotation is easily recognizable when it consists of a whole line, e. g.: E quibus medius ... erumpens et, 'canitiem inmundam perfuso vulnere turpans' ... inquit (Epist. I. ro, 2 ..... Verg. Aen. XII. 6rr); Numquid, quia gravi corpore terrae haereo, avium non miror volatus nee columbam praedico, quad 'radit iter liquidum celeris neque commovet alas' (ib. 49, 20 ,2 - Verg. Aen. V. 217)? Ubi nunc totius orbis homines ... tam innumerabiles populi et tantarum gentium multitudines 'quam variae linguis, habitu tam vestis et armis' (ib. 60, 4, l - Verg. Aen. VIII. 723); Amafionios ac Rabirios nostri temporis qui 'de Graecis bonis Latina f aciunt non bona' (In Os. lib. II praef. pp. 52 sqq. - Ter. Eun. prol. 8). Many cases however are not so obtrusive, consisting of less than a line, e. g.: Quomodo igitur 'crebris micat ignibus aether' et in ictu oculi atque momenta discurrunt fulgura et revertuntur (In Ezech. 1, 13-14 p. 15 - *Verg. Aen. I. 90); Praetermitto Carthaginis conditores 'Tyrios et Agenoris urbem' (In Gal. lib. II praef. pp. 425-426 .....*Verg. Aen. I. 338); Ipse quoque 'caput horum et causa malorum', Arius presbyter (C. Luci/. 20 p. 192 - *Verg. Aen. XI. 361); Nunc mihi evanescentibus terris 'caelum undique et undique pontus' (Epist. l, 2, l ..,. Verg. Aen. III. 193); Domestica sanctae V erae exempla sectare . . . et sit tibi tanti 'dux femina facti' (ib. rr8, 7, 4 ..,. Verg. Aen. I. 364); Dum propheto, 'dum spiritus hos regit artus' (In Os. 4, 15-16 p. 45 .....*Verg. Aen. IV. 336); Contrariis contraria intelliguntur. Et 'sapientia prima est stultitia caruisse' (In Eccles. p. 395 - *Hor. Epist. I. l, 41 sq.); Obsecro itaque te 'et repetens iterum iterumque monebo' (Epist. 52, 5, 3 .....Verg. Aen. III. 436); De Adamantio autem sileo, cuius nomen, 'si parva licet componere magnis', meo nomine invidiosius est (Quaest. hebr. in gen. praef. pp. 303-304 - *Verg. Georg. IV. 176).


The hidden quotations contribute not a little to a richer colouring of the exposition, they call up a variety of associations and give the connoisseur the pleasure of recognition. They are still more expressive when they are inserted unexpectedly after a sentence in order to complete the writer's own statement and bring it into relief. That magniloquent young man Jerome did not hesitate to apply to himself, when writing to a friend, the lines in which Horace glorified the constancy of a Roman and a Stoic: Epist. 6, 2, 2 Et licet me sinistro Ribera excetra rumore dilaniet, non timebo hominum iudicium habiturus iudicem meum. 'Si fractus inlabatur orbis, inpavidum ferient ruinae' (Hor. Carm. III. 3, 7 sq.). This kind of laconism comes in well in polemics, in mocking and menacing, e. g. Adv. Iovin. I. l Non est contentus nostro, id est humano more loqui, altius quiddam aggreditur.

'Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus' (Hor. Ars 139). 'Quad ipse non sani esse hominis, non sanus iuret Orestes (Pers. 3, II7 sq.). Cf. further Adv. Ru/in. I. 17, II. 16 (p. 180), Adv. Pelag. III. II (p. 268), Epist. 50, 5, 5 Procul Epicurus, longe Aristippus, subulci non aderunt, feta scrofa non grunniet. 'Et nos tela, pater, ferrumque haud debile dextra spargimus, et nostro sequitur de vulnere sanguis' (Verg. Aen. XII. 50 sq.). The device also lends itself to a compliment: Epist. 79, 6, 2 Nebridius pusio patrem quaerentibus exhibet:

'Sic oculos, sic ille manus, sic ora ferebat' (Verg. Aen. III. 490). Scintilla vigoris paterni lucet in filio et similitudo morum per speculum carnis erumpens: 'Ingentes animos angusto in pectore versat' (Verg. Georg. IV. 83). It serves to round off an exhortation: Epist. 58, II, 2 Accingere, quaeso, accingere. 'Nil sine magno vita labore dedit mortalibus' (Hor. Sat. I. 9, 59 sq.), or a moral discussion: Epist. 79, 9, 3 Ex quo perspicuum est ... proclivius esse cor hominis a pueritia ad malum et inter opera carnis et spiritus ... mediam animam fluctuare nunc haec, nunc illa capientem. 'Nam vitiis nemo sine nascitur; optimus ille est, qui minimis urguetur' (Hor. Sat. I. 3, 68 sq.).



It is a matter of course that sentences of general applicability, as in the last instance, are often used in this manner; cf. furthermore Epist. 52, 9, 3 Sed et genus adrogantiae est clementiorem te videri velle quam pontifex Christi est. 'Non omnia possumus omnes' (Verg. Eel. 8, 63); In Zach. lib. II praef. pp. 825-826 Ad hanc difficultatem urget petasatus libri portitor. 'Dimidium facti, qui coepit, habet' (Hor. Epist. I. 2, 40). Quanto magis nos, qui tertiam partem iam confecimus viae, eodem debemus in reliquis labore sudare. By this kind of laconism Jerome obtains an effect of pathos equal to the subject when he relates the sack of Rome by Alaric (Epist. 127, 12). The tale itself is short, consisting of a few sentences: Capitur urbs, quae totum cepit orbem, immo fame perit ante quam gladio, etc. Then follow, without any prelude and without any intermediary link, three quotations relating to the fall of Moab (Is. 15, 1), of Jerusalem (Ps. 78, 1-3) and of Troy (Verg. Aen. II. 361-365). 1) Jerome here surpasses himself, making the disaster stand out in historical perspective against the fate of other celebrated cities. The Bible and the Classics are Jerome' s two sources of inspiration, and it is not unusual to find both of them quoted in the same passage though not with the same effect of pathos as in the previous case. The two quotations serve so to speak to give double evidence, e. g. In Mich. 1, 16 p. 447 Quod autem aquila certo tempore soleat amittere plumas, et in Psalterio scriptum est: 'Innovabitur ut aquilae senectus tua' (Psal. 102, 5). Et comicus in Heautontimorumeno: 'Visa est' inquit 'vere, quod dici solet, aquilae senectus' (Ter. Haut. 520 sq.); Adv. Pelag. I. 26 Veritas amara est, rugosae frontis ac tristis, offenditque correptos. Unde et Apostolus loquitur: 'Inimicus vobis factus sum veritatem dicens vobis' (Gal. 4, 16). Et comicus: 'Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit' (Ter. Andr. 68). A fine specimen is to be found in In Ezech. 40, 5 sqq. p. 468. Jerome remembers visits to the catacombs of Rome which he made in his youth; his relation is so impressive that it deserves to be quoted in full: Dum essem Romae puer et liberalibus studiis erudirer, solebam cum ceteris eiusdem aetatis et propositi diebus dominicis sepulcra apostolorum et martyrum circuire crebroque cryptas ingredi, quae in terrarum profunda defossae ex utraque parte ingredientium per parietes habent corpora sepultorum, et ita obscura sunt omnia, ut propemodum illud propheticum compteatur: 'Descendant ad inf ernum viventes' (Ps. 44, 16), et raro desuper lumen 1)

The passage is quoted in full p. ·259.





admissum horrorem temperet tenebrarum, ut non tam f enestram quam foramen demissi luminis putes; rursumque pedetentim acceditur et caeca nocte circumdatis illud Vergilianum proponitur: 'Horror ubique animos, simul ipsa silentia terrent' (Aen. II. 755). Biblical and classical citations are clustered together in Epist. 127, 6 in a rather peculiar way: Annis igitur plurimis sic suam transegit aetatem ... laudans illud Platonicum, qui philosophiam meditationem mortis esse dixisset. Unde et noster apostolus: 'Cotidie morior per vestram salutem', et dominus iuxta antiqua exemplaria: 'Nisi quis tulerit crucem suam cotidie et secutus fuerit me, non potest meus esse discipulus', multoque ante per prophetam spiritus sanctus: 'Propter te mortificamur tota die, aestimati sumus ut aves occisionis', et post mul(as aetates illa sententia: 'Memento semper diem mortis et numquam peccabis', disertissimique praeceptum satirici: 'Vive memor leti, fugit hora, hoe quodloquorindeest'. Thus in rapid succession we are presented with six quotations: (1) illud Platonicum: Phaedo 64 A, presumably through Cic. Tusc. I. 74, (2) noster apostolus: 1 Cor. 15, 31, (3) dominus: Luc. 14, 27, (4) per prophetam: Ps. 43, 22, (5) illa sententia: Eccli. 7, 40, (6) disertissimi praeceptum satirici: Pers. Sat. 5, 153. No preference is given, either here or in the preceding instances, to one or the other kind of literature. This unprejudiced attitude is peculiar/ to Jerome as distinguished from other Christian writers. It is an exception for him to make amends for quoting a classical author by excusing himself and by introducing a Biblical passage. 1) I have noticed only three such cases: Epist. 52, 2, 1 (after three quotations from Vergil) Quad ne de gentili tantum litteratura prof erre videamur, divinorum voluminum sacramenta cognosce; ib. 105, 3, 3 (to Augustine) after a literal quotation of Verg. Eel. 9, 51-54 a passage in the Bible is alluded to, announced by the words: Et ut magis de scripturis sanctis loquar; In Is. XVI praef. p. 667 Egregia disertissimi oratoris sententia est: 'Felices essent artes, si de illis soli artifices iudicarent'. Ac ne a prof anis tantum sumere videar exemplum, nimirum hoe illud est, quod aliis verbis propheta demonstrat: 'Beatus qui in aures loquitur audientium' (Eccli. 25, 12). Let us now proceed to the 'open' quotations and examine the different ways of denoting the author. Information both as to the author and the work from which the quotation originates is given only 1) As e. g. Ruricius does; cf. Methods of Citation, pp. II5 sq.


occasionally. The best instance is Adv. I ovin. II. 14: I osephus in secunda I udaicae captivitatis historia et in octavo decimo antiquitatum libro et contra Appionem duobus voluminibus, but it is not characteristic of Jerome's own methods, as he is here plagiarizing Porphyrius (see above p. 149). However, he now and then adopts the same documentary method when quoting Cicero, e. g. Epist. 8,1 ut in Rhetoricis Cicero ait; ib. ro, 3, 1 de quibus pro Flacco agens luculente Tullius ait; ib. 52, 8, 3 Marcus Tullius . .. in oratione pro Quinto Gallio; In Hab. 2, 9 p. 617 Crispus loquitur in Historiis . .. Simile quid et Tullius ad Caesarem pro Marcello; Adv. Ru/in. I. 1 Unde et Tullius in commentariis causarum pro Gabinio. This kind of accuracy is appropriate to philological method and is uncalled for in quotations which serve more as a literary adornment than as matter-of-fact information. Because of this it is seldom to be found in quotations from poetry; there are only two instances from Terence (see above p. 271, n. I), two from Virgil: In Os. 4,1516 p. 45 De quo (sc. asilo) et Vergilius in tertio Georgicorum libro refert; Adv. Ru/in. III. 39 Quod quidem et Vergilius in sexto Aeneidos volumine sequens loquitur; and two from Horace: ib. I. 1 Flaccus Horatius quoque in epistola quam scribit ad Florum . .. ait; Epist. 57, 5, 5 Horatius ... in Arte poetica ... praecipit. Jerome's inventive turn of mind comes into its own in the manifold and artful devices by which the quotations are introduced. The simplest one is mentioning the author's name, e. g. ut ait Crispus, Tullius re/ert, iuxta Persium, iuxta illud Tullii, etc. Very often the name is replaced by a characteristic epithet which leaves no room for doubt as to the person hinted at. Ut ait sublimis orator, secundum praeclari oratoris exordium, ut incliti oratoris utar sententia - could anybody but Cicero be referred to by such phrases? In conformity with Quintilian's pregnant characterizations, quotations from Horace and Lucanus are simply ascribed to lyricus and poeta ardens.1) Sallustius is to Jerome the historicus or nobilis historicus,2 ) Terence the comicus.3 ) Virgil is often hinted at by means of laudatory epithets, such as poeta 1

See above p. 186, n. 1. E. g. In Gal. 5, 16 p. 500 Secundum sententiam historici 'animi imperio, corporis servitio magis vivere' (Sall. Cat. 1, 2); In Eccles. p. 430. Cf. above p. 292. 8) Didym. Spir. praef. p. 106; In Eccles. p. 390; Adv. Iovin. I. 48; II. 7; Epist. 54, 9, 5; 130, II, 1; Adv. Pelag. I. 26 p. 723 (the passages are quoted above pp. 271 sqq.). 2

) )


sublimis, illustris (or insignis or eloquentissimus) poeta;1) occasionally he is simply called poeta.2 ) Strange to say, Virgil's name never appears in the writings prior to J erome's settling in Bethlehem, though his influence even in those writings proves to be greater than that of any other secular author. 3) In this period, and even later, he is denoted now and then in an ✓ anonymous way as gentilis poeta.4 ) The context usually gives us to ✓ understand that the expression has been chosen with a view to pointing out the difference between Christian and pagan conditions. This is the case in Epist. 17, 2, I where Jerome complains of the sufferings which he had to endure in his first stay in the East because of the orthodox fanaticism of Eastern monks; after quoting Aen. I. 539-541 he continues: Quae idcirco de gentili poeta sumpsimus, ut, qui Christi pacem non servat, pacem saltim discat ab ethnico. On the other hand no intention of this kind is recognizable in Epist. 7, 4, I (dating from about the same time): Huie ego, ut ait gentilis poeta, omnia etiam tuta timeo (- Verg. Aen. IV. 298 omnia tuta timens). It is more easily accounted for in the commentaries: whenever a Virgilian line is adduced in the exposition of a Biblical text, it would come naturally to the exegete to emphasize its pagan provenience, and it is rather astonishing that he does so only exceptionally. 5) Not until the last period (from 402) is Virgil mentioned proportionately to his influence and more frequently than all the other classics together. The quotations are often introduced by a stereotyped phrase, 1) See above p. 276. Insignis poeta is an epithet given also to Ovid in a quotation (In Os. 2, 16--17 p. 24), 2 ) In Eccles. p. 388 Ut ait poeta: 'Interea magnum sol circumvolvitur annum' (Aen. III. 284); ib. p. 460 Secundum illud poetae (-Aen. XI. 104); In Is. 21, 13 sqq. p. 217 De quibus puto et poetam dicere: 'Lateque vagantes Barcaei' (Aen. IV. 42 sq.); ib. 66, 22-23 p. 826 Quod et poeta uno versiculo demonstravit (..,..Georg. I. 396); In Ezech. 1, 27-28 p. 22 Unde et poeta (- Aen. V. 89). 3) See above pp. 279 sq. 4 ) Exceptionally, the same epithet is applied to Horace in Epist. 16, 2, 1:

Verum, ut ait gentilis poeta, 'caelum, non animum mutat, qui trans mare currit' II, 27). 6) In Eccles. p. 448 De qua et poeta gentilis: 'Varium et mutabile semper femina' (Aen. IV. 569 sq.); In Agg. 1, 1 p. 738 Quem (sc. imparem numerum) mundum esse gentilis quoque poeta novit dicens: 'Numero deus impare gaudet' (Eel. 8, 75); In Gal, 3, 1 p. 417 Unde et quidam e gentibus: 'Nescio quis teneros oculus mihi fascinat agnos' (Eel. 3, 103). 20 Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV: 2 (Hor. Epist. I.

liAlHistoire du cliche Virgilien des ) I refer to P. Courcelle's interesting cent bouches,>, Revue des eludes latines, XXXIII (1955), 231-240 (about Jerome pp. 235 sq.). 6 or changed in the quotations in question. ) Line 626 is left out or incomplete



care of sick people in Epist. 77 he wrote morborum, talking of the barbarian invasions in Epist. 123 he wrote caesorum. Other Virgilian lines are distorted in a rather farcical way. Aen. VI. 846 sq.: 'Tu Maximus ille es, unus qui nobis wnctando restituis rem', is appropriate in the praise of Fabiola's ancestry (Epist. 77, 2, 3), but Jerome hardly shows good taste when he applies it to Rufinus in the following way: Adv. Ru/in. III. 29 'Tu Maximus ille es, unus qui nobis scribe n do restituis rem'. Nor. is he at his best when he makes use of Aen. VIII. 287 sq.:

'H ic i1wenum chorus, ille senum, qui carmine laudes Herculeas et facta ferunt, talking of the general sorrow at Fabiola's death (Epist. 77, II, 2): (Fama) totius urbis populos exsequias congregabat. Sonabant psalmi et aurata tecta templorum reboans in sublime alleluia quatiebat.

'Hie iuvenum chorus, ille senum, qui carmine laudes femineas et facta ferant'. It is rather a burlesque fancy to associate the funeral of the noble lady with the sacrifice to Hercules. Sometimes he perverts his model in such a way that a Christian reader who knew the original wording would have had reason to feel bewildered. In Aen. III. 435 sq. Helenus, bidding farewell to Aeneas, cautions him first and foremost to conciliate Juno:

'Unum illud tibi, nate dea, proque omnibus unum praedicam et repetens iterumque iterumque monebo'. In Epist. 130, 7, 12 Jerome, exhorting the Christian virgin Demetrias, makes use of these lines by an abortive play upon words: for Virgil's nate dea, 'born by a goddess' he substitutes nata deo, 'born to serve God'. This perversion and Christianization of an expression founded on pagan mythology is by no means unprecedented either in Jerome or in other Christian writers. The practice offers so much interest that I shall reserve it for a fuller discussion in a following chapter.1) As distinct from the poets, prose writers are seldom quoted literally except for short sentences. The longest quotations are those from Part III, Chap. 3 ~Pagan mythology and poetry applied to Christian beliefs,>, pp. 382 sqq. 1)


Cicero's De optima genere oratorum (above p. 164; Liibeck pp. 133 sq.), Commentarii causarum pro Gabinio (above p. 174), Pro Marcello (above p. 134) and Pro Quinto Gallio (above p. 194). For the rest, paraphrase is the method commonly practised. The borrowings from prose vary in length from short dicta and data to whole chapters. Jerome is a thorough-paced compiler and plagiarist. His commentaries are to a high degree, certainly higher than can ever be proved, compilations from Greek exegetes, above all Origen. 1) This fact explains both the size of his exegetic work and the speed with which he worked. His unscrupulous plagiarism is most obvious in De viris illustribus, which has turned out to be compiled, for the most part, from Eusebius' >>ChurchHistory>>, and further with a carelessness that reflects no credit on the monk in Bethlehem. He did not even hesitate to deck himself in borrowed plumes by stealing from Porphyrius, the arch-enemy of Christianity - without mentioning him, of course. A great many of the pagan topics in Adversus Iovinianum originate, as we have seen (pp. 147-150), from the Neo-Platonic philosopher, and likewise whole chapters in Adversus Ru/inum (pp. 177 sqq.). 2) From these literary thefts we learn that Jerome unblushingly followed his Greek model, and we may infer that he did the same in other cases where the evidence is lost; certainly he did not expect many people in the West to be capable of detecting his dependency. On the other hand he proceeded with the greatest caution in compiling from Latin authors and strove to render the plagiarism less obvious by arranging the excerpts in an order different from that of the original source. This is to be seen in the extensive borrowings from Cicero's Cato Maior (Epist. 52, 3, 5 sq., above pp. 192 sq.) and from Quintilian's Institutio oratoria (Epist. ro7, Chap. 4 and 9, pp. 197-201). The same was certainly the case also in his use of lost works such as Seneca's De matrimonio (see pp. 150 sqq.) and Cicero's Consolatio (pp. 202 sq.). In what goes before we have repeatedly had occasion to refer to Jerome's habit of making a show of his learning. Rufinus had a watchful eye upon this habit and jested at his >>throwingdust in the 1

) Jerome admits himself to have been charged with compiling from Origen, and Rufinus characterizes the commentaries on the Pauline epistles as translations from Origen (see above p. 162). 2 ) As to In Dan. see above pp. 224-226.


eyes of the readers in order to appear as a learned mam. In reply Jerome had to admit that he knew the Greek philosophers whom he was so fond of mentioning, not at first hand, but only from Cicero, Brutus and Seneca.1) As a rule, he suppresses the name of his real informant; if by exception it is mentioned, it is done in a rather confusing way. Talking of the opinions of the Stoics and the Peripatetics as to the perturbationes, Jerome adds: Quorum sententias et Tullius in Tusculanis disputationibus explicat (Adv. Pelag. praef. I, p. 693). I have drawn attention to the little et before Tullius 2 ) and likewise to the harmless et Porphyrius in the commentary In Danielem:3 ) could an unsuspicious reader here have any idea that the authors mentioned so cursorily were in reality Jerome's chief informants? Considering this unsatisfactory method of acknowledging a literary indebtedness, which is not without parallels in secular authors, 4) we cannot give credit to his statement in Epist. 60, 5, 2: Legimus Crantorem . .. ; Platonis, Diogenis, Clitomachi, Carneadis, Posidonii ad sedandos luctus opuscula percucurrimus; the chances are that he knew those authors solely from Cicero, whose Consolatio is hinted at in a subordinate clause: Crantorem, cuius volumen ad confovendum dolorem suum secutus est Cicero.5)

0. Jerome's attitude: principles and practice Jerome's attitude towards the cultural legacy left by the ancients cannot be defined in a plain and unequivocal formula. It is inconsequent, inconsistent, reflecting opposite tendencies, fluctuating like the currents of the tide. On the one hand it shows the same negative rigorousness which, since Paul, had distinguished the old church, and which found a sonorous expression in Tertullian: 6) Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis? quid Academiae et ecclesiae?quid haereticis et Christianis? This renuncia1) See above pp. 93 sq., 176 sq. B) P. 261; cf. Kunst, p. 209. 8) P. 225.

•) Cf. A. Gudeman

in Berliner philologische Wochenschrift, XXXIV

93 sq. (I owe this reference to Kunst, loc. cit.). 5 ) See above p. 202. _ 8)

Praescr. haer. 7.




tion is echoed in Jerome's equally famous antithesis: Quid facit cum psalterio Horatius? cum evangeliis J.r1aro?cum apostolo Cicero?1) It recurs more than thirty years later in this form: Quid Aristoteli et Paulo? Quid Platoni et Petro?2) On the other hand Jerome is an exponent of a new current, distinguished by a less prejudiced recognition of pagan thought and literature. It emerged in the Greek world at the end of the second century and had its centre in the Christian school at Alexandria, whose leaders, Clement and Origen, strove to assimilate and utilize the essence of Greek philosophy. 3 ) It found another expression in the apologists, above all in Minucius Felix and Lactantius, when they tried to win over people of education. After being officially recognized, the church could not maintain her cultural isolation. In proportion as she aimed at universality, she had to make room for culture and create a literature that was on a par with secular literature. That is what came about in the century after Constantine. However, this process of assimilation had its limits and was not accepted without difficulty. J erome's case is not unique. The inconsistency of his attitude recurs in almost every educated Christian writer. It proceeded from the feeling that classical culture and Christianity were fundamentally incompatible. In Jerome this feeling is reflected more distinctly than in anybody else, in the words he seemed to hear in the dream: Ciceronianus es, non Christianus; Cicero, the protagonist of Latin humanism, is opposed to Christ. 4) The conflict between the two worlds of thought gave birth, in Jerome's soul, to a dissonance which he never resolved. As a Christian he felt obliged 1)

Epist. 22, 29, 7. 2) Adv. Pelag. I. 14. 8 The Attitude of the Early Christian Latin Writers ) Cf. Gerard L. Ellspermann, toward Pagan Literature and Learning (The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies, LXXXI, Washington 1949), pp. 9 sqq. 4 ) A. D. Leeman, Hieronymus' droom. De betekenis van Cicero voor Christendom en humanisme (Leiden 1952), p. 3: »De zielestrijd in deze mens (sc. Hieronymus), waarin Cicero optreedt als de tegenspeler van Christus, kunnen wij zien als een paroxysme in de strijd tussen twee werelden, twee geesteshoudingen, die van de tijd der kerkvaders tot in onze dagen heeft voorgeduurd,>. Why and how Cicero played this part, is the subject of this excellent paper (an inaugural lecture at the University of Amsterdam). - Cf. also P. Antin (title above p. n6, n. 2), p. 55: ►>Dans la grande alternative, qui est proposee a Jerome, ciceronien ou chretien, Ciceron represente toute la litterature profane, tout l'humanisme greco-romaim.





to condemn pagan literature .. but he could not cease admiring and reading - what he condemned. Christianity triumphed over the pagan religions, but it had to yield to the pagan school-system, the last stronghold of classical culture. In the first four centuries the Christians did not dream of creating Christian schools; the pagan educational system, to which they were once, at best, indifferent, became in course of time indispensable to them. 1 ) 'l'he pagan schools of grammar and rhetoric exercised upon them an influence that can hardly be overrated. They affected, as Homes Dudden put it, »not merely the literary style of those who were bred in them, but also their feeling and habit of thought». 2) Jerome is perhaps the best example of this influence. No other! Christian writer, former teachers like Lactantius and Augustine not excepted, has so much to say about school education. Again and again he recalls his schooldays, first in Stridon, then in Rome. 3 ) In the grammar school, where he studied under the distinguished grammarian Donatus, he acquired the intimate knowledge of the Latin classics which we have endeavered to track and laid the foundations for his masterly use of the Latin language. He often discusses questions of grammatical correctness and scoffs at the shortcomings of his adversaries in this respect.~) Rhetoric attracted Jerome still more than grammar. 'l'he established curriculum of rhetoric, as it was taught in the schools for centuries, 1) Cf. Henri-Irenee

Marron, Histoire de l't!ducation dans l'antiquitt! (2e ed. Paris

1950), chap. IX, pp. 416 sqq; Ellspermann, pp. 1 sqq. 2) T. Homes Dudden, The Life and Times of St. Ambrose (Oxford 1935), I, p. 8. 8) E. g. Praef. lob {PL 28, u4r) = Adv. Rufin. II. 29 In Latino paene ab ipsis

incunabulis inter grammaticos et rhetores et philosophos detriti sumus. - On Jerome's education I refer to Griitzmacher, I, pp. u1-129; Cavallera, I, pp. 5-17. G")'i Cf. about Helvidius Virg. Mar. 1 Hominem rusticanum et vix primis quoque imbutum litteris; ib. 16 Praetermitto vitia sermonis quibus omnis liber tuus scatet; about Iovinianus Adv. Iovin. I. I Verum scriptorum tanta barbaries est et tantis vitiis spurcissimus sermo confusus, ut ... (see above p. 143; cf. also Adv. Pelag. prol. 2 p. 695 I ovinianus ... tam elinguis et sic sermonis putidi, ut magis misericordia dignus fuerit quam invidia); about Vigilantius Adv. Vigil. 4 Est quidem imperitus et verbis et scientia et sermone inconditus. Above all he criticizes Rufinus (see p. 174) and advises him to put himself to school again: Adv. Ritfin. I. 17 Vel si Latina tentaveris, (debes) ante audire grammaticum, ferulae manum $Ubtraherc et inter parvulos d01')voytewvartem dice1idi disc~re,




developed his versatile genius and gave him an intellectual training and a stylistic skill which are already conspicuous in his earliest writings. He often refers to the instructions of the rhetors 1) and dialecticians. 2) Above all he was influenced by the school declamations, controversiae, where the pupils had to act alternately as prosecutor and as defendant in fictitious legal cases far remote from real life. As an old man he still dreamed that he was standing before the rhetor; 3) he recurs now and then to his school declamations 4) and quotes many sentences from controversiae, both extant ones and lost ones. 5) Jerome's principles and practice in the matter of style are a counterpart to his attitude towards classical literature and may therefore claim our attention. The first writings are distinguished by a redundant style which smells of the rhetorical school. A typical example is the letter to Heliodorus, Epist. 14, of which Jerome, nearly twenty years later, judged as follows (Epist. 52, 1, 1): In illo opere pro aetate tune lusimus et calentibus adhuc rhetorum studiis atque doctrinis quaedam scholastico flare depinximus. In the same letter, one of the most refined in his correspondence, 6) he disclaims all pretentions to oratory: Ne a me quaeras pueriles declamationes, sententiarum flosculos, verborum lenocinia et per fines capitum singulorum acuta qttaedam breviterque conclusa, quae plattsus et clamores excitent attdientium (Chap. 4, 1). There is every reason not to take such utterances too literally; according to literary etiquette modesty was required of an author when talking 1

) E. g. about the genera dicendi: Epist. 49, r3, r (see above p. r58) Adv. Ru/in. I. 15 Docebo senex quod puer didici, multa esse genera dictionum; about the pane-

gyric: Epist. 60, 8, I Praecepta sunt rhetorum, ut maiores eius qui laudandus est et eorum altius gesta repetantur sicque ad ipsum per gradus sermo perveniat. 2 ) E. g. Epist. 50, I, 2 sq. (see above p. 159). 8 I. 30 Nunc cano et recalvo capite saepe mihi videor in somnis ) Adv. Ru/in. comatulus et sumpta toga ante rhetorem controversiolam declamare. Cumque experrectus fuero, gratulor me dicendi periculo liberatum. 4 Joh. 2 (PL 23, 372) Putes eum non expositionem fidei sed figuratam ) Adv. controversiam scribere. Quod iste nunc appetit, olim in scholis didicimus. Nostra adversum nos dimicat armatura. Adv. Pelag. I. 23 In ipsis controversiis in quibus quondam pueri lusimus (see about this interesting passage above p. 264). 5 from Seneca rhetor: see p. 297, from Pseudo-Quintilian's Decla) Quotations mationes maiores: pp. 296 sq., from anonymous controversiae: In Mich. 6, 5-7 p. 517, etc. 8 ) See p. 19r.


of himself.I) In hoe libello nulla erit rhetorici pompa sermonis, says Jerome in a letter to Eustochium which from a stylistic point of view is one of the most extravagant things he ever wrote. 2) In the pamphlet against Helvidius he begins by saying: Non campum rhetorici desideramus eloquii, but he gives the lie to this in practice and finally concedes: Rhetoricati sumus et in morem declamatorum paululum lusimus. 3 ) The examples could easily be multiplied. However, in Jerome and other Christian writers, there is another ground for the breach between theory and practice in the matter of style. 4) Christianity was founded by fishermen, 5) the Scriptures were translated in vulgar Latin, 6 ) simplicity was imposed by tradition. 7) In Jerome's opinion simplicity was required above all in sermons; he disapproved of preachers who indulged in rhetoric and provoked applause. 8) He also disclaims oratory in the commentaries: In Amos I refer to my book La correspondance de Ruricius (GoteborgsHogskolas ArsGiiteborg 1952), pp. 93 sqq. 2 ) See above p. 11 r. 8) See above p. 112 n. 1. 4 ) Cf. E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa, II, p. 529: oln der Theorie haben sie (die christlichen Autoren) von den ii.ltesten Zeiten bis tief in das Mittelalter hinein fast ausnahmslos den Standpunkt vertreten, dass man ganz schlicht schreiben miisse, in der Praxis haben sie das gerade Gegenteil befolgt». 5) This had been a commonplace since Odgen (cf. Norden, op. cit., II, p. 516 n. 1). Sulpicius Severns had luck with his antithesis: Meminerint (sc. lectores) salutem saeculo non ab oratoribus ... sed a piscatoribus praedicatam (Mart. praef. 1)

skrift, LVIII,

3 sq.). 6) Jerome's

attitude, as usual, is inconsistent. Compare e. g. Epist. 22, 30, 2 Si quando ... prophetam legere coepissem, sermo horrebat incultus and Epist. 53, 10, I N olo offendaris in scripturis sanctis simplicitate et quasi vilitate verborum, quae vel vitio interpretum vel de industria sic prolatae sunt, ut rusticam contionem facilius instruerent. 7) Tract. de ps. 78 (Anecdota Maredsolana, III: 2 p. 67, 14: Ego vero simpliciter rusticana simplicitate et ecclesiastica ita tibi respondebo: ita enim apostoli responderunt, sic sunt locuti, non verbis rhetoricis et diabolicis. 8) In Eccles. p. 467 Quemcumque in ecclesia videris declamatorem et cum quodam lenocinio ac venustate verborum excitare plausus, risus excutere, audientes in affectus laetitiae concitare, scito signum esse insipientiae tam eius qui loquitur quam eorum qui audiunt. Epist. 52, 8, 1 Dicente te in ecclesia non clamor populi, sed gemitus suscitetur • .. Nolo te declamatorem esse et rabulum garrulumque , . • In Ezech. 33, 23 sqq. p. 404. Tales sunt usque hodie multi in ecclesiis qui aiunt: 'Venite audiamus .Wum et illum, mira eloquentia praedicalionis suae verba volventem', plaususque commovent et voci/8rantur et iactant manus. lb. 34, 1 sqq. p. 412. -



lib. III praef. pp. 309-3ro In explanatione sanctarum scripturarum non verba composita et oratoriis floribus adornata, sed eruditio et simplicitas quaeritur veritatis.1) His interest was centred in exegetics, he wrote for those who were concerned with exegesis, not for persons of literary taste. 2) In spite of this he by no means despises oratory in the commentaries. 3) Tribuatque nobis Dominus, he writes in the commentary on Ezekiel (16, 13 p. 157), ut divinum sensum accipere mereamur atque sapientiam et id quad mente concipimus eloquii venustate prof erre. He bestowed care upon the style even in translations, as he confesses about his rendering of Theophilus' epistula paschalis (Epist. 98);4) it is so elaborated that it could serve as a basis for an analysis of Jerome's own style. But, of course, he is at his best in the letters and the polemical writings, where he gives free rein both to his personal feelings and to his rhetorical skill. As a letter-writer he can be compared only with Cicero - it suffices for his glory. By nature and education he was a controversialist, inferior to none in satirical verve and subtlety, alas also in recklessness. His polemical tone is low, to say the least. 0 ) In Jerome's own sermons (Anecdota Maredsolana, III: 2-3) are so accommodated to the simplicity of the brethren that the style is all but unrecognizable as his. 1 ) Cf. further In Sophon. 3, 14 sqq. p. 730 Haec scio molesta esse lectori, qui si animadverterit non me controversias et declamationes scribere nee in locis exsultare communibus sed commentarios et commentarios prophetarum, reprehendet potius sicubi rhetorum more ludere voluero quam arguet in tantis obscuritatibus ut dignum est immorantem. In 0s. 2, 16--17 p. 25 Neque enim Hebraeum prophetam edisserens oratoriis debeo declamatiunculis ludere et in narrationibus atque epilogis Asiatico more cantare. lb. IO, 13 p. n8 Neque enim rhetorum more sententias repetimus, verba construimus et audientes vel legentes in laudes nostras declamationibus suscitamus, sed quae obscura sunt, maxime alienae linguae hominibus explanare nitimur. In Ezech. lib. V praef. p. 164 In quo (sc. quinto volumine) nihil ex arte rhetorica, nihil ex compositione reperies et veniistate verborum. 2) In Is. lib. VIII praef. p. 328 Certe nos studiosis scribimus et sanctam scripturam scire cupientibus, nee fastidiosis et ad singula nauseantibus. 3 ) »Encore qu'il vise dans ses commentaires a un style depouille, simple et claire», says Dom P. Antill (op. cit., p. 158), •>ilne peut s'empecher parfois de parler en rheteur habile et magnifique». ') Epist, 97, 3, I In qua laborasse me fateor, ut verborum elegantiam pari inter• pretationis venustate servarem ... et eloquentiae eius fluenta non perderem. 6) Cf. pp. III, 143, 166, 173. Cavallera (I: 1, p. 12) cites de Tillemont's judgment: »Quiconque l'a eu pour adversaire a presque toujours ete le dernier des hommes,►•




this he adopted the bad habits of Roman lawyers, as he depicts them. 1 ) He took advantage of his superiority in rhetorical training and ridiculed without mercy the deficiencies of his adversaries. On the other hand he does not forget to praise the style of his friends. If he praises the beauty of secular literature - and nobody has done it more unreservedly - 2 ) he is no less eager to emphasize the merits of Christian writers; it is enough to call to mind his efforts to glorify their oratory in De viris illustribus. 3) In short, he lives as a writer in the atmosphere of the rhetorical school. 4) In judging his style we must take into consideration some important circumstances. Mostly he did not write in his own hand, but dictated to stenographers. He excuses himself (Epist. 74, 6, 2), si scatens oratio solito cursu non fluat. Non enim eodem lepore dictamus, quo scribimus, quia in altero saepe stilum vertimits, >>iterum quae digna legi sunt scripturi>>, in altero, quidquid in buccam venerit, celeri sermone dictamus. 5) He often 1) In Gal. 2, II-I3 p. 408 (PL 26, 365) Aliquoties cum adolescentulus Romae controversias declamarem et ad vera certamina fictis me litibus exercerem, currebam ad tribunalia iudicum et disertissimos oratorum tanta inter se videbam acerbitate contendere, ut omissis saepe negotiis in proprias contumelias verterentur et ioculari se invicem dente morderent. 2 ) In lonam 3, 6 sq. p. 420 (PL 25, u98) Quem non inebriavit eloquentia saecularis? Cuius non animos compositione verborum et disertitudinis suae fulgore perstrinxit? Even though he rejects the carmina poetarum, saecularis sapientia, rhetoricorum pompa verborum as being daemonitm cibus (Epist. 21, 13, 4), he cannot hold back Ws admiration: Haec sua omnes suavitate delectant et, dum aures versibus dulci modulatione currentibus capiunt, animam quoque penelrant et pectaris interna devinciunt. 3 ) See above p. qr. ') A few passages referring

to school education may be quoted. Epist. 60, 5, I Quid agimus, anima? qua nas vertimus? quid primum adsumimus? quid tacemus? Exciderunt tibi praecepta rhetorum et accupata luctu, oppressa lacrimis, praepedita singultibus dicendi ardinem non tenes ! Ubi illud ab infantia studium litterarum .. .? lb. 69, 6, r Reddamus, quad paulo ante pramisimus, et de schala rhetarum aquarum laudes et baptismi praedicemus. lb. rr7, 12, 1 Haec ad brevem lucubratiunci,lam celeri sermane dictavi ... quasi ad schalasticam materiam me exercens ... simulque ut astenderem obtrectataribus meis,' quad et ego passim quicquid venerit in buccam dicere (cf. Adv. Vigil. 3 p. 389). Adv. Ru/in. I. I Videtis nos intelligere prudentiam eius et praedicationis diasyrticae strophis in scholis saepe lusisse? 6) Cf. In Abd. 20--21 Neque enim ea lenitate (to write laevitate?) et compositione verborum dictamus ut scribimus. Epist. 21, 42 Saepe causatus sum excoli non posse sermonem, nisi quem prapria manus limaverit. ltaque ignosce dolentibus oculis, id est ignosce dictanti.



complains of being compelled to dictate in great haste and of not having time to correct or even to read through what he has dictated. 1) He emphasizes himself the difference inter subitam dictandi audaciam et elucubratam scribendi diligentiam. 2) The analyser of his style will go wrong if he does not keep this in view. 3 ) It does no credit to classical scholarship that we are still in want of up-to-date monographs on Jerome's style. Latin prose has stylists of a richer individuality and a greater artistic perfection, but no one since Cicero can compete with the easy fluency of Jerome's style. His register is wide, he possesses all modes and tempos, from plain instruction and discussion to sharp polemics, from edification and consolation to jokes and humour, from insinuation and irony to sentiment and pathos. Rufinus, who knew him better than anyone else, called him rhetor noster,4) and with that he hit the mark. Jerome, as I have said before, is ►>an antique rhetor with all the merits and faults, mental and literary, which rhetorical training implies: the brilliancy and fluency of style, the power of invention, the subtlety of mind, the ready wit and recklessness of a thorough controversialist, the tendency to superficial ostentation and self-conceited overbearingness>>.5) Among his teachers Jerome mentions after the grammatici and rhetores also the philosophi, but in reality his interest in philosophy was as slight as his knowledge of it was superficial. 6) In this respect 1) In Ezech. lib. VII praef. pp. 239-240 Ista quae notariorum stilo cudimus et ad quae emendanda spatium vix habemus. In Zach. lib. II praef. pp. 825-826. Quem (sc. librum) tanta celeritate dictamus, ut paene non sit emendandi spatium. Ib. lib. III praef. pp. 881-882 Urget me frater Sisinnius incompta et impolita transmit/ere, ut non dicam emendandi sed ne relegendi quidem habeam facultatem ... et quicquid sensu concipimus, composito non licet ornare sermone. In Is. lib. V praef. pp. 169-170 Dictamus haec, non scribimus, currente notariorum manu currit oratio. Ib. lib. XIII praef. p. 534 Hane praefationem tumultuario sermone dictavi, ut quae habentur in schedulis describantur et plena emendatio lectoris iudicio reservetur. 2) In Matth. prol. p. 5-6, 8 ) I refer to my remarks in Gnomon XV (1939), 88 sq. about two dissertations on Jerome's prose rhythm: P. C. Knook, De overgang van metrisch tot rythmisch proza bij Cyprianus en Hieronymus (thesis, Amsterdam 1932) and Sister Margaret Clare Herron, A Study of the Clausulae in the Writings of St. Jerome (Th11Catholic University of America Patristic Studies LI, thesis, Washington 1937). •) Apol. adv. Hier. I. ro (PL 21, 548). 6 ) P. 93. 6 ) See below pp. 337 sq. 377 sq.



he was a true Roman. The numerous references to Greek philosophers are, as we have pointed out several times, nothing but boasts of a learning he did not possess; they are due to Latin intermediaries, as he himself had to admit, 1) above all to Cicero.2) His attitude towards the philosophers is mostly unfavourable or hostile, partly on the ground that the heretics rely on them. 3) He is far from the broad-mindedness of Lactantius, who held that every single part of the truth is to be found in the philosophers, although none of them attained it in its entirety. 4 ) Only one passage, In Dan. 1, 2 (PL 25, 518),5 ) forms an exception; it is so remarkable that I almost feel tempted to suppose that Jerome took it over from one of the Greek Fathers whom he followed in this commentary. Elsewhere, if by chance he approves or makes use of philosophers and their ideas, he does so with a view to practical utility, as he says in a letter to Damasus (Epist. 21, 13, 6): Atqui et nos hoe facere solemus, quando philosophos legimus, quando in manus nostras libri veniunt sapientiae saecularis: si quid in eis utile repperimus, ad nostrum dogma convertimus, si quid vero superfluum, de idolis, de amore, de cura saecularium rerum, haec radimus. Thus the artes liberates in Jerome's opinion are useful or necessary. They are enumerated in Adv. Pelag. I. 21 (above p. 264) and in Epist. 53, 6, 1: Taceo de grammaticis, rhetoribus, philosophis, geometricis, dialecticis, musicis, astrologis, medicis, quorum scientia mortalibus vel utilissima est. He distinguishes between veritas quae non habet pietatem and scientia pietatis. 6 ) He admires the immense ceuvre of polyhistors such as Varro and Didymus and opposes it to the materialism of his 1)

Above p. 94 n. 1. Above p. 177. I) Cf. Arthur Stanley Pease, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, L (1919), 161 sq.; Ellspermann, pp. 155 sq. - Tertullian's verdict (Adv. Hermog. 8): Philosophi, patriarchae hereticorum, is quoted with approval in Epist. 133, 2, 1. 4 ) See above pp. 83 sq. •) In Dan. 1, 2 Si enim cunctos philosophorum revolvas libros, necesse est ut in eis reperias aliquam partem vasorum Dei, ut apud Platonem fabricatorem mundi Deum, ut apud Zenonem, Stoicorum principem, inferos et immortales animas et unum bonum, honestatem. 6) In Tit. 1, 2 sqq. (PL 26, 593) Est plane veritas quae non habet pietatem, si quis grammaticam artem noverit vel dialecticam, ut rationem recte loquendi habeat et inter falsa et vera diiudicet. Geometria quoque et arithmetica et musica habent in sua scientia veritatem, sed non est scientia ilia pietatis. 2)



time (Epist. 33, I, 2): Nos Epinienidis dormire somnum et studium, quad illi post{erunt in eritditione saecularium litterarum, in congregandis opibus ponere. Albeit his learning has turned out to be less extensive than his writings could give to understand, he was no doubt the most learned of all Latin Fathers, being called philosophus, rhetor, grammaticus, dialecticus, Hebraeus, Graecus, Latinus, trilinguis (Adv. Ru/in. III. 6). He was a hard worker, and he spoke from personal experience when he said: Litterae marsupium non sequuntur. Sudoris comites sunt et laboris, sociae ieiuniorum, non saturitatis, continentiae, non luxuriae (ib. I. 17). \Ve have looked at several aspects of Jerome's attitude towards secular culture and can now approach our main problem: his attitude towards Latin literature. From the very outset I have placed the tale of his dream (Epist. 22, 30) in the foreground, and I have explained how I read this document, which, agreeable to its importance, has become a bone of contention among scholars. 1 ) The difference of opinion is partly owing to the fact that it is decked in so much rhetoric that some scholars fail to see anything but rhetoric in it. 2) I think this is to underrate matters. Nor can I see that the parallels pointed out by de Labriolle 3) in pagan and Christian writings make against the authenticity of the dream; they only attest - if attestation is needed - that the belief in dreams was common in antiquity. As I take it, two points are decisive. First: in A. D. 400, when Rufinus charged him with perjury because of the oaths he had taken in the dream, Jerome did not deny having had it; 4 ) 1) For a survey of their opinions see Rudolf Eiswirth, Hieronymus' Stellung zur Literatur und Kunst (Klassisch-Philologische Studien, herausgegeben von Hans Herter und Wolfgang Schmid. Heft 16. Wiesbaden 1955), pp. ro sqq. 2 by A. Schone, who calls Jerome's relation »eines ) The extreme is represented der argerlichsten Musterstiicke verlogener Rhetorik, miihsam ausgesonnener Begeisterung und unechter Frommigkeit ►> (Die W eltchronik des Eusebius in ihrer Bearbeitung durch Hieronymus, Berlin, 1900, p. 240). E. Bickel, »Das asketische Ideal bei Ambrosius, Hieronymus und Augustin», Neue Jahrbucher fur das klassische Altertum, Geschichte und deutsche Literatur, XIX (1916), p. 456, agrees with Schone. 3 ) Pierre de Labriolle, »Le songe de St Jerome», Miscellanea Geronimiana (Roma 1920), pp. 227-235. 4 to this fact: »Les passages on il ) Cavallera (I: 2, p. 77) calls special attention s'en occupe dans la controverse avec Rufin ... confirment expressemcnt la realite du songe. Jerome ne pense pas a la nier,>.


he only declined to be bound for life by a promise given in a dream. Second: withont any external provocation, Jerome in the commentary on Galatians calls Paula and Eustochium to testify that for more than fifteen years neither Cicero nor Virgil nor any pagan writer whatsoever has come into his hands (In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486, see above p. 120). This is an evident allusion to the dream related in the letter to the same Eustochium (Epist. 22). For these reasons I take the dream seriously: it is a specimen of J erome's state .of mind, most interesting from a psychological point of view. Before going farther we have to clear up another point. The account of the dream is inserted in the context in the following way. Jerome warns the virgin not to indulge in a taste for literature or mince her words. Then, rather abruptly, he quotes Paul's antithesis: Quae enim communicatio luci ad tenebras? qui consensus Christo et Belial? (2 Cor. 6, 14-15) and subjoins an antithesis of his own: Quid facit cum psalterio Horatius?, etc. It would be preposterous to presume that he is here addressing himself only to Eustochium or to the Christian virgins. His words have a wider bearing, they aim at all Christians, including himself. Simul bibere non debemus calicem Christi et calicem daemoniorum. Secular literature is incompatible with Christianity; it is the calix daemoniorum. 1) In order to confirm this view he then relates what he experienced in his dream. The dream dates, as is generally accepted, 2 ) from the early years of Jerome's first stay in the East (about 374), and the account of it was written in 384 during his last stay in Rome. One year before, he had unfolded his views concerning the problem in question in a letter to Damasus (Epist. 21, 13, 4 sqq., quoted pp. mg). Expounding the parable of the prodigal son he takes the husks, siliquae, to be secular literature 3 ) which, in spite of its formal beauty, is devoid of saturitas veritatis and only leaves an empty sound. It can be used only if treated like the 1) In the preceding letter (Epist. 21, 13,4) it is called daemonum cibus. See above p. 120, n. 3. 3 ) This line of exegesis goes back to Origen and is followed by both Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine; owing to their influence it was transmitted to the Middle Ages, where it played an important role; see Bernhard Blumenkranz' interesting paper »Siliquae porcorum (cf. Luc, XV, r6). L'exegese medievale et les sciences profanes», Melanges d'histoire du moyen dge dedies a la memoire de Louis Halphen 2)


1951), pp. II-17.



captive woman in Deut. 2r, ro-r3. Even with this restriction, however, Jerome is in doubt because of Paul's warnings against idolatry (1 Car. 8, 9-rr): 1) Nonne tibi videtur sub aliis verbis dicere, ne legas philosophos, oratores, poetas, ne in eorum lectione requiescas? Psychologically this attitude is easy to understand. It is that of primitive Christianity; it is an integral part of the same tendency to isolation which gave rise to monasticism. The early letters bear witness to Jerome's ecstatic turn of mind during his first stay in the East. Hence the pangs of conscience reflected in the agony of the dream. The writings dating from his last stay in Rome are distinguished by a rigorousness and ascetic zeal which are a prelude to his final retirement from the world, and which also account in full for his severe principles as to secular literature. And his practice? If we are to believe Jerome, he did not read pagan authors for more than fifteen years. Is this true? In the first period his memory of what he learned at school is still fresh. The earliest letters, overflowing with sentiment, are enriched by reminiscences of secular authors of whom some (Turpilius, Lucilius and Florus) leave no traces in his later writings (seep. ro2). On the other hand literal quotations do not appear in writings intended for the public (with one exception) or in the letters written in Rome, 2) and the reminiscences are neither particularly frequent nor conspicuous. Thus I conclude that Jerome, at least towards the end of this period, put his principles into practice. In the second period matters are different. Whole lines from poetry, not allowed before in writings for the public (except in Vita Pauli), appear not infrequently in the great commentaries, viz.

In In In In In In

Gal.: Virgil r line, Terence I, quidam de neotericis Eph.: Virgil 6, Horace 2. Eccles: Virgil 10, Horace 3. Nah.: Virgil 2. Hab.: Virgil 2. Mich.: Terence 5, Horace r.


Every reader of my Chap. 3 (pp. rr5-14r) can be sure that quotations of less than one line and paraphrases of lines are far more numerous. 1) 1)

It may be noticed that the same passage is hinted at in Epist. Except in two letters to Marcella (see p. u3).








There is no doubt that Jerome has changed his attitude in practice. We must ask, then: Does he really quote from memory, as he says in the same passage where he denies having read the classics during the last fifteen years: 1 ) Et si quid forte inde, dum loquimur, obrepit, quasi antiqui per nebulam somnii recordamur? There is a great deal to be said against this. When Jerome wrote the first commentaries, his school-days, according to Cavallera's chronology, were at least twenty years back in the past. And would his memory of secular authors read at school still have been so fresh - in spite of his learning Greek and Hebrew, in spite of the manifold new interests and the literary activity that filled the many years between? There is very little likelihood of its being possible; I think psychologists will agree on this point. Now, special circumstances, too, call for our attention. The prefaces to Quaest. hebr. in gen. and In Mich. lib. II (quoted in full pp. 130 sqq. and 137 sq.) are composed, like a mosaic, of pieces put together both from the Bible and from many secular authors. The latter contains literal quotations from three of Terence's prologues, those to Andria, Eunuchus and Adelphoe, besides other borrowings from the prologue to Andria. It stands to reason that Jerome looked up these passages when he, like Terence, had to answer malevolent criticism. I.

2. Is it mere chance, I have asked before (p. 128), that three of the

four quotations from Horace occurring in In Eccles. belong to the first book of the Epistles, and, more expressly, to the first two epistles? 3. The only imitation of Seneca's tragedies that has been pointed out hitherto is to be found in this period (see p. n8).

4- If poetical lines, because of their metrical form, easily imprint JJ themselves on our mind, it is just the contrary with prose. It therefore gives cause for reflection that a passage in Cicero's Pro Marcello (§ IO, see p. 134) is quoted word for word in In Hab. 2,9 p. 617, and that the following paragraph likewise is quoted literally in a much later commentary (In Ezech. lib. III praef. p. 80). It is out of the question that Jerome could have retained in his memory the very wording of those passages for about 20 and 45 years respectively. Considering the 1)

In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486.

Giiteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





other cases mentioned here I do not doubt that he had Cicero's speech before him when he wrote. 1) 5. Not until this period did Jerome take a real interest in Cicero's philosophical works (see pp. 291 sq., 331, 377). 6. The same can be said in the case of Sallust. Nearly half of the quotations from him are to be found in the writings of this period; above all some prefaces are conspicuous for such adornment (see p. 294). Whether or not Jerome kept the oaths taken in the dream, is a bone of contention among scholars. Among those who believe his word, Eiswirth has recently taken matters to an extreme: he denies that J erome ever read secular classics after the dream, either during the period in question or subsequently. 2) Most scholars take up a sceptical attitude. This is to-day the communis opinio, as Eiswirth concedes (p. 13), quoting Rostagni's verdict: >>11 solenne giuramento - si sa - non fu mantenutm>.3) Only there are differences of opinion as to the date of Jerome's resuming his reading of the classics. According to Geffcken 4 ) and Kunst, 5 ) he did so a short time after the dream, according to Griitz1)

Cf. above p. 239. P. 18 »Als Gesamtergebnis lasst sich feststellen, dass ernstlich kein Beweis vorliegt, dass Hieronymus nach seinem Traumgelobnis bis zu den Pauluskommentaren die Klassiker sich neu vorgenommen, wenn er sie auch von Zeit zu Zeit zitiert, um seinen Stil zu hebem. Pp. 28 sq. >>Soscheint es mir im ganzen nicht moglich, aus den von Kunst angefiihrten oder sonst bekannten Beispielen zwingend zu beweisen, dass Hieronymus sein Traumversprechen gebrochen ... ; ja nicht einmal, dass er die Klassiker wieder gelesen habe ... Allerdings zitiert er die Klassiker in spateren Abschnitten seines Lebens wieder haufiger als unmittelbar nach dem Traum. Auch sind die Zitate bisweilen umfangreicher. Doch is nirgends mehr als sein gutes Gedachtnis zur Erklarung notwendig». Eiswirth, here as elsewhere, makes too great a demand upon a scholar's credulity: hundreds of passages quoted word for word over more than fifty years without any refreshing of the memory! Psychologists could teach hinI something about the capacity and function of memory. Eiswirth is preceded by Liibeck who says (p. 9): oProbabile est quae postea ex 'gentilibus' scriptoribus affert ea memoriae magis quam iteratae lectioni deberi». 3) A. Rostagni, Storia della Letteratura Latina, II (Torino, 1952), p. 664. 4) J. Geffcken, >>Antike Kulturkampfeo, Neue Jahrbucher fur das klassische Altertum, Geschichte und deutsche Literatur, XXIX (1912), p. 606 n. 1: »Hieronymus hat sich jedoch ziemlich schnell von seiner geistigen Beklemmung erholt». 6 ac perbrevi vetus stu) Op. cit., p. 176 »Hoe quidem promisso stare nequivit dium et consuetudo diuturna revixerunb>. 3)






macher,1) and Cavallera 2 ) he kept his promise for a long time. Pease is more precise: >>Inthe light, them, he says, ,>ofJerome' statements and practice it is likely that the vision had some effect for fifteen years or so, but after that he regarded it as in no way binding,>. I for my part agree in the main with Pease's opinion. Considering the arguments, both general and special, which I have brought forward, I think it is out of the question that Jerome at the time of the first I commentaries quoted from memory. I conclude that at this time there was a change in his attitude in two respects: he began both to read and J/ to quote the secular authors. Facts have a greater weight than words. The discrepancy between Jerome's words and actions appears distinctly in other passages of the commentary on Galatians. He declines to quote Varro and states the reason for it as follows: Nobis propositum est incircumcisos homines non introducere in templum Dei (In Gal. lib. II praef. pp. 425-426, see above p. 120). But in the same book he quotes illa sententia nobilis apud Romanos poetae (Ter. Andr. 68). In the preface to the third book he discusses principles of style in a way so contradictory that Eiswirth admits having the impression that there were two souls in his breast. 3) This is the heart of the matter. Asceti- ✓ ~· cism and culture were the two poles in Jerome' s life. As has been said before (p. 92), ,>henever succeeded in getting over the internal conflict or in reaching a stable equilibrium>>. Why did he change his attitude? I think we can answer this question/ by considering his situation. When he burst into literary activity, he had V:r for many years been silent before the public. His tongue was corroded by rust, as he says; 4 ) he had ruined his style, omnem sermonis elegantiam et Latini eloquii venustatem, by learning Hebrew, by desisting from reading the classics, by the necessity of dictating instead of writing. 5) >>I

Op. cit., I, p. 154 »Langere Zeit hat er dieses Geliibde auch gehaltem. Op. cit., I: 1, p. 31 »Il est incontestable toutefois qu'au moment meme et de longues annees encore, l'impression persista profonde et se traduisit par le renoncement absolu a toute lecture profane n'ayant pour but que le divertissement». 3 ) Op. cit., p. 15 »Liisst man den Prolog so auf sich wirken, dann hat man den Eindruck, dass Hieronymus zwei Seelen in seiner Brust hat», etc. 1)


4 ) Vita Malchi 1 p. 41 Ego qui diu tacui . .. prius exerceri cupio in parvo opere et veluti quandam rubiginem linguae abstergere. 5) In Gal. lib. III praef. pp. 485-486,



know what I have lost in the use of my language>>.1) No wonder if renewed acquaintance with the classics suggested itself to him as a remedy. Later he suspected Rufinus of being a reader of Cicero: Aut ego fallor aut tu Ciceronem occulte lectitas (Adv. Rufin. I. 30; see above p. 174); only so, he says ironically, could he account for the richness of his style (tanta verborum copia, sententiarum lumen, translationum varietas). Jerome speaks from personal experience. At the time of Galatians his own case was the same. The radical change of procedure is undisguised in the pamphlet against Iovinianus (A. D. 393) with which the third period begins. The introductory chapter (quoted pp. 143 sqq.) could as well have been written by a lettered pagan, some other chapters are entirely filled with pagan topics, others are a mosaic put together from Christian and pagan elements and quotations. And, finally, Jerome declares openly that he will allege exempla saecularis quoque litteraturae, ad quam et ipse (sc. Iovinianus) provocat (I. 4) and mentions as his sources Aristotle, Plutarch and Seneca (I. 49); moreover, a long quotation is passed off under the name of Theophrastus (I. 47). It is quite another matter that we cannot take it for granted that he really read and used precisely those authors, except Seneca (and perhaps Plutarch); there is every probability that he got his knowledge of Aristotle and Theophrastus through Porphyrius, the Neo-Platonic philosopher and enemy of Christianity, whom he plagiarizes unblushingly in II. 6-14, of course without mentioning him. 2 ) This reticence as to his real source is as misleading as the boastful reference to authors known only through intermediaries. Both procedures are well-known from other writings of the ten years 393-402. The long borrowings from Cicero's Cato maior in Epist. 52 (pp. 192 sq.) and from Quintilian in Epist. 107 (pp. 197 sqq.) are unacknowledged, and so are also the two quotations of Plin. Epist. II. 3, 8-9 in Epist. 53. 1)

lb. I refer to Bickel's Diatribe in Senecae philosophi fragmenta and to my account in Chap. 4, pp. 150 sqq. Eiswirth mentions Bickel's book once (p. 23: >>Bickelhat ja gliinzend nachgewiesen, dass er in adv. Iovinian u. a. auch Seneca benutzt hat», etc.), but he has not been much influenced by this research, the most penetrating that exists into Jerome's method of using sources. Nor does he pay regard to Adv. Iovin., where pagan topics and quotations take up a greater deal of space than in any other work of Jerome's. 2






Nobody who knows anything about literary technique can doubt that Jerome, when writing, had those authors before him. On the other hand, nobody will believe that he was familiar, as he says in Epist. 60, with Crantors, Plato's, Diogenes', Clitomachus', Carneades' and Posidonius' consolatory writings; the chances are that his knowledge of them was due to Cicero, whose Consolatio is hinted at in passing. 1) As to his habit of scattering about in his writings the names of Greek philosophers, he was bound to admit, in reply to Rufinus' mockery, that he derived his knowledge of them from Cicero, Brutus and Seneca. 2) 'There is a distinct increase in Cicero's influence in this period; in fact, everything goes to show that it was not until then that Jerome took a real interest in Cicero's philosophical writings. 3) The quotations from Virgil, too, increase considerably and reach their height in the last commentaries of the fourth period. 4) It is also a matter of importance that authors who have left no traces in earlier writings make their appearance: Pliny the Younger is quoted only in letters dating from A. D. 395 and 398, 5) Lucanus for the first time in a letter written in 394-395 and then not until the years 408-4r4. 6 ) As to 'Terence, his influence seems to undulate; it suggests that Jerome again and again resumed his reading of the comicus. 7) Now, what we must infer from our analysis of Jerome's writings, is in perfect harmony with facts of which Rufinus gives us a glimpse (Apol. adv. Hier. II. 8). Firstly, in Rufinus' convent on the Mount of Olives, his monks copied most of Cicero's dialogues on behalf of Jerome, and Rufinus often had the copies in his hands and corrected them, because Jerome paid a higher price for them than for other writings. Secondly, Rufinus himself got from Jerome a codex containing unus dialogus Ciceronis et idem ipse Graecus Platonis. Thirdly, a few years before A. D. 400 Jerome in his convent in Bethlehem performed the duties of a teacher of a grammar school (partes grammaticas exsecutus 1)

2) 3)


5) 8)


See See See See See See See

above p. 202. above pp. 94 n. above p. 322. above p. 280. p. 325. p. 284. pp. 273 sq.





sit) and explained Virgil, the comedians, the lyrics and the historians to boys (M aronem suum comicosque ac lyricos et historicos auctores traditis sibi ad discendum Dei timorem puerulis exponebat). It is true, we have only Rufinus' word for these data, but, as Jerome does not answer the indictment in his pamphlet against Rufinus, we can take it for granted that they are true. The alteration of Jerome's attitude, which we have endeavoured to / follow step by step, is reflected in Epist. 70 (written in 397). Against reproaches for quoting secular literature Jerome advances in his defence that Moses, the prophets, Solomon and Paul did the same. In comparison with Greek apologists, who answered the enemies of Christianity, Jerome, he says, will be found to be indoctissimus. A long succession of Greek Fathers is passed in review whose works are so filled with pagan philosophy that it is impossible to know, quid in illis primum admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi an scientiam scripturarum. The same is true of Latin ecclesiastical writers. Nowhere else has Jerome taken such a firm stand in defence of secular learning. There is the greatest distance conceivable between this attitude and that proclaimed fourteen years before in the letter to Damasus (Epist. 21), and it is thrown into strong relief by the different use made of Deut. 21, 10- 13 about the captive woman getting married to an Israelite. 1 ) At the same time, however, we get new evidence of Jerome's inconsistency. For he repeats substantially the statement made in the preface to Galatians: Invenies nos . .. imperitissimos et post tanti temporis otium vix quasi per somnium, q@d pueri didicimus, recordari (Epist. 70, 3, 2). He falls back upon the same line of defence in Adv. Ru/in. I. 30: Dixi me saeculares litteras deinceps non lecturum: de futuro sponsio est, non praeteritae memoriae abolitio. ►>Et quomodm>,inquies, >>tenes,quod tanto tempore non relegis?►> The answer is characteristic of Jerome's polemical method. First, he says, he will allege aliquid de veteribus libris and quotes a Virgilian line: 'Adeo in teneris consuescere multum' (Georg.II. 272). Then he begins to talk of his childhood - Quis nostrum non meminit infantiae suae? - of the first years at school and of the declamations before the rhetor. The short tale is coloured by remi:niscences of Cicero (Tusc. III. 31), Horace (Epist. II. 1, 70 sq.; ib. I. 2, 69 sq.) and Lucretius (cf. VI. 1074 sqq.). After mentioning his 1)

I refer to my discussion of it p.




study of dialectics (with a borrowing from Cicero, Tusc. I. 14) he proclaims solemnly: I urare possum me postquam egressus de schola sum, haec numquam omnino legisse. An inattentive reader can easily be deceived by this oath; in reality, it refers only to dialectics. Lastly he makes a counter-attack and supposes Rufinus to be a reader of Cicero because of his much boasted style. >>Thiswould be my answer►>, he continues, >>i£ I had made a promise when awake. Now, by an unprecedented shamelessness, he expostulates with me on a dream! Listen to the prophets: dreams are not to be trusted>>. Non tibi sufficiunt quae de vigilante confingis, nisi et somnia crimineris. Nobody, I think, will be swayed by such quibbling which only shows to what a state of embarrassment Jerome was brought by the indictment. He denies being bound by a dream; so far his practice is in harmony with his words. But when he gives us to understand that he still quotes from memory, he makes too great a call upon our credulity. In the fourth period there is nothing new to be seen in his attitude besides the fact that Cicero's and Virgil's influence increases and reaches its maximum. Writings dating from about the same time often differ considerably as to the use made of secular learning and literature. Generally speaking, the more the style is elaborated, the more frequent are the non-Christian elements, and vice versa. The one extreme is represented by the artless sermons which, with only a few exceptions, are devoid of classical elements, the other by the polemical pamphlets, the necrologies, the didactic and moralizing letters where frequent quotations of the classics, above all of Virgil, serve to enhance and adorn the style. This suggests also that the kind of literature to which a writing belongs plays an important part. Jerome likewise pays regard to the degree of education of those to whom he writes or dedicates a work, as we have seen in the case of Paulinus of Nola (pp. 185 sqq.) and of Pammachius (p. 224). But we are warned not to overstress this point by recalling the difference in classical quotations between In Isaiam and In Ezechielem both of which are dedicated to Eustochium. The inconsistency of Jerome's attitude easily conveys the impression that he yielded to strong prejudices in the Christian world which he did not dare to brave, and so far we could be, and in some measure



also are, entitled to talk of hypocrisy. But we do not do Jerome justice, I think, by laying too much stress upon this point of view. In his case, matters lie deeper. His inconsistency reflects the inner conflict of his soul. He was a Christian ascetic and felt strongly the incompatibility of this ideal and the humanism of pagan antiquity. But he was also a rhetor brought up in the atmosphere of the old cultural legacy. He felt attracted and repelled - at the same time. For a time the one feeling prevailed over the other, but he never reached a stable equilibrium. As a Christian he felt bound to reject pagan literature. But he did not cease admiring it and reading it - apart from a short interruption caused by the dream. To this reading he owes more than his incomparable style. If any Latin Father can be called a humanist, it is certainly Jerome.




Chap. 1. >>Illasnotissimas

quattuor animi perturbationes>>

I take as my starting-point a passage in Jerome's letter to Algasia (Ad Algasiam liber quaestionum undeeim), Epist. I2I, 8, I5: Prius quaerimus, quae sit ista eoneupiscentia, de qua lex dieit: 'Non eoneupisces' (Rom. 7, 7). Alii putant illud esse mandatum, quad in deealogoscriptum est: 'Non eoneupisees rem proximi tui' (Ex. 20, I7; Deut. 5, 2I). Nos autem per eoneupiseentiam omnes pertitrbationes animae signifieatas putamus, quibus maeremus et dolemus, timemus et eoneupiseimus. The last editor, Hilberg, here adopted the reading dolemus from three of his MSS (Caroliruhensis Augiensis 105, Guelferbytanus 4156 and Berolinensis lat. 18), whilst two MSS (Berolinensis lat. 17 and Vaticanus lat. 355+356) have gaudemus. I am at a loss to understand how Hilberg, in opposition to previous editors (e. g. Migne, PL 22, 1025), could reject gaudemus, which is obviously the true reading. 1 ) For Jerome refers to the common pagan conception of the four main passions, sorrow and joy, fear and desire, illas notissimas quattuor animi perturbationes, eupiditatem timorem, laetitiam tristitiam, as Augustine has it (Civ. dei XIV. 3). Just at the time when Jerome wrote his letter to Algasia (A. D. 407) this conception was often in his thoughts; frequent references are to be found in works written about this time. Let us first consider the commentary on Ioel (written in the autumn of 406), 1,4 (PL 25, 998): Quattuor esse perturbationes, quibus animarum sanitas subvertatur, omnes philosophorum seholae eonelamant. Duae praesentes sibique eontrariae, ditae futurae mutuo dissidentes. Praesentes a e grit u do et g au di um. Aegritudinem animi dieimus, alioquin eorporis non aegritudo sed aegrotatio nominatur. Aut igitur tristes sumus et maerore eonfieimur statusque nostrae mentis evertitur ... aut e eontrario gaudemus gestimusque laetitia et bona nostra moderanter f erre non possumus; iustique et fortis viri est nee adversis frangi nee prosperis sublevari sed in utroque esse moderatum. Diximus de perturbatione praesentium; dieamus et de futitrorum in quibus m e tit s aut s p e s est. Adversa 1)

Kunst (pp.


sq.) is of the same opinion.



timemus, prospera praestolamur, et quod aegritudo et gaudium operantur in praesenti, metus et spes f aciunt de futuro, dum aut adversa p!its quam decet timemus esse ventura aut prospera quae speramus in tantum nos faciunt exsultare, ut non teneamus modum, maxime in his quae incerta sunt, quia futi,ra sperantur potius quam tenentur. According to his usual practice Jerome, while referring to omnes philosophorum scholae, conceals the precise origin of his information; his main, and perhaps his only, source is Cicero's Tusculans, which he mentions in other similar passages.1) Cf. Tusc. IV. II (the Stoic classification of the passions): Partes perturbationum volunt ex d1wbus opinatis bonis nasci et ex duobus opinatis malis; ita esse quattuor, ex bonis libidinem et laetitiam, ut sit laetitia praesentium bonorum, libido futurorum, ex ma/is metum et aegritudinem nasci censent, metum futuris, aegritudinem praesentibus; quae enim venientia metz,untur, eadem adficiunt aegritudine instantia. In Tusc. III. 23 Cicero proudly points out the richness of the Latin language, which denotes perturbations of the mind and of the body by different words, aegritudo and aegrotatio respectively,2) while the Greeks used the one word na0or; indifferently of both; from this passage Jerome apparently derived his distinction: Aegritudinem animi dicimus, alioquin corporis non aegritudo sed aegrotatio nominatur. 3 ) In continuing his exposition of Joel I, 4 Jerome quotes a line of Virgil, Aen. VI. 733, which because of its pregnant brevity, comes as a perpetual refrain in the Church Fathers, whenever they deal with the four passious: Has perturbationes uno et nee pleno versiculo illustris poeta comprehendit: 'Hi metuunt cupiuntque' (hoe de futuro), 'dolent gaudentqite' (hoe de praesenti) 'neque auras' inquit 'respici11nt, clausi tenebris et carcere caeca'. Qui enim perturbationum tenebris obvolvuntur, clarum sapientiae lumen non valent intueri. 1) In Ezech. I, 7 (PL 25, 23) Quattuor perturbationes, de quibus ptenissime Cicero in Tusculanis disputat, gaudii, aegritudinis, cupidinis et timoris; Adv. Pelag. II. 6 (PL 23, 567) Quinque Tusculanarum quaestionum Ciceronis libri his disputationibus referti sunt (the passage is quoted in full below, p. 336). 2 23 Ut aegrotatio in corpore, sic aegritudo in animo nomen habet non ) Tusc. III. seiunctum a dolore. The passage is wrongly assigned in Thes. I. 953, 7r to Tuse. IV. 29. 3 'J usti et fortis viri est nee adversis frangi nee prosperis sublevari ) The sentence (In I oel I, 4) is a Stoic commonplace; cf. e. g. Sen. Dial. XII. 5, r Nee secunda sapientem evehunt nee adversa demi8mt.





After this exposition of the four passions according to the common doctrine of pagan philosophers, Jerome makes use of it in his interpretation of Joel 1, 4: Residuum eriecae comedit locusta et residuum locustae comedit bruchus et residuum bruchi comedit rubigo. A few lines will give a sufficient indication of his exegetical method: Cavendum est igitur ne aegritttdo quasi eruca nos comedat, ne locusta vastet in gaudio, hue illucque volitans et gestiente laetitia per diversa se iactans, ne bruchus, id est pavor et futurorum metus, radices sapentiae devoret, ne rubigo et desiderium futurorum res inutiles concupiscat et nos perferat in ruinam, etc. At the end of his exposition Jerome returns to the consideration of the doctrine itself: De his quattuor perturbationibus in principio quoque Amos, si vita comes fuerit, disseremus ... Quas nos 'perturbationes' interpretati sumus, Graeci na0'f/ appellant, quae si xaxoC~AWf;in 'passiones' vertamus, verbum magis quam sensum verbi expresserimus. From this passage one would imagine that Jerome himself had interpreted na0'f/ as 'perturbationes', working directly from a Greek original; in fact he slavishly follows Cicero, Tusc. III. 7: Haec (sc. perturbationes animi) ... Graeci na0'f/ appellant; ego poteram 'morbos', et id verbum esset e verbo, sed in consuetudinem nostram non caderet ... nos ... motus concitati animi recte, ut opinor, 'perturbationes' dixerimus. 1 ) When Jerome later in the autumn of 406 commented upon Amos (PL 25, 1039 sqq.), he did not apply the four passions to Amos 1, 3 sqq., as he had promised in the commentary on Joel. But he had already made use of this conception in his commentary on Zacharias, written before the two others in the autumn of 406, In Zach. 1, 18 sq. (PL 25, 1498): Possumus qitattuor cornua, quae regnaverunt contra populum Dei, et quattuor na0ri accipere, quae eruditi non verbum de verbo exprimentes :iGa:iGoC~AWf; 'passiones' sed 'perturbationes' interpretantur, aegritudinem animi et gaudium, duo praesentia, et duo futura, metum et cupiditatem, de quibus et illustris poeta significat: 'H inc metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque'.

Evidently Jerome here used the passages from Cicero I have quoted above, and he has acknowledged his indebtedness to him for the inter1) Cf. etiam Tusc. IV. ro Qitae Graeci nd.071vacant, nabis 'perturbatianes' appellari magis placet quam marbas; ib. IV. II Est igitur Zenanis haec definitio, ut 'perturbatio' sit, quad nd.0o,; ille dicit, etc.; ib. III. 13 De omni animi, ut ego Posui 'perturbatione', 'morbo' ut Graeci volunt, explicabo.



pretation of na0rJ by mentioning the eruditi, just as he refers to Virgil by the epithet illustris poeta. When commenting on Joel he evidently recollected what he had written before in the commentary on Zacharias, but at the same time he enlarged his exposition by new borrowings from Cicero. These two features call for special attention. On one hand Jerome's constant habit of paraphrasing himself partly accounts for the astonishing speed and extent of his literary activity. On the other hand we must conclude that his acquaintance with Cicero was kept alive by renewed and extensive reading. The first feature may be illustrated by a passage in the commentary on Ezekiel (written in 410), r, 7 (PL 25, 23), which is merely a paraphrase of the passage discussed in Comm. in Zach. 1): Audisse me memini quattuor perturbationes, de quibus plenissime Cicero in Tusculanis disputat, gaudii, aegritudinis, cupidinis et timoris, quorum duo praesentia, duo futura sunt, per quattuor significari animalia, de quibus et Virgilius breviter:

'Hine metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque.' Passing on to the second feature I have mentioned, I think it will suit our purpose to quote in full a passage in the letter to Ctesipho (dating from 4r4), and to point out in the footnotes the Ciceronian parallels. Jerome writes, Epist. r33, I, 2 sq.: Quae enim potest alia maior esse temeritas quam ... brevi sententia omnium hereticorum venena complecti, quae de philosophorum et maxime Pythagorae et Zenonis, principis Stoicoritm, Jonte manarunt? Illi enim, quae Graeci appellant :n:a0rJ,nos 'perturbationes' possumus dicere,2) aegritudinem videlicet et gaudium, spem et metum, quorum duo praesentia, duo futura sunt, 3) adserunt extirpari posse de mentibits et nullam fibram radicemque vitio1) The two passages correspond even in the respect that the author proceeds to discuss the four virtues, referring to Cicero's De officiis. See below p. 377 n. 3. 2 ) This sentence recalls Cic. Tusc. IV. 10: Quae Graeci mi.01'} vocant, nobis 'perturbationes' appellari magis placet quam 'morbos'. The pagan philosophers whom Jerome mentions are to be found in the same context of Cicero's: In his (sc. perexplicandis veterem illam eq1,idem Pythagorae . . . discriptionem turbationibus) sequar ... ; utamur tamen in his perturbationibus discribendis Stoicorum definitionibus et partitionibus ... Est igitur Zenonis haec definitio, ut, etc. 8 as rendered by Cicero in the same passage ) Jerome follows the Stoic definition of the Tusculans (IV. n) with which his previous exposition coincides (see above, p. 333 n. 1). Evidently Jerome, while dictating his letter, had the Tusculans lying open before him.





rum 1) in homine omnino residere meditatione et adsidua exercitatione virtutum. Adversum quos et Peripatetici, qui de Aristotelis fonte descendunt, fortissime disputant et Academici novi, quos Tullius sequitur,2 ) et eorum non dico res - quae nullae sunt - sed umbras et vota subvertunt. H oc est enim hominem ex homine tollere3 } et in corpore constitutum esse sine corpore et optare potius quam docere dicente apostolo: 'Miser ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius' (Rom. 7, 24)? Et quia epistularis brevitas non potest omnia conprehendere, strictim tibi vitanda describam. Unde et illud Vergilianum est: 'Hine metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque neque auras dispiciunt clausae tenebris et carcere caeco'. Quis enim potest aut non gestire gaudio aut maerore contrahi aut spe extolli aitt timore terreri? Quam ob rem et gravissimus poeta Flaccus scribit in satira: 'Nam vitiis nemo sine nascitur; optimus ille est, qui minimis urgetur' .4) 1)

In matter of phraseology and thought cf. Cic. Tusc. III. 13 (against the Academic conception of the passions): Nos autem audeamus non solum ramos amputare miseriarum, sed omnis radicum fibras evellere. Tamen aliquid relinquetur fortasse; ita sunt altae stirpes stultitiae; ib. IV. 57 Sunt enim omnia ista ex errorum orta radicibus, quae evellenda et extrahenda penitus (according to the Stoics), non circumcidenda nee amputanda sunt (according to the Peripatetics). 2 ) Here Jerome is mistaken. In the third and the fourth books of Tusculans Cicero, contrary to his usual practice, does not follow the Academics, but the Stoics; he not only adopts the Stoic definitions of the passions (IV. 24), but also the Stoic doctrine that they can and ought to be eradicated (cf. III. 13 quoted above footnote 1; III. 22 Sententiis tamen utendum eorum potissimum, qui maxime forti et, ut ita dicam, virili utuntur ratione atque sententia). In agreement with the Stoics, he disapproves of the views held by the Peripatetics, e. g. III. 22 Peripatetici . . . mediocritates vel perturbationum vel morborum animi mihi sane non probant; IV. 38 Quocirca mollis et enervata putanda est Peripateticorum ratio et oratio, qui perturbari animos necesse dicunt esse sed adhibent modum quendam, quem ultra progredi non oporteat; cf. further IV. 43. 55, etc. As to the Academics, he openly declares hiniself against the opinion of Crantor (III. 12 sq.) and Carneades (III. 59 sq.). 3 ) Cf. Cic. Off. III. 26: Quid cum eo disseras, qui omnino hominem ex homine tollat. This is the only reminiscence from Cicero that Hilberg and Liibeck (p. 150) have pointed out in the passage in question. 4 ) Hor. Sat. I. 3, 68 sq.



The Christian elements to be seen in this exposition are rather insignificant in comparison with the solid mass of pagan material garnered from Cicero, Virgil and Horace. Nevertheless, even if Jerome takes over most of his materials from Cicero, there is one respect in which he does not agree with him. Cicero, follov'.-ingthe Stoics, considers the passions as mental diseases and condemns them as unworthy of the wise man. Jerome on the other hand strongly disapproves of the Stoic conception and adopts instead the views of the Peripatetics 1) as being in harmony with the doctrine of the Scriptures. He states this explicitly in his dialogue against the Pelagians (written in 415), where after a foll discussion of the four 'perturbationes' he says, Adv. Pelag. II. 6 (PL 23, 566): Quibus ad perfectum carere iuxta Stoicos, Zenonem videlicet et Chrysippum, possibile est, iuxta Peripateticos autem et difficile et impossibile est, cui sententiae omnis scripturae sanctae consentit auctoritas. Unde et I osephus M achabaeorum script or historiae frangi et regi posse dixit perturbationes animi, non eradicari, et quinque Tusculanarum quaestionum Ciceronis libri his disputationibus ref erti sunt. Both in Epist. 133 and in Adv. Pelag., Jerome raises the question of the four passions while carrying on a controversy with the Pelagians and their doctrine of free will. The Stoic conception of the passions was based on the postulate of freedom of the will, a fact that Cicero emphasized, 2) and it was only natural if the Pelagians, as Jerome states, should have followed the Stoics on that very point. This would explain why Jerome again and again returned to the question in his diatribes against the Pelagians. On the other hand, his reasons for making use of it in his commentaries must seem to us most hazardous and far-fetched. ·whenever a group of four is mentioned in the Bible, Jerome without hesitation connects it with the pagan conception of the four passions. The four animals in Ezekiel 1, 5 sqq., each with four faces and four wings, are variously identified, as the occasion arises, with the four Gospels, with 1) Cf. e. g. Epist. 130, 13, 2 (written A. D. 414) Nos affectus et perturbationes moderari et regere possumus, amputare non possumus; ib. 79, 9, 2 (written in 400): Difficile est, quin potius impossibile perturbationum initiis carere quempiam,


quas significantius Graeci neona0ela, vocant, nos, ut verbum vertamus e verbo, 'antepassiones' possumus dicere. 2 ) Tusc. IV. 65 Miki quidem in tota ratione ea, quae pertinet ad animi perturbationem, una res videtur causam continere, omnis eas esse in nostra potestate, omnis iudicio susceptas, omnis voluntarias.






the four Platonic divisions of the soul, with the four elements, with the four seaseons, with the four passions,1) and with the four virtues etc.; likewise the four plagues in Joel I, 4 with the four passions, 2) the four horns in Zacharias I, r8 with the four peoples who enslaved the Jews or with the four passions. 3 ) Thus following the fancies of earlier exegetes or giving full play to his own, Jerome puts into the Bible text a conception originating from Greek philosophers and unfamiliar to the Prophets. By indulging in such unscrupulous interpretations 4) and in endless prolixity Jerome in his commentaries sometimes tries the patience of the reader severely. Jerome was a great admirer of Origen and perhaps did more than anyone else for the propagation of his works in the West. I think it is not unfair to apply to the follower what Labriolle says of the master: 5) >>Cebavardage exegetique, cette abondance fluide et intarissable, ou son talent s' est en partie gate>>. We may well ask ourselves why the four passions are mentioned by Jerome almost exclusively in his polemical and exegetical writings. 6 ) This may be connected with the fact that Jerome above all is a controversialist and an exegete. But it is also, I think, characteristic of his general attitude towards the classics. Apart from his sincere admiration for their literary qualities and his ambition to enrich his own works in matter and form by all kinds of imitations and borrowings, he shows a remarkable lack of interest in or esteem for pagan philosophers and their ideas. Jerome was a Christian from the very beginning, he never had to fight his way, like Augustine, through philosophy to Christian faith, and - to come to essentials - he did not possess the creative genius of Augustine, but was far more what the Germans call 'ein unphilosophischer Kopf'. He appropriated the conception of the four passions, but only to use it as a weapon in his polemics or as a means 1)

In Ezech. I, 7. In Joel I, 4. 3 ) In Zach. I, r8. 4) They often bring to my mind what Jerome says of some heresies, In Amos 3, 9 sq. (PL 25, rn68): Nonne hae insaniae sunt et multae insaniae, unoquoque fingente quad in animum eius inciderit? 5) Pierre de Labriolle, La reaction paienne, Paris r934, p. r r4. 6) There are of course exceptions, although not of great moment, e. g. Epist. 22, 27, 4 (A. D. 384): Mirum in modum laus, dum vitatur, adpetitur. Ceteris perturbationibus, quibus mens hominis gaudet, aegrescit, sperat et metuit, plures invenio extraneos; huic vitio pauci admodum sunt qui caruerint. 2)

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





of explanation in his exegesis; it did not come into his head to analyse it, to modify it or to make it usable for Christian ethics. The latter course was followed by Lactantius and Augustine. Lactantius devotes to the passions not less than four chapters in his main work, Divinae institutiones, VI. 14, 7-I7. As is to be expected from 'the Christian Cicero', he derives his definition from Cicero and follows him on the whole more closely than Jerome did. This will be shown most easily by placing some passages from the two texts side by side. Lact. Inst. div. VI. I4, 7: Stoici adfectus omnes ... ex homine tollunt, cupiditatem laetitiam metum maestitiam, quorum duo priora ex bonis sint aut futuris aut praesentibus, posteriora ex malis.

Cic. Tusc. IV. n: Partes ... perturbat-ionum ... esse quattuor, ex bonis libidinem et laetitiam, ut sit laetitia praesentium bonornm, libido, futurorum, ex malis metum et aegritudinem nasci censent (sc. Stoici), metum futteris, aegritudinem praesentibus.

ib. § 8 Haec quattuor morbos vacant non tam natura insitos quam prava opinione susceptos

III. 23 V oeant enim n&.0o~,id est morbum ... IV. 14 Sed omnes perturbationes iudicio censent fieri et opinione; cf. IV. 23 pravarum opinionum conturbatio.

et idcirco eos censent extirpari posse radicitus,

IV. 57 Sunt enim omnia i"sta ex errorum orta radicibus, quae evellenda et extrahenda radicitus.

si bonorum malorumque opinio falsa tollatur.

IV. 60 Cum doceas nee bonum illud esse, ex quo laetitia aut libido oriatur, nee malum, ex quo aut metus aut aegritudo. IV. 38 Perturbari animos necesse dicunt esse (sc. Peripatetici); § 43 Non modo natural is esse dieunt sed etiam tttiliter a natura datas; § 44 Ad summam utilitatem esse dicunt a natura datum.

VI. 15, 2 Peripatetici ergo rectius, qui haec omnia detrahi negant posse, quia nobiscum simul nata sint, et conantur ostendere quam providenter et quam necessario deus sive natura - sic enim dicunt - his nos armarit adfectibus:



quos tamen, quia vitiosi plerttmque fiunt, si nimii sint, posse ab homine adhibito modo salubriter temperari, ut tantum homini quantum naturae satis est relinquatur.



§ 39 (Peripatetici) adhibent modum quendam, quem ultra progredi non oporteat; ib. § 57 Aiunt nimia resecari oportere, naturalia relinqui.

After these preliminary remarks Lactantius enters upon a criticism of the views of the Stoics. The passions, he says, are constituent elements in human nature. 1) In eradicating the moral defects the Stoics at the same time abolish virtue. For if it is virtue to restrain wrath, carnal desires, covetousness, then a man who is without these passions is without virtue. Ubi ergo vitia non sunt, ne virtuti quidem locus est, sicut ne victoriae quidem, ubi adversarius nullus est. Ita fit ut bonum sine malo esse in hac vita non potest. Adfectus igitur quasi ubertas est naturalis animorum ... Deus itaqite cum hominem primum fingeret, mirabili providentia ingeneravit ei prius istas animi commotiones... posuitque materiam vitiorum in adfectibus, virtutis in vitiis (VI. 15, 7-9). Then Lactantius, still following Cicero, proceeds to discuss the modifications of Stoic theory which the Stoics (viz. Chrysippus) made by introducing the conception of evna0uai :2) Pro cupiditate substituunt voluntatem ... pro laetitia gaudium, pro metu cautionem. At in illo quarto inmutandi nominis eos ratio deficit. Itaque aegritudinem penitus, id est maestitiam doloremque animi, sustulerunt (VI. 15, IO sq.). 3) Lactantius finds fault with this distinction, 4 ) which in his opinion is merely 1) Cf. VI. 15, 1 Haec naturalia esse, non voluntaria; ib. § 3 Stoici ... rebus natura insitis castrare hominem quodammodo volunt; 17, 21 Adfectibus quibus omnis constat humanitas. 2 ) Three evn6.0etat correspond to three na.011:f3ovA1]0'tsto em0vµ{a, xaed to ~OOV'I],evJ,.6.{Jeiato ? 9) VI. 18, 2 N os ... quibus solis a deo veritas revelata et caelitus missa sapientia est. 3) Civ. dei IX. 4 Duae sunt sententiae philosophorum de his motibus, quae Graeci

n&.0TJ,nostri autem quidam, sicut Cicero, perturbationes, quidam affectiones vet affectus, quidam vero, sicut iste (sc. Apuleius), de Graeco expressius passiones vocant. Cf. also XIV. 7 Tristitia ... quam Cicero magis aegritudinem appellat, dolorem autem Vergilius, ubi ait: 'Dolen/ gaudentque' (Aen. VI. 733), sed ideo malui tristitiam dicere, quia aegritudo vel dolor usitatius in corporibus dicitur. ') lb. IX. 4 Stoicos Cicero in libris de finibus bonorum et malorum verbis magis quam rebus adversus Platonicos vel Peripateticos certare convincit. - lb. Videtur mihi etiam in hoe, ubi quaeritur utrum accidant sapienti passiones animi an ab eis



esteem for such disputes by quoting with approval Cicero's contemptuous words: V erbi controversia iam diu torquet Graeculos homines contentionis cupidiores quam veritatis.1) In order to show that there were no, or only insignificant, discrepancies between the Stoics and the Peripatetics as to the conception of the passions 2) Augustine tells an anecdote he found in Gellius (XIX. 1) about a Stoic philosopher who turned pale when he was in danger of being drowned at sea. While Augustine in the ninth book touches upon the Christian doctrine only in a few words, 3) he unfolds it fully in the fourteenth. He begins with a quotation from Virgil, XIV. 3: Quamvis Vergilius Platonicam videatur luculentis versibus explicare sententiam dicens (Aen. VI. 730-734):

'I gneus est ollis vigor et caelestis origo seminibus, quantum non noxia corpora tardant terrenique hebetant artus moribundaque membra', omnesque illas notissimas quattuor animi perturbationes, cupiditatem timorem, laetitiam tristitiam, quasi origines omnium peccatorum atque vitiorum volens intellegi ex corpore accidere subiungat et dicat: 'Hine metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque, nee auras suspiciunt clausae tenebris et carcere caeca': tamen aliter se habet /ides nostra. Augustine admired, as Jerome did before him, 4) the pregnant brevity of Virgil's line (Aen. VI. 733), ubi has quattuor perturbationes summa brevitate complexus est: 'Hine metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque (Civ. dei XIV. 8); in the chapters with which we are here concerned (XIV. 3-9) he quotes them literally four times and paraphrases them five times. 5 ) Thus the Virgilian line is the theme on which Augustine builds up his exposition. Augustine rejects the Platonic idea expressed by Virgil that the sit prorsus alienus, de verbis eos potius quam de rebus facere controversiam. Nam et ipsos (sc. Stoicos) nihil hinc aliud quam Platonicos et Peripateticos sentire existimo, quantum ad vim rerum adtinet, non ad vocabulorum sonum. 1 Civ. dei IX. 5. ) Cic. De or. I. 47 .-Aug. 2 4 Aut nihil aut paene nihil distal inter Stoicorum aliorumque ) Civ. dei IX. philosophorum opinionem de passionibus et perturbationibus animorum. 3 ) lb. IX. 5. ') In Joel r, 4, quoted above, p. 332. 6 Virgil in der Deutung Augustins, Stuttgart-Berlin, 1939, ) Cf. K. H. Schelkle, pp. 126 sqq. (Tubin{fer Beitriige zur A ltertumswissenschaft. XXXII. Heft).





passions, from which all sins and vices are derived, have their ongm in the body. For if that were the case, then the devil, who is without body, would be without vices. It is not the corruption of the body that makes the soul sinful, but the sinful soul that makes the body corrupt. 1) The nature of the body is good in itself; if we blame it for our sins, we wrong the Creator. Therefore, the Platonists are not right in imputing the four passions to the influence of the body upon the soul. It is man's will that makes the passions evil or inculpable, nay even laudable. Voluntas est quippe in omnibus; immo omnes nihil aliud quam voluntates sunt. Nam quid est cupiditas et laetitia nisi voluntas in eorum consensione quae volumus? Et quid est metus atque tristitia nisi voluntas in dissensione ab his quae nolumus (XIV. 6)? A man who is living in accordance with God's will must love the good and hate the evil. Recta itaque voluntas est bonus amor et voluntas perversa malus amor. From such arguments Augustine comes to the following conclusion, which at the same time is a new definition of the passions from a Christian point of view (XIV. 7): Amor ergo inhians habere quod amatur, cupiditas est, id autem habens eoque fruens laetitia; fugiens quad ei adversatur, timor est, idque si acciderit sentiens tristitia est. Proinde mala sunt ista, si malus amor est; bona si bonus. By quoting passages from the Scriptures, Augustine proves that three of the passions are good, viz. cupiditas, laetitia and timor. As to the fourth, tristitia, quam Cicero magis aegritudinem appellat, dolorem autem Vergilius (XIV. 7), he finds the answer more difficult. We may remember that according to the Stoic theory there are three evn6.0etat corresponding to the former passions, but none corresponding to the latter because sorrow is quite alien to the wise man. This fact was evidently the cause of Augustine's hesitation, for he proceeds immediately to give an account of the evn6.0etat, referring twice to Cicero and making use of his exposition. 2 ) Then he asks himself whether the 1)

Civ. dei XIV. 3 Nee caro corruptibilis animam peccatricem, sed anima peccatrix

fecit esse corruptibilem earnem. This is a good instance of µs1:a{Jo1,,~ and illustrates Augustine's rhetorical training and habit of thought. a) Civ. Dei XIV, 8; cf. Cic. Tusc. IV. 12-14 (above p. 339 n. 3). Augustine adopts Cicero's terminology with two exceptions: he has cupiditas instead of libido (like Lactantius) and tristitia instead of aegritudo (cf. XIV. 7, quoted above, p. 341 n. 3). Constantia, the word Cicero forged for eimxi0sta, appears only in Augustine (and Fav. Eul.; cf. Thes. IV. 507, 42 sq.); compare Cic. loc. cit. § r.j. Sic quattuor perturbationes sunt, tres constantiae, quoniam aegritudini nulla constantia opponitur,



Stoic distinction between velle and cupere, gaudere and laetari, cavere and metuere is consonant with the Scriptures, and furthermore with the usage as it appears in classical authors. 1) This is a regular examination from a philological point of view. Its finding is that the distinction in question is not supported by Latin usage. Proinde volunt cavent gaudent et boni et mali; atque ut eadem aliis verbis enuntiemus, cupiunt timent laetantur et boni et mali; sed illi bene, isti male, sicut hominibus seu recta seu perversa voluntas est. Even sorrow, tristitia, for which the Stoics had nothing correspondent that could affect the wise man, is to be found, especially among the Christians, in a good sense. Thus Augustine, returning to the Virgilian line, sets down the following sentence as applicable to Christians who live according to God's will: 'Metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque', 2) et quia rectus est amor eorum, istas omnes a/f ectiones rectas habent. M etuunt poenam aeternam, cupiunt vitam aeternam; dolent in re . .. gaudent in spe ... Item metuunt peccare, cupiunt perseverare, dolent in peccatis, gaudent in operibus bonis (XIV. 9). Even Christ, being a true man, was affected by sorrow and joy and desire, because these passions are human. But they belong solely to this life, not to the life beyond. In this way Augustine arrives at a conclusion from which he can render justice both to the Academics and to the Stoics. On one hand he agrees with the former in their criticism of the Stoic ana0c:ta. Si ana0cta ilia dicenda est, he says (XIV. 9), cum animum contingere omnino non potest ullus affectus, quis hunc stuporem non omnibus vitiis iudicet esse peiorem? It is interesting to compare his attitude with Cicero's. He quotes from Cicero 3) a statement of the Academic Crantor: Nam omnino 'non dolere', sicut quidam etiam apud saeculi huius litteratos sensit et dixit, 'non sine magna mercede contingit inmanitatis in animo, stuporis in corpore' (XIV. 9). and Aug. lac. cit.: Quas Graeci appellant dmaOsta,, Latine autem Cicero constantias nominavit; ib.: Et illas tres esse constantias, has autem quattuor perturbationes secundum Ciceronem. 1 that Augustine here mentions that some interpreters of ) It is interesting Matthew 7, 12 added one word, and that he goes back to the Greek text for information about the right wording. This is rather an exception. For Augustine, when discussing a passage in the Bible, seems mostly not be aware of the fact that his text is a translation. 2 the conscious allusion to Virgil! ) Remark 3) Tusc. III. r2.





But whereas Cicero finds this statement too weak,1) Augustine assents to it. On the other hand, he says, the idea of an6.0eiawas put forward by extremely pious and righteous men, and although to be rejected in this life, it is to be hoped for in eternal life. 2) I shall not enter on the attitude of other Western theologians towards the old philosophical conception we have traced in Lactantius, Jerome and Augustine. I shall confine myself to one case which testifies to the influence of Augustine's work. About 500 A. D. Iulianus Pomerius, abbot in Arles and a skilled rhetor, 3) wrote a treatise in three books De vita contemplativa (PL 59, 4n-520). In Book III, Chap. 31 (PL 59, 514-517), Iulianus Pomerius discusses the four passions in order to show that they are not to be considered moral defects, if their use originates in a good will. This is the position held by Augustine, whom Iulianus Pomerius usually follows;4 ) in this very chapter he even plagiarizes him with such a devotion that he contributes hardly anything of his own. Almost all the quotations from the Bible, the whole argumentation, the diatribe against the Stoics are to be found in Augustine in addition to two verbal quotations. 5 ) The same is true with regard to the quotations from pagan literature which enter into the exposition and which are all the more noticeable as neither Cicero nor Virgil nor any other pagan author is mentioned by Iulianus Pomerius except here. A passage in Cicero's In Catilinam (I. z, 4) is quoted in§ 4: Tullius orator amplis1 ) lb. Sed videamus, ne haec oratio sit hominum adsentantium nostrae inbecillitati et indulgentium mollitudini. 2 ) Civ. dei XIV. 9 Si autem dn&0na illa est, ubi nee metus ullus exterret nee angit dolor, aversanda est in hac vita ... ; in illa vero beata, quae sempiterna promittitur, plane speranda est. 3) One of his pupils was Caesarius who in 502 was elected bishop of Arles. 4 ) Vit. contempl. III. 31, 6 Sanctus Augustinus episcopus, acer ingenio, suavis quem in his libellis pro possibilitate eloquio, saecularis litteraturae peritus, etc .... secutus sum. 5) lb. III. 31, 6 (Augustinus) hanc quaestionem de qua agitur hoe modo determinat dicens: 'Hi motus, hi affectus de amore boni et de sancta caritate venientes si vitia vocanda sunt, sinamus ut ea quae vere vitia sunt virtutes vocentur. Sed cum rectam rationem sequantur istae affectiones, quando ut oporteat adhibentur, quis eas tune morbos et vitiosas passiones audeat dicere' (--- Aug. Civ. XIV. 22 p. 22, 12 sqq.)? lb. Post aliquanta idem doctor (sc. Augustinus) adiungit et dicit: 'Etiam cum rectas et secundum Deum habemus has affectiones, huius vitae sunt, non illius quam futuram speramus' (---Aug. 1. l. p. 23, 3 sqq.).


simus cupiditatem ponat in bono, ubi dicit: 'Cupio, patres conscripti, me esse clementem' (-Aug. Civ. XIV. 8 p. 18, 13 sqq.: Ait enim Cicero orator amplissimus: 'Cupio, patres conscripti, me esse clementem'. Quia id verbum in bono posuit, etc.). The statement of the Academic Crantor (see above p. 344) which Augustine quotes from Cicero is alleged in § 3. The Virgilian line, Aen. VI. 733, with which Augustine opens his exposition and which he in the sequel follows as a load-star is taken over from him in § 4: Vergilius gaudium vituperet dicens: 'H inc metuunt cupiuntque dolent gaudentque'. This line is followed, both in Augustine (XIV. 8 p. 19, 4) and in Iulianus Pomerius, by Aen. VI. 278, quoted openly by the former: Dixit etiam idem auctor: 'M ala mentis gaudia', hiddenly by the latter: Item cum in malum malae mentis gaudia et apud nos laetitia ponatur in bonum. Iulianus Pomerius is aware of the fact that the doctrine of the four passions originates from the philosophers. It is shown by another passage, III. 18, 1: Ipsius etiam animae quattuor esse affectiones, quibus vel ad bona utimur vel ad mala, et antiqui subtiliter invenerunt et eorum inventa probantes posteri susceperunt. Here antiqui aims at the philosophers, posteri at Christian writers like Augustine who took over their theory.

Chap. 2. The four virtues The notion of the four cardinal virtues is a subject that would lend itself to treatment, if a scholar wished to follow the vicissitudes of a philosophic idea from its birth in Periclean Athens through the thousand years until the beginning of the Middle Ages or even later. 1 ) The task I have taken upon myself is a more modest one, in conformity with the planning of this book. I am concerned only with the Latin Fathers, and my treatment of the subject is also limited in another way. How the notion of the four virtues was adopted and remodelled by the Fathers and what part it plays in Christian ethics, these questions fall chiefly within the province of the theologians and the historians of philosophy and are on the whole beyond my scope. My interest is centred in the transmission of the idea to the Fathers. The results to which I have come will contribute, I hope, to throw more light on one particular point: Cicero's importance as an intermediary between Greek philosophy and the Latin Fathers. Cicero's De officiis, written at the end of 44 B. C. is the middle link of a chain connecting the first manual of Christian ethics, Ambrose's De officiis ministrorum (about 386 A. D.), with the fundamental exposition of Stoic moral doctrine, Panaetius' neei xa01xovro~ (about 150 B. C.). It was an event of considerable importance that Cicero, otherwise an eclectic, should for once model himself on a Stoic. Unfortunately we cannot judge in detail how closely he attached himself to the original, but this much is certain that he took over from Panaetius most of the contents of Books I and II; in Book III he had to use other sources, as Panaetius' work was left unfinished, and from those 1) Claude W. Barlow in his excellent edition of Martini episcopi Bracarensis opera omnia (New Haven, 1950 = Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome, XII, p. 2.05) refers to H. Makowski, ~De quattuor virtutibus Augusti in clupeo aureo ei dato inscriptis•>, Eos, XXXVII (1936), 109-12.8, and Catharine Haines, The Four Greek Virtues from Socrates to Bonaventure (Master's thesis, Mount Holyoke College, 1941). The thesis in question seems to be inaccessible (unprinted?).


sources he also derived some views occurring in the first two books. What Cicero contributed of his own, was above all his wide experience of life and the exempla referring to Roman conditions and history. Cicero's attitude is repeated by A m bro s i us. Both of them addressed themselves to a definite person or group, Cicero to his son, Ambrose to his spiritual sons, his clergy, but in reality they wrote with a view to giving instructions of general application. Ambrose followed Cicero, as Cicero had followed Panaetius; only in the case of the former the extent of dependency can be established in the minutest particulars. Having Cicero as his intermediary, Ambrose made Panaetius' division and general discussion of the duties his own, provided that there was nothing in them that seemed to him to be irreconcilable with the Christian doctrine; in this respect he set rather wide limits as to what could be allowed. This procedure was in itself no novelty. Minucius Felix' Octavius is modelled on the lines of Cicero's De natura deorum. Lactantius is >>the Christian Cicero>>not only because of his style but also because of his indebtedness to the philosopher. Jerome owes most of his knowledge of pagan philosophy to Cicero. And Augustine, how much did he not draw from Cicero in his Cassiciacum dialogues! But all the same, Ambrose's case is different. He was a bishop, the most authoritative man in the Western Church, who took a pagan treatise as a model when writing a manual of Christian ethics for the clergy. 1 ) Because of that his work >>marksan epoch in the history of ethical thoughb>: 2) it outlines Christian ethics on the basis of Stoic moral doctrine and thus, in Thamin's words, >>scellel'alliance de deux civilisations et de deux 3 ) morales>>. The bond of union that joins Ambrose to Cicero and Cicero to Panaetius is the notion of the four cardinal virtues. It originates, as is well 1 ) Raymond Thamin, Saint Ambroise et la morale chretienne au IVe siecle. Elude comparee des traites •>Desdevoirs» de Ciceron et de saint A mbroise (These, Paris 1895), p. 202: •>Cen'est pas un apologiste amateur, comme Minucius Felix, ni un homme de lettres comme saint Jerome, ni un debutant comme Augustin a Cassiciacum, mais un eveque cette fois, a !'apogee de son talent et de son autorite, qui choisit un traite de Ciceron, non pour amuser de studieux loisirs, mais pour y trouver la matiere d'un enseignement►>. 2) Homes Dudden, II, p .. 502. 3 ) Op. cit., p. 203.




known, from Plato. 1} It was taken over by the Stoics, although it did not fit in well with their doctrine of the unity of virtue. 2) Panaetius made it the leading idea in his exposition of the duties, Cicero and Ambrose followed suit. In the following the relation between the first book of Ambrose's De officiis and the first book of Cicero's De officiis will be examined in detail from a philological point of view, which seems not to be uncalled for, as students of Ambrose have mostly paid attention to other aspects. I hope it will be seen that Ambrose depends on Cicero to a far greater extent than scholars have recorded. 3) As compared with Cicero's work that of Ambrose is marked by very loose composition owing partly to the fact that homilies are worked into the Ciceronian framework, partly to the extensive use made of Biblical exempla. After accumulating various themes and examples in a rather confused way Ambrose arrives finally at a definition of the principales virtutes (§ rr5) and excuses himself for not having mentioned them at the outset (§ rr6): Haec forsitan aliquis dicat primo loco poni oportuisse, quoniam ab his quattuor virtutibus nascuntur officiorum genera. 4 ) Sed hoe artis est, ut primo officium definiatur, 5) postea certa in genera dividatur. N os autem artem fugimus, exempla maiorum prop animus, quae neque obscuritatem ad/ erunt ad intelligendum neque ad tractandum versutias. This is written with regard to Cicero's systematical and E. Zeller, Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, II: 1 (3. Aufl. Leipzig 1875), pp. 748 sq. W. Jaeger, Paideia. Die Formung des griechischen Menschen, I (2. Aufl. Berlin und Leipzig 1936), pp. 149 sq. 2 ) Cicero takes the trouble to explain the discrepancy, Off. II. 35: Sed ne quis sit miratus cur, cum inter omnes philosophos constet a meque ipso saepe disputatum sit, qui unam haberet, omnes habere virtutes, nunc ita seiungam, quasi possit quisquam, qui non idem prudens sit, iustus esse, alia est illa, cum veritas ipsa limatur in disputatione, subtilitas, alia, cum ad opinionem communem omnis accommodatur oratio. Quam ob rem ut volgus ita nos hoe loco loquimur, ut alias fortes, alios viros bonos, alios prudentes esse dicamus. 3) I base my study on Migne's text, PL XVI (Paris 1880). Many of the parallels are listed in this edition and in the edition of De officiis by I. G. Krabinger (Tubingae 1857). I am indebted for much information to Thamin and Homes Dudden (Chap. XX, Vol. II, pp. 502-554) and Paul Ewald, Der Einfluss der stoisch-ciceronianischen Moral au/ die Darstellung der Ethik bei Ambrosius (Thesis, 1)

Leipzig 1881). 4 ) Cf. Cic. Off. I. 15 Quae quattuor quamquam inter se co/ligata atque implicata sunt, /amen ex singulis certa officiorum genera nascuntur. 6 ) Ib. I. 7 Placet igitur ... ante definire, quid sit officium.



theoretical treatise (ars): Ambrose prefers to place the patriarchs in the foreground and to display them as worthy of imitation. He paves the way to a discussion of the virtues by plagiarizing what Cicero says about the working of our minds: Ambr. Off. I. 98 Sunt autem gemini motus, hoe est, eogitationum et appetitus, alteri eogitationum, alteri appetitus ... Cogitationes verum exquirere et quasi emolere muneris habent; appetitus ad aliquid impellit agendum atque exeitat. ... Ita ergo informati simus, ut bonarum rerum subeat animum eogitatio, appetitus rationi obtemperet . ..

Cic. Off. I. r32 M otus autem animorum dupliees sunt, alteri eogitationis, alteri appetitus. Cogitatio in veroexquirendo maxi me versatur, appetitus inpellit ad agendum. Curandum est igitur, ut eogitatione ad res quam optimas utamur, appetitum rationi oboedientem praebeamus.

Let us now examine the analysis of each virtue by itself. I begin with P r u d e n c e. Ambrose defines it according to Cicero: § rr5 Prudentiam quae in veri investigatione versatur - Cic. I. 15 In perspieientia veri sollertiaque versatur (cf. ib. Ex ea parte ... in qua sapientiam et prudentiam ponimus, inest indagatio atque inventio veri), § rr8 Primi igitur nostri definierunt prudentiam in veri eonsistere eognitione - Cic. I. 18 In veri eognitione eonsistit. In spite of the literal agreement with Cicero's definition, in the last case Ambrose pretends to follow Christian authorities (nostri). The statement refers to the Christian persuasion, exemplified in the person of Abraham(§ rr7), that prudence consists in believing in the Lord. Making a digression Ambrose represents Abraham as embodying all the four virtues (§ rrg): Adverte hie omnes virtutes quattuor in uno faeto; the theme is developed, not only with regard to Abraham but also in praise of Jacob(§ 120) and Noah(§ l2I), in conformity with the rhetorical instructions as to the disposition of a panegyric. 1 ) The Ciceronian thread is resumed in § 122 with a paraphrase of Cicero's warning (I. r8 sq.) of two errors to which we are liable in the desire for knowledge, viz. over-hastiness of judgment and waste of 1


I refer to my exposition below pp. 378 sq.




time on unprofitable studies. Cicero adduces as instances of honourable branches of science, quae in veri investigatione versantur, astronomy, geometry, dialectics and knowledge of law; Ambrose disowns, characteristically enough, the first two subjects: Quid tam obscurum quam de astronomia et geometria tractare, quad probant (sc. philosophi), et profundi aeris spatia metiri, caelum quoque et mare numeris includere, relinquere causas salutis, errores quaerere? He has Moses' authority who, although versed in the wisdom of the Egyptians, held such things as folly; he characterizes this view by retorting in Cicero's own words (§ 123): Non hie incognita pro ineognitis habebat hisque temere adsentiebatur; quae duo in hoe maxime naturali atque honesto loco vitanda diseant, qui ... - Cic. I. 18 In hoe genere et naturali et honesto duo vitia vitanda sunt: unum, ne ineognita pro eognitis habeamus. Seeking for truth is a noble and native quality, indeed the first of all duties. 1 ) In this Ambrose agrees with Cicero whose chapter on Wisdom he paraphrases throughout. 2) But his view is different. Thirst for knowledge is taken by Cicero in a wide sense, whereas to Ambrose it means knowledge of God. Because of that a new purport steals in when Ambrose makes use of the Ciceronian passage Off. I. 107: Omnes participes sumus rationis praestantiaeque eius, qua antecellimus bestiis. Ambrose writes (§ 124): Nihil est enim quo magis homo ceteris animantibus praestet quam quad rationis est particeps, eausas rerum requirit. So far he imitates Cicero, but he puts in a new meaning by adding: generis sui auctorem investigandum putat, etc. 3) Scientific studies ought not to 1 ) Ambr. Off. I. r26 Primus igitur officii fons prudentia est. In my opinion primus has another meaning than in Cic. Off. I. rg Ac de primo quidem officii fonte diximus: it refers to the value of the virtue, not to the order in which it is treated by the author. 2) Cf. I. 125 Omnibus igitur hominibus inest secundum naturam humanam verum investigare, quae nos ad studium cognitionis et scientiae trahit et inquirendi infundit cupiditatem. In quo excellere universis pulchrum videtur ..,.. Cic. Off. I. 18 Primus ille (sc. locus) qui in veri cognitione consistit maxime naturam attingit humanam. Omnes enim trahimur et ducimur ad cognitionis et scientiae cupiditatem, in qua excellere pulchrum putamus. Ib. § r24 Duo haec, id est, et tempus et diligentiam ad considerationem rerum examinandi gratia conferre debemus ..,.. Cic. I. 18 Quad vitium effugere qui valet ... adhibebit ad considerandas res et tempus et diligentiam. 3 ) Thamin (p. 253) remarks quite rightly: »Cette phrase est caraderistique: le commencement en est d'un stoicien, et la fin d'un chretien. Tout ce que saint Ambroise a ecrit sur la science est dans le meme esprit».



carry us away from action, says Cicero;1) Ambrose adopts the view, applying it to a passage in the Bible,2) and writes (§ 125): Nam studia scientiae sine factis haud scio an etiam involvant magis. Before dealing with Justice Ambrose makes a digression and sets forth, in agreement with Cicero, that the virtues are connected with each other 3) and cannot exist without each other: § 126 Qui tamen fans (sc. prudentia) et in virtutes derivatur ceteras; neque enim potest iustitia sine prudentia esse (- Cic. Off. II. 35 quasi posset quisquam qui non idem prudens sit iustus esse; Fin. V. 66 Servari enim iustitia . .. nisi a sapiente non potest);4) ib. N eque iterum prudentia sine iustitia est (- Cic. Off. II. 34 Sine iustitia nihil valebit prudentia); § 129 Liquet igitur et has et reliquas cognatas sibi esse virtutes: siquidem et f ortitudo ... plena sit iustitiae (- Cic. Off. I. 62 about fortitudo: Si iustitia vacat ... , in vitio est; Fin. V. 66 Servari enim iustitia nisi a forti viro ... non potest); ib. Captare etiam temporum et locorum opportunitates prudentiae ac modestiae sit, et temperantia ipsa sine prudentia modum scire non possit (- Cic. Off. I. 142 Sic fit, ut modestia haec ... scientia sit opportunitatis idoneorum ad agendum temporum. 143. Sed potest eadem esse prudentiae definitio ... hoe autem loco de moderatione et temperantia et earum similibus virtutibus quaerimus. The line of thought we have followed is interrupted by some out-ofplace remarks on Justice. For the present we shall pass by § 127 (see below pp. 353 sq.) and dwell only upon§ 128. It is a mosaic composed of borrowings from Cicero as will be seen from the columns below. Ambr. I. 128 Omnibus quoque animantibus innascitur primum salutem tueri, cavere quae noceant, expetere quae prosint, ut pastum, ut latibula ...


Cic. Off. I. II Principio generi animantium omni est a natura tributum, ut se, vitam corpusque tueatur, declinet ea quae nocitura videantur omniaque quae sint ad vivendum necessaria anquirat et paret, ut pastum, ut latibula.

Off. I. 19 (Veri investigatio) cuius studio a rebus gerendis abduci contra officium est. Virtutis enim laus omnis in actione consistit. 2) Matth. 7, 21 Non omnis qui dicit mihi: 'Domine, Domine', intrabit in regnum caelorum, sed qui facit voluntatem patris mei. ') Cf. Cicero's general statement, Fin. V. 67 Nam cum ita copulatae conexaeque sint (sc. virtutes), ut omnes omnium participes sint nee alia ab alia possit separari, /amen proprium suum cuiusque munus est, etc. Off. II. 35 (quoted above p. 349 n. z. ') On the contrary Cic. Off. II. 34 Iustitia sine prudentia multum paterit.



Succedit quoque, ut omnium genera animantium congregabilia1) natura sint . .. Ut videmus boves armentis, equos gregibus et maxime pares paribus delectari . .. I am de procreandi studio et sobole vet etiam generantium amore quid loquar, in quo est forma iustitiae praecipua?



I. 157 (Apes) cum congregabilia1)

natura sint ... Cato Maior 7 Pares autem vetere proverbio cum paribus f acillime congregantur. Off. I. 54 Nam cum sit hoe natura commune animantium, ut habeant lubidinem procreandi, prima societas in ipso coniugio est, proxima in liberis . . . Quae propagatio et suboles origo est rerum publicarum. Sanguinis autem coniunctio et benevolentia devfncit homines et caritate.

Like Cicero, Ambrose gives much more space to the three practical virtues than to the theoretical one. In his general description of J us t i c e he follows Cicero closely: § 130 I ustitia igitur ad societatem generis humani et ad communitatem ref ertur. Societatis igitur ratio dividitur in duas partes, iustitiam et beneficentiam, quam eandem liberalitatem et benignitatem vacant.

Cic. Off. I. 20 De tribus autem reliquis latissime patet ea ratio qua societas hominum inter ipsos et vitae quasi communitas continetur, cuius partes duae: iustitia, in qua virtutis est splendor maximus, 2) ... et huic coniuncta beneficentia, quam eandem vel benignitatem vel liberalitatem appellari licet.

Thus Justice bears solely on human society and the intercourse of men with each other. Ambrose's adoption of this view is a token of his over-hasty readiness to make the Ciceronian framework his own. For in § 127 he expresses a different view which is more in conformity with 1 ) Congregabilis is an accidental coinage of Cicero's, (lac. cit.) occurring only four times in Latin literature (Thes. IV, p. 288, 9 sqq.). It was taken over once by Ambrose and twice by Favonius Eulogius who about A. D. 385 commented upon Cicero. 2 ) Cf. Ambr. Off. I. 136 Magnus itaqiee iustitiae splendor.

Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:





Christian conceptions: Justice bears not only on the relation of men to each other, but above all on the relation of men to God: Iustitiae autem pietas est prima in Deum, secunda in patriam, tertia in parentes, item in omnes. Cicero, on the contrary, leaves out the Divine and gives, in harmony with his definition of Justice, the first place to our native country, the second to our parents.1) However, Cicero too is guilty of self-contradiction. Illa autem sapientia, he says later (Off. I. I53), quam principem dixi, rerum est di v in a r u m et h u m an arum scientia, in qua continetur d e o r u m et h o mi n u m c o m m u n i t a s et so c i et as inter ipso s. Accordingly, he ranks the duties in a different way, Off. I. I6o: In ipsa autem communitate sunt gradus officiorum, ex quibus quid cuique praestet intellegi possit, ut prima diis immortalibus, secunda patriae, tertia parentibus, deinceps gradatim reliquis debeantur. This new graduation is taken over word for word by Ambrose (§ I27); his want of consequence is due to the fact that he imitates Cicero both in § I27 and in § IJO. Cicero's inconsistency is accounted for by the fact that in the last part of De Officiis I (from § I52) he no longer follows Panaetius, his previous guide, but a new source. As he (Ad Att. XVI. II, 4) mentions Posidonius among the authors consulted in writing the treatise and quotes him in this very part (I. I59), there is much in favour of Hirzel's opinion that the new conception of Justice in Off. I. I53 and I6o originates from Posidonius, who, in Hirzel's words, >>dieSittlichkeit und das hochste Gut des Menschen an die Religion, d. i. die Abhangigkeit von der Gottheit kniipfte>>.2) If such be the case, Ambrose turns out to be influenced by different tendences within Stoicism. In the sequel Ambrose differs from Cicero: the duties of Justice as defined by the philosophers 3) cannot be approved of from a Christian point of view: § IJI. Sed primum ipsum quod putant philosophi iustitiae munus apud nos excluditur. Dicunt enim illi eam primam esse iustitiae formam, ut nemini quis noceat nisi lacessitus iniuria, quad evangelii auctoritate vacuatur. V ult enim scriptura, ut sit in nobis spiritus Filii 1 ) Cic. Off. I. 57 Omnes omnium caritates patria una complexa est; I. 58 Sed si contentio quaedam et compai-atio fiat, quibus plurimum tribuendum sit offici, principes sint patria et parentes. 2) Rudolf Hirzel, Untersuchungen zu Cicero's philosophischen Schriften, II: 2

(Leipzig r88z), pp. 723 sq. 8} Cic. Off. I. 20 Sed iustitiae primum munus est, ut ne cui quis noceat nisi

lacessitus iniuria, deinde ut communibus pro communibus utatur, privatis ut suis.




hominis, qui venit conferre gratiam, non inferre iniuriam. r32. Deinde formam iust·itiae putaveritnt, ut quis communia, id est, publica pro publicis habeat, privata pro suis. Ne hoe quidem secundum natitram; natura enim omnia omnibus in commune profudit. Thus, in Ambrose's opinion, the first form of justice is: 'not to do harm to anyone', only that; he denies the right to revenge an injury and the right to own private property. Private property is said to be contrary both to the ordinance of God 1) and to the law of Nature: Natura igitur ius commune generavit, usurpatio ius fecit privatum. 2) In this connection Ambrose refers to the Stoics(§ r32): Quoin loco aiunt placuisse Stoicis, 'quae in terris gignanfar, omnia ad usus hominum creari; homines autem hominum causa esse generatos, ut ipsi inter se aliis alii prodesse possint'. This is a literal quotation of Cic. Off. I. 22 (placet Stoicis, quae in terris gignantur prodesse possint); by ascribing it to anonymous informants (aiunt) Ambrose in this case just as in so many others misleads his readers as to his real source. To this he adds a question: Unde hoe nisi de nostris scripturis dicendum adsumpserunt? The naive misconception, prevailing in many Christian writers, 3 ) that pagan philosophers derived their thoughts from the Old Testament had a firm believer in Ambrose; 4 ) because of that it was easy for him to make pagan thoughts his own, provided that they had a warrant in Biblical parallels. The description of Justice in a limited sense depends on Cicero only for a few leading ideas, 5 ) developed rather independently. The other I. 132 Sic enim Deus generari iussit omnia, ut pastus omnibus communis esset et terra foret omnium quaedam communis possessio. 2 ) Cf. Cic. Off. I. 2I Sunt autem privata nulla natura, sed aut vetere occupatione ... aut victoria ... aut lege, pactione, condicione, sorte. 3 ) E. g. Clement of Alexandria (cf. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten, pp. 254 sq.), Theodoretus (ib. p. 3I5), Tertullian, Augustine. 4) Ambr. Bon. mort. II, 5I Quis utique prior, Hesra an Platon? ..• Nostra sunt quae in philosophorum litteris praestant. Cf. Ewald, p. 18; Homes Dudden, I, pp. 15 sq. •) Injustice arises from avarice (§ 137, cf. Cic. Off. I. 24) and from love of power (§ 138, cf. ib. I. 26). Justice is due even to enemies (§ 139, cf. ib. I. 34). As to § 141: Denique etiam adversarios molli veteres appellatione nominabant, ut peregrinos vocarent; hastes enim antiquo ritu peregrini dicebantur, cf. Cic. Off. I. 37 Equidem etiam illud animadverto, quod, qui proprio nomine perduellis esset, is hostis vocaretur, lenitate verbi rei tristitiam mitigatam. Hostis enim apud maiores nostros 1)


kind of Justice, beneficentia, is divided (§ 130 and 143), in conformity with Cic. Off. I. 20 ( quoted above p. 353), into benevolentia and liberalitas which must complete each other (§ 143): Ex his igitur duobus constat beneficentia, ut sit perfecta. Non enim satis est bene velle, sed etiam bene facere; nee satis est iterum bene facere, nisi ex bona /ante, hoe est, bona voluntate proficiscatur. This is the part of Justice on which Ambrose lays most stress. Let us first examine how far he bases himself on Cicero. The following parallels hardly need any comment. Ambr. I. 144 Pulchrum est igitur bene velle et ea largiri consilio, ut prosis, non ut noceas. § 145 Non probatur largitas, si, quad alteri largitur, alteri quis extorqueat.

§ 147 N ec illa perfecta est liberalitas, si i act anti a e causa magis quam m i s e r i c o r d i a e largiaris. § 150 Est etiam illa probanda liberalitas, ut proximos seminis tui non despicias, si egere cognoscas. Melius est enim, ut ipse subuenias tuis. § 160 Pulchrum quoque est propensiorem eius habere rationem, qui tibi aut beneficium aliquod aut munus contulerit . . . Quid enim tam contra officium quam non reddere quad acceperis?

Cic. Off. I. 43 Videndum est igitur, ut ea liberalitate utamur, quae prosit amicis, noceat nemini. Ib. Sunt autem multi . .. qui eripiant aliis quad aliis largiantur .. Id autem tantum abest ab officio, ut nihil magis officio possit esse contrarium. I. 44 ... plerosque ut benefici videantur, f acere multa quae proficisci ab o s t e n t a t i o n e magis quam a v o l u n ta t e videantur. I. 58 Next to our native country and parents we must assist proximi, liberi totaque domus, quae spectat in nos solos neque aliud itllum potest habere perfugium. Cf. I. 50. I. 47 Sin erunt merita, ut non ineunda sed referenda sit gratia, maior quaedam cura adhibenda est; nullum enim officium referenda gratia magis necessarium est.

is dicebatur quem nunc peregrinum dicimus. Another passage, Cic. Off. I. 23, is quoted literally: (§ 142): Fundamentum est iustitiae /ides, but it is given a different sense: /ides to Cicero means 'good faith', to Ambrose religious faith: /ides enim omnium Christus.



Ib. N ec mensura pari sed uberiore reddendum arbitror ...

§ 161 Unde imitanda nobis est in hoe quoque natura terrarum, quae susceptum semen multiplicatiori solet numero reddere quam acceperit. Ib. Esto tamen, ut aliquis excusare possit, quad non dederit, quomodo excusare potest, quod non reddiderit? Non dare cuiquam vix licet, non reddere vero non licet. § 167 lumen de lumine accendere. Benevolentia itaque in his est omnibus ... tamquam lumen, quad etiam in aliis Zuceatnee illis desit, qui de suo lumine aliis lumen accenderint.

§ 169 Benevolentia a domesticis primum profecta personis, id est, a filiis, parentibus, fratribus, per coniunctionum gradus in civitatum pervenit ambitum ... § 171 Adiuvant etiam parium studia virtutum; siquidem benevolentia etiam morum f acit similitudinem. § 172 Nihil autem tam consociabile quam cum aequitate iustitia. § 173 Simul advertimus etiam correptiones in amicitia gratas esse.


3 57

I. 48 Quad si ea quae utenda acceperis maiore mensura, si modo possis, iubet reddere Hesiodus, quidnam beneficio provocati f acere debemus? lb. An imitari (sc. debemus) agros fertiles, qui multo plus eff erunt quam acceperunt?

Ib. Nam cum duo genera liberalitatis sint, unum dandi benefici, alterum reddendi, demus necne in nostra potestate est, non reddere viro bona non licet, modo id f acere possit sine iniuria. Off. I. 51 Omnium autem communia hominum videntur ea quae sunt generis eius quad ab Ennio positum in una re transf erri in multas potest: 'Homo qui erranti comiter monstrat viam, / quasi lumen de suo lumine accendat facit. / Nihilo minus ipsi lucet, cum illi accenderit'. I. 54 (quoted above p. 353).

I. 56 Et quamquam omnis virtus nos ad se allicit f acitq11eut eos diligamus in quibus ipsa inesse videatur, tamen iustitia et liberalitas id maxi me efficit. I. 58 ... interdum etiam obiurgationes in amicitiis vigent maxime.


§ 174 Non omnibus eadem semper officia debentur nee personarum semp er sed plerumque causarum et temporum praelationes sunt, ut vicinum quis interdum magis quam fratrem adiuverit.

I. 59 Ita non eidem erunt necessitudinum gradus qui temporum, suntque officia quae aliis magis quam aliis debeantur, ut vicinum citius adiuveris in fructibus percipiendis quam aut fratrem aut f amiliarem.

From what precedes it will be seen that Ambrose models his exposition on the lines of Cicero's and follows them step by step. But he takes a view quite different from that of Cicero. >>Theessence of justice, according to his view, is kindness, altruism, unselfish love►>, remarks Homes Dudden in his biography of Ambrose (II, p. 525); he concludes his penetrative analysis in the following way (ib., p. 527): >>Kindness, which is strictly only a part of justice, is so emphasized that it really takes the place of justice. Justice is no longer merely an exact and conscientious balancing of rights and duties; it is now caritas quae alias sibi praefert, non quaerens quae sua sunt.1) Justice, in short, is transfigured into altruism, charity. Although this supreme virtue of Christianity is not, under its own name, classed among the cardinal virtues, yet, under the name of justice, it receives full recognition». Charity being the Christian virtue par excellence,it is rather astonishing that Ambrose, beside it, lays so much stress on friendship. In antiquity, friendship was cultivated, not only among the Pythagoreans, as a cornerstone of human society and a blessing of life; from the rise of Christianity it had to yield to charity. In Ambrose, however, friendship reassumes its old place; 2) it is highly praised and recommended to his spiritual sons (Off. III. 131): Servate igitur, fili, initam cum fratribus amicitiam, qua nihil est in rebus humanis pulchrius. Solatium quippe vitae huius est, ut habeas cui pectus aperias titum, cum quo arcana participes, cui committas secretum pectoris tui, ut colloces tibi fidelem virum, qui in prosperis gratuletur tibi, in tristibus compatiatur, in persecutionibus adhortetur. The advice given to the clergy is but a paraphrase of Cic. Lael. 22: Quid dulcius quam habere, quicum omnia audeas sic loqui ut tecum! Qui esset tantus fructus in prosperis rebus, nisi haberes, qui i!Zis aeque ac tu 1) 2 )

Off. I. 127. Cf. Homes Dudden, II, pp. 532 sq.






ipse gauderet? Adversas vero ferre difficile esset sine eo, qui illas gravius etiam quam tu ferret. This is not at all a unique case. Ambrose recurs to Cicero's treatise on friendship even in his first book on the duties. Friendship originates from kindness: Off. I. 172. Nam cum amicitia ex benevolentiae f onte procedat, non dubitat pro amico gravia vitae sustinere pericula .- Cic. Lael. 50 benivolentiam, qui est amicitiae /ons a natura constitutus; cf. 24 si quando aliquod officium extitit amici in periculis aut adeundis aut communicandis. Kindness is praised in the same words as friendship is praised by Cicero: I. 167 Tolle ex itsu hominum benevolentiam: tamquam solem e mundo tuleris, sic erit .- Lael. 47 Solem enim e mundo tollere videntur, qui amicitiam e vita tollunt. Thus it comes quite naturally to Ambrose to quote from Cicero what Pythagoras asks for in friendship: I. 173 Benevolentia f acit, ut unus fiat ex p!itribus .Cic. Off. I. 56 efficiturque id quod Pythagoras vult in amicitia, ut unus fiat ex pluribus. Community of religion is in Cicero's opinion a firm bond of union.1) Ambrose, of course, emphasizes this point of view. 2) Likewise, he has first and foremost the charities of the Church in view when he gives detailed instructions about liberality. 3) The third virtue, Fortitude, stands high in the estimation of both Cicero (Off. I. 61 splendidissimum videri) and Ambrose (§ 175 velut celsior ceteris). The former pays regard above all to the soldier and the statesman, as being the foremost representatives of Roman society, but does not distinguish expressly between military and civil courage. The latter makes such a distinction (§ 175), but only to hold forth that the interest in military affairs is alien to the Christians. He does not forget, however, to remind us of Biblical martial heroes. 4) The statesman does not concern Ambrose more than the soldier. Nevertheless he takes up what Cicero says about the statesman, but he applies it to the Church: 1 ) Cic. Off. I. 55 Magnum est enim eadem habere monumenta maiorum, eisdem uti sacris, sepulchra habere communia. 2 ) Ambr. Off. I. 170 Augetur benevolentia coetu ecclesiae, fidei consortia, initiandi societate, percipiendae gratiae necessitudine, mysteriorum communione. 3 ) Cf. Homes Dudden, I, pp. u7 sq. 4 ) § 175, 195 sqq. Cf. § 195 Sed fortasse aliquos bel/ica defixos gloria tenet, ut putent sotam esse praeliarem fortitudinem (- Cic. Off. I. 74 Sed cum plerique arbitrentur res bellicas maiores esse quam urbanas, minuenda est haec opinio) et idea me ad haec deflexisse, quia illa nostris deforet. Quam fortis Jesus Nave, etc.



§ 183 Itaque considera, quemadmodum eos, qui ad o f f i c i a e c c l e s i a e a c c e d u n t, d e sp i c i e n t i a m r e r u m h u m an arum habere debere doc eat.

§ 185 Ea est etiam quae dicitur vacuitas animi ab angor i bus, ut neque in doloribus molliores simus neque in prosperis elatiores. Qiwd si hi, qui ad c a p e s s e n d a m r e m p u b l ic a m adhortantur aliquos, haec praecepta dant, quanta magis nos, qui ad officium ecclesiae vocamur, talia debemus agere, quae placeant Dea.

Cic. Off. I. 72 C a P e s sent ib u s autem r e m p u b l i c a m nihilo minus quam philosophis, haud scio an magis etiam, et magnificentia et d e s p i c i e nt i a adhibenda est r e r u m h um an arum ... ib. § 73 Quocirca non sine causa maiores motus animorum concitantur maiorque cura efficiendi rem publicam gerentibus quam quietis, qua magis eis magnitudo est animi adhibenda et v a c u it a s a b a n g o r i b u s.

Fortitude, says Cicero (Off. I. 79), animi efficitur, non corporis viribus. Ambrose adopts this view and connects it with another statement of Cicero's: § 178* Non igitur in viribus corporis et lacertis tantummodo fortitudinis gloria est sed magis in virtute animi, neque in inferenda, sed in depellenda iniuria lex virtutis est (- Cic. Off. I. 23 Sed iniustitiae genera duo sunt: unum eorum, qui inferunt, alterum eorum, qui ab eis quibus infertur, si possunt, non propulsant iniuriam). In Cicero's view, however, physical strength is useful and the body must by duly trained: ib. I. 79 Exercendum tamen corpus et ita afficiendum est, ut oboedire consilio rationique possit in exsequendis negotiis et labore tolerando. Ambrose advises the clergy to the contrary: § 183 Corporalis exercitatio nulli rei usui est, pietas autem ad omnia utilis. I list the other, rather numerous parallels without further comment. § 176 Est itaque fortitudo ... numquam incomitata virtus. Non enim se ipsam committit sibi; alioquin f ortitudo sine iustitia iniquitatis materia est.

Cic. Off. I. 62 (Fortitudo) si iustitia vacat pugnatque non pro salute communi sed pro suis commodis, in vitio est.





§ r8r ... in duobus generibus fortitudo spectatur animi. Primo, ut externa corporis pro minimis ha beat et quasi super/ lua despicienda magis quam expetenda ducat. Secundo, ut ea quae summa sunt ... usque ad eff ectum persequatur.

lb. I. 66 Omni no f ortis animus et magnus duabus rebus maxime cernitur, quarum una in rerum externarum despicientia ponitur ... Altera est res, ut . .. res geras magnas illas quidem et maxume ut-iles, sed vehementer arduas ...

§ r86 Sed quia in omnibus quae

lb. I. 73 Ad rem gerendam autem qui accedit caveat, ne id modo consideret, quam illa res honesta sit, sed etiam ut habeat efficiendi potestatem.

agimus non solum quid honestum sed etiam quid possibile sit qitaerimus, ne forte aggrediamur aliquid quod non possimus exsequi. U nde nos temp ore persecutionis de civitate in civitatem concedere, immo, ut verbo ipso utar, fugere vult Dominus, ne temere aliquis, dum martyrii desiderat gloriam, off erat se periculis . . . § r87 N ec rursus propter ignaviam cedere quis ac deserere /idem debet metu periculi.

lb. I. 83 Numquam omnino periculi fuga committendum est, ut inbelles timidique videamur, sed fugiendum illud etiam, ne off eramits nos periculis sine causa, quo esse nihil potest stultius.

§ r88 ... illud ingenii (sc. est), siquis potest vigore mentis praevidere quae futura sunt, et tamquam ante ocitlos locare, quid possit accidere et quid agere debeat, si ita acciderit, definire ... 189.

lb. I. 8r ... illud etiam ingenii magni est, praecipere cogitatione futura et aliquanto ante constituere, quid accidere possit in utramque partem et quid agendum sit, cum quid evenerit, nee committere, ut aliquando dicendum sit: 'Non putaram'.

Fortis ergo est viri ... obviare cogitatione provida rebus futuris, ne forte dicat postea: 'I deo ista incidi, quia non arbitrabar posse . ' evenire. § r91 Quid enim tam di/ ficile

quam dispicere tamquam ex arce aliqua sapientiae opes ... ?

lb. I. r7 ut . .. animi excellentia magnitudoque ... in his ipsis (sc. opibus utilitatibusque) despiciendis eluceat.


§ 192-193 Fortitude consists in subduing the passions, voluptates, avaritia, metus, iracundia. § 208 Prospiciendum etiam, ne adulantibus aperiamus aurem.

Cf. I. 68 sq.

lb. I. 91 ... cavendum est, ne assentatoribus pate/ aciamus auris neve adulari nos sinamus.

As a rule Ambrose gathers his exempla from the Bible, not from the history of antiquity, as Cicero does. For once, however, he inserts a Ciceronian example, which is to be found in Laelius: § 206 In /abulis ferunt tragicis excitatos theatri magnos esse plausus, cum se Pylades Orestem diceret, Orestes, ut erat, Orestem se esse asseveraret: ille ut pro Oreste necaretur, Orestes ne Pyladem pro se pateretur necari.

Cic. Lael. 24 Qui clamores tota cavea nuper in hospitis et amici mei M. Pacuvi nova /abitla! Cum ignorante rege, uter Orestes esset, Pylades Orestem se esse diceret, ut pro illo necaretur, Orestes autem, ita ut erat, Orestem se esse perseveraret.

The fourth virtue, T e m p e r a n c e, is called by different names, as Cicero states, Tusc. III. 16: Eam virtutem awcpeoavv'Y}vvacant, quam soleo equidem tum t e m p e r a n t i a m, tum m o d e r a t i o n e m appellare, nonnumquam etiam m o de s t i a m. This uncertainty in terminology 1) is reflected in Cicero's treatise on the duties; Off. I. 93 contains a description rather than a definition: Sequitur, ut de una reliqua parte honestatis dicendum sit, in qua v er e c u n di a et quasi quidam ornatus vitae, t e m p e r a n t i a et m o d e s t i a omnisque s e d a t i o p e r t u r b a t i o n u m animi et rerum m o d u s cernitur. Hoe loco continetur id, quad dici Latine decorum potest, Graece enim neenov dicitur. Huius vis ea est, ut ab honest o non queat separari. Ambrose (§ 209) follows Cicero's description: Restat, ut de quarta virtute dicamus, quae temper anti a ac modest i a vocatur, in qua maxime tranquil lit as an i mi, studium mansuetudinis, m o d e r a t i o n i s gratia, h o n e s t i cura, d e c o r i s consideratio 1 ) Because of this I do not agree with Holden (see his note on Off. I. 93) and Homes Dudden (II, pp. 528 sq.) who make a distinction between verew.ndia and modestia (temperantia): in their opinion the former means shrinking from giving offence to others, the latter is a matter of self-respect.


spectatur et quaeritur. 2IO. Ordo igitur quidam vitae nobis tenendus est, ut a v e r e c u n di a Prima quaedam fundamenta ducantur. Cicero bases his exposition on the leading idea of decorum, 'seemliness' or 'propriety' which, although not alien to the other virtues, is yet the essential part of Temperance. Ambrose adopts this view unreservedly and in close accordance with Cicero's wording: Ambr. § 218 We ought to observe verecundia, modestia and illud quad decorum dicitur, quad ita cum honesto iungitur, ut separari non queat. Siquidem et quad decet honestum est et quad honestum est decet, ut magis in sermone distinctio sit quam in virtute discretio. Differre enim ea inter se intellegi potest, explicari non potest. § 219 Et ut conemur aliquid eruere distinctionis, honestas velut bona valetudo est et quaedam salubritas corporis, decus autem tamquam venustas et pulchritudo. Sicut ergo pulchritudo super salubritatem ac valetudinem videtur excellere et tamen sine his esse non potest neque ullo separari modo ... sic honestas decorum illud in se continet, ut ab ea prof ectum videatitr et sine ea esse non possit. § 221 ..• decorum ... cuius divisio gemina est. Nam est decorum quasi generale, quad per universitatem funditur honestatis et quasi in toto spectatur corpore; est etiam speciale, quad in parte aliqua enitet.

Cic. Off. l. 93 Huius vis ea est, itt ab honesto non queat separari.

lb. 94 Nam et quad decet honestum est et quad honestum est decet. Qualis autem di/ f erentia sit honesti et decori, facilius intellegi quam explanari potest. lb. I. 95 Est enim quiddam, idque intellegitur in omni virtute, quad deceat, quad cogitatione magis a virtute potest quam re separari. Ut venustas et pulchritudo corporis secerni non potest a valetitdine, sic hoe, de quo loquimur, decorum totum illud quidem est cum virtute confusum, sed mente et cogitatione distinguitur.

lb. I. 96 Est autem eius (sc. decori) discriptio ditplex: nam et generate quoddam decorum intellegimus, quad in omni honestate versatur, et aliud huic subiectum, quad pertinet ad singulas partes honestatis.

These general points of view, however, are of little concern to Ambrose whose interest is focused not on the doctrinal system in itself,


but on the application of moral instructions to Christian life. As he is writing with a view to the clergy, the instructions to be found in the last part of the book (from § 232) are drawn exclusively from the Bible. It is just the contrary in the previous exposition (from§ 209): the moral advice and instructions given by the bishop are for the most part derived from Cicero, that is to say, from the Stoic philosophy of life and rules of conduct prevailing in pagan Rome. It is not for me to discuss here how far Christian moral law has been affected or changed by this infiltration of pagan maxims started by Ambrose. What I want to establish, here as in the preceding, is what elements he took over from his pagan model. I think it will be to the purpose to place the parallels side by side following their order in Ambrose; this will also serve to show how much his arrangement differs from Cicero's. Ambr. § 2n Seq·uatur conversationis electio, ut adiungamur probatissimis quibusque senioribus.

§ 212 Quaerendum etiam in omni actu, quid personis, quid temporibus conveniat atque aetatibus,

quid etiam singitlorum ingeniis sit accommodatum.

§ 214 Unusquisque igitur suum ingenium noverit ... N overit bona sua sed etiam vitia cognoscat aequalemque se iudicem sui praebeat.

Cic. 0//. I. 122 0//icia non eadem disparibus aetatibus tribuuntur aliaque sunt iuvenum, alia seniorum. . . Est igitur adulescentis, maiores natu vereri exque eis deligere optimos et probatissimos, quorum consilio atque auctoritate nitatur. Cf. II. 46. Ib. I. 125 lta /ere o//icia reperientur, cum quaeretur quid deceat et quid aptum sit personis, temporibus, aetatibus. Ib. I. 107 ... duabus quasi nos a natura indutos esse personis, quarum una ... , altera autem, quae proprie singulis est tributa; I. no Admodum autem tenenda sunt sua cuique . .. Sic enim est /aciendum, ut ... propriam nostram (sc. naturam) sequamur. Ib. I. rr4 Suum quisque igitur noscat ingenium acremque se et bonorum et vitiorum suorum iudicem praebeat.



§ 215 The bishop, in assigning the parts to the clergy, ought to consider every one's natural disposition and capacity: Haec omnia spectet sacerdos et, quid cuique congruat, id officii deputet.

lb. I. rr9 In qita deliberatione (sc. in choosing a course of life) ad suam cuiusque naturam consilium est omne revocandum.

§ 216 Amat enim unusquisque sequi vitam parentum. Denique plerique ad militiam f eruntur, quorum militaverunt patres.

lb. I. rr6 Quorum vero patres aut maiores aliqua gloria praestiterunt, ei student plerumque eodem in genere laudis excellere, ut ... Pauli filius Africanus in re militari.

§ 222

Simul illud adverte, quod et decorum est secimdum naturam vivere ... et turpe est, quod sit contra naturam.

lb. III. 13 ... quod summum bonum a Stoicis dicititr, 'convenienter naturae vivere'. Cf. Fin. V. 89 Bonum appello quicquid secundum naturam est, quad contra, malitm; ib. IV. 72.

§ 223 Similiter ergo et in fabrica humani corporis grata est uniuscuiusque membri portio sed plus in commune compositio membrorum apta delectat ...

lb. I. 98 Ut enim pulchritudo corporis apta compositione membrorum movet oculos et delectat ...

§ 224 Si quis igitur aequabilita-

ordinem quoque et constantiam dictorum atque operum moderationemque custodial, in eius vita decorum illud excellit et quasi in quodam speculo elucet.

lb. I. III Omnino si quicquam est decoritm, nihil est prof ecto magis quam aequabilitas cum universae vitae htm singularum actionum ... lb. I. 98 ... sic hoe decorum, quad elucet in vita, movet adprobationem ... ordine et constantia et moderatione dictorum omnium atque factorum.

§ 226 Non despiciat, quid unusquisque et maxime vir mus sentiat; hoe enim modo bonis def erre reverentiam.

lb. I. 99 Adhibenda est igitur quaedam reverentia adversus homines et optimi cuiusque et reliquorum. Nam neglegere, quid de

tem universae vitae et singularum actionum modos servet,

de se optidiscit Nam


negligere bonorum iudicia vel arrogantiae vcl dissolutionis est.

se quisque sentiat, non solum arrogantis est sed etiam omnino dissoluti.

Before dealing with the cardinal virtues Ambrose lays down as a fundamental truth that appetite should be obedient to reason (Off. I. 106): Sed primum illud quasi fundamentum est omnium itt appetitus rationi pareat. Nowhere else does his dependency on Cicero appear in where this doctrine is set forth in a stronger light than in I. 227-228 agreement with Cic. Off. I. 101-103. On close inspection Ambrose's exposition proves to be a mosaic composed of nothing but Ciceronian pieces. § 227 Sunt enim motus (sc. animi),

in quibus est appetitus ille, qui quasi quodam prorumpit impetu; dicitur, quad vi unde Graece oeµ~ quaaam se repente proripiat. Non mediocris in his vis quaedam animi atque naturae est. Quae tamen vis gemina est, una in appetitu, altera in ratione posita, quae appetitum refrenet et sibi obedientem praestet et ... edoceat, quid fieri, quid evitari oporteat . .. § 228 Solliciti enim debemus esse, ne quid temere aut incuriose geramus aut quidquam omnino, cuius probabilem non possimus rationem reddere. lb. Nam etsi vis quaedam naturae in omni appetitu sit, tamen idem appetitus rationi subiectus est lege naturae ipsius et obedit ei.

Cic. Off. I. roo about animi motus. Ib. § IOI ... in appetitu posita est, quae est oeµ~Graece, quae hominem hue et illuc rapit ... lb. Duplex est enim vis animorum atque natura : una pars in appetitu posita est (cf. above) ... altera, in ratione, quae docet et exp!anat, quid faciendum fugiendumqtte sit. Ita fit, ut ratio praesit, adpetitus obtemperet. Ib. Omnis autem actio vacare debet temeritate et neglegentia (cf. § 103 ut ne quid temere ac fortuito, inconsiderate neglegenterque agamus) nee vero agere quicquam, cuius non possit causam probabilem reddere. Cf. § 100 . . . animi motus ... qui item ad naturam accommodati sunt. § I02 rationi ... cui sunt subiecti lege naturae (sc. appetitus).



U nde boni speculatoris est ita praetendere animo, ut appetitus neque Pr a e cur rat rationem neque d e s e r a t . . . P e r t u r b a t i o tollit c o n s t a n t i a m, destitutio prodit i g n a v i a m, accusat p i g r i t i a m.

lb. Efficiendum autem est, ut appetitus rationi oboediant eamque neque p r a e c u r r a n t nee propter p i g r i t i a m aut i g n av i a m d e s e r a n t sintque tranquilli atque omni animi p e r t u rb a t i o n e careant, ex quo elitcebit omnis c o n s t a n t i a ...

Perturbata enim mente latius se ac longius fundit appetitus et .. . frenos rationis non suscipit .. .

lb. Nam qui appetitus longius evagantur et . . . non satis a ratione reti'nentur, ei sine dubio finem et modum transeunt.

Unde p!erumque non solum an i sed etiam inf lammatur v u l t u s vel i r ac u n di a vel l i b i di n e, pallescit t i m o r e, v o l u p t a t e se non capit et nimia gestit laetitia.

lb .... a quibus (sc. appetitibus) non modo a n i m i perturbantur sed etiam corpora. Licet o r a ipsa cernere i r a t o r u m aut eorum, qui aut l i b i d i n e aliqua aut m e t u commoti sunt aut v o l u pt a t e nimia gestiunt.

§ 229 Haec cum fiunt, abicitur illa naturalis quaedam censura gravitasque morum

Cf. § 103 . . . generati a natura sumus . . . ad severitatem potius et ad quaedam studia graviora atque maiora.

nee teneri potest illa, quae in rebus gerendis atque consiliis sola potest auctoritatem suam atque illud quad decet tenere, constantia.

I. 125 Nihil est autem quad tam deceat quam in omni re gerenda consilioque capiendo servare constantiam.

m u s exagitatur ...

Cicero's chapters on Temperance (Off. l § 93- 151) have left their mark not only on Ambrose's exposition of this virtue in§ 209-258 but also on the part of Book l which precedes the examination of the cardinal virtues. Decorum is given preference even in the Scriptures, says Ambrose 1) and goes on asking whether Panaetius and Aristotle were prior to David 1 ) Ambr. Off. I. 30 Decorum autem in nostris scripturis primo constitui loco (quad Graece :nee:nov dicitur), instniimur et docemur legentes: 'Te decet hymnus, Deus, in Sion' (Ps. 65, 2), etc. Cf. Cic. Off. I. 93 (quoted above p. 362).


(I. 31). Consequently, as this notion is sanctioned by the Scriptures, he feels at liberty to adopt without reserve Cicero's views and directions. The list of parallels as below needs no comment.

Ambr. Off. I. 65 ... de officiis aggrediamur dicere, quae nobis ab adulescentia spectanda sunt ... Est igitur bonorum adulescentium timorem Dei habere, deferre parentibus, honorem habere seiiioribus, castitatem tueri ... diligere ... verecundiam.

Cf. Cic. Off. I. 122 Est igitur adulescentis maiores natit vereri ... M axitme autem haec aetas a libidinibus arcenda est ... caveant intemperantiam, meminerint verecundiae.

I. 67 (Verecundia) non solum in f actis sed etiam in ipsis spectatur sermonibus.

I. 134 In primisque provideat, ne sermo vitium aliquod indicet inesse in moribus.

I. 71 Est etiam in ipso motu, gestit, incessu tenenda verecundia.

I. 126 ...

I. 73 Sunt enim qui sensim ambulando imitentur histrionicos gestus et quasi quaedam f ercula pomparum ...

I. 130 . . . histrionum non nulli gestus ineptiis non vacant ... I. 131 Cavendum autem est, ne aut tarditatibits utamur in ingressu molliori6us, ut pomparum f erculis similes esse videamur, aut in f estinationibus suscipiamus nimias celeritates, quae cum fiunt anhelitus moventur, vultus mutantur, ora torqttantur.

I. 74 Nee cursim ambulare honestum arbitror ... Nam plerumque f estinantes anhelos videmus torquere ora . .. I. 76 . . . cavendum est, ne quid turpe ore exeat . . . Non enim cibus coinquinat, sed ... verborum obscenitas. I. 77 ... ipsa natura ... per/ ecte quidem omnes partes nostri corporis explicavit ... sed tamen eas, quae decorae ad aspectum f orent ... obvias atque apertas reliquit; eas vero, in quibus esset naturalis

decorum illud in omnibus factis, dictis, in corporis denique motu et statu cernitur.

Cf. I. 127 sq. about obscenitas.


natura ipsa ... formam nostram reliquamque figuram, in qua esset species honesta, eam posuit in promptu, I. 126 ...

quae partes autem corporis ad



obsequium necessitatis ... in ipso ... abscondit corpore.

I. 78 ... modestia hominitm quam a modo scientiae, quid deceret, appellatam arbitror ...

I. 79 Ex quo mos vetus et in urbe Roma et in plerisque civitatibus fuit, ut filii puberes cum parentibus vel generi cum soceris non lavarent. I. 81 Quae cum sit omnibus aetatibus, personis, temporibus et locis apta ... I. 82 Unde Tullius . .. idque (sc. decus) positum dicit in formositate,1) ordine, ornatu ad actionem apto, quae difficile ait loquendo explicari posse et idea satis esse intellegi. I. 83 ... non sit affectatus decor corporis sed naturalis, simplex, neglectus magis quam expetitus, non pretiosis et albentibus adiutus vestimentis, sed communibus ...

I. 98 Sunt autem gemini motus, hoe est cogitationum et appetitus, alteri c o g i t a t i o n u m, alteri appetitus ... Cogitationes verum exquirere et



naturae necessitatem datae aspectum essent deformem habiturae atque f oedum, eas contexit atque abdidit. I. 142 H aec autem scientia continentur ea, quam Graeci eirra;lav nominant, non hanc, quam interpretamur 'modestiam', quo in verbo modus' inest ... I. 129 Nostro quidem more cum parentibus puberes filii, cum soceris generi non lavantur.

I. 125 ... cum quaeretur, quid deceat et quid aptum sit personis, temporibus, aetatibus. I. 126 ... decorum illud ... positum est in tribus rebus, formositate, ordine, ornatit ad actionem apto, difficilibus ad eloquendum - sed sati's erit intellegi ... Cf. I. 130 Adhibenda praeterea munditia est non odiosa neque exquisita nimis, tantum quae fugiat agrestem et inhumanam neglegentiam. Eadem ratio est habenda vestitus, in quo, sicut in plerisque rebus, mediocritas optima est. I. 132 M otus autem animorum duplices sunt, alteri cog it at ion is, alteri a pp e tit us.

Cogitatio in vero exquirendo max-

1) Ambrose raises opposition, I. 83: Formositatem autem cur posuerit, non satis intelligo, quamvis ille etiam vires corporis laudet. N os certe in pulchritudine corporis locum virtutis non ponimus, gratiam tamen non excludimus, etc. Goteb. Univ. Arsskr.






quasi emolere muneris habent, appetitus ad aliquid impellit agendum ... Ita ergo informati simus, ut bonarum rer11msubeat animum cogitatio, appetitus rationi obtemperet. I. 99 about two kinds of speech: sermo in duo dividitur, in colloquium familiare et in tractatum disceptationemque fidei atque iustitiae ...

Et sicut in omni actu vitae id cavere debemus, ne rationem nimius animi motus excludat . .. , ita etiam in sermone f ormulam eam tenere convenit, ne aut ira excitetur . . . aut cupiditatis nostrae aut ignaviae aliqua exprimamus indicia. I. roo H abeat caput eius (sc. sermonis) rationem et finis modum.

102 M ulta praeterea de ratione dicendi dant praecepta saeculares viri, quae nobis praetereunda arbitror, ut de iocandi disciplina. I. 105 De ratione dicendi satis dictum puto, nunc de actione vitae, quid congruat, consideremus. Tria autem in hoe genere spectanda cernimus: unum, ut rationi appetitus non reluctetur ... Deinde, ne maiore studio, quam res ipsa est,


ime versatur, appetitus inpellit ad agenditm. Curandum est igitur, ut cogitatione ad res quam optimas utamur, appetitum rationi oboedientem praebeamus. lb. Et quoniam magna vis orationis est eaque duplex, altera contentionis, altera sermonis, contentio disceptationibus tribuatur iudiciorum, contionum, senatus; sermo in circulis, disputationibus, congressionibus f amiliarium versetur ... I. 136 Sed quo modo in omni vita rectissime praecipitur, ut perturbationes fugiamus, id est motus animi nimios rationi non obtemperantes, sic eius modi motibus sermo debet vacare, ne aut ira existat aut cupiditas aliqua aut pigritia aut ignavia ... appareat. I. 135 A nimadvertendum est etiam, quatenus sermo delectationem habeat, et ut incipiendi ratio f uerit, ita sit desinendi modus. I. 132-135.

I. 134. I. 141 In omni autem actione sus-

cipienda tria sunt tenenda; primum ut appetitus rationi pareat deinde ut animadvertatur, quanta illa res sit, quam efficere velimus, ut neve maior neve minor cura et opera suscipiatur, quam



quae suscipitur, vel minore ... suscepisse ... videamur. Tertium de moderatione studiorum operumque nostrorum ... I. ro6 Sequitur de ordine rerum et de opportunitate temporum.




causa postulet. Tertium est, ut caveamus, ut illa quae pertinent ad liberalem speciem et dignitatem, moderata sint. I. 142 Deinceps de ordine rerum et de opportunitate temporum dicendum est.

Temperance based on decorum stands foremost, it takes Ambrose's attention so much that in a way it is made the main theme of the treatise, being discussed in two different parts of it. In the general conception of decorum as well as in the practical directions Ambrose follows Cicero' s lead more closely than he does in other cases. As Homes Dudden states, he emphasizes, in conformity with Cicero, the aesthetic aspect of virtue. 1) I should like to lay still stronger stress upon this point of view. Cicero measures decorum by the standards of the upper class in Rome. It came naturally to the bishop to embrace the same views, as he by birth and by his earlier civil service career belonged to this very class and had had the same conventional upbringing. The directions, for instance, as to gait are of little concern for the morals of the clergy, but all the more characteristic of the sensibility of a gentleman to outward decorum. 2) I do not think we misjudge Ambrose by stating that his interest was centred far more in the practical side of morals than in the doctrinal system. He was a great Bishop, a prince of the Church and a spiritual guide, far more than an original thinker and theologian. From a doctrinal point of view, the importance of his treatise is due to the fact that this first attempt at systematizing Christian ethics is modelled on a Stoic systematical treatise. This could not be carried out without a radical change. The duties derived from the cardinal virtues are considered in a new light and subordinated to Christian conceptions. Prudence, for instance, has been transfigured into knowledge of God. But, in spite of the new religious aspect from which morals are viewed, it is remarkable how 1) Homes Dudden, II, p. 529. Cf. also his remarks (ib. p. 530) about the austere morality of Christianity and the elegant virtue of the Greeks which Ambrose tries to harmonize. 2) A pleasant illustration is to be found in 0//. I. 72.



much of the Stoic doctrinal system has been left untouched, not least in the exposition of the fourth virtue. By taking Cicero as his model in a treatise of this kind Ambrose silently pays tribute to the superiority of pagan literature. As a writer he proves to be an unscrupulous plagiarist: there is no other Christian author who exploits a pagan author in such a way, as we can learn from the numerous parallels which I have brought together. The great reputation which this work of Ambrose's has acquired is in justice to be shared by the master of Latin prose. The largest exposition, next to that of Ambrose, is to be found in I u 1 i a n u s P o m e r i u s' De vita contemplativa, Book III, Chapt. 18-30 (PL 59, 501-514).1) The conception of four cardinal virtues, originating from pagan philosophy, has been adopted, he says, also by the Christians. 2) As compared with Cicero, Iulianus Pomerius takes the virtues backwards, viz. in the following order: temperantia (Chap. 19), fortitudo (Chap. 20), iustitia (Chap. 21-28), prudentia (Chap. 29-30). The short chapter on temperantia (19) has not much in common with Cicero's extensive exposition in De officiis I. 93-151. 3 ) Nor are there many points of contact with regard to f ortitudo between Chap. 20 and Off. I. 61-92. Iulianus Pomerius and Cicero take a different view of this virtue: the former applies it to the steadfastness of a Christian in tribulation, persecution and temptation, the latter chiefly reviews the duties of a soldier and statesman. In spite of that, there are some similarities suggestive of dependency on Cicero. Pomerius' definition (20, 1): Animi fortitudo ea debet intellegi, quae non solum diversis pulsata molestiis inconcussa permaneat sed etiam nullis voluptatum illecebris resoluta succumbat, recalls the moral aspect taken by Cicero in § 68: Non est autem consentaneum, qui metu non frangatur, eum frangi 1)

Quotations refer to the reprint, Paris 1862. Vit. contempt. III. 18 Videamus nunc an vera sit philosophorum illa sententia, qua quattuor virtutes velut quosdam virtutum omniiim fontes, vitia quoque quattuor velut quasdam origines malorum omnium definiunt. Principales quattuor esse virtutes non solum philosophi sentiunt sed etiam nostri consentiunt. 8 are some points of agreement as to rules of conduct: reverence for ) There old people (Chap. 19, 2, cf. Off. I. 122), detraction (19, 2, cf. § 134), moderation in sensual gratification (cf. § rn6). But principles like honestum and decorum and following Nature's guidance are no concern of Pomerius. He appropriates, however, one important theory (§ rnr) in a following chapter (see pp. 375 sq.). 2






cupiditate nee, qui invictum se a labore praestiterit, vinci a voluptate. Fortitude must be accompanied by Justice, says Cicero (§ 62): Itaque probe definitur a Stoicis fortitudo, cum eam virtutem esse dicunt propugnantem pro aequitate. This is also Pomerius' opinion (20, 2): Non in eis est patientia, qui aequanimiter patiuntur angentia, sed in eis tantum, quos fortiter facit sustinere iustitia.1) No fewer than eight chapters (21-28) are given to iitstitia, and in them Cicero's influence (0//. I. 20-60) is most obvious. Iustitiae opus est proprium sua cuique tribuere, says Pomerius (Chap. 26) repeating a part of Cicero's definition (§ 15): In hominum societate tuenda tribuendoque situm cuique et rerum contractarum fide (sc. versatur). Another statement of Cicero's: Fundamentum est iustitiae /ides (§ 23), is repeated in Chap. 21: Fides . .. est iustitiae fundamentum. But in reality, the similarity is a mere show: to Cicero /ides means good faith - as is elucidated by the additional explanation: id est dictorum conventorumque constantia et veritas - to Pomerius it refers to religion and means the Christian faith. In Chap. 22 Pomerius, deriving his knowledge from Cicero, reproduces thoughts originating from Plato, the Stoics and Terence: Chap. 22 Ex iustitia manat et aequitas, quae nos facit ut omnium necessitates hominum nostras esse dicamus nee nobis tantum, sed etiam generi humano nos natos esse credamus ... quia, qui homines sumus, nihil humani a nobis alienum putare debemus.2)

Off. I. 22 Ut praeclare scriptum est a Platone, non nobis solum nati sumus . . . atque, ut placet Stoicis, . . . homines hominum causa esse generatos. ib. I. 30 Terentianus ille Chremes humani nihil a se alienum putat (-Ter. Haut. 77).

There are two kinds of injustice, we are taught in Chap. 23: Duo sunt iniustitiae genera: unum quo iniurias irrogamus, alterum qiw ab aliis irrogatas, cum possumus, propulsare negligimus. This is a mere paraphrase of Off. I. 23: Sed iniustitiae genera duo sunt: unum eorum qui 1) Another topic treated by Cicero in the chapters on fortitude is to be found in Pomerius' Chap. 28 (see below p. 376). 2) The following comparison between animals and human beings agrees in some particulars with Off. I. 11 sq.



in/erunt, alterum eorum qui ab eis quibus in/ertur, si possunt, non propulsant iniuriam. Cicero divides the second virtue, Justice in a general sense, into iustitia and bene/icentia (Off. I. 20):1) De tribus reliquis (sc. virtutibus) latissime patet ea ratio, qua societas hominum inter ipsos et vitae quasi communitas continetur, cuius partes duae, i us tit i a, in qua virtutis est splendor maximus, ex qua viri boni nominantur, et huic coniuncta b e n e / i c e n t i a, quam eandem vel b e n i g n i t a t e m vel l i b e r al it ate m appellari licet. Pomerius adopts this division, Chap. 24: De i us tit i a e adhuc /ante procedunt lib er al it a s, b en e / ic e n t i a, caritas et cetera eiusmodi quibus multipliciter iuvari homines possunt. He even follows Cicero with regard to a caution to be observed in the exercise of bene/icentia: Chap. 24 Si modo absque ulla o s t e n t a t i o n e opus bene/icentiae fiat nee nos ad misericordiam /aciendam turpis amor g l or i a e popularis impellat.

Off. I. 44 Videre etiam licet plerosque non tam natura liberales quam quadam g lo r i a ditctos, ut bene/ici videantur, /acere multa quae proficisci ab o s t e n t a t i o n e magis quam a voluntate videantur.

Duties are varied, says Cicero (Off. I. 53 sq.), by the gradations of human society: race, nation, language, country and, above all, relationship and affinity. 2) The last point is developed in the following way: Nam cum sit hoe natura commune animantium, ut habeant lubidinem procreandi, prima societas in ipso coniugio est, proxima in l i b e r i s ... Sequuntur /ratrum coniunctiones, post consobrinorum sobrinorumque ... Sequuntur conubia et adfinitates, ex quibus etiam plures prop inq u i. Quae propagatio et suboles origo est rerum publicarum. Sanguinis autem coniunctio et benevolentia devincit homines et caritate ... Sed omnium societatum nulla praestantior est, nulla firmior quam cum viri boni moribus similes sunt familiar it ate con i u n c t i. Nothing could be more illustrative of the distance between the way of thinking prevailing in antiquity and Christian asceticism than the use Pomerius 1

as H. A. Holden states in his well-known com} This division corresponds, mentary on De officiis (New edition, Cambridge 1899), to that in Diogenes Laertius (VII. 127) into la6rri, and eoyvwµoavvri. 2 } Artior vero colligatio est societatis propinquorum: ab illa enim immensa societate humani generis in exiguum angustumqi1e concluditur.





makes of the passage quoted (Chap. 25): Itaque iam de caritate ... pauca perstringam. Taceo de carnali amore, qui incipiens a con i u g i o manat in f i l i o s, quia talem amorem cum pecoribus habemus bestiisque communem. Prop in quorum etiam praetereo, qui et ipse adhuc ad carnem pertinere videtur et sanguinem. Nee de illo aliquid dico, quo etsi am i cos amamus, tamen etiam ipse refertur ad aliquod commodum temporale. Non quad hi amores honesti non sint, cum sint omnibus naturales, sed quad his omnibus sit ille incomparabili diversitate praestantior quo Deum gratis diligimus et amicum. Thus Pomerius by a rhetorical praeteritio passes over love and affection in the family, as being rooted in the flesh, and also friendship; love of God comes before all. Therefore, if we practise justice, cuius iustitiae opus est proprium sua cuique tribuere,1) we must resign ourselves into the hands of God (Chap. 26). If we observe justice in this way, we shall realize perfection in practice. After arriving so far Pomerius recapitulates Cicero's division of the virtues into practical and theoretical ones: Chap. 27 Cui actuali vitae tres illae virtutes . . . proficiunt. Siquidem temperantia et animi fortitudo atque iustitia spiritalis est act i o, sine qua nihil omnino valet illa quae ad prudentiam videtur pertinere cog n i t i o.2 ) Cf. chap. 29, 2 Si ergo tota humanae vitae perf ectio in a c t i o n e et c o g n i t i o n e consistit, sicut impleri a c t i o n e m temperantiae ac fortitudinis, iustitiae consummatione probavimus, ita cogn i t i o n e m rerum provenire consecutione prudentiae comprobemus. Ergo v i s a n i m i, quae in appetitum rationemque

Off. I. 17 sq. Reliquis autem tribus virtutibus necessitates propositae sunt ad eas res parandas tuendasque, quibus a c t i o vitae continetur ... 18 Ex quattuor autem locis, in quos honesti naturam vimque divisimus, primus ille qui in veri c o g n i t i o n e consistit (sc. prudentia) maxime naturam attingit humanam.

Ib. I. IOI Duplex est enim vis an i m or um atque natura: una

The definition comes from Cicero, see above p. 373. 2) Cf. Cic. Off. I. 153 Etenim cog nit i o contemptatioque naturae manca quodam moilo atque incohata sit, si nulla a c t i o rerum ·consequatur. 1)



dividitur, ad perfectionem bonae actionis implendam cognitionemque rerum latentium consequendam his quattuor virtutibus . . . adiuvatur. Quarum tribus, temperantia scilicet et animi f ortitudine atque iustitia informatur ipse appetitus ut actio fiat; prudentia vero rationem . .. illuminat, ut et rat o appetitum g u b e r n e t et rationi a p p e t i t u s o b t e m p ere t. Nam virtus omnis, sicut veteribits placet, tribus in rebus Jere versatur: quarum una est in perspiciendo quid in quaque re verum sincerumque sit, quad prudentiae munus est proprium ... ; altera, quae animi perturbatos affectus, quos Graeci dicunt na.017, coercet et temperat, ut omnes appetitiones, quas illi oeµa~vacant rationi obedientes efficiat, tertia ut his quibus congregamur uti velimus ad eomm salutis et nostrae plenitudinem capiendam.

pars in a pp et it u posita est, quae est 6eµ1Graece ... , altera in ration e . ..

Ib. Ita fit, 1d ratio p r a es i t, a d p e t i t u s o b t e m p ere t.

lb. II. r8 Etenim virtits omnis in tribus f ere vertitur, quarum una est in perspiciendo quid in quaque re verum sincerumque sit ... ; (Cf. I. 15 indagatio atque inventio veri; eiusque virtutis hoe munus est progrittm) alterum cohibere motus animi turbatos, quas Graeci na.017nominant, appetitionesque, quas illi oeµa~, oboedientes facere rationi; tertium eis quibus congregamur uti moderate et scienter, quorum studiis ea quae natura desiderat expleta cumulataque habeamus.

Before leaving the subject of Justice, Pomerius, in Chap. 28, takes up the question whether or not it is consistent with justice to withdraw from occupations useful to all and lead a life of devotional exercises. He, like Cicero, adopts the Stoic conception of vita activa, but he applies it to the duty of serving the church when called upon, in ecclesiastical functions, while Cicero (Off. I. 70 sqq.) considers the duty of serving the state. Both of them agree that shrinking from such service may be excused only in exceptional cases. Pomerius devotes much more space to Prudence (Chap. 29-30) than





What he has in common with the latter, is Cicero (Off. I. I8-I9). mainly limited to the definition: P r u d e n t i a m e t s a p i e n t i a m plerique in i n d a g a t i o n e v e r i e t i n v e n t i o n e constituunt (Chap. 29, I) ..,,.Cic. Off. I. I5 Ex ea parte, quae prima discripta est, in i am ponimus, inest in d a g aqua s a Pie n t i am et prudent t i o at q u e invent i o v er i (cf. I. 18). Pomerius here follows Cicero in taking prudentia and sapientia to be identical,!) while Cicero in the sequel makes a distinction between sapientia (ao>Dieromanischen Sprachen zeugen endgiiltig davon, dass feria als ein rein ecclesiastisches Wort anzusehen ist. Das feira im Portugiesischen zeigt, dass der Einfluss der Kirche bier starker gewesen ist als anderswo (dialektisch kamen die Planetentage vor, siehe Williams, From Latin to Portuguese S. rr6)».


Iuno) nimborumque facis tempestatumque potentem; as to line 663 excitamqtte hiemem cf. I. I25 emissamque hiemem. Prudence is not the only poet who associated the appearance of Christ stilling the storm with that of Neptune in Aeneis I, as will be seen from a passage in Sedulius' Carmen paschale (III. 62 sq.): Exurgens Dominus validis mitescere ventis imperat et dicta citius tumida aequora placat.

The poet applies to Christ what Virgil says of Neptune (I. I42): Sic ait et dicta citius tumida aequora placat. The Devil tempted Christ, we read in Matth. 4, 8-9: >>Again,the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and saith unto him, 'All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me'>>. Sedulius, Carm. pasch. II. 187 sqq., paraphrases the passage in the following way: Cum Domino montana petit cunctasque per orbem regnoru,m monstravit opes: >>Haecomniai>, dicens, >>me tribuente feres, si me prostratus adores>>.

Huemer, the editor of Sedulius in the Vienna corpus (CSEL, X), does not notice that the last line contains a reminiscence of Ovid, Met. II. 44 sq.: Quodvis pete munus, ut illud me tribuente f eras. The words put into the Devil's mouth are those uttered by Phoebus to his son Phaethon. I pass on to a more startling device: prayers to God are couched in the words of a prayer to a pagan divinity. The opening line of Prudence's Psychomachia runs thus: Christe, graves hominum semper miserate labores.

The connoisseur of Virgil will recognize Aeneas' prayer Aen. VI. 56: Phoebe, graves Troiae semper miserate labores.

to Apollo,


It is a matter of course that this device above all is to be found in the Vergiliocentones, as in this kind of poetry everything had to be said in the form of Virgilian lines or half-lines. We have already made the acquaintance of the first Christian specimen of this kind, the Cento Probae, written by a Roman lady of noble birth in the middle of the fourth century (see p. I89), and we have listened to Proba's version (v. 403) of the voice from heaven in Marc. I, n: the Father addresses himself to the Son in the words of Venus to Cupid in Aen. I. 664: Nate, meae vires, mea magna potentia solus.1) Talking of the creation (Gen. I, 4) Proba does not hesitate to apply to God (v. 64) what Virgil says about Jupiter (Aen. X. rno): Tum pater omnipotens, rerum cui summa potestas.

In the same way the epithet duction to Jupiter's answer mundi, 2 ) is repeated by Proba X. I8) is reproduced in the

given to Jupiter in Aen. IX. 93 (the introto Berecyntia mater): torquet qui sidera (v. I36). Venus' allocution to Jupiter (Aen. prayer which opens Proba's cento (v. 29):

0 pater, o hominum rerumque aeterna potestas. Another famous passage where Venus addresses herself to her father (Aen. I. 229 sq.): 0 qui res hominwmque deumque aeternis regis imperiis, appears in the cento De ecclesia, v. 4 sq. (CSEL, X, p. 6ZI). The application is a perfect failure: 'Father of men and gods' does not agree with the Christian conception of God. We come across the same practice in Paulinus of Nola, next to Prudence the foremost of the Christian poets. He introduces a prayer, with a slight remodelling of the line on Jupiter (Aen. X. rno) which we have found in Proba, in the following way, Carm. 4, I:


Omnipotens genitor rerum cui summa potestas.3 )

1) The same line appears also in the anonymous cento De verbi incarnatione v. 35 (CSEL. X, Pars I, p. 617). 2) Paulinus of Aquileia, archbishop of Frejus (787-802) applies the epithet to Christ, Regula fidei 2 (Mon. Germ. hist. Poetae latinorum medii aevi; ed. E. Dtimmler, I, p. 126). a) Cf. Paul. Nol. Carm. 6, 1 Summe pater rerum caelique aeterna potestas. Paulin. Pell. Euch. 519 deus alme, subest cui summa potestas. Goteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:




He apostrophizes further the Creator in dose agreement with Venus' words to Jupiter (Aen. X. 18, imitated by Proba), Carm. 6, 276: 0 pater, o hominum rerumque aeterne creator. Before leaving the poets I should like to draw attention to a sepulchral inscription,1) the poetic epitaph on S. Petronius Probus, consul A. D. 371, Proba's husband. The poem ends thus:

Hunc tu, Christe, choris iungas caelestibus oro, te canat et placidum iugiter aspiciat eque tuo semper dilectus pendeat ore. For once we have to do with a reminiscence of Lucretius', whom we should not expect to find in such a context. The last line is, as Lofstedt2) has seen, an imitation of Luer. I. 37:

eque tuo pendet resupini spiritus ore. There is a startling contrast between the two passages. A scene of love and eternal happiness shows here Mars in the arms of Venus, there Probus in the arms of Christ. Although medi::eval literature is extraneous to my subject, I take the occasion to recall a striking parallel which Lofstedt has pointed out. 3 ) In the Vita Landiberti, chap. XVII (p. 399, 21 Krusch) 4 ) we read: Sed quia in ventum fundebat verba, se q u a m f a m i l i a rite r in De um re i c i en s, dicebat: 'Exurge, Domine, et iudica causam meam.' To this Lofstedt remarks: >>Werseinen Terenz im Kopf hat, erkennt sofort die Vorlage: es ist die bekannte Szene im ersten Akt der Andria, V. 135 f.: tum illa, ut consuetum facile amorem cerneres, r e i e c i t s e i n e u m / l e n s q u a m / a m i l i a r i t e r ! Die Imitation wirkt auf den ersten Blick beinahe blasphemisch: hier das schone, allerdings auch anstii.ndige und nette junge Mii.dchen, das sich ihrem Geliebten an die Brust wirft, dort der Bischof und sein Goth>. Among the prose writers, Jerome provides us with two very remarkable instances. He emphasizes the difficulty of his task, In Ezech. lib. 1

Carmina Latina epigraphica, II (Lipsiae 1897), No. 1347 B, ) F. Biicheler, v. 27 sqq. 2 ) Eranos, XIII (1913), p. 81. 3 IX (1948), pp. 138 sq. ) Classica et mediaevalia, 4 ) Mon. Germ. hist., Script. rer. Merov., VI, ed. Krusch.




XIV praef. p. 562 (cf. above p. 240), by reminding us of the Cretan labyrinth and of Virgilian passages referring to it; he does not pretend to a perfect knowledge of God's mysteries, being content if he can give some guidance to those eager to learn, non meis viribus sed Christi misericordia, qui errantibus nobis 'ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens' spiritu sancto 'vestigia'. This is, as I have pointed out, an imitation of Verg. Aen. VI. 29 sq. Daedalus ipse dolos tecti ambagesque resolvit, caeca regens filo vestigia. What a burlesque fancy! Christ is substituted for Daedalus, and the Holy Ghost for the mythical ball of yarn. In the polemical pamphlet against Rufinus, I. 5 (seep. 180) 1 Jerome scorns his adversary who will perhaps prove to be in possession of eloquence: Sic pater ille deum faciat, sic magnus Jesus! I ncipiat conferre man um! Jerome travesties Verg. Aen. X. 875 sq., where Aeneas accepts Mezentius' challenge: Sic pater ille deum faciat, sic altus Apollo! Incipias conferre manum!

It is easy to understand that Jerome could identify his situation when he had to answer Rufinus' pamphlet with that of the Roman national hero. 1) Nevertheless, the travesty arouses attention: altus Apollo replaced by magnus Iesits and pater ille deum, a hint at Jupiter, applied to the Christian God! It is a question of taste whether or not we should take it as a blasphemy. How do we have to explain this transfer from the pagan to the Christian sphere? In J erome's case, I think, the answer is not far to seek. Like the rhetor he was, he was loath to give up a literary association even if, on closer inspection, it might seem far-fetched or absurd. As to the cento-poems, the matter is quite clear: the poet had no other 1 ) In the combat, Mezentius' lances are checked by Aeneas' shield. Cf. the colouring of Jerome's exposition: Quamvis libraverit accusationis suae ha s ta s et totis adversum nos viribus intorserit, credimus in Dominum satvatorem, qitod s c u to circumdabit nos veritas eius.


alternative than to adopt what Virgil says about the gods. We can expect the motives to be more complicated in the case of Paulin us of Nola. He was a most pious man. Did not all that Virgil says about an almighty father and ruler of the world, correspond to his own conception of God? He was a poet too, sensible of the beauty of Virgilian poetry. After all, is it possible to mould the idea of an almighty God in verses more beautiful than those which Paulinus took over from Virgil? In this connection we have to recollect Arnobius' and Lactantius' attitude towards Lucretius. The former modelled, as we have seen (pp. 17 sqq.), his eulogy of Christ (I. 38) on Lucretius' (V, prooem) eulogy of Epicurus; the latter quoted and applied to Christ (see p. 69) Lucretius' praise of Epicurus (VI. 24-28). Why did they follow Lucretius, in spite of their aversion to his impious master, if not for the same reasons which I have suggested in the case of Paulinus: the sublimity of the thought and the beauty of the form? 1) In the preceding we have dealt with allusions to poetic passages of a mythological nature, with the reception of formulas by which pagan divinities are characterized and called upon. As a rule, the pagan background is recognizable only to those who know the poetic passages in question. Such borrowings imply by intimation that the Christian author could not give a more perfect expression to his own conception of God than by adopting those to be found in pagan poetry. It is a long step, indeed, from here to the acceptance of pagan nomenclature, but the poets did not hesitate to take it. Olympus, the residence of pagan divinities, means 'Heaven' in the Christian sense of the word not only in the centones, where it was indispensable,2) but also in other poems. 3 ) The epithets given by poets to Jupiter are coolly transferred to God: superi regnator Olympi: Cento de ecclesia 3 (CSEL, XVI: 1, p. 621) - Verg. Aen. II. 779. - Arator, Act. apost. I. 346. rector Olympi: Mar. Viet. Aleth. I. 158; Arator, Act. apost. I. 37 ..... Lucan. Phars. II. 4; V. 620. 1)

Cf. my remarks on p. 87. De verbi incarnatione 32 (CSEL, XVI: I, p. 6r7) Panditur interea domus omnipotentis Olympi (- Verg. Aen. X. 1). 3 Carm. I. 6, 29; I. 9, 48. Ven. Fort. Carm. II. 16, 9; V. 16, 5; ) E. g. Ennod. Vit. Mart. I. 310. 2)






Tonans: Prud. Cath. 6, 81; 12, 83; Paul. Nol. Carm. 22, 149; Ennod. Carm. I. 7, 79; Arator, Act. apost. I. 49 Nee cessant elementa suo servire Tonanti _,.Lucan. Phars. I. 35 suo servire Tonanti; Ven. Fort. Carm. VIII. 3, 65; 93; X. II, 13; Vit. Mart. I. 126; 308; 323, etc. The rich pagan terminology concerning the infernal regions has for the most part been adopted by Christian poets since Prudence and applied to hell:1)

Tartarns, Tartara: 2) Prud. Cath. 1, 70; II, II2; 12, 92; Ham. 826; Mar. Viet. Aleth. praef. 87 ad impia Tartara _,.Verg. Aen. VI. 543; Ennod. Cann. I. 16, 6; Arator, Act. apost. I. 183 Tartara maesta _,.Lucan. Phars. VI. 782; Ven. Fort. Carm. II. 7, 48, etc. Avernus: Prud., Hymn. Ambr., Drac., Arator, etc. Cf. Thes. II. 1315, 69-76.

Phlegeton: Prud. Cath. 3, 199. Styx: Prud. Cath. 5, 126; Ven. Fort. Vit. Mart. I. 5. Erebus: Mar. Viet. Aleth. praef. 89 sedibus ex Erebi _,.Verg. Georg. IV. 471 Erebi de sedibt,s imis. I go on to discuss, in the form of appendices, two instances which in my opinion offer a special interest, in as much as they prove to be under the influence of a definable poetic passage also in the way of thinking.

B. The myth of the iron age in Christian disguise.3)

In the second Book of Adversus nationes, Chap. 39-43 (pp. 79, 783, 9 Reifferscheid), Arnobius vehemently opposes the idea that souls have been sent to the earth by God. To this end he gives a grand and 1) Cf. Carmelo Rapisarda, »La rappresentazione dell' altretomba in Prudenzio», Miscellanea di studi di letteratura cristiana antica (Catania I947), p. 56: >>Ingenerale si puo osservare che il colorito dei due regni e squisitamente classico. Cio affinita tra il Tartarus vale particolarmente per !'Inferno, data la strettissima pagano ed il luogo dell'eterna punizione cristiano: infatti, non solo la maggior parte dei nomi con cui esso viene designato e classica, ma classici sono pure gli aggettivi esornativi che l'accompagnano». 2 ) Also in prose writers, e. g. Hier. Adv. Ru/in. I. JI; In Matth. I2, 29 p. 80; In Is. 60, 6-7 p. 722; Ennod. Opusc. 2, 9. 3 ) This paragraph has been published in Eranos XXXV (I937), 36-40 under the heading: >>En Ovidiusreminiscens hos Arnobius,>.



gloomy picture of the vices, folly and misery of humanity. The passage is meant to be a rhetorical masterpiece; it is divided into twelve long periods, introduced by the question: I dcirco animas misit ut ... ?, and overloaded with picturesque and even awkward details. A scrutiny of the themes and their provenience gives an interesting insight into the methods of a rhetorician. In Chapters 39 and 40 we meet reminiscences of Lucretius,1) in the following two chapters there are points of agreement with Clement of Alexandria's Paedagogus.2) In addition to these sources I would point out a third one. At the end of Chap. 40 (pp. 80, 24-81, 6) Arnobius gives a detailed description of avarice. It runs thus: I dcirco animas misit, i,t quae secum commorantes possessionis alicuius nullum umquam habuissent amorem, avarissimae hie fierent et in habendi studium inexaturabili pectoris ardescerent adpetitu, eff oderent altos montes et viscera ignota terrarum in materias verterent alieni nominis atque usus, penetrarent abditas discrimine cum capitis nationes et translatis mercibus caritatem semper vilitatemque captarent, exercerent avidum atque iniustissimum f aenus et miserorum ex sanguine supputandis augerent insomnia(m) milibus, possessionum semper producerent fines et quamvis provincias totas rus f acerent unum, pro arbore una, pro sulco forum litibus tererent, cum amicis et fratribus inexpiabiles susciperent simultates? On this passage Kroll remarks (op. cit., p. 341): »Nachdem Arnobius die Erbarmlichkeit der menschlichen Existenz hinlanglich ausgemalt hat, geht er S. 80, 24 dazu i.iber, gegen die Laster zu eifern, und verwendet dazu in reicher Fi.ille die von der popular-philosophischen Literatur ausgebildeten Motive. Was er gegen die Habsucht sagt, findet sich so ungefahr bei Horaz (vgl. Wien. Stud. 37, 223)>>.There is no need for us to be content with vague suggestions as to the origin of his ideas, since the apologist was manifestly influenced by a definite poetical passage, viz. Ovid's tale of the iron age in the first Book of the Metamorphoses. To begin with I call attention to some cases of agreement in wording. Compare habendi studium, effoderent, viscera ignota terrarum (p. 80, 26-28) and amor sceleratus habendi (Met. I. 131), viscera terrae (ib. v. 138), effodiuntur (ib. v. 140).3) 1 ) See pp. 37 sq. above. 2) W. Kroll, Rhein. Mus. LXXI (1916), 341 sq. 3 ) The Ovid.ian lines r38 sqq.: Itum est in viscera terrae quasque recondiderat




39 1

The points of agreement are however not limited to phraseology. Arnobius has adopted the chief motives of the poem. As long as the souls dwell with God, they have, according to the apologist, no desire for proprietorship; in the same way the generation of the golden age in the myth is free from amor habendi. But since the souls have become resident on earth, it has happened to them as it did to the iron age generation: the desire of possession has seized them and demoralized them. Ovid mentions three manifestations of amor sceleratus habendi: navigation, the ownership of landed property and mining. Arnobius begins with the last one, partly, as we have seen, in literal agreement with Ovid. The rather obscure words (p. 80, 28): Viscera ignota terrarum in materias verterent alieni nominis atque usus, are in my opinion to be interpreted in the light of Met. I. 140 sqq.:

Effodiuntur opes, irritamenta malorum. Iamque nocens ferrum ferroque nocentius aurum prodierat: pradit bellum quad pugnat utroque. Iron and gold get a new name and a new employment when they are used for producing arms and coins and thereby, as Ovid has it, enter the service of warfare. What Arnobius says about navigation and landed property has only the chief motive in common with Quattuor aetates; the colours are his own or rhetorical -r61wtfetched from elsewhere; e. g. p. 81, 3 quamvis provincias totas rus facerent uniem reminds of Sen. Epist. 90, 39 licet in provinciarum spatium rura dilatet (thus Kroll 1. 1.). Another motive in Ovid also recurs in Amobius, viz. the enmity of friends and brothers; cf. p. 81, 5 cum amicis et fratribus inexpiabiles susciperent simultates and Met. I. 144 sq.:

Non hospes ab hospite tutus, non sacer a genera; fratrum quaque gratia rara est. Further influences where the apologist souls have been sent quisquam est rationis

from Quattuar aetates are to be seen in Chap. 43, sums up his objections to the opinion that the to the earth by God (p. 83, 3 R.): Et mortalium alicuius accipiens sensum, qui ardinatum existimet

Stygiisque admaverat umbris, effadiuntur apes, are also imitated by Lactantius, Div. Inst. VII. 3, 9 Ad eruendas apes interiara terrae viscera effadiuntur. This is the only imitation cited by Magnus in his standard edition (Berlin, I9I4).



mundum per has esse1) ac non potius sedem ac domicilium constitutum, in quo omne cotidie perpetraretur nefas, maleficia cuncta confierent, insidiae, fraudes, doli, avaritia, rapinae, vis, scelus, audacia, obscenitas, turpitudo, flagitium, mala omnia cetera, quae in orbe homines toto mente noxia pariunt et labem machinantur in mutuam? Not a few of the manifestations of evil included in this catalogue (omne nefas, insidiae, fraudes, doli, vis, scelus) recur in Ovid's description of the corruption which broke out in the iron age, Met. I. 128 sqq.: Protinus irrupit venae peioris in aevum omne nefas: fugere pudor verumque fidesque; in quorum subiere locum fraudesque dolique insidiaeque et vis et amor sceleratus habendi. Concerning three more notions there is something corresponding in Ovid: avaritia may be compared with amor habendi v. 131, rapinae with vivitur ex rapto v. 144, maleficia and mala omnia cetera with irritamenta malorum v. 140. Only four notions (audacia, obscenitas, turpitudo, flagitium) have no parallel, unless we suppose them to correspond to what is said about the dissolution of the family ties, vv. 144-148. It would seem quite natural for the apologist to have made use of the Metamorphoses when controverting pagan mythology. But he never does so, taking Cicero, Clement of Alexandria and others as his guides. Quattuor aetates is in fact the only part of the Metamorphoses which has left clear traces in Arnobius' work. This is not without interest from a psychological point of view. The mythological tale of the gradual degeneration of humanity was in keeping with Arnobius' own pessimism. Thus he borrowed the colours in which the poet had depicted the iron generation, when in his turn he was going to represent the guilt and depravity of humanity.

C. The conception of Purgatory Together with the letters of Faustus, bishop of Riez, there is transmitted a letter written by a certain Paulinus (Faust. Epist. 4). 2) 1 ) As has been said before (pp. 35 sq)., Arnobius here came into opposition to Christian doctrine in denying that the world was created for the sake of men; in this respect he took the same point of view as Lucretius. 2 pp. 181-184; Mon. Germ. hist., auct. ant. VIII, ) CSEL XXI, ed. Engelbrecht,






Being conscious of his carnal sins Paulinus trembles for his salvation, terrified by the prospect held out by the hermit Marinus (ib. p. I82, I9 Engelbrecht): Quad qui corporalibus vitiis succumberet, nullam possit veniam promereri, sed in hisdem servetur ipsa surrectione suppticiis nee possit expiari infernalibus tormentis, quad corporalibus (vita) vitiis concreta contraxerat. After having asked a number of questions about the nature and the destiny of the soul, Paulinus makes a confession of faith as follows (p. I83, I): Ita miserrimus credo, quad qui semel susceptum signum divini nominis et infixum fronti character domini nostri numquam male sibi conscius vel subdolus f alsator infregerit, susceptis leviter pro expiando errore tortnentis p u r u m a e r i u m s e n s u m et s i m P l i c is an i ma e i g n em die[s] consumpta producat. The passage is as remarkable for the thought as for the expression. The man who does not intentionally violate his Christian faith, says Paulinus, will after a time, when he has been tormented moderately in order to expiate his guilt, >>producehis soul purified>>. It reminds us of the catholic dogma of Purgatory. This conception, quite alien to early Christianity, derives its origin from popular pagan belief and philosophy. It was taken over first by a platonizing theologian, Origen, 1) but not officially sanctioned until I439· Nor is there any Christian flavour in the phraseology: aerium sensum and simplicis animae ignem suggest to the mind the Stoic conception of the fiery and aerial substance of the soul. Now it is unnecessary to emphasize further the pagan character of ed. Krusch, pp. 275 sq. - Paulinus' letter is mentioned by Alcinrns Avitus, Epist. ad Gundobadum (Mon. Germ. hist., auct. ant., VI: 2, ed. Peiper, p. 29). Cf. Engelbrecht, pp. XXIII, 183; Krusch, p. 276. 1 ) Cf. Eduard Norden in his commentary to P. Vergilius Maro. Aeneis Buch VI (2. Aufl. Leipzig, Berlin 1916), p. 29 (•>Exkurs iiber das christliche Purgatorium>>): 1>Zuniichst darf als feststehend betrachtet werden die Tatsache, dass der Begriff einer Liiuterung der Seelen nach dem Tode vor ihrer Riickkehr zu Gott, kurz gesagt der Begriff des Purgatoriums, der christlichen Lehre urspriinglich durchaus gefehlt hat: die Schriften des Neuen Testaments wissen nichts davon, ebensowenig die des Alten. Die ersten die den Begriff haben, sind Origenes ... und der Verfasser der griechischen Pistis Sophia. Diese N amen sagen genug: der in den Kreisen platonisierender Hellenen geliiufige Begriff ist von der platonisierenden christlichen Theologie iibernommen worden. Dann kennt ihn Augustinus civ. 21, 13; bezeichnend ist, dass er ihn dort im Anschluss an unsere Vergilverse (6, 733-742) erortert, die er als 'platonisch' bezeichnet,>.



the whole passage, since it is easy to point out the source. In, Virgil's famous exposition of metempsychosis (Aen. VI. 745 sqq.) we read that the souls are punished and purified in air, water and fire:

Donec longa dies, perfecto temporis orbe, concretam exemit labem purumque reliquit aetherium sensum atque aurai simplicis ignem. These lines are essential for the understanding of Paulinus' words. The first line, 'a long period when the revolution of time has been accomplished', has its counterpart in die consumpta, 'after the lapse of a period', aetherium sensum is slightly changed into aerium sensum. Only the Virgilian expression aurai simplicis ignem, 'the fire of pure air' - according to the Stoics, the substance of soul (nvevµa nveouM; - has been misunderstood 1} and rendered by simplids animae ignem, whatever meaning the writer may have assigned to this. When Augustine (Civ. Dei XXI. 13) discusses the idea of purification after death, he takes as a text Aen. VI. 733-742, the locus classicus for this conception in Latin literature. There can be no doubt that Paulinus, in attesting thus early the doctrine of Purgatory, is directly indebted to the great pagan poet, whose lines, we may suspect, being familiar even to Christian writers, played an important part in grafting on to Western Christianity this old pagan conception. There is another point of interest. Faustus answers Paulinus, Epist. 5 (p. 193, IO Engelbrecht): Quod autem, sicut pagina continet, sermo tuus de poeta mutuatus 'ignem animae simplicis' aestimavit, de sola hoe divinitatis substantia dici convenit, cui nihil adpositum, nihil a superiore conlatum, nihil constat adiunctum. Faustus disowns the idea suggested by Paulinus and agrees with the hermit Marinus in reprobating the sinner (p. 93, 21): Nam quod subtiliter indicasti: 'Si omnia haec, quae domnus M arinus interminatur, excipiunt peccatores, quid maius impii mereantur ignoro',2) habent sub perennibus malis et supplicia gradtts suos, ut gravium obnoxius peccatomm infinitis licet tamen utcumque tolerandis, impius vero inauditis cruciatibus torqueatur. This certainly was a poor consolation to Paulinus who hoped for salvation after a short period of moderate discomfort. Faustus not only disapproves of the doctrine 1) 2)

Or did Paulinus read animae instead Faust. Epist. 4 (p. r83, 5 E.).

of aurai in his copy of Virgil?





of purification, but points out that Paulinus has got it or, more correctly, has got one of his expressions, from a pagan poet (serino tuus de poeta mutuatus). Thus the Bishop of Riez knew his Virgil well enough to recognize the reference,1) which is more than can be said of his editors, judging from their silence. Virgil's name is not mentioned, however, in conformity with a constant habit: classical authors are never named by Faustus, nor, except in one case, 2) are the quoted.

1) Cf. Faust. Epist. g (p. 212, 1 Engelbrecht) Quanta dudum alacritate saecularibus stitdiis militavimus, tanta nunc devotione domino serviamus, 2) Faust. Serm. 5 (p. 242, 25) Unde bene di:rit quidam: 'Crescit amor nummi, quantum ipsa pecunia crescit' (...-Iuv. 14, 139).

Index locorum AMBROSIUS

De bono mortis II,5 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 355 n. 4 De officiis ministrorum I. 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367 n. 1 65 ...................... 368 67 ...................... 368 72 .................. 371 n. 2 73 ...................... 368 74 , ..................... 368 76 ...................... 368 77 78 79 81 82

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 368-9 · · · · · · · · • • • · · • • • • • • • • • 369 · · ·,., ................ 369 ...................... 369 ...................... 369

83 • • · · · • • • • • • · · • • • • • • • · · 369 98 ············ .. 350, 369-70 99 ...................... 370 100 ..................... 370 102 ..................... 370 105 .................. 370-1 106 ................. 366, 37r 115 ..................... 350 116 ..................... 349 118 ..................... 350 122-3 ............... 350-1 124 ..................... 351 125 ............. 351 n. 2, 352 126 ..................... 352 127 .................. 353-4 128 .................. 352-3 129 ..................... 352 130 ......... , . . . 353, 354, 356 131-2 ............... 354-5 136 ................. 353 n. 2 137 ..... , .. •. • • • • • • • 355 n. 5 138 ................. 355 n. 5

139 141 142 143 144 145 147 150 160 161 167 169 171 r72 r73

........ • • • • .. • •. 355 n. 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 355 n. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 sq. n. 5 ..................... 356 ..................... 356 ..................... 356 ..................... 356 ..................... 356 .................. 356----7 ..................... 357 ................. 357, 359 ..................... 357 ..................... 357 ......... • • • .. • • • 357, 359 • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 357, 359

1 74 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 358 176 ..................... 360 r78* .................... 360 181 ..................... 36r 183 ..................... 360 185 ..................... 360 186-7 .................. 361 188-9 .................. 361 r91 ..................... 361 192-3 .................. 362 195 ................. 359 n. 4 206 ..................... 362 208 ..................... 362 209-10 .............. 362-3 2II .......... • , .... · • • · • 364 212 ..................... 364 214 ..................... 364 215 ..................... 365 216 ..................... 365 218 ..................... 363 219 ..................... 363 221 ..................... 363 222 ..................... 365

HARALD HAGENDAHL 223 ..................... 365 224 ..................... 365 226 .................. 365-6 227-8 ............... 366-7 229 ..................... 367 III. 131 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 AMMIANUS



XXV. 4,1 .................

379 n. 2



Nubes 225 .....................



Adversus nationes I. 2 (4,9) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 ib. (4,15) ................ 30 ib. (4,19) ................. 31 3 (5, 15) .................. 31 II (10,24) .......... • , , 36-7 31 (20,29) . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 n. 2 36 (23,16) ............ 40 n. 3 38 (24,29-25,27) 17 sqq., 29,388 ib. (25,24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 II. 6 (51,28) ................. 25 ib. (52,2) ................. 26 7 (52,14-53,II) • • • • • • • • 24-5 14 (59,12) ............. 31-2 16 (60,23) ............. 15, 33 ib. (60,27) ................ 33 18 (62, 14) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 ib. (62,24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 26 (69,26) .. · .... , ... , .. ·. 39 ib. (70,3) ................. 39 27 (70,17) ................ 39 ib. (70,20) ................ 39 30 (73,17) . , · · · · • • · · • • • · • · 37 31 (73,27) • • • .... • • • • • • 37 n. 3 37 39 ib. 40 ib. 43 56

(78,3) , · · · ... · · · · · · · 35-6 (79,II) • • • • • • • 37-8, 42 ll, 3 (79,22) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 (80,12) ................. 38 (80,24-81,6) . . . . . . . 390-1 (83,3) , , . , , . . . . . 36, 391-2 (92,22) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27



58 60 61 66 69 10

(94,6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 (96,17) ................ 29 (97,5) ................. 29 (rn1,25) ............ 34-5 (rn3,21) ............. , , 35 (u8,17) ............... 41 II (II9,17) • • • • • • • • • • • · · • • 47 18 (124,14) ....... , .... , , · 42 32 (133,8) ............. 40 n. 3 35 (135,5) ................ 41 41 (139,3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4o 8 (147,12) ............. 45 n. 2 21 (158,3) ................ 42 24 (160,23) ............ 40 n. 3 26 (162,22) ............ 40 n. 3 27 (163,27) ............... 40 19 (191,u) ............ 40 n. 2 23 (194,8) ............. 40 n. 3 ib. (194,13) ........... 40 n. 3 2 (214,18) ................ 46 3 (239,27) ..... · · · · · · ·, 43-4 4 (24o,15) ................ 44 15 (249,13) ............ 46-7 28 (262, 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 ib. (262,22) ............... 43


De civitate dei IX. 4-5 ................. 5 ........................ XIV. 3-9 .... , .....

341-2 342 · · .. · ·. 341-5

3 · · · · · · · · · · · 342, 343 ll, I, 346 6. • • • • • • • · • • • • · · · • · · • • · • 343 7 · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · • · · · • · · • 343 8 . • · , · • · · · • , , · • • 342, 343, 346 9 · · • • · · · • • · • • · · · · · · · 344,345 22 ...................... 345 1 XXI. 3 · · · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · · · · • 394 Epistulae 82 .................. 223 n. 4 166 ................. 239 n. 3


1347 B ..................




CATO Memorabilia Sop. 1roJ


CENTO de ecclesia 4~-5 · · · · · · · • • · · · ·, · · ... · 385 73 ...................... 190 CENTO de verbi incarnatione 32 ..................

388 n. 2

CICERO Academica priora II. 74 .................. 176, So ...... 106, 170, 262-3, 96 .......... 185 n. 2, 214, Academica posteriora I. 2 .......................

288 288 288

174 5 ....................... 218 8 ................... 112, 287 18 .................. 175, 191 25 ......... 123, 125, 238, 287 Pro Archia 24 ................... 118-9 Epistulae ad Atticum II. 1,2 ................. 265 n. 1 Brutus 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103, 256-7 187 ..................... 160 265 ................. 265, 286 In Catilinam , .. , ... , . 176, 287 I. I .........• 4 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 345-6 II. l ............... 176 n. 2, 287 Cato maior 7 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 353 13,23,22,26,31 ....... ,. 192-3 24 ...................... 253 33 ...................... 265 69 .................. 239, 289 Pro Cluentio 105 ................. 194 n. 2 De divinatione II. I 15-6 .......... · · · · · 234-5 II9 ................. 238, 289 146 ................. 103,289



Divinatio in Caecilium 39 , , , , , , , ·, .. , , . , . , , .... II3 Epistulae ad familiares IX. 22,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 De fato 12-3, 17 ................ 263 De finibus I. 17 .................. 234, 288 II. 15 .. , . · · ........ · ·,. 157, 233 III. 3 ....................... 287 49-53 ·,,, · · .. ·, .... , 233-4 53 .................. 251, 291

V. 24 26 66 67

· · ·. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 379 ...................... 379 ...................... 352 ... 184 n. r, 352 n. 3, 378-9

89 ·, .. • · · · · · · · • • · · · · · • • • 365 92 ...................... 258 Pro Flacco frg. 2 M .....•....... 104, 122 Fragmenta lib. inc. 38 M . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 J r8 ................ 245, 255 Pro Q. Gallio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 Pro imperio Cn. Pompei 7 ................... 170, 287 37 .................. 194 n. 2 De inventione 103 I. 2 ..••••••...•.....•..... 91 ...................... 250 Laelius de amicitia 22 ................... 358-9 24 .......... , , ...... 359, 362 47 · , ·. · ....... , · · -· -. · · · 50 ...................... 67 ...................... 76 ...................... So ............ , ...... ··· 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pro Ligario l l . . . •. . . . •. . •. . . . . •. •. .

Pro Marcello 10 .......... II


,, •• , •••

, ....... , •• ,

Pro Milone 10 •.....................

359 359 135 103 1 35 136 122

134, 321 239, 287, 321 260



73 ..................

Pro Murena J2

46 De natura I. 45 66 85 91 II6


.................. deorum ................... ................ ................... ...................... •. , .......•.......

190 264, 287 71 n. 2 · · .. · · · 74 72 ll. I 265 72 ll. 2 72 ll. 2 71 72 238, 289 55 n. 2 157, 289

121 .................. 123 ...................... 124 ...................... II. 55 .......•.......... 121 .................. III. 81 .................. De officiis 352, 373 n. 2 I. II .............. 15 ......... · · ... 350, 373, 377 17 .................. 361, 375 18 .......... 350, 351 n. 2, 375 18-9 ................ 350-1 19 .................. 352 ll. I 20 ...... 353, 354 n. 3, 356, 374 22 ......... · .... · · · · 355, 373 23 ......... • 355 n. 5, 360, 373 2 4 • • • • • • • • • · • • • • • • • • 355 n. 5 26 .................. 355 n. 5 30 ...................... 373 34 · · · · · · · · · · · · · • · · • • 355 n. 5 37 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 355 n. 5 43 · • · · · • • • · · · · · · · · 44 · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · 47 · · · • • · · · · · · · · · · · 48 · · · · · • · · · · · · · · · · 5 1 ......................

• · · · · · 356 · · 356, 374 · · 356,379 · • · · · · 357 357

54 · • · · • · · · · · · · · · 353, 357, 374 55 · · • • · • · · • • · · · • · • • • 359 ll. I 56 . · · • · · ·. • • · · ·. · · · · 357, 359 57-8 • • • • , • • • • , • , , , , 354 ll. I 58 ... · ·, .. • • · · .. · ... 356, 357 59 ... · .... · · · · ·. · ....... 358 62 .. ····· ....... 352, 36~ 373 66 ...................... 361 68 ................... 372-3 68-9 ................... 362 72 ...................... 360

74 79 81 83 91 93

360, 361

• • • • · · · · · · · · · • • • · 359, ...................... ...................... ...................... . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... , , .... , , , , 362, 363, 367

n. 4 360 361 361 362 ll.


94 · · · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · • • • • • 363 95 · .... · · · .. · · · · · · · · · · · · 363 96 · ·,,, · · · · · · · · · · ·. · · · · · 363 98 · · · · · • • · · · · • • · · · · • • · · · 365 99 ................... 365-6 100 ..................... 366 IOI •................. 375-6 101-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366-7 107 .... · ·, ... · · · .... 351,364 IIO .....•..••..•........ 364 III .•................... 365 114 ..................... 364 116 ..................... 365 119 ..................... 365 122 ......... 364, 368, 372 n. 3 125 ............. 364,36~ 369 126 .............. 368-9, 369 127-8 .................. 368 128 ..................... 235 129 ..................... 369 130 ..................... 369 131 ............. 157, 255. 368 132 ............. 350, 369-70 134 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 368, 372 n. 3 135 ..................... 370 136 ..................... 370 141 .................. 370-1 142 · · · · · · · · .. ,,. · · · · 369,371 r4 2-3 .................. 352 153 • 125, 234, 354, 375 n. 2, 377 157 ..................... 353 160 ..................... 354 II. 18 ...................... 376 23 ....... , .......... 168 n. I 34 ...................... 352 35 . , . , · 129, 184 ll. I, 262, 289, 349 n. 2, 352 52 ...................... 191 67 ...................... 264




l .............••...•.... 156 26 • ....... • • •. • • •. •. 335 n. 3 45 • • • • • • • • • • •. • ... • . 213 n. l De optimo genere oratorum 13-14 .................. 164 23 ...................... 164 Orator 4 ....................... 237 18 ...................... 266 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 n. 2, 286

De oratore I. 102-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 132 ................. 185 n. 2 138 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263, 286 174 ..................... 103 206 ................. 159-60 II. 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 u7 ..... rr2, rr7, 185 n. 2, 286 345 · · • • · · • • · · · · • • • • · · · • • 379 III. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l9I, 286 36 ................... 253-4 91 .......... 104, 190, 194 n. 2 Oratio Philippica II. 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 n. 4, 287

De re publica I. 27 ...................... 59 ...................... II. 16 ...................... III. frg. 4 ............... 135, VI. 17-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fragm. inc. sedis 5 . . . . 256, Pro Roscio Amerino 70 .................. Tusculanae disputationes I. 14 .................. 34 ...................... 74 .................. 109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. 57 .................. 60 .................. III. 7 .............. ····· 12 ................... 13 • ....... • • • • • • • • •. 16 ...... • ................ 23 .................. Giiteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV:

156 221 127 22I 160 258



3I •••• • 176,235,258,266,326 69 ...................... 194 IV. ro . . . . . . . . 227, 234, 289, 291, 333 n. I, 334 n. 2 II ... , . , 22I, 332, 333 ll, l, 338 12-4 • • • • • . . 339 n. 3, 343 n. 2 13 ...................... 122 33 • •, •, • ·, •.,, , • I04, II2, 176 43-4 · · · · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · 57 • • • • • • • • • • 335 n. l, 338, 75 ...................... v. 74 ... , , .... , ........ 234, In Verrem, actio II I. 40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246,

176, 291 123 250,303 248, 288 157, 288 185 n. 2 234, 333 344-5 335 ll. l 362 332,338 2

338 339 255 289 287


Protrepticus II. 17,2

40 n.



Ad Demetrianum 3 · · ·, · · · · · · • · · · · · • · · · · · · • 77

De mortalitate 14 ....................



Epigr. II p. 215 V ..... 165 n. 2 Fab. inc. 402 V ....... 185 n. 2 Medea exul, frg. 1,1 R ..... 250 FAUSTUS


Epistulae 4 ....................




5 ..... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · • 394-5 9 • • · • • · • · • · • • • • · • • • • 395 ll. Sermones


5 · • • • · • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 395 n. 2 Fr,oRUS

Epitoma I. 40,7 .................... Vergilius orator an poeta p. 184,1 R ............

105 102

n. 6


opera et dies 293,295-7

229 n. 3 26




InAbdiam praef. ............... 20--l ...............

221,295 2II,282

In Aggaeum l,l ... •, , . , . • • • • · · • • · • • • 133 2,21 sqq. . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 n. 5 In Amos prol. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222, 293 I,I ..................... 221 I,2 ..................... 222 5,3 ..................... 221 5,8 ............. 220, 221, 383 6,2 sqq .................. 221 lib. II praef. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 lib. III praef ......... 221, 223 In Daniclem I,2 ................. 227, 317 2,28 227 3,21 .................... 226 3,46 .................... 226 5,7 ..................... 226 6,4 ..................... 227 11,17 ................... 227 II,29-30 . . . . . . . . . . . 226 n. 6 13,8 ................ 227, 291 Interpr. I. Didymi de spir. sancto praef. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II 5-7 In ecclesiasten p. 388 ................... 127 p. 390 ................... 128 p.395 .......... 128,282,300 p. 405 ................... 128 p. 409 ................... 127 p. 430 .............. 127, 128 p. 434 .............. 129, 292 p. 441 ................... 129 p. 442 ................... 129 p. 448 ................... 127 p. 452 ................... 127 p. 460 ................... 127 p. 468 ................... 129 p. 469 ................... 128 p. 471 ................... 129 In Ephesios 1,4 ..................... 125

1,5 ..................... 125 I,9 ............ , ........ 125 I,I3 ............. , ...... 125 1,22-3 ............. 378 n. 4 3,8-9 .............. 125, 293 4,5-6 .................. 124 4,16 .................... 125 4,20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378 n. I 5,20 .................... 124 5,33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 124 Epistulae I,2,I ........... 100, 103, 300 I,I0,2 ............... IOI, 300 I,14 ................ I02n.2 l, 15,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IOI 2,4 ..................... IOO 3,3,I ..... , , , , ....... 102, 282 3,4,4,, .... ,, .... , ....... JOO 3,6 ................. 102 n. 8 4,1,2 ................ 102 n. 6 5,I ................. I02D.6 6,I,I .................... 103 6,2,I ................ 102 n. I 6,2,2 ............ 102 n. I, 301 7,1,2 .................... 103 7,2,2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 n. 9 7,4,l ...... , ..... , ....... IOI 7,5 ................. 102 n. 4 8,1,1 ............ 102 n. 3, 103 8,I,2 .................... 103 10 2,1 ........... 102 n. 1, ro4 10,3,1 ................... 104 I0,3,3 ........... 102 ll. I, 105 14,2,I, ... , .......... IOI, 104 14,2,3 ............... 104, 297 14,3,2 ....... , ....... IOI, 104 14,3,3 , .......... IOI, 102 D. 5 14,4,I ................... IOI 14,4,2 ........ , , .... , .... IOI 14,ro,r .................. 104 16,2,1 ............... 102 n. 1 17,2,1, .............. IOI, 305 20,5,2 ................... II3 21,2,5 ................... 113 21,13,4 sqq .. 108, 109, 208, 317 22,2,2 ......... , ..... III, 297 1



22,6,6 ........... , .... ,., 22,8,l ....... , ... , . , ..... 22,27,3 .................. 22,27,4 ........... IIO--l, 22,29,6 .................. 22,29,7 ....... , . II0, 310, 22,30,1-6. gr, 93, r10, 269, 22,32, 2 ................. , 27,3,1 ................... 28,7 . . . . . . . . . . . . II3, 273 29,1,1 ................... 30,14,1 .................. 33,l,2 ................... 33,2 .................... 33,3 ................. • .. 33,4 .................... 39,8,1 ... " ............... 40,2,1 ................... 40,2,3 ................ • .. 46,9,2 ............ , ...... 47,l,2 ..... , ....... , .....

ll0 110 II0 282 l 10

319 3r9 II0 II3 ll. l r13 113 318 114 l r3 114

113 113 II3 l 13 265

47,3,I • • • • • • • • • • • · • • • • • · • 295 158 48,2, l .. , .. , ............. 49,I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 159 49,12,3 .................. 160 49,13,1 .................. 158 49,13,3 ..... , , , . , 158, 186 ll. l 49,15,1 ........... "." .... 161 49,15,6 ........ , .. , ...... 145 49,19,5 .................. 160 49,20,2 .............. 160,300 50,I,I , .. , ..... , ........ , 160 50,2,l .......... , .. , ... , . 160 50,2,2 ................... 160 50,2,3 ................... 160 50,4,2 ................... 160 145 5o,4,3 ................... 50,4,4 ................... 161 50,5,2.......... . . . . . 145, 16r 50,5,5 .. ............. 161, 301 52,1,2 ................ 191-2 52,3,4 . ·. , .. , , , · .. , , . · 193-4 52,3,5-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192-3 52,4,1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 n. 2 52,5,3... . . . . . . . . . . . . 192, 300 194 52,7,3 ...................



52,8,1 ............... 194 n. 2 52,8,3 ................... 194 52,9,3 ............... 192, 302 52, I 1,4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 52,13,1 .............. 194 n. 2 52,13,2 .............. 378 n. 3 52,17,2 .. 192, 194 n. 2, 271 n. 2 53,1,3 ................... 186 53,1,4 ................... 187 53,2,2 ................... 186 53,6,1 ............... 188, 317 53,6,2 ................... 188 53,7,1 ................... 188 53,7,3 ................ 188--9 53,9,3 ................... 293 53,II,2 ...... , ....... 156, 187 54,2,1 ................... 195 54,5,1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 195 54,5,3 · ·, · · · · ·,. · .. · · · · · · 195 54,9,5 ................... 195 54,13,5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 54,14,2 ........... 195-6, 278 57,2,2 ............... 165 n. 2 57,5,1 , .......... 163 ll. 5, 271 57,5,2 ................... 164 57,5,4 • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 n. 2 57,5,5 ................... 164 57,12,1 .......... 165 n. 3, 277 57,12,2 ........... 165, ib. n. 6 57,12,4 .............. 165 n. 4 58,r,3 ................... 190 58,2,3 ................... 190 58,4,1 ................... 190 58,7,r ..... , ...... , ...... 191 58,7,2 ............... 190, 191 58,8,1 ................... 191 58,8,2 ................... rgr 58,9,1 ................... 190 58,11,2 .............. 190, 301 60,4,1 ............... 204, 300 60,5,r-2 ............. 202-3 60,5,2 ............... 202, 309 60,14,4 .................. 204 60,16,3 .................. 204 60,16,5 .............. 204, 306 66,1,2 ................ 205-6

HARALD HAGENDAHL 66,2,1 ................... 205 66,3,1 ............... 205, 380 66,3,3 ................... 206 66,5,1 ................... 206 66,5,2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206, 306 66,7,2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 66,7,3 ............... 206, 294 66,9,2 ................... 206 66,rr,r .................. 206 69,2,4 ............... 185 n. 2 69,2,5 ............... 185 n. 3 69,8,4 ............... 185 n. 3 69,8,7 ............... 185 n. 2 70 ............... 208-9, 326 70,2,5 .......... ' ........ 208 70,3,2 ................... 326 73,10,r ....... 184 n. 1, 186-7 74,6,2 , , , , ........... 184 ll. l 77,2,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205, 307 77,6,4 ............... 205, 306 77,II,2 .... , ......... 205, 307 78,17,5 , . , ........... 184 ll. l 78,39,2 , , , , ......... , 184 ll. I 79,6,2,,,,,, ..... , , , , 207, JOI 79,7,8 ................... 207 79,9,J-4 • •,, ·, , , , , , , 207, JOI 81,r,4 ........ 171 n., 269-70 82,3,2 . . . . . . . 168 n. 1, 185 n. 2 84,2,3 ................... 170 84,3,5 ................... 17o 84,4,1 ............... 170, 288 84,6,2 , , , , ..... 94 ll, l, 176-7 84,8,2 ................... 170 84,10,2 .................. 170 85,3,2 ............... 185 n. 2 85,4,1 ............... 185 n. 2 97,1,3 ............... 185 n. 4 100,15,2 ................. 156 102,2,1 ......... See Addenda 102,2,2 . . . . . . . . . See Addenda 105,3,3 .................. 281 106,57,1 , . , .. , .... , .. 184 ll. l 107,1,4 ..... , ........ 202 ll. l 107,3,1 ............... 201-2 107,4,2-7 .......... 197-200 107,4,8 .................. 202

107,8,r .............. 187, 201 107,9, I ..... , ............ 201 107,10,3 ................. 201 107,13,3 ................. 202 107,13,4 ............. 202, 277 108,3,4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 108,4, I .... , ............. 248 108,7,2 .................. 248 108,15,r ................. 249 108, 18, 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 108,20,4 .............. 248--9 108,21,4 ................. 249 108,26,5 ................. 249 108,33, I ..... , . , , , , . , , , · · 24 7 109,2,4 ........... , .. II2 ll, 2 109,2,5 .......... 176 n. 2, 287 115,3 .................. 223 117,1,2 .................. 250 118,2,4 .................. 251 l 18,3,3 ................. , 251 I 18,5,2 .................. 251 II8,7,4 ........... 251-2, 300 II9,1,3 .............. 246, 272 120,4, I .... , .......... , , , 383 120,10,12 ................ 246 121,6,6 .................. 246 121,8,7 .................. 246 121,8,15 ................. 331 121,10,3 ................. 246 121,I0,5 ......... 186 ll. I, 247 122,4,3 .................. 251 123,4,2 .............. 253, 283 123,13,r ............. 252,281 123, 14,6 ................. 253 123,15,3 ................. 252 123,16,4 .......... 252-3, 306 125,5, I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 125,6,r ............... 253-4 125,7,2 .................. 255 125,7,6 .............. 255, 293 125,11,3 ................. 254 125,12,2 ................. 255 125,14,r ................. 255 125,16,2 ................. 255 125, 18,1 ................. 255 125,18,3 ............. 254, 275



126,2,2 ............... 259-60 127,5,2 .................. 250 127,6,1-2 ........... 250, 303 127,12,2-3 ........... 259, 302 127,13,1 ................. 259 128,l,l .................. 256 128,4,3 .................. 256 128,4,5 .................. 256 128,5,1 .................. 260 12 9,4,3 .................. 247 12 9,4,4 .................. 247 130,1,2 .................. 258 See Addenda 130,3,2 ......... 13°,5,3 .................. 257 13°,5,5 .................. 257 130,6,4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256-7 130,7,3 .................. 257 257 130,7,8 .................. 130,7,12 ............. 257, 307 130,8,l .................. 257 130,ll,l .... , . , ..... , , ... 257 130,12,r ................. 258 130,13,2 ................. 258 130,16,3 ................. 258 130,16,6 ................. 258 130,17,2 ................. 258 130,19,r ................. 258 133,1,2-3 ..... 260-1, 334-6 133,2,1 .............. 317 n. 3 133,2,4 .................. 261 133,3,4 .................. 261 133,3,7 ........... 261, 274-5 140,10,2 ................. 247 140,16,3 ................. 247 143,2,1 .................. 267 147,8,1 ....... , . , .... 185 n. l

In Ezechielem 1,6-7


237, 241, 242, 332 n,


334, 330-7, 377 ll, 3, 378 1,8-9 .................. 241 1,13-14 ........... , 242, 300 1,27-8 .............. 241-2 238, 291 4,9 sqq .............. 8,10 ................. 242-3 8,12 ................ 238, 289 9,9-io .... , ........ , . . . 242



16, 10 ................... 238 17,19-20 ........... 243,277 18,1-2 ............. 238, 296 18,5-6 , , , .. , . , .. , , , 237 ll, 3 2 7,7 ..................... 243 28,11 ................... 237 , , , 243 30,l sqq. , , .. , ........ 32,7-8 ................. 242 243 37,15 sqq • • • • • • .......... 238 39,17 sqq ................ 40,5 sqq .. , . . . . . . . . . . 243, 302 242 40,28 sqq ................ 44,9 sqq. • • • • • • • • • • ..... • 244 44,17 sqq. • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • 243 lib. III praef. . . . . . 238--9, 259 287,289,293,321 lib. VII praef. . . . . . . . . . 243-4 lib. XII praef. . . . . . . . 237, 238 lib. XIII praef. . . . . . . . . . . . 237 lib. XIV praef. 239-41, 278, 380-7

In Galatas 1,4 ..................... , , ... 3, I , , , ..... 4,15-16 ................ 5,16 .................... 5,19-20 ............ 5,22 .................... 5,26 ................

122 121, 122 121 123 121, 123 122 122, 123 lib. II praef. . . . . . . . . . 122, 300 lib. III praef. . . . . 19, u9-20, 319, 321, 323 , , . .

In Habacuc 2,9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134, 239, 321 2, 19-20 . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 n. 2 lib. I praef. . . . . . . . . . . 134 n. 2 lib. II praef. . . . . . . . . . . 134-5

Homiliae Origenis in Lucam praef .................... In Ieremiam I,Il-12 , , , , , , , , , , . · ·, · · 4,11-12 ................ 6,4-5 .................. 6,20 ........ ; ...........

II7 245 244 2 44 244

ro,3-5 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2 44 II,,5 . , . , , .. , . , , , , , , , , 244-.5

HARALD HAGENDAHL 13,26 ................... r8,r4 .............. 29,r sqq ................. 3r,9 ................

245 • • • • • 345 378 245, 272

In Ioel 1,2-3 .................. 220 1,4 ...... 220, 221, 331-3, 337 1,5 ..................... 221 Contra Iohannem 1,3,5,6,r2,34,37,39 • • • • • 167-8 12 .................. 167, 297 In Ionam 1,8 ..................... 210 2,2 ............. , .... 2I0-I 3,6-7 .................. 210 Adversus Iovinianum 142, 143-4, 157, 270, 301 I. l ... 3 ................... 157, 288 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146, 293, 297 34 ...................... 157 36 ...................... 146 41-9 ......... 146-7, r50-4 41 ...................... 145 145, 155-6 47 ............... 48 ... 146, 152 11. l, 153, 155-6 II. 6---14 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 147-5o 7 ................... 146,155 9 ....................... 154 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 ll. l, 155 II


14911. I

12 ...................... 144 13-4 ................ 148-9 21 ...................... 145 22 ...................... 145 1 44 36 ...................... In Isaeam 2,8 ..................... 230 5,21 .................... 234 II,6 sqq. . . . . . 232, 233-4, 291 13, 10 ................ 382-3 15,31-2 ............ 378 n. I 21, r3 sqq ................ 230 26,14 ................... 231 26,19 ................... 231 27,1 .................... 230 30,26 .... ' .............. 232

38,16 sqq. 234,291 234, 29r 40,12 sqq. 41,21 sqq ................ 234 42,1 sqq ................. 235 44,6 sqq ................. 229 46,1-2 ................. 230 47,1 sqq ................. 235 56,3 .................... 230 57,16 . . . . . .......... 230-1 66,7 .................... 230 66, 18-9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 66,20 ................... 231 66,22-3 ................ 231 lib. XII praef. . . . . . . . . 232-3 lib. XVI praef. . . . . . . . . . . . 232 Contra Luciferianos l ....................... 106 4 ....................... 106 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 20 .............. 106, 279, 300 22 ...................... 106 In Matthaeum 2,11 ................ 2I2 ll. 5 12,26 ............... 212, 293 14,11 ............... 213 n. 1 18,19-20 ........... 213 11. I In Michaeam 1,16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136, 302 7,5-7 ..... , , 135-6, 186 n. I 7,14 sqq ................. 136 lib. II praef ...... 137-8, 27r, 272,300, 32r In Nahum 2,1-2 ..... _.......... 133-4 3,1 sqq .......... 134, 378 n. 2 Nomina Hebraica p. 104 ................ 130 n. praef. . . . . . . . . . . . 129 n. 5, 293 In Osaeam 2,16--r7 2r9, 222,223, 237 n. 4. 4,15-16 ................ 219 lib. II praef. 218, 281, 283, 300 lib. III praef. ......... 218-9 Adversus Pelagianos prol. ...... 261, 265, 268, 309 I. 9 ....................... 263




267 267, 276 2, 262-3, 286 , , . , ..

13 .................. 14 ..... , . IIO


288, 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262, 282, 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263-4, 22 .................. 264, 23 ............... 264-5, 24 ...................... 25 ...................... III ll. 2, 266, 297, 26 ...... 28 ......................




6 .....



266, 332

I .....•...••••..........

4 ..............••....... II


16 ...................... 17 ...................... 19 ......................



310 289 287 282 267 267 267 302 265 265 336 266 267 268 270 266 266

Praefationes Bibliae vulg. editionis Dan. praef. . . . . . . . . . . 132 n. 2 Esdr. et Nehem. praef ..... See Addenda 132 n. 2 lob praef ............ Ios. praef. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278 Par. praef. . . . . . . . . . . . 132 n. 2 Psalm. praef. . . . . . . . . . 132 n. 2 Quaestiones Hebraicae in Genesim praef ........ 130-32, 300,321 p. 319 ................... 130

p. 353 ................... p. 355 ................... Adversus Rufinum I. l , ......... 5 ...................

297 130

174, 182 180, 387 6 ....................... 181 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 16 ............... 87, 175, 275 17 .. 175, 176, 180, 181, 270, 291 30 . . 181, 182, 290, 324, 326-7 31 .................. 182, 278 II. 15 ...................... 179 16 ...................... 180 17 .................. 183, 284 III. 6 ....• , , ...... , ........ , 179 , .....

, , .



9 ....................... 180 1 3 ...................... 1 79 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 176 28 ................... 181-2 29 .................. 180,275 31 ...................... 181 32 ...................... 180 39 • • • •,,, • 94 ll. l, 17], 290-l 39-40 ............... 177-9 4° ...................... 177

De situ et nominibus

p. 202 ................

130 n.

In Sophoniam 1,15-16 2 ,5-7

................ ..................

133 1 33

In Titum 2,15 ....................


Tractatus Anecd. Mareds. III:

p. 130, I



, , . . . . . . . . .

ib. p. 215,7 .............. ib. p. 407,20 ............. ib. III: 3, p. 83,20 ........ Contra Vigilantium 8 ....................... 10 ..................

De viris illustribus praef .................... De perpetua virginitate (contra Helvidium) l

. , , ..

, , ...

, , ....

246 246, 270


Mariae , , . , • , ,

17 , ..................... 22 , . , . , , , .. , . , ... , , .. , . .

Vita Hilarionis pro!. ................ Vita Malchi 6 .......................


II2 I 12




n8 118 118 297

7 ....................... 8 ....................... 9 .........•.........

214 214 214 214

Vita Pauli 4 ....................... 9 ....•..................

16 ..................

' ...

105 105 105


In Zachariam 1,18-9


216-7, 333-4, 337, 377 n. 3, 378 n. 6 8, 16-17 ................ 217 8,18-19 ............ 217n.4 14,1-2 ................. 217 lib. II praef ...... 216, 278, 302 lib. III praef ............. 216 HORATIUS

Carmina I. 3,8 .....................

136 218, 281 ............... 125, 281 ........ 131, 204, 248 ............. 221, 241 ........ , 102 ll. l, 282 ...... ro2 n. 1, 124, 251,

4,13 ................

12,45 II. ro,II-2 14,1-2 17,5-6 III. 3,7-8

1 44 .................... 2,56 . . . . . . . 127, 156, 230, 282 2,69-70 .. , . 102 ll. l, 105, 125, 181,200,282,326 3,19--20 , , , .. , , ..... II7, 283 3,31-2 ................. 182 144 4,15-6 ................. rr,27 ............... 102 n. 1 II. 1,50 ............ 136, 186 n. 1 1,70-I ............. 182, 326 1,114-7 ................ 180 I,rr5-7 .... , ........... 188

De arte poetica 21-2 ............... 113,202 60-1 ............... 218, 283 88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 94 ...................... 195 r33-4 .................. 164 139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 147 , , ... , .... , , .... 102 ll, l. 270-r .................. 181 359-60 ................. 170 390 ............. 157 n. 2, 158

257, 301 256 117 247 110

16,1 .................... 27,11-2 ................ 30,1 .................... IV. 3,22

Epodi 4,14 ....................

Satirae I. 3,1-3

.............. 3,68 ................ 3,68-9 ......... 3,96-7 ............. 3,120-r ............

129 102 III, 207, 282, 262, 262,



1,15 .... 151, 161, 165, 181, 284 14,390 .. , . . . . . . . . . . . 395 n. 2

n. r 282 335 282 282

4, 1 -4 · • · • • • • · · · • • · · · · · · 255 4,34 •,, ... , ............. 161 III, 207, 261, 264, 6,66-7 .... 282 8,1-4 .................. 229 9,59-60 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 ro,1-4 ................. 170 10,3-4 ................. 250 10,34 . . . . . . . . . . . 132 n. 2, 266 10,72-3 122, 128, 184 n. l,

Epistulae I. 1,41-2



......... 128, 282, 300 1,99-100 ............... 127 2,40 ................ 216, 302


I. 250---1 . , ............





Divinae institutiones I. 16,3 ..................... 21,14 21,48

II. 3, 10 -II

58 58 58-9

59 60 60---1 16,14 . , , , ......... 52 ll. l, 62 17 .................... 61-2 17,10 .................... 62 17,28 .................... 61 50 17,41-2 ................. 18,6 ..................... 62 27,ro ................. 63, 86 28,3-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85-6 · · ... · · · · . · · ...

sqq .................. 14,1 sqq ............... Il,l


.................... .................




IV. 28,13 .................... 63 VI. 10,7 ..................... 63 10,13-15 ..............•. 64 14,7-17 ............ 338-41 14,7,8 ................... 338 15,2 ................. 338-9 15,7 sqq ................. 339 15,15-17 ............... 340 16-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340--1 51 VII. 1,7 sqq ................... 3,9 ................... 391 n. 3,13 .............. 36 n. 4, 65 12,l sqq ..... , , . , .. , ... 66-8 12,5 .... , , ..... 52 ll. I, 67-8 13,9 ..................... 51 27,6 , , , , . , , , , , , , . . 52 ll. l, 69 Epitome div. inst. 20,4 ..................... 69 Deira Dei 4,2 ...................... 71 4,7 • · · • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7 1 n. 5 4,8 .......... , ....... 72 ll, l 8,r ............ 72 n. 2, 72-3 8,3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 ib. n. 2 8,6 .................. 72 n. 2 IO • •, • •,, •, • • • •, • • • • • • 73-5 10,5 ..................... 74 10,16 .................... 74 De opificio Dei 3,1-2 ................ 55-6 6,1 , , , , .. , ............... 56 6,2-3 ................ 56-7 6,8 .....•................ 56 8,12 .................. 56, 57 19,I sqq. , , , , . , , , , · · · · · · · • 57 19,3 ..... , .. , . , 52 ll, I, 57, 64

Lrvrus XXXIX. 43 ............... XLV. 12 ............... CXIV, frg. 45 W .............

213 n. l 226 n. 6 218

Lucn,1us 1299 M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 n. 4 LUCANUS

I. 313 .....................


IV. 10 ...................... V. 260 ..................... 274 ..................... X. 133-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

230 244 252 230


De rerum natura I. I-2 ... ,., .....•.. ,, •.... 40 37 · · · · · .... , ... , ........ 386 44-49 ( =II. 646---51) .. 46-7 64 ................. 62-3, 86 75-77 (cf. 594-6) , , ... · .. 25 83 ....................... 58 IOI ..• , , ...•....•. , •..... 58 112-3 ................... 22 139 ................. 125,275 159-60 .................. 74 205-7 ................... 74 302-4 ................... 43 304 ...................... 80 321 .................. 26 n. 3 520-r ................... 28 705-15 .................. 27 932 ................... 58, 63 936-8 ..... ·. 64,261, 274-5 954-7 ................... 28 II. 14-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 28 .................. 205,275 147-8 ................... 30 3o3-7 ................... 31 517-8 ................... 31 633-4 ................... 4° 646---51 · • • · · · · · · .. · 46-7, 73 870-3 ................... 24 991-2 .. , , , , , , . 52 ll. l, 57, 63 999-1001 ...... , , , ... , 67-8 IIOl-4 ................ 62, 79 u44-74 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • · · · 77 1153 ..................... 30 u53-4 • • • • • • • • · · • • • • 33 n. 3 III. 161-2 ......... , ...... · · · 39 56 359 sqq ................... 417-614 .............. 66-7 22, 39 462 .................... 25 463-4 ................... 484-6 ............•...... 39


410 53 1- 2 • • • • • · · · • · 612--4 .................. 624-6 ................... 721 .................. 971 ...................... 1041 ..................... 1043-4 ..................

• • • • •

37 n. 3 68 44 45 n. 2 39 62 61

IV. II-13 see I. 936--8 547-50 ..................

417-8 · · · · · · · ·. · · · · · · · · · · 79 962_965 ......... 129, 246, 275 1072-3 .................. 25 rn74-7 ............ 182, 276 I 138-1286 ..... , . , ..... , . 78


634-7 • • • • · · · · · · · · · · · · · · • 43 636 ............... 15, 25 ll. I 640 . , ... , , . , , , .... 25 ll. I, 37 658-60 ............... 24-5 673-4 · · · · · · · · · · · • • • • · · · · 43 822 sqq ................... 56 1168 ..................... 41 V. prooem ................. 388 6-8 ..................... 61 8 sqq ................. 18-20 50-1 .................... 61 59-61 ................... 22 64-69 ................... 21 69-70 ................... 22 76-81 ................... 21 96 ....................... 30 148-51 .................. 44 156-7 ................ 36, 65 165-7 ................... 65 222-30 .. 38, 42, 55-6, 80-1 226-7 ................... 81 23o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 79, 249 n. 4 231-4 ................... 38 240---246 ................. 41 330---6 , • • , • · • • · · · · · ·., ... 335-7 ................... 575-6 ................... 660-2 ................... 783-820 ................. 808 ...................... 837 sqq ................... 892-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257, 9o5 ................. 254, 925-1457 ....... ······ 9 2 7-8 ................... 1154 ..................... u98-1202 ...............

1448--g · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 33 1452-5 .................. 34 145 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 VI. 24-8 ................ 69, 388 52-3 ................. 59, 69

35 62 30 79 60 60 56 276 275

34-5 33 38



I. 38,1-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183, 284 II. 12,4 ................ 258, 284 FEr,rx 2,1 ...................... 2,1-2 ..................


79 249

5,9 · · · · · · · • • • · · · · • • · · · · · · 79 34, 2 · • • • • · · · • • • · · · • • • 77 n. 3 OVIDIUS

Amores III. 2,83 Metamorphoses I. 19-20 .............. III-2 .................. 127-148 .............

II. 44-5 IV. 57-8 PAUI,INUS


129, 283 231 390-2

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 384 ................... 219


fidei 2 ...................



385 n. 2


Carmina 4, 1 · · · · · · · · · · · • • · · · · · · · · 385 6,1 ................. 385 n. 3 6,276 ................... 385 PAUI,L~US


519 • • - - • ............

385 n. 3


1,1 , .................... 1,29 ....................

214 145



1,32-3;35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 1,46 ................ 145, 156 1,57 • · • • • • • • • • • • • • · • • • • • 145 1,58-60 ................ 255 I,104 ....... , , , ......... IIO l,II5 ............... 145, 161 1,128 ................... 145 2,16 ................ 145, 230 2,37-8 , .. , . , ........... Il3 3,18 ................ 102 n. 5 3,30 ............ 180, 190, 247 3,80-2 ................. 255 3,II7-18 ............... 143 4,24 ............ see Addenda 5,12 .................... 255 5,153 ............... 250, 303 6,24 .................... 113 PHII,OSTRATUS

Vita Apollonii Tyanensis l. 13 .................. VIII. 5 .......................

251 n. l 168


Phaedo 64A .................... 250 Leges XII. 2 p. 942D . . . . . . . . . . . 213 n. 1 De re publica IV. 15 sqq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 n. 1 V. 18 p. 473D .............. 210 PLAUTUS

Aulularia 49 .................. 181, 270 195 ..... 158 n. 1, 171 n. 1, 270 Captivi 80-1 ............... 201,270 Curculio 55 .................. 190,270 l\lienaechmi 247 ................. 217,270 Pseudolus 25-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144, 270 PLINIUS


N aturalis historia XIII. 70 ..... , ......

, . , . . . 102 n. 9





Epistulae II. 3,8 ..................... 3,9-IO ................. IV. 7,3 .............

186 186 184 n. 1, 186


Cato minor 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 POMBRIUS,


De vita contemplativa III. 18-30 ............... 19,2 ................ 20!1 .................... 20,2 .................... 21 ...................... 22 ...................... 23 ...................... 24 ...................... 25 ...................... 26 ...................... 27 ...................... 28 ...................... 29,1 .................... 29,2 ................. 31 ...................

372-7 372 n. 3 372 373 373 373 373 374 375 375 375 376 377 375-6 345-6


De abstinentia IV. 2,4,6,11,15, 16, 17, 19,22 De vita Pythagorae 19,22,33,40,41,42,45 PROBAE

148-9 178----g


29 ...................... 385 64 ......•............... 385 136 ..................... 385 403 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189, 385 624 ..................... 189 PRUDENTIUS

Apotheosis 661-3 Psychomachia



I · · · · · • · • · · · · · · • · · · · · · · · 384



Sententiac 628W ...............

156, r87


Institutio oratoria I. pr. 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199, 295 pr. 7 ............ 211 n. 3, 295 1,26;25;27;20;34;23 .... 197--9 1,4;5;6;9 . , . . . . . . . . . . 199-200 1,12-14 ................ 201 II. 8,11 .................... 254 17,21 ............... 160, 295 275 III. 1,4 ..................... 7,15 .................... 379 IV. 1,61 ........ 165 n. 6, 179, 295 2,91 .................... 179 VIII. pr. 23 ............ 246-7, 296 5,18 ........ II2, 137, 166 ll. l, 185 n. 3, 258, 296 6,44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238, 296 X. 1 ............... 186 n. 1, 222 1,76 sqq ............. 158 n. 2 XII. 1,1 ................. 185n.3 l,35 , . , , , , , , , , , ...... , .. 160 II,28 , , , 131, 179, 290 ll, I, 296 PS.

Declamationes maiores 3,16 .................... 10,2 .................... 12,23 ............... 13,2 .............



Carmen paschale II. 187--9 .................. 384 III. 62-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384



3,2 ................. u8, 292 8,4 ..................... 118 10,5 ............ 106, 125, 293 rr,3 . 128, 148 n. 1, 248--9, 293 20,4 ................ 180, 258 Bellum Iugurthinum 2,3 .............. 77, 239, 2 93 3,4 ............. See Addenda 4,2 ............. 129 n. 5, 293 4,4 ................. 132 n. 2 ro,6 ................ 212, 293 18,2 ................ 255, 293 18,8 ................ 222, 293 19,2 .... 129, 217 n. 4, 238, 293 48,3 ................ 222, 293 63,6-7 ................. 206 78,4 .................. 130 n. Historiarum fragmenta II. 64 lvI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 106, II2, 246, 255 IV. 54 ;\>[ ••••••• 226 61 M .................... 77 M ................. 130 n.

104 104 168, 180 118, 131-2


6, 10 ...................


I. 8,15 ................ II. 5,20 ................ IV. praef. 7 .............



De beneficiis


adversus Hieronymum II. 7 ............. gr, 94 n. II. 8 .......................


177 325

VI. 29,1 Dialogi IX. 14,1 ................ Epistulae



104, 297 167, 297 167, 297

, 379





45,7 • • • • · • • •, · ·, 108,8 sqq ................

Catilinae , , , , , , .. 129, 292 123, 124, 148 n. r, 155

. , , , , , ...

1,2 .....

167,297 185 n. III,


266,297 299

Troades ;110-2

, ..•.•...•....

n8, 297







Vita Vergilii p. 59 R .............. p. 66 R ..................

I22, 216 131


Adelphoe prol. 17-9 .......... 43-4 ........... 409 .................

138, 272 146,155,273 245, 272

Andria prol. 5-7 . . . . . . . . . . . 130, 137 prol. 16 ................. 138 prol. 17 ......... 163 n. 5, 271 prol. 18-rg ............. 138 prol. 20---r ...... n3, 161, 271 prol. 22-3 . . . . . . 137, 192, 271 6r ........ 249 n. 3, 257, 273 n. 68 ......... 121, 214, 267, 271, 302,323 135-6 .................. 386 566 ................. 146,273 941 ................. 217, 270 Eunuchus prol. 8 ......


De anima 1,2 ................. 5,6 ...................... 19,7 sq ................... Apologeticus 18,4 ........... , .... 39,15 ............... 46 ...................... Adversus Hermogenem 1 ................... 8 ................... Adversus Iudaeos

251 ll. 2 So

Sr 202 ll. I 253,260 154 112n.4 317 n. 3 80

9 ........................

Adversus Marcionem. III. 13 ....................... IV. 8 ........................ De monogamia 17 ...................... De praescriptione haereticorum 7 ............... IlOll.

80 So 154 2,309


Inc. fab. frg. 1 R ..


n. 3, II3



172 n. 3, 218, 271,300 prol. 18 ............. 137, 272 prol. 23-4 .............. 131 prol. 41 ............. 128, 273 236 ....... , , IIO, 133, 273 ll. 2 263-4 .................. 161 445 ..................... 146 732 . . . . . . . . 146, 155, 195, 272

Hautontimoroumenos 520-1 .............. 136, 796 . . . . . . . . . 102 n. 2, 173 805-6 .............. 244, Hecyra 201 ........ 136, 146, 155,

302 n. 2 273 273

Phormio 186 ..................... 419 ..................... 506-7 .............. 594 ................. 780 .....................

267 267 168, 273 246, 272 267

Aeneis I. 2-3



37 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Il3 80 ................... 383-4 go .............. 242, 277, 300 125 ..................... 384 244 135 ..................... 142 ..................... 384 173 ..................... 248 177-8 .................. r8r 218 ................. II8, 277 229-30 ................. 385 288 ..................... 248 145 316---7 .................. 338 ............. 122, 277, 300 364 ........ 206,251,252,300 416---7 .......... 130,220,244 446 ............. 219 n. 3, 277 539-41 ................. IOI 607-9 .................. 245 614 ..................... 227

HARALD HAGENDAHL 664 ............. 188, 189, 385 729-30 ................. 219 744-46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 II. 65-6 . . . . . . . . . . . 165 n. 3, 277 90 .................. 183, 277 329 . . . . . . . . . . . . . See Addenda 36r-5 .............. 259, 302 368-9 .................. 204 390 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243, 277 650 ............. 105, 188, 189 755 .. 184 n. I, 243, 280-1, 303 774 ................. 257, 277 III. 29-30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 n. I 48 ...................... 257 56---7 ................... 1o5 98 .................. 220, 243 III ................. 133,278 120 ..................... 244 126---7 .................. 248 193 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . roo, 300 194 ..................... IOO 195 ..................... 100 284 ..................... 127 4o5 ..................... 243 420-1 .................. 134 426 ................. 185 n. 4 428 ................. 185 n. 4 435-6 · · · · · · . · · , · · .. 257, 307 436 ........ 182,192,278,300 490 ..................... 207 516---7 .................. 220 578-82 ............. 220n. 4 658 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 ll. I IV. 28----9 ................... 207 32-3 ................... 195 32-4 ............... 252, 281 42-3 ........... 230,247,259 67 ...................... 255 172 ..................... 144 298 IOI, 113,160,195,257,278 IOI, 278 323 • .......... ,, .... 336 • • • • • • . • • • • • • Il3, 219, 278 IOI, 206 366-7 . • .. , ......... 379-80 ................. 242 402-7 .................. 118 548-52 ................. 252

569-70 ............. 9 ....................... 89 ...................... 217 ................. 368-460 . . . . . . . . See 588-91 ................. VI. 27 ...................... 29-30 ....... 240-1, 30 ...................... 56 ...................... 266 ..................... 278 ..................... 497 ..................... 541-3 .................. 585-6 .................. 625-7 . . . . . 204, 205,


672 .....................

127, 136 100 242 160, 300 Addenda 240 240 278,387 216 384 259 346 113 128 181 206, 253, 3o6---7 105

724-7 ... ······· 124,231,242 725-7 .................. 127 726---7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r34 n. z 73o-4 .................. 34 2 733 .... 134, 216, 242, 261, 332, 333, 334, 34 1 n. 3, 342, 346 733-4. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 335 745-7 · · · · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · 394 748-51 ................. 178 845-6 .......... 180,205,307 VII. I I 2-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 247 ..................... 226 3 2 4 • • • • · • • • • • • • • • • • • 133 n. 5 IOI 337-8 • • • • • • • • .......... 417 .............. 195-6, 278 769 ................. 231, 279 777 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 279 VIII. 43-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 n2-4 .................. 210 138-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 n. 3 193 sqq .................. 246 287-8 .............. 205,307 298-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 n. 4 322-3 ...... , . . . . . . . . 40 n. 3 389-90 • · • • • • • • • . • . . IIO, 279 517 ..................... 202 660-1 .............. 121 n. 4 698 ............. 230,243,281

LA'l'IN FATHERS 699 723 727 13 .


, , , .. , , , ......... ................. ................. .................

243, 204, 231, 257,

281 300 252 279

59 · · • ·, · · ·. · ·,,, .. · · · · · ·. 37 93 • • • • , . . . . . . . . . . 40 n. 3, 385 X. 18 ........... 40 n. 3, 385, 386 79 .................. 257, 279 100 .................... , 385 501 ..................... 127 640 . . . . . . . . . 134 n. 2, 144, 279 843 .. ,.,.,,,.,,,,,,. II8, 279 861-2 .................. 247 875-6 .............. 180, 387 XI. 104 ..................... 127 139 ..................... 205 159 ............. See Addenda 283 , .. , ..... , ....... IIO, 170 283-4 ............... I60-I 361 ...... , ...... IO~ 27~ 300 374-5 .................. 160 508 ..................... 145 XII. 50-1 ................... 161 59 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ...... IOI 486 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105, 279 603 ..................... 190 6II ................. IOI, 300

Eclogae r,82-3 ................. 3,26----7 ................. 3,49 .................... 3,86 .................... 3,89 ................. 3,103 , . , . , , ............. 4,6----7 .................. 4,60 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,61 .. , ...... , . , .. , , 6,9-10 ................. 8,63 . . . . . . . . 192, 265, 8,75 ................ 9,51 .................... 9,51-4 ................ 9,53-4 ... '.... .....

244 181 268 218 244-5 I2I 188 202, 258 I 13, 276 132 267, 302 133, 160 191 ' 281 192, 281

Georgica I. 57-9 ................... 108-10 .................

243 254



132 ..................... 245 145--6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 n. 2 153--4 .................. 106 154 ................. 267, 276 156 ..................... 106 201-3 .................. 267 228 ..................... 243 380-1 .................. 242 396 ..................... 231 468 ..................... 242 II. 117 ..................... 130 150 ..................... 130 256 ..................... 247 272 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182, 326 3 2 5-7 .................. 261 402 ............. 127, 241, 280 461-2 .................. 206 470 , . , , ... , , ... , , . , , IOI, 277 478-80 ................. 181 484 ..................... 191 III. 53 ....... , . . . . . . . . . . 191 n. I 66-8 ................... 204 67-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190, 281 40 n. 3 92 sqq ................ 147-51 ................. 219 261-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100, 277 280-1 .................. 245 284 ............. 221, 241, 247 IV. 83 ......... 195,202,207,277 147-8 ........ , ......... IOI 176 ............. 132, 277, 300 221-2 .............. 124, 277 267 317 sqq .................. VITA HII.ARII 4 ....................... 380 5 .................... 380-1 VITA LANDIBERTI 17 ...................... 386 BIBI.IA SACRA Deut. 21,10-13


109, 208, 320,326 Matth. 4,8-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . 384 Marc. 1,n ........... 189, 385 1 Cor. 3,19 ................ 26 2 Cor. 6,14-5 ............ 319

Addenda Hier. Esdr. et Nehem. praef. Frustra autem, ut ait quidam, niti neque aliud fatigando nisi odium quaere1'e extremae dementiae est_. Sall. Iitg. 3, 4 Frustra autem niti neque aliud se fatigando nisi odium quaerere extremae dementiae est. Ib. Itaque licet et excetra sibilet victorque Sinon incendia iactet..,.. Verg. Aen. II. 329 Victorque Sinon incendia miscet. Epist. 102, 2, 1 Sed illa est vera inter amicos reprehensio, si nostram peram non videntes aliorum iuxta Persium manticam consideremus. Cf. Pers. 4, 24. Ib. 102, 2, 2 Ne solus mihi de poetis aliquid proposuisse videarfs, memento Daretis et Entelli. Cf. Verg. Aen. V. 368-460. Ib. 130, 3, 2 Felix morte sua _. *Verg. Aen. XI. 159 Felix morte tua (Hilberg).

General index (Chief passages in italics) Abraham, 350 Academics, 7r, 72, 26r, 275, 299, 335, 343, 344, 346 1Midipoeov,233, 25r, 291 Aeneas, 257, 307, 387 Aeschines, r64, 179 n. 2, 186, 187 Aesculapius, 19, 231 Aesopus, 249 Africanus, temporum scriptor, 228 n. 3 Alaric, 236, 249, 259, 302 Alexander of Aphrodisias, 159 n. 1, 179



Alexander, Gallic monk, 217 Alexandria, Christian school at, 310 Alypius, 256 Ambrose, 3r9 n. r, 341 n. 1; De spir. s. u5-7; Expos. evang. sec. Luc. n7; De off. min. based on Cicero's De off. 347-72; Stoic influence 347, 348, 354, 364, 371-2; conception of decorum 371; Christian conception substituted for Stoic conception 350, 351, 353-4, 358, 371-2; disowns misleading scientific studies 351-2; about sources 350, 355; use of Cic. Lael. 358-9; 362; plagiarism 372; De exc. fr. Satyri 379-80; criticized by Jerome u5-7 Ammianus Marcellinus, 379 n. 2 Anchlses, 189 angellus, 14 Anastasius, pope, 171 Anaxagoras, 203 Andronicus Alipius, 225 Anecdota Maredsolana, 213-4 antepassio (:neo:nd0sia),336 n. r Giiteb. Univ. Arsskr. LXIV: 2

Antigenidas, 160 Antiochus Epiphanes, 224 Antipater, 175, 179 n. 2 Antonius, pioneer of monasticism, 189 dl;{wµa, 176 n. 1, 291 dnd0eta, 261 Apicius, 294 n. 2 Apollinaris of Laodicea, 107, 123, r59, 209, 215 n. 2, 224, 228 Apollo, 180, 384, 387 Apollonius of Tyana, 187 apologists, see Arnobius, Cyprian, Lactantius, Minucius Felix, Tertullian applause in the church, 313 Arator, 388, 389 Arcesilaus, 179 n. 2 Archippus, 177 Archytas Tarentinus, 160 Aristides, 177, 222 Aristippus, 126 Aristotle, 51, 64, r26, 150, 151, 158, 159, 172, 179, 189, 210, 213, 262, 275, 324, 367 Aristoxenus, 5r, 139 Arnobius, 10, II, I2-47, 75-6, 81-2, influenced 209, 229, 388, 389-92; by Lucretius I2-47 (Lucretian words 13-6); eulogy of Christ I7 sqq., 60, 69, 388; opposed to Epicurcanism 20, 27, 31, 8r-2, 87; rejects natural science 26; agnosticism 23, 26--7, 29; pessimism 32-3, 35, 392; holds the soul as mediae qualitatis and perishable 31-9; the world not created for the sake of men 35-7; denies Divine wrath 45-7; polemics against pagan 27


religion 39--45; use of Virgil 40, Plato 24, 32, 33, 38, Ovid 390-2; method of quotation 48 artes liberates, 264, 317-8 Asper, 175, 275 Atarbius, 163 Athanasius, 196 augmen, 14 Augustine, 96, 223, 256, 260, 3II, 319 n. 3, 331, 348, 393 n. r, 394; view of the four passions 34r-5

au:riliatus, 14 Avernus, 'hell', 389 Berosus, 226 Blaesilla, 126 books, copying of, 183, 254, 325 Brutus, used by Jerome, 93-4, 177 Caecilius, 164, 270, 274 Caesar, commentarii, 265 Caesarea, the library at, 162 Calagurris, 246 Callinicus Sutorius, 225, 226 Calpurnius Flaccus, 297 Cardinal virtues, 347-Br; in Ambrose 348-72, Iulianus Pomerius 372-7, Jerome 205, 216-7, 291, 377-8, 380, rhetoric 378-80, Ammianus Marcellinus 379 n. 2, Vita Hilarii 380-1; Prudence 350-3, 371, 376 -7; Justice 352, 353-----9, 373-6; Fortitude 359-62, 372-3; Temperance 362-71, 372; Spes, Fides, Caritas, Humanitas 381 Carneades, 126, 160, 179 n. 2, 202, 325 Cato, 166 n. 1, 206, 222 Celsus, 159, 209 Ceres, rg Genta, 189, 387-8; Vergiliocentones 188, 189, 190, 385; cento Probae 189, 385 charity, 358 Christianity founded by piscatores and rusticani, II9 n. 3, 213, 313 Chrysippus, So, 166 n. r, 175, 177, 179 n. 2, 299

Cicero, 10-r, 48, 51, 52 n. r, 62, 63, 71-2, 73, 75, 86, gr, 93, 94, 95, 103-4, 106, 110, 112, 113, 117, II8--g, 120, 122-3, 125, 127, 129, 131, 132 n. 2, 134, 135, 136, 139, 155-6, 157, 158, 159--60, 164, 165, 179, 167, r68, 170, 172, r74-7, 184-5, r86 n. 1, 189, 190-r, 192 -4, 202-3, 206, 208, 209, 210, 2II, 213 n. I, 214, 216-7, 218, 219, 221, 222, 226, 227, 229, 232-3, 233-5, 237, 238, 239, 245, 246, 247, 248, 250, 251, 253, 254, 255, 256, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265-6, 269, 276, 279, 284-92, 296, 298-9, 300, 304, 308, 309, 310, 314, 316, 317, 319, 321-2, 324, 325, 326, 327, 332-6, 338-9, 341-2, 343-6, 347-77, 379; influence on Ambrose 347-72, Augustine 34r-5, Jerome 284-92 (and passim), Lactantius 7r-4, 338-41. See further Index

locorum. Ciceronianus - Christianus, 91,310 circumcaesura, 14,25 n. r, 42 Claudianus, 220 n. 4, 230 Claudius Theo, 225 Cleanthes, 80, 299 Clement of Alexandria, 39, 40 n. 2, 228, 310, 341, 355 n. 3, 390 Clitomachus, 202, 325 comicus (= Terentius), 127, 271, 272, 273, 274 commentaries on classics, 175 comptus, 14 congregabilis, 353 n. 1 Consolatio, 202-3 constantia (rondOcta), 339 n. 3, 343 sq. n. 2 constellations, names of, 220, 382-3 contages, 14 controversiae, 102, 135, 222, 264, 297, 312 Cornelius Nepos, Vit. Cic., r3r, 167 n. 2 Cotta, Cicero's spokesman in Nat. deor., 71



Crantor, 202, 325, 335, n. 2, 344, 346 Crates Thebanus, 251 n. 2 Cromatius, bishop, 133 Cupid, 189, 385 Ctesiphon, 260-1 Cynics, 124 n. 2 Cyprian, 77-8, 196, 209, 229 Cyrenians, 126 Damasus, pope, 107, 108, u3, 326 declamationes, 296, 312, 314 n. 1 decorum, 363, 367-8, 371, 372 n. 3 delirus, delirare, 69 Demetrianus, 77, 209 Demetrias, 256 Democritus, 58, 62, 68, 234, 291 Demosthenes, u2-3, 158 n. 2, 179 n. 2, 184, 186, 187, 189, 194, 210, 222, 256, 290 dialectics, 158, 159, 317, 327 Dicaearchus, 68 dictation, 120, 123, 315-6 Dido, 219 n. 3, 252, 277 Didymus 'Chalcenterus', 317 Didymus 'Videns', 115-6, 123, 215 n. 2, 228 dies lunae, Martis, etc., 383 difteritas, 15, 25 n. 1, 33, 43 n. I Dike, 221 n. 1 Diodorus, 225, 226 Diogenes, 202, 325 Dionysius, 228 n. s Domnion, 158 Donatus, 175, 270, 3II doxographical learning, 82-3 Empedocles, 177 Ennius, 15, 94 n. 3, 165 n. 2, 168 n. I, 185 n. 2, 203, 204, 235, 2.50, z74 Ennodius, 389 Ephorus, 253-4 Epicurus, Epicureanism, 10, 17 sqq., 25, 27, 32, 35, 37, 38, 46-7, 49-5r, 57, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70-5, 79, 8z-4, 126, 179 n. 2, 209, 213 n. 5, 222, 234, 275, 291, 388



Epimenides, 318 Epiphanius of Salamis, 161, 163, 228 n. 5, 232 n. 2, 237 Erebus, 'hell', 389 w1ui0eta, 339, 343, 344-5 Euripides, 63, 152 n. 1, 153, 227 Eusebius of Caesarea, 159, 209, 215 n. 2, 224, 228; Chronica translated by Jerome 107, 139, 164; Historia ecclesiastica 96, r39-4r Eusebius of Cremona, 169 n. 3, 171, 211 Eustochium, 108, 109, 110, 120, 126, 133, 195, 196, 205, 236, 247, 248, 252, 256, 319, 327, 380 Evagrius, 165 Exsuperius of Toulouse, 215 Fabiola, 204-5 Faustus of Riez, 392-5 feria, 383 flares, 223-4 Florus, 102, 105 formamentum, 15, 42 formatura, 15 fortitudo, see cardinal virtues friendship, 358 Pronto, 10, 254, 294 n. 2 Furia, 195, 252 Gabinianus, 229, 294 n. 2 Galenus, 148, 195, 196, 223 Gallio, Iunius, 229, 294 n. 2 Germanicus, Aratea 86 Geruchia, 252-3 Gorgias, 179 n. 2, 193, 194 Gracchi, 189, 222 Gregory of Nazianzus, 107 Grunnius (= Rufinus). 254 Helenus, 257, 307 Heliodorus, friend of Jerome, 104, 191, 202 Helvidius, 108, 1u-2, 3II n. 4, 313 Hercules, 19, 307 Heraclitus, 57, 144



Hermagoras, 179 n. 2 Herodotus, 152 n. 1, 155, 204, 236 Hesiodus, 203, 229 Hieronymus of Cardia, 225 Hilarius of Poitiers, 165, 196, 209, 229 Hippocrates, 236 Hippolytus of Rome, 215 n. 2, 228 n. 3 historicus ( = Sallustius), 127, 292 Horace, 102 n. 1, 105, 110, rrr, 113, 117, 122, 124, 125, 127, 128, 131, 132

n. 2, 136, 143, 144, 156, 157 n. 2, 158, 184 200, 218, 250, 266, 319,

161, 164, 170, 180, 181, 182, 1, 188, 190, 195, 202, 204, 207, 211 n. 5, 216, 221, 229, 230, 241, 247, 248, 251, 2 55, 256, 261, 262, 264, 279, 281-3, 300, 301,302,304, 320, 326, 390

n. 1, 186 n.

Homerus, 186 n. 1, 189, 222, 270; Homerocentones 188 honestum, 362, 363, 372 n. 3 Hortensius, 222 Hugo de Folieto, 151-2 Hyginus, 294 n. 2 Hyperides, 222


153, 173, 178-9,


knowledge of the classics 94 sqq., 269-97; attitude towards secular 120-1, 190, literature 92, 108-10, JI8-28, 337-8; scholarly 208-9, airs, show of learning 94, 126, 141, his 172, 177, 178, 237 n. 2, 308-9, dream 91, 97, 120, 310, 3r8-20; technique of citation 96-7, 130-2, 137-8, 153-6, 298-309; frequency of quotations 91-2, 97-8, 207-8, 224, 241, 244, 327; plagiarism 138120, 41, 147-50, 308----9; dictating 123, 215-6, 249, 250-1, 315-6, 323; style ru, u9-20, 176, 223-4, 229, 249, 312-6, 328; a Christian rhetor 144, 173, 316; characterization 92-3, 172, 228, 320, 327-8, 337-8.

indifferens, 233, 251, 291 infernal regions, names of, 389 Irenaeus, 38, 228 n. 5 Isocrates, 194, 253-4 iustitia, see cardinal virtues Jerome, education 3u-2; knowledge of Greek 93, rn6, 177; study of 120, 130, 254, 295, Hebrew 106-7, 323, rhetoric 3u-2, dialectics 327; interest in philosophy 316-7, 337-8, 348, 379-80; polemics against philosophers 124, 126, 210, 213, Helvidius u1-2, Jovinianus 142-57, Rufinus 173-83; Johannes 166-8, Vigilantius 245-6, the Luciferians ro5-6, the Pelagians 260-8; polemical tone II l, 143, 158, 166, 173, 245-6,

necrologies: on Nepotianus 202-4, Fabiola 204-5, Paulina 205-6, Nebridius 207, Paula 247----9, Marcella 249-50; didactic and moralizing writings: epist. 22 to Eustochium 109 -II, 319, epist. 52 to Nepotianus 191, epist. 54 to Furia 195-6, epist. rn7 to Laeta 196-202, epist. 123 to Geruchia 252-3, epist. 125 to Rustiepist. 130 to Demetrias cus 253-5, 256-8; exegetical works u9-38, 209-13, 215-46; attitude towards Ambrose u5-7, Origen 161-3, 165 -6, 169-71, 212, 308; Porphyrius


Writings: In Abdiam 209, 2u In Aggaeum 133 In Amos 220-1, 222-3 In Danielem 224-7 Didym. Spir. n5-7 In ecclesiasten n9, 126----9 In Ephesios 123-5 Epistulae roo-5, 108-u, 145, 158--01, 163-6, 183-209, 246-60, 314 In Ezechielem 232, 236-44 In Galatas u9-23, 292 In Habacuc 133, 134-5

II2-4, 169-71,


Homiliae Origenis 107, u7, 162 In Ieremiam 244-5 In Joel 220, 221 Contra Iohannem 166-8 In Ionam 209-u Adv. Iovinianum 96, 142-57, 324 In Isaeam 227-35 Contra Luciferianos 105-6 In Malachiam 217 In Matthaeum 2n-3 In Michaeam 135-8 In Nahum 133-4 Nam. Hebr. 129 n. 5 In Oseam 218-9, 223 Adv. Pelagianos 260-8 In Philemonem II9 Quaest. Hebr. in gen. 129-32 Adv. Rufinum 173-83 De situ et nom. 130 n. In Sophoniam 133 In Titum 126 Tractatus (Anecd. Mareds.) 213-4 Contra Vigilantium 245-6 De viris illustribus 95-6, 99, 115, 138-41, 209, 308, 315 Virg. Mar. (C. Helvidium) 108, 1n-2 Vita Hilarionis u8-9 Vita Malchi u7-8 Vita Pauli 105 In Zachariam 215-7 Johannes of Jerusalem, 161, 163, r66 -8, 169 Il. I Josephus, 130, 217, 226, 236 Jovinianus, 142-3, 146 sqq., 3II n. 4 Judas, 190 Julianus, the Apostate, 379 n. 2 Julianus, a wealthy Dalmatian, 251 Jupiter, 40 n. 3, 385, 386, 388-9 Justinus, the apologist, 38 Justinus, the historian, 226, 294 n. 3 Juvenal, 156, 181, 284, 395 n. 2 Juvencus, 209, 212 n. 5 Lactantius, 48-76, 8I--8, 120-1, 228 n. 5, 298, 299, 310, 3rr,

209, 317,




338-4r, 348, 388; use of Lucretius 48-76, 81, 85-7, 388, Cicero 54, 62, attitude 63, 71-2, 74, 75, 338-41; towards Epicureanism 48-52, 55, 70-2, 339, 81 sqq., Stoicism 51-2, philosophy in general 53-4, 60-1, 70 sqq., 83-4, 317, 340-1, natural science 85, magic arts 68-9, poetry 48, 86-7, 298, 299-300; quotation of Scriptures 52 n. r, 63; relation to Arnobius 52-3, 75-6, 87-8. Writings: Div. inst. 57-69 Epitome 69 De ira Dei 70-6 De opificio Dei 53-7 Laeta, 196 leti ianua, 37, 39 Leucippus, 73-4 Liber, 19 Livius, 186, 187, 189, 213 n. 1, 218, 226, 227, 294 n. 3 Lucilius, 102, 274 Lucanus, 186 n. 1, 190, 230, 244, 252, 284, 325, 389 Lucretius, influence on secular literature 9-u; panegyrics upon Epicurus 17-20, 52 n. 1, 60-1, 69, 388; influence on Arnobius 12-47, 388, Lactantius 48-76, Sr, 85-7, 388, Cyprian 77-8; Minucius Felix 79, Tertullian 79-81, Jerome 94 n. 3, 274-6, epitaph on Probus 386; school author 87, 175, 275 ludere, about commentaries, 223 Lysias, 167, 189, 222 Macrobius, 9 Magnus, orator urbis Romae, 208--9 Marcella, n2-3, 171, 249-50, 259 Marius Victor, 388, 389 Mars, 386 Martialis, 183, 258,_ 284 media qualitas of the soul, 31 sqq. Menander, comedian, 189, 270 Menander, rhetorician, 379 n. 1



Mercury, 40 n. 3 Methodius, 159, 209, 224 Milesiae fabellae, 232 Minerva, 19 Minervius, Gallic monk, 217 Minucius Felix, 77 n. 3, 79, 209, 229, 249, 310, 348 moras rumpere, 257 n. 2 :\!loses, 326, 351 myth of the iron age, 389-92

Naevius, 94 n. 3, 203, 204, 274 Nebridius, 204, 207 Nepotianus, 191, 202 Neptune, 383, 384 Nicolaus of Damascus, 237 Nonius Marcellus, 9, 87

Oceanus, friend of Jerome, 169-70, 171, 176 Olympus, 'Heaven', 388 Oppianus, 237 Orestes, 362 Origen, 159, 161-3, 165, 169, 170, 172, 209, 310, 313 n. 5, 319 n. 3, 337, 341, 393; catalogue of his writings II4, 162; Ilsel dexwv 169-70; homelies translated by Jerome 107, II7, 162; used by Jerome 123, 126, 133, 212, 215, 228, 236 n. 3, 308 Origenist controversy, 161-183 Ovid, 129, 210, 219, 231, 253, 283, 384, 390-2

Pacatula, 256 pagans blaming the Christians for all disasters, 30 Pammachius, 157, 163, 16g-70, 171, 176, 205-6, 217, 218-9, 224, 249, 327, 380 Panaetius, 347, 348, 354, 367 panegyrics, rhetorical instructions 312 n. 1, 350, about, 205, 247-8, 378-80

passions, the four, 33r--46; Latin terminology 333, 339 n. 3, 341 n. 3, 343 n. z :ia8o,;, 261, 289, 291, 332, 333 Paul, the Apostle, 109, no, 159, 187, 195, 262, 310, 319, 326 Paula, 108, 120, 126, 133, 157, 196, 202, 205, 215, 262, 319, 380; Jerome's epitaph on, 247-9 Paulina, 204, 205-6, 380 Paulinus of Aquileia, 385 n. 2 Paulinus of Nola, Jerome's letters to, 185-91, 327; imitation of Virgil 385-6, 388 Paulinus of Pella, 385 n. 3 Paulinus, obscure layman, 392-5 Paulus, pioneer of monasticism, 189 Pelagius, Pelagianism, 244, 256, 260-8, 336 Pericles, 222 Peripatetics, 222, 261, 275, 309, 335, 338-9, 341; theory of the passions approved of by Jerome 336, criticized by Lactantius 340 Persius, 102 n. 5, IIo, u3, 143, 145, 156, 180, 190, 195, 214, 230, 247, 250, 255, 284 perturbatio, 261, 289, 291, 332, 333 Petronius Arbiter, 258 n. 1 Petrus, the Apostle, 262 Phaedo, 222 Phaethon, 384 Philo, 236 philosophy of the Greeks derived from the Old Testament, 355 Philostratus, 168, 186, 187 Phlegeton, 'hell', 389 Phlegon, 130 Phoebus, 384 Phormio, 161 Pierius, 215 n. 2 Pindarus, 186 n. I, 222 Plato, Platonism, 24, 32, 36, 37, 38, 51, 64, 67, 126, 158 n. 2, 177, 179 n. 2, 187, 189, 194, 202, 203, 210, 213 n. 1, ib. n. 5, ib. n. 6, 214, 219,




222, 227, 250, 262, 275, 317, 325, 342-3, 349, 355 n. 4, 373 Plautus, 93, 144, 158 n. r, 171 n., 18r, 201, 217, 246, 269--70 Pliny the Elder, 103 n., 217 n., 232, 237, 294 n. 3 Pliny the Younger, 184 n. 1, 186-7, 254, 324, 325 Plutarchus, 150-3, 154, 168, 324 poeta ( = Vergilius), 127, 304-5 poeta neotericus, I 2 r Polemo, 222 Polybius, 225, 226 Pomerius Iulianus, view of the passions 345-6, the cardinal virtues 372-7; follows Augustine 345-6 Pompeius Trogus, 226, 294 n. 3 Porphyrius, I47-50, 153, 154, 159 n. 2, 209, 224-6, 304, 308, 173, I78-9, 32 4

Posidonius, 202, 265 n. 1, 325, 354 Principia, 249 Priscianus, 87 Proba, 189, 385 Probus, S. Petronius, 256, 386 pronuntiatum (d;twµa), 176 n. 1, 291 :ll:(!O:na.0eta, 336 n. l prose rhythm, 298, 316 n. 3 prudentia, see cardinal virtues 389 Prudentius, 383-4, Publilius Syrus, 156, 187, 269 Purgatory, 392-5 Pylades, 362 Pythagoras, Pythagoreans, 6r, 94 n. :r, 160, 177-9, 187, 189, 238, 291, 334, 358, 359 Quintilian, n2, 131, 137, 158 n. 3, 160, 165 n. 6, 166 n. 1, 185 n. 3, 186 n. I, I97-20I, 206 n. 2, 222, 229, 232 n, I, 246, 254, 258, 275, 294-6 Ps. Quintilian, Declamationes maiores, 104, 118, 119 n. 2, 131-2, 168, 180, 296-7 quotation, technique of, 58, 96-7, 298-309 (of poetry in prose 298 sqq.)

repetentia, 38-9 Rhetorica ad Herennium, 379 Rome, sack of, 236, 249-50, 256, 259, 302 Rufinus of Aquileia, 91, 93, 94 n. 1, 116, n7, 123-4, 126, 162, 163, 165, 202, 218, 236, 254, 265, 270, 3II n, 4, translation of 318, 324, 325-6; Origen's Ileei dexwv 169, 174; quarrel with Jerome in the Origenist controversy I68-83; Apologia adv. Hieronymum 171-3; Jerome's answer, Adv. Rufinum 173-83 Rusticus, layman, 251 Rusticus, Gallic monk, 253-5

Sallustius, 77, 106, n2, u8, 123, 124, 125, 128, 129, ib. n. 5, 132 n. 2, 134, 148 n. 1, 155, 180, 206, 212, 217 n. 4, 222, 238, 239, 246, 248-9, 255, 258, 292-4, 304, 322 Salvina, 207, 252 Santra, 294 n. 2 schools, teaching at, 87, 3u sqq., 315 n. 4 Scipio, P., 160 Sedulius, 384 Seneca rhetor, 104, 167, 297 Seneca philosophus, borrowings from, in Jerome 93, 111, n8, I50-2, 167, 177, 266, 290, 291, 297, 321, 324; correspondence with Paul 141 n. 3, included among Christian writers by Jerome 141; De matrimonio 151-2; about quotations from poetry in prose 299 Septuaginta, 132 sermons, style of, 213, 313 siliquae, 108, 319 Sinnius Capito, 130, 294 n. 2 Socrates, 158 n. 2, 176, 189, 222, 266, 291; Socratici 268 Solomon, 208, 326 soul, see media qualitas Stesichorus, 179 n. 2

HARALD HAGBNDAHL Stoics, Stoicism, 35, 51, 64-5, 70, 80, 124, 222, 233, 234, 260-1, 262, 275, 291, 299, 309, 317 n. 5, 332- 346 (passim, about the four passions), 347-378 (passim, about the cardinal virtues); theory of the passions followed by Cicero in Tusculans (332, 335 n. 2 and passim), disapproved of by Jerome 336, Lactantius 339343 sqq. See also 40, Augustine cardinal virtues. Styx, 'hell', 389 Suetonius, De vir ill., 107, 138-9 Tacitus, 217 Tartarus (Tartara), 'hell', 389 Telamon, Ennius' comedy, 203 temperantia, see cardinal virtues Terentius, 102 n. 2, 110, rr3, 116, 121, 128, 130, 131, 133, 136, 137, 138, 146, 155, 161, 163 n. 5, 168, 172, 192, 195, 214, 218, 244, 245, 246, 249 n. 3, 257, 267, 270-4, 300, 302, 321, 3 2 3, 373, 386 Tertullian, no n. 2, rr2 n. 4, 148, 151, 154, 202 n. 1, 209, 228 n. 3, 229, 251 n. 2, 253, 260, 309, 317 n. 3, 355 n. 3; and Lucretius 79-81 Testamentum Grunnii Corocottae Porcelli, 232 Thales Milesius, 61 Theodoretus, 355 n. 3 Theodosius, the emperor, 189 Theon, rhetorician, 379 n. I Theophilus of Alexandria, 156, 166, 168, 1 71 , 314 Theophrastus, 150, 151, 155, 156, 158 n. 2, 194, 210, 219, 222, 324 Theopompus, 253-4 Thucydides, 78, 186, 189, 204, 292 Timaeus, Platon's dialogue, translated by Cicero, 221, 232, 233 Tonans, 'God', 389 torques, gender of, 226 translation, Jerome's principles of, 163-5, 169-70

Triptolemus, 19 Tullius, see Cicero tumor Asianus, 253 Turpilius, 102 n. 3, rr3,


Varius Geminus, 297 Varro, 54, 120, 121, 130, 317, 323; catalogue of his writings r 14 Venantius Fortunatus, 388-9 Venus, 189, 385, 386 Vergiliocentones, see cento Victorinus, rhetor, 175, 209, 222, 228, 237 Vigilantius, 165, 245-6, 31 r n. 4 Virbius (Hippolytus), 125, 231 Virgil, 37, 40 n. 3, 100, ror, 102, 105, 106, IIO, II3, II8, 121, 122, 124, 125, 127, 128, 130, 132, 133, 134, 136, 144, 160--1, 165 n. 3, 170, 178, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184 n. 1, 185 n. 4, 186 n. I, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 195, 195-6, 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 210,







226, 227, 230, 231, 240-4, 244-5, 247, 248, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 257, 258, 259, 261, 265, 267-8, 276-----Sr, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304-7, 310, 320, 326, 332, 333, 334, 335, 341 n. 3, 342, 344, 345, 346, 383-4, 384, 385-6, 387, 388-9, 394-5 virginity Jerome's leading idea, ro8, 150, 195, 256 virtue, unity of, 349; the four virtues, see cardinal virtues widowhood, 195 Vita Hilarii, 380-1 Vita Landiberti, 386 wrath of the gods, 45-7, 7o--6 Vulcatius, 175

Xenocrates, 222 Xenophon, 148, 158 n. 2, 210, 222, 226, 236 Xystus Pythagoreus, 237 Zeno, 80, 124, 126, 213 n. 5, 222, 227, 275, 3 17 n. 5, 334