INDEX OF TEXTS.

GENESIS
i.16[287]
26[155], [290], [292]
27[219], [318]
28[291]
ii.2[296]
7[460]
24[445]
25[348]
iii.1–4[362]
2, 3[304]
4, 5[218]
6[434]
7[286], [348]
8[317], [318]
16[411], [482]
18[7]
iv.4[230]
7[273]
10[8], [165], [219]
14[245]
v.24[252]
vi.3[255]
viii.11[276]
11, 20[334]
ix. 1, 9, 12, 20, 23[334]
20[367]
21[289]
24[335]
25[236]
26, 27[335]
x.1, 9[335]
xii.17[492]
xv.6[349]
xvii.9[431]
10[423]
12[425]
xviii.3[392]
12[349]
xix.17, 30[206]
24[393]
xx.3[349]
xxi.10[450]
10, 12[223]
12[431]
xxii.6[472]
7, 8[28]
xxiv.63[324]
xxvii.4, 20[30]
29[237]
37[251]
39, 40[451]
40[452]
43[390]
xxviii.1, 2[115]
13[86]
xxix.34[222]
xxx.32[195]
xxxi.14[193]
15, 16[192]
27[194]
33[30]
xxxii.24[195]
xxxiii.6[391]
xxxiv.25[116], [195]
xxxv.2[402]
17[481]
19[415], [416]
xxxviii.27[481]
xxxix.12[348]
xli.48[238]
xliv.15[472]
xlvi.34[191]
xlvii.20, 22[238]
xlix.8, 9[430]
12[273]
EXODUS
i.15[481]
iii.5[196], [371]
11–14[29]
14[204]
12[30]
iv.1, 10, 12[29]
12[399], [404]
v.2[218]
vi.3[256]
vii.1[199]
viii.26[191]
xii.2[169]
3[186]
4[22]
5–8[173]
8[170]
11–14[174]
18[173]
29, 31, 33[174]
xiii.2[221]
4[169]
21[211]
xiv.15[219]
22[211], [284]
29[277], [295]
xv.20[285], [369]
xvi.4[277], [410]
4, 15[29]
15, 16[395]
15, 16[28], [459]
17, 18[21]
18[308]
xvii.6[284], [367]
xxi.12[245]
5[24]
xxii.29[230]
xxiv.6[398]
xxv.13, 14[196]
22[18]
xxix.12, 13[392]
xxx.8[396]
12, 15[21]
xxxi.13[439]
xxxii.1[218]
2[401]
6[350], [362]
26, 27[403]
xxxiii.7[392]
xxxiv.9[275], [438]
26[230]
28[203], [363], [404]
LEVITICUS
x.16–18[405]
xii.2[186]
xvi.8, 27[408]
xvii.1, 8[432]
xx.8[188]
xxiii.5[169], [173]
xxv.6[408]
NUMBERS
iii.12, 13[221]
xii.1[404]
1, 10[376]
8[404]
xiii.24[277]
xv.33[439]
35[437]
xvi.2[218]
3, 32, 48[374]
8–11[375]
48[18]
xvii.8[270], [373]
xviii.6[403]
xx.11[285]
26[376]
xxi.24[277]
xxii.12, 19, 25[320]
35[321]
xxiii.2[277]
8, 10, 11[321]
21[322], [474]
xxiv.5–9, 19[322]
xxv.8[116]
11[323]
xxvii.1[445]
12[459]
xxviii.16[173]
DEUTERONOMY
v.31[371]
vi.4[27]
5[456]
ix.4[278]
xv.6[239]
8[19]
xvi.1[171]
xviii.10[319]
15[404]
xix.14[15]
xxi.11[239]
12[216]
13, 14[217]
14[240]
15, 16[221]
17[223]
xxii.5[410]
xxiv.14[115]
xxv.4[440]
xxviii.11, 12[200]
23[409]
xxx.14[26], [451]
xxxii.2[200]
xxiii.8, 9[84]
16[85]
13[290]
35[385]
39[458]
xxxiii.8[465]
23[253]
24[276]
xxxiv.10, 11[399]
10[404]
JOSHUA
i.1[219]
ii.14[392]
v.15[196]
viii.23, 29[277]
x.26[278]
JUDGES
xi.36[246]
xiii.8[118]
xiv.14[119]
16, 18[120]
xv.16, 18[123]
xvi.20[125]
28[126]
xix.1[486]
2[416]
3, 10[487]
15, 22, 23, 24[488]
20, 25, 28[489]
26, 35[490]
xx.1[486]
44[116]
47[486]
xxi.2, 3[490]
4, 16[491]
23[492]
1 SAMUEL
viii.5[218]
xxv.32, 35, 39[215]
2 SAMUEL
iii.28[327]
vi.20[346]
21, 22[347]
vii.8[264]
xii.7, 13[326]
7[278]
xiv.22[472]
xviii.17, 18[208]
xxiv.10[326]
12, 14, 17[327]
1 KINGS
iv.33[218]
x.22[421]
24[84]
xii.16[465]
30[402]
xvii.1[40]
3[382]
3–6[383]
9[252]
19[208]
xix.3[383]
4[203]
6[367]
8[382], [383]
xx.23[208]
xxi.3[149]
10[484]
2 KINGS
i.14[252]
ii.4[83]
11[252], [294]
iv.8, 10, 16[208]
34[463]
39[368]
vi.6[285]
16[146], [161]
18[82]
vii.6[82]
1 CHRONICLES
xxi.17[234]
2 CHRONICLES
ix.21[86], [87]
EZRA
viii.21[368]
NEHEMIAH
viii.2[368]
ESTHER
iv.16[368]
v.2[368]
JOB
ii.9, 10[132]
v.17–24, 26[251]
vi.19, 21[197]
ix.25[197]
xiii.19–21[243]
xx.15[253]
xxv.5[244]
xxvii.2[244]
xxviii.14[197]
18, 19[240]
xxix.15[249]
xxxi.33[249], [327]
xxxiii.4[159]
PSALMS
iv.4[377]
5[28]
6[201]
viii.2[150]
xi.2[281]
7[186]
xii.6[24], [440]
7[194], [212]
xiv.6[249], [406]
3[305]
xv.1, 6[115]
xvi.2[205]
2[293]
7[132]
xvii.13[115]
xviii.26[193]
xix.1[159], [290], [360]
2[160], [162]
4[212]
5[416]
xx.7[161]
xxii.29[200]
6, 7[308]
xxiii.5[368]
xxiv.2[5], [350]
xxvi.4, 5[372]
5[385]
xxvii.4, 13[200]
9[233]
xxix.5, 6[402]
xxx.9[134]
11, 12[135]
xxxi.5, 8, 11, 16[310]
xxxii.1[419]
6[250]
10[248]
xxxiii.16[388]
5[460]
6[386]
xxxiv.10[253]
xxxvii.1[372], [385]
26[251]
xxxviii.4, 5[248]
9[234]
xxxix.6[225]
xl.1[232]
xli.1[63]
xlii.5[210]
15[215]
xlv.1[393]
2[309], [313]
3[335]
3[199]
8[244], [463]
xlvi.4[5], [383]
xlvii.1[346]
xlviii.7[81]
l.16[149]
20[372]
li.6[243]
lii.1[45]
17[274]
lv.7[81]
lviii.3[222]
lxiii.6[250]
lxiv.7[157]
lxv.4[200]
8, 9[384]
lxviii.5[178]
13[445], [465]
14[86]
18[464]
lxix.10[286]
lxxi.8[274]
lxxiii.21[292]
lxxvi.2, 3[134]
lxxviii.2[18]
lxxix.1[134]
lxxxi.6[243]
lxxxii.1[360]
lxxxv.8[348]
13[7]
lxxxvi.2[310]
lxxxviii.4, 5[393]
lxxxix.9[292]
26, 27[310]
32[414]
36, 37[168]
xcii.11[253]
xciii.4[5]
6[326]
xcv.8[299]
xcvi.5[88]
xcix.6[374]
cii.25[290]
ciii.5[256]
civ.2[206]
15[22], [214], [383]
19[226]
24[296]
cv.18[11]
18, 19[238]
cix.4[391]
25, 26[307]
28[392]
cx.1[347], [399], [446]
4[301]
7[402]
cxiii.5, 6[160]
7, 8[160]
9[160]
cxiv.3[284]
cxvi.10[274]
cxviii.19[198]
22[150]
24[168], [170], [297]
cxix.14[253]
46[257], [342]
57, 111[192]
68, 103[202]
71[14], [435]
73[290]
91[310]
94[388]
109[204]
126[168], [329]
131[274]
146[219]
cxx.5[351]
cxxii.3[8]
cxxvi.7[416]
cxxvii.1[210]
cxxviii.5[201]
cxxix.8[416]
cxxxii.6[388], [415]
cxxxiv.1[450]
4, 2[372]
cxxxix.13[465], [470]
cxli.2[396]
3[175]
cxliii.10[201], [233]
cxliv.4[225]
cxlvii.9[383]
cxlviii.5[6], [296]
PROVERBS
ii.13[198]
v.15[240]
vi.2[8]
26[8]
27[8]
ix.2[22], [400]
5[219]
x.15[388]
xi.1[10]
xii.12[253]
xiii.8[20], [387]
24[248], [414]
xiv.7[249]
30[373]
xv.16[8]
7[7]
17[116]
18[377]
xvi.24[6], [396]
xvii.2[239]
xviii.7[249]
17[329]
xix.12[380]
17[156]
xxi.1[104]
xxii.1[8], [335]
xxiv.30[249]
xxvi.8, 9[248]
xxvii.2[454]
25[200]
xxviii.10[251]
xxix.22[247]
ECCLESIASTES
ii.14[217]
iii.1[168], [329]
iv.5[246], [347]
9[462]
10, 11[463]
12, 13[464]
vii.2[392]
11[304]
16[21]
x.4[464], [465]
8[307]
xi.2[187], [297]
3[6]
xii.11[6]
CANTICLES
i.1[275]
2[274]
3[202]
ii.14[215]
iii.4[217]
6[396]
iv.3[209]
9[205]
12[303], [369]
v.2[86]
vi.13[212]
vii.2[397]
8[205]
13[256]
viii.6[213]
ISAIAH
i.3[388]
6[276]
3[168]
17[178]
v.2[413]
ix.6[157], [271], [464]
xi.2[296]
6, 7[430]
xiii.8, 9[482]
xix.20, 21[285]
xx.2[349]
3[348]
4[346], [347]
xxv.8[299], [402]
xxx.15[407]
xxxi.1[198]
xxxii.20[440]
xxxv.1[212]
3[387]
xxxviii.8[187]
xl.5[308]
6[219]
31[204]
xli.8[310]
xlii.6[311]
xliii.2[8]
19[283]
xlix.1–3[310]
4[312]
6[311], [464]
8[169]
9[272]
li.7[153]
lii.7[199]
liii.2[308]
7[388], [443]
liv.1[212], [416]
17[192], [450]
lv.1[239]
lviii.11[368]
lx.8[87]
lxiii.1[219]
lxv.16[57]
lxvi.1[290]
12[5]
JEREMIAH
i.11[269]
iv.19[234]
vii.14–17[262]
viii.7[168]
xii.8[442]
xvii.1[151]
9[309]
11, 12[217]–219, [312]
13[188]
15, 16[474]
xx.9[293]
19[209]
xxii.13, 14[209]
29, 30[183]
xxiii.5[311]
24[292]
xxxi.31, 32[301]
xxxiii.15[311]
LAMENTATIONS
iii.25[232]
EZEKIEL
iii.17[257]
18[325]
20, 21[258]
vi.11[346]
xviii.23[454]
xx.25[438]
xxxiv.23, 24[311]
xliv.1, 2[284]
DANIEL
i.8[25], [367]
16[380]
iii.18[25]
40[367]
vi.22[363]
vii.9, 10[360]
ix.2[363]
xii.3[289]
xiv.30[367]
HOSEA
i.2[187]
ii.19[213]
iii.2[187], [293]
iv.6[216]
JOEL
i.8[213], [215]
iii.9[207]
13[206]
18[207]
AMOS
v.14[202]
JONAH
iii.5[286]
iv.7, 9[136]
MICAH
i.1[412], [413]
iv.4[215]
8, 9[413]
10, 13[414]
v.2[412]–416
5[298]
7, 8, 10[417]
vi.3, 4[277]
8[278], [418]
vii.1, 2, 8, 9[418]
9, 18[419]
HABAKKUK
ii.4[454]
9–12[8]
11[219]
iii.7[351]
HAGGAI
i.2, 4[208]
4[209]
8, 10, 14[210]
ii.6[211]
7, 8, 23[212]
ZECHARIAH
iii.3, 8, 12[311]
v.1[149]
7[11]
ix.10[212]
MALACHI
iv.2[187], [214], [298]
3 ESDRAS
iv.29, 30, 31[238]
TOBIT
iv.21[116]
xii.8, 9[363]
JUDITH
xiii.16[367]
WISDOM
ii.15[465]
iv.9[87], [103], [453]
11[252]
15[224], [252]
vii.22[397]
viii.19[217]
ix.15[204]
ECCLESIASTICUS
i.14[452]
xv.2[214]
xviii.30, 31[368]
xix.2[368]
23, 24[11]
xxiii.18[208]
xxvii.11[236]
xxx.1[414]
BARUCH
iii.24, 25[81]
SUSANNA
15[483], [484]
34[479]
43[246]
BEL AND THE DRAGON
36[295]
2 MACCABEES
iv.18[343]
S. MATTHEW
i.18[340], [482]
23[284]
ii.6, 18[415]
iii.4[368]
9[230]
11[187], [407]
15, 23[284]
iv.2, 34[363]
4[395]
17[202]
v.3[253]
17[169], [187], [298], [383], [431], [438]
27[183]
28[430]
30[439]
37[59]
44[318], [385]
44, 45, 48[204]
vi.22[20]
33[233]
vii.3[188]
7[30], [210]
14[198]
15, 16[280]
17[201]
viii.2, 3[309]
7[458]
24[294]
29[163]
ix.12[329]
13[329]
15[214]
20[407]
x.19, 20[30], [258]
28[42]
30[22]
33[346], [432]
39[146]
xi.12[389]
17[347]
25[307]
27[412]
28[145], [474]
xii.48[86]
xiii.43[236], [417]
52[256]
xiv.4[134]
26[285]
31[457]
xv.8[275]
xvi.18[290]
19[423]
24[382], [426]
26[10]
xvii.2[461]
4[203]
21[286], [363]
27[23], [25]
xviii.15, 17[259]
16[479]
19, 20[359]
21, 22[381]
23, 35[272]
xix.5[283]
12[428]
21[24], [318]
26[205]
xx.10[23]
15[201]
23[189]
xxii.12[281], [288]
17, 18[154]
18, 19[24]
21[133]
xxiii.10[442]
xxiv.15[275]
35[212], [226]
40[408]
41[396]
xxv.21[83]
40[3], [277]
43[463]
xxvi.41[234]
59, 60[484]
64[446]
70[461]
xxvii.4[407]
23, 25[218]
25[226]
45[393]
46[219]
52[309]
xxviii.19[315]
20[328]
S. MARK
i.24[165]
ii.11[460]
iii.17[158]
iv.38[294]
viii.38[346]
S. LUKE
i.24[482]
28[483]
34, 37, 38[284]
35[317]
42[415]
ii.4[415]
23[221]
28[230]
35[403]
36, 37[284]
37[368]
51[275]
52[464]
iii.2, 19[382]
6[430]
iv.25[409]
29[318]
vi.45[44]
vii.36–38[270]
43, 47[266]
44[273]
45[274]
viii.17[325]
ix.23[14]
26[432]
x.2[19]
20[189]
35[186]
xi.1[233]
xii.49[463]
xiii.11[414]
19, 21[396]
32[168]
xiv.16[288]
xv.8, 9[20]
10[278]
17, 19[8]
22[472]
xvi.9[469]
13[92]
31[404]
xvii.5[457]
6[396]
7[465]
31[206]
xviii.42[231]
xix.8[407]
17[44]
33[440]
35[145]
40[150]
xx.4[157]
36[492]
xxi.2[186]
xxii.7–12[167]
42[422]
43[219], [299], [407], [422]
48[275]
xxiii.34[308]
44[211]
53[230]
xxiv.7[187]
32[206]
S. JOHN
i.1[159], [203]
14[310]
16[202]
17[169]
18[57], [159], [293], [310]
26[222], [232], [359]
29[23], [189], [202], [256], [391], [400], [436], [443]
32[277]
36[429]
47[230]
ii.19[170]
19[463]
iv.6[463]
14[207]
26[201]
34[407]
v.10, 30[454]
18[46]
30, 31, 45[453]
vi.44[48]
50[415]
58[395]
vii.4, 5, 7, 15[188]
12[44]
16[185], [461]
37[210]
38[5], [383]
56[47]
viii.8, 9[183]
10[189]
10, 11[184]
11[439]
12[206]
20[185]
34[247]
40[48]
56[423]
ix.1[459]
2, 3, 5–7[460]
10, 11[461]
25[164], [461]
28[461]
29[165]
x.11[43]
xi.33, 34[309]
35[202]
43[460]
50[320]
54[422]
xii.1[422]
5[278]
xiii.2[389]
27[449], [461]
xiv.9[155]
12[164], [231]
21[4]
23[290]
27, 28[46]
27[274]
30[25]
xv.3[461]
15[243]
22[434]
xvi.15, 16[155]
32[189], [318]
xvii.1[168]
3[40]
11, 14, 18[25]
xviii.8[422]
xix.6[226]
10[454]
25, 27[393]
26, 27, 30[340]
30[402]
34[400]
xx.22[399]
xxi.7[295]
22[147]
ACTS
i.18[38]
26[445]
ii.4[27]
iii.6[387]
6, 13[308]
vii.55[203], [398]
56[349], [360]
ix.1[255]
5[7]
x.9[208]
10[317], [363]
xv.10[423]
xvi.22[289]
xvii.18[365]
27, 28[291]
28[204], [224], [458]
xx.24[382]
35[467]
ROMANS
i.17[453], [454]
20[37]
ii.14[433]
iii.4[319]
19[434], [436]
iv.7[436]
11[430]
15[433], [434]
v.3, 4, 5[195], [414]
19[11], [156], [435]
20[305], [435], [436]
vi.3[362]
5[426]
8[220], [463]
10[147]
13[249]
vii.7[435]
8[434]
22[429]
viii.13, 16, 17[228]
17[295], [362], [386]
20[288]
20–24[224]–232
26[233]
27[234]
37[244], [417]
x.2[259]
4[24], [292]
8[451]
10[26], [274], [299]
15[199]
xi.5[212]
25[376], [420]
25, 26[226]
33[253]
36[205]
xii.19[390]
xiii.4[182]
7[345]
8[452]
10[204]
12[461]
xiv.2[370]
1 CORINTHIANS
i.1[201]
8[37], [48]
23, 24[432]
25[319]
27[220]
30[359]
ii.9[232], [459]
15[351], [431]
iii.2[7], [207], [384]
6, 7[31]
12, 13[439]
14, 15[440]
18[220]
iv.3, 4[243]
9[381]
20[315]
21[270]
v.3[313]
5[418]
7[173]
8[175]
9[361]
10, 11, 12[362]
12[466]
vi.1, 2, 5[153]
4–6[466]
7[467], [468]
12, 13[247]
vii.4[368]
22[450]
25[369]
26, 32, 34, 35, 37–40[370]
34, 38[283]
viii.5, 6[305]
ix.1, 17, 19[242]
17[452]
26[289]
24, 27[243]
27[285], [360], [403]
x.2[175]
4[290]
7[362]
12[372]
17[416]
23[353]
29[248]
xi.1[14]
3[304]
13–15[411]
14[216]
xii.7–9[22]
7, 11[233]
21[279]
23[428]
28[230]
xiii.1[322]
2, 7, 10, 13[456]
4[195]
7[457]
10[395]
xiv.15[233]
34, 35[411]
xv.22[423]
23[230]
28[14], [227], [229], [308]
32[280]
32–34[364]
41[160]
45, 46, 47[295]
48, 49[213]
49[290]
54, 55[299], [402]
55[308]
2 CORINTHIANS
i.19[29], [204]
ii.10[270]
iii.3[153]
17[443]
18[161]
iv.6[438]
16[429]
18[296]
v.4[224]
8[203]
4, 7, 8, 10[225]
15[301]
16[255], [307]
16, 17[23]
17[353]
17, 19, 20, 21[256]
17, 21[308]
21[152], [456]
vi.2[169]
5[285]
10[381]
15[149]
vii.5[244], [417]
viii.9[386], [464]
x.10, 11[314]
xi.2[303], [370]
14[149]
26[289]
27[368]
29[231]
xii.2[86], [203]
4[234], [398]
10[45], [135]
GALATIANS
i.8[281]
15[222]
18[188]
ii.4[242]
6[13], [456]
18[338]
19[152]
20[255], [301], [302]
iii.6[455]
10[451]
10, 13, 16, 19[441]
11, 13[152]
13[308], [382]
22, 25, 29[442]
23[453]
24[437], [452]
iv.1, 3[442]
4[35], [152], [310], [443]
6[228], [231]
8[309]
10, 11[167]
22[455]
24[450]
v.1[451]
2[455]
6[256]
13[242]
13, 14[452]
vi.11[313]
14[382], [457]
EPHESIANS
ii.4, 6[446]
14[359], [417]
14, 15, 18[447]
iii.1[464]
iv.5[157]
8[464]
10, 11, 13[447]
13[216], [300], [443]
14[236]
15[444]
16[448]
22, 26[449]
32[384]
v.3[7]
3, 5[362]
1, 3, 5, 9, 10[445]
14[13]
24, 25[449]
27[369]
31, 32[445]
vi.12[144], [289], [381], [445], [449]
13[449]
16[238]
PHILIPPIANS
i.23[145]
24[81], [231]
ii.6[243]
6, 7[14], [309]
7[23], [307], [310]
7, 8[316]
7, 11[308]
6–8[46]
8[421]
9[387]
16[312]
iii.7[156]
8[14]
20[159], [392]
iv.7[212], [251]
13[207]
COLOSSIANS
i.15[18], [230]
16, 17[210]
18[230]
ii.9[316], [368]
13, 14[272]
14[436]
20–22[203]
20[285]
iii.11[386]
13[391]
iv.3[175]
1 THESSALONIANS
iv.4[7]
1 TIMOTHY
i.9[240]
ii.5[309]
iii.2[378]
6[379]
3–7[69]
16[201]
v.6[210]
23[367]
24[10]
vi.10[10]
16[41]
2 TIMOTHY
ii.5[288]
11, 12[411]
19[375]
iv.2[258], [270]
7[288]
8[23]
TITUS
i.6, 7, 9[378]
iii.10[66]
PHILEMON
1[389], [475]
HEBREWS
i.3[155], [201], [202], [231]
5[59]
ii.7[47]
iv.4[299]
12[212], [322], [400], [403]
13[318]
14[301]
v.1[377]
2, 4, 5, 7[373]
vi.13[47]
18[316], [319]
vii.2, 3[373]
16, 17[301]
viii.8, 9[301]
ix.4[18]
17[442]
x.7[302]
xi.9[374]
26[346]
33, 34, 37, 38[380]
34[381]
xii.22[222]
29[407]
xiii.8[299]
12[329]
1 S. PETER
i.12[203], [459]
15, 17–19[386]
18, 19[426], [443]
ii.18[394]
iii.3[253]
3, 4[250]
iv.8[457]
v.8[144]
2 S. PETER
i.4[200], [291]
1 S. JOHN
ii.18[174], [301]
iii.9[457]
iv.18[457]
v.1[456]
20[40]
2 S. JOHN
10[69]
REVELATION
i.8[26], [223], [374], [413]
ii.10[288]
14, 15[323]
iii.1[227]
v.12[308]
viii.3, 4[396]
xviii.22[397]
xxi.23[206]
xxii.16[299]

INDEX OF LATIN AND GREEK WORDS

THE END.

Footnotes.

[1] – The word in the original is [a]Sacerdos]. It is constantly used by S. Ambrose and other writers of his time for Bishops, though they sometimes add a qualifying epithet, ‘[a]Summus Sacerdos.]’ But even alone it is used where the writer is clearly speaking of Bishops, and of Bishops quâ Bishops. Thus it occurs frequently in the Proceedings of the Council of Aquileia, which is itself styled ‘[a]Sacerdotale Concilium.]’ See the Article ‘Bishop’ by Mr. Haddan in Dict. of Chr. Ant. Vol. 1 p. 210 b., who refers also to Bp. Taylor, Episc. Assert. § 27. It has therefore been rendered ‘Bishop’ throughout this volume, wherever it is plain that the reference is to Bishops, and ‘Priest’ wherever it is used in a more general way.
[2] – This forms the two first books of the ‘[a]De Fide]’ still extant among the works of S. Ambrose. The other three books were added afterwards, as S. Ambrose explains at the beginning of Bk. iii, to maintain his statements against the attacks of heretical teachers. The Treatise, ‘[a]De Spiritu Sancto],’ in 3 books, was sent afterwards in 381 A.D.
[3] – [a]Nivei]. This is the reading all MSS. Ed. Rom. has ‘[a]vivi],’ which would agree better with the text of S. John.
[4] – The Benedictine reference for the first of these texts is Prov. xiv. 3. The lips of the wise shall preserve them, with which the Sept. and Vulg. agree. In the second the English Vers. has The lips of the wise disperse knowledge. Here S. Ambr. agrees with the Sept.
[5] – Forum Cornelii was on the Via Æmilia, about 23 miles S.E. of Bononia. It was at this time in the Province Æmilia. The modern name is Imola.
[6] – The Benedictine Editors refer this to the ravages of the Goths after Valens’ defeat at Hadrianople A.D. 375. It is on this that they found the date of the letter, but the reference is somewhat vague.
[7] – tubera
[8] – Amentata illa non manipularis sententia. Ed. Ben. refers to Junius, Adagiorum Centuriae 3, 10, who says ‘Amentatam sententiam dixit D. Ambrosius pro validâ et haud vulgari firmisque argumentis roboratâ. Est autem amentum lori genus quo hasta praeligata validius certiusque libratur evibraturque: hinc amentata sententia ea est quæ neutiquam trivialis est et pedanea, cujusmodi manipularis vocatur, velut a gregario milite profecta, sed eximia et artificio vallata.’ He quotes two passages from Cicero, De Orat. 1 57, 242. Brut. 78. 271, in both which places he uses ‘amentatæ hastæ’ of arguments, and also Tertull. adv. Marc. iv. 33 where he says that our Lord amentavit [Phariseis] hanc sententiam, non potestis Deo servire et mammonæ, where it plainly means, ‘gave them this home-thrust.’
[9] – puleium, lit. the herb penny royal.
[10] – Bassianus is mentioned among the Bishops who took in the Council of Aquileia, as Bishop of Laus Pompeia, now Lodi Vecchio, S.E. of Milan. The modern town of Lodi is about 5 miles from the site of the ancient one.
[11] – He means the day of his consecration as Bishop. So S. Ambr. speaks of his own consecration day as his birthday, Comm. in Luc. vii. 78.
[12] – Comum is the modern Como, at the southern extremity of the Lake which takes its name from it.
[13] – These words are added by S. Ambrose.
[14] – statera.
[15] – denarius.
[16] – ὅροι.
[17] – There is no text in Holy Scripture exactly corresponding to this. Lev. xxv. 11 which is referred to by Ed. Ben. is hardly to the point.
[18] – There can be little doubt that the true date is iii. Non. Sept. i. e. the 3rd of Sept., and not Nonis, the 5th. For in 381 A.D. the 5th of Sept. was on a Sunday, and it is hardly likely that a Council would have sat from daybreak till one o’clock (Ep. 10. 5) in the Church on such a day, and moreover it would not have been natural for Palladius to say, as he does in § 47. Non respondebo nisi auditores veniant post Dominicam diem, if he were speaking on a Sunday.
[19] – The reading of Ed. Rom. has been adopted, which omits the preposition ‘cum.’ If this were correct, it would imply that the consuls were themselves taking a leading part in the Council; whereas it is clear that they are mentioned solely as the ordinary way of fixing the year; nor had the consuls at this time any other than such ornamental functions. See Gibbon’s description, ch. xvii. vol. ii. ed. Smith p. 206–208.
[20] – By ‘acta’ here are meant formal and official records taken down and published by authority. Thus Jul. Cæsar ordered the ‘Acta’ of the Senate to be regularly published. Suet. Cæs. 20.
[21] – It is to be remembered that ‘diocese’ was then a civil and not an Ecclesiastical term. A ‘diœcesis’ was an aggregate of provinces, under the charge of a Vicarius, who was subordinate to one of the four Præfecti Prætorio, each Præfectus having under him a number of dioceses. Thus the Vicarius Italiæ, who was subordinate to the Præfectus Prætorio Italiæ, had in his diocese fourteen provinces, including both Liguria of which Milan was the capital, and Venetia in which Aquileia was situated. It is to be remembered also that Italia at this time meant only the north of Italy, the rest of Italy being now included in the Diocese of Rome, and under the Vicarius Urbis Romae. See the table given in Smith’s Gibbon, vol. ii. p. 315. taken from Marquardt. When the word diocese came into Ecclesiastical use, it was applied, first to “an aggregate not merely of several districts, governed each by its own bishop, but of several provinces (ἐπαρχίαι) each presided over by a metropolitan. The diocese itself was under an Exarch or Patriarch.” Dict. of Chr. Ant. sub voc. ‘Creditâ’ is here read for ‘creditam,’ as required by the order of the words.
[22] – It is not certain to whom the Emperor’s letter was addressed. Some have thought that it was addressed to the Pretorian Prefect of Italy. Tillemont maintained that it was addressed to Valerian, Bishop of Aquileia, in whose see the Council was held. The language, though not decisive, seems in favour of the former supposition. In § 7. the Prefect of Italy is spoken of as issuing letters in pursuance of it.
[23] – i. e. a copy of S. Paul’s Epistles.
[24] – i. e. the Emperor’s letter.
[25] – The text here seems defective, nor is there any thing to guide us to supply the lacuna. What is given in the translation is no more than a guess at the meaning of the sentence. The general connection is however clear enough even if it be omitted.
[26] – The reading of Ed. Rom. is here adopted, as alone furnishing a reasonable sense. The Benedictine text is unintelligible.
[27] – By Illyricum is here meant Illyricum Occidentale, which at this time was under the jurisdiction of the Vicarius Italiæ. (See the Table in Smith’s Gibbon, referred to in note[21] p. 33.) Sirmium, which in the following Century was entirely destroyed by the Goths under Attila, was at this time a place of great importance both civil and ecclesiastical. It is spoken of by Justinian as capital of Illyricum both in civil and episcopal matters (Tillemont, note xv on the Life of S. Ambrose vol. x. p. 739). Its ecclesiastical importance is shewn by the contest in which S. Ambrose engaged with Justina, two years before the Council, 379 A.D. to bring about the election of Anemius as Bishop, when the Empress was using all her influence to cause an Arian Bishop to be appointed. Arianism had been rife there for some time, and Germinus a previous Bishop had been one of the leaders of that party. (Tillemont, S. Ambr. ch. xx.) Illyricum had been finally separated into two divisions, Orientale and Occidentale, by Gratian, in 379 A.D. who transferred the Eastern Division to Theodosius when he made him Emperor of the East, from which time it formed part of the Eastern Empire. (Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. vol. v. p. 716.)
[28] – The context requires the reading ‘bonus’ for ‘omnibus,’ which is that of one MS. The same MS. also inserts ‘Deum’ in Eusebius’ next speech, which is required by the argument.
[29] – made Himself of no reputation E.T.
[30] – But now ye seek to kill me, a man &c. E.V.
[31] – By ‘tractatus concilii Nicæni’ is meant simply the Nicene Creed. This is established by S. Ambr. De Fide iii. 15. 125 (518 Ed. Ben.) where, speaking of the letter of Eusebius of Nicomedia read at the Council, in reference to the word ὁμοούσιος, he says, Hæc cum lecta esset epistola in Concilio Nicæno, hoc verbum in tractatu fidei posuerunt Patres, etc.
[32] – The reading in Ed. Ben. is ‘carendum.’ If it is genuine, the word must have acquired a sort of transitive sense and have come to mean ‘to be deprived.’ No traces of such an use is to be found in Facciolati or in Ducange. Ed. Ben. quotes a parallel use of ‘abstinendus’ but without any instances. Rom. reads ‘privandum,’ Chifflet ‘curandum,’ either of which give the required sense, but seem corrections without MS. authority.
[33] – The text in this passage is defective and confused: but the general sense, as given here, may fairly be made out of it as it stands.
[34] – It is to be noticed that the sentence of only twenty-five Bishops are here given out of thirty two or thirty three. It is probable therefore that the Record is defective, and that the sentences of the rest have been lost.
[35] – Ed. Ben. here reads, Et cum Secundianus subripuisset. As subripuisset by itself could have no sense, the reading of Ed. Rom. has been adopted, Et cum Secundianus se paullulum subripuisset et postea convenisset. This is adopted in Tillemont’s narrative, Il sortit mesme de l’assemblée, mais il revint quelque temps après.
[36] – This is according to the text of Ed. Rom.
[37] – The abrupt termination of the discussion with Secundianus, without any account of a decision in his case, seems to point to the same conclusion as the incomplete list of Bishops who give sentence on Palladius, that the Record is defective. Moreover the unusual number of various readings is generally a sign of a defective text. The force and cleverness of the evasions of Secundianus seem sometimes to be lost thereby.
[38] – With regard to the names of the sees, those of which the modern name is as familiar or more familiar than the ancient have been rendered by the modern name, those of which the modern name would be unfamiliar to general readers have been left in their ancient form. It would be affectation to call S. Ambrose Bishop of Mediolanum: on the other hand nothing would be gained by calling Felix Bishop of Jadera, Bishop of Zara.
[39] – This name is omitted in the list at the beginning, so that there are thirty three in this list, only thirty two in the other. The two presbyters were probably representatives of Bishops, but it is not stated of whom.
[40] – It is probable that similar letters were addressed to the Bishops of the other Provinces of Gaul, who had sent Justus as their deputy, and to Africa and Illyricum, though no record of them remains. Possibly they were identical, except the address. Gaul had at this time been so subdivided, that the Vicariate or civil Diocese consisted of no less than seventeen provinces. See Marquardt’s Table, as quoted above.
[41] – There is no mention of the condemnation of Attalus in the Records, another proof that they are not complete.
[42] – Julianus Valens was Bishop of Petavio or Pettau on the Drave, into which See he had apparently been introduced in the place of the orthodox Bishop Marcus: for this is, according to Tillemont, the meaning of the word ‘superpositus.’ When Pannonia and Illyricum were overrun by the Goths after Valens’ defeat at Hadrianople, (378 A.D.) he deserted his charge. The ravages of the Barbarians are described by S. Jerome ad cap i. Zephan. vol. iii. p. 1645. See Gibbon ch. 26. (from a note in Newman’s Fleury, vol. 1 p. 38.)
[43] – The reading here is uncertain. Ed. Rom. has ‘prout jam et sacerdotum concilio sententia in eos lata est.’ Nor is it certain to what laws allusion is made. A long note in Ed. Ben. does not seem to clear up the matter.
[44] – Dacia Ripensis. The original Province of Dacia was beyond the Danube. It was conquered and included in the Empire by Trajan. In the time of Aurelian it was abandoned again, and the Danube re-established as the frontier. Then the Roman colonists were removed to the South of the Danube, into the central district of Mœsia, which was then called Dacia Aureliani. This was afterwards divided into two Provinces, called Dacia Ripensis and Dacia Mediterranea, Ripensis being the northern part, extending along the bank of the Danube, whence the name.
[45] – “Damasus was made Pope on the death of Liberius A.D. 366. Ursinus, called by some Ursicinus, was, as Damasus had been, Deacon at Rome, and could not endure the exaltation of his former colleague who is suspected of having taken part with Felix, the successor to the power of Liberius, when exiled by the Arians. Ursinus was factiously consecrated by one Bishop, and a contest ensued in which even much blood was shed. Ursinus was banished, and being recalled the next year, was banished again after two months. In 371 he was allowed to leave his place of exile, and only excluded from Rome and the suburbicarian provinces. In 378 he held the factious meetings mentioned in the letter, and was exiled to Cologne. He continued to petition Gratian to restore him, and hence the request of the Bishops at Aquileia.” Note in Newman’s Fleury vol. 1, p. 38.
[46] – i. e. Julianus Valens, Bp. of Petavio, mentioned in the preceding letter.
[47] – after the first and second admonition E.V.
[48] – This Lucius the person who, after the death of S. Athanasius, was forced upon the Church of Alexandria as Bishop, in the place of Peter who had been duly elected, by the Governor of the Province. His crimes and cruelties are recorded at length by Eccl. Hist. iv. 21, 22. He was eventually expelled from the see he had usurped, and is mentioned by Socrates, Hist. Eccl. v. 7, as afterwards dwelling at Constantinople and sharing the fate of Demophilus.
[49] – Demophilus was originally Bishop of Beroea, (probably Beroea in Thrace,) and was deposed from his office for Arianism. In A.D. 370, on the death of Eudoxius, he was elected by the Arian party Bishop of Constantinople, in opposition to Evagrius. He was supported by Valens who was then Emperor, and Evagrius banished. In 380 A.D. after the accession of Theodosius, matters were changed. Theodosius offered to maintain him in his see, if he subscribed the Nicene Confession, but he refused, and withdrew, and maintained, in conjunction with Lucius and others, Arian worship outside the walls of Constantinople. He died A.D. 386. He is mentioned by S. Ambrose (De Fide 1. 6. 45.) as a leader of one of the various forms of Arianism.
[50] – This refers to the long schism which had existed in the Church at Antioch, ever since 331 A.D. when Eustathius was deposed by the Arian party: in 361 A.D. Meletius was elected as successor to Eudoxius, having previously subscribed the Creed of Acacius (Socr. ii. 44.); but on his accepting the Nicene Creed, and acknowledging the Homoousion, he was deposed, and banished by the Emperor Constantius, and Euzoius, an Arian, appointed in his stead, who was afterwards succeeded by Dorotheus, (who was afterwards transferred to Constantinople, 385 A.D.)Meanwhile Meletius had returned from exile, but the extreme orthodox party refused to recognise him, because he had at first been appointed as a Semi-Arian, and elected Paulinus, though the Council of Alexandria had urged them to submit to Meletius, so that, as Socrates says, when recounting the Bishops of the chief sees in the year 379, the Church at Antioch τριχῆ διῄρητο. Paulinus was supported by the Church of Alexandria and by the Bishops of the West, and, as appears from the statements of this letter, a compromise had been proposed, that when either Meletius or Paulinus died, both parties would acknowledge the survivor. The Bishops at Aquileia urge the Emperor to enforce this, not aware that Flavian had already been elected as Meletius’ successor at the Council of Constantinople. The schism was thus perpetuated, and continued till 415 A.D. What the difficulty about Timotheus was, is not certain. He had been consecrated Bishop of Alexandria that same year, after the death of Peter, the successor of S. Athanasius. Tillemont (vol. x. p. 139) suggests that it was probably connected with the question of the succession at Antioch.
[51] – The enemy are the Goths under Fritigern. See Gibbon ch. 26.
[52] – The reading ‘pactum’ which is suggested by Valerius is here adopted instead of ‘factum’, which seems to give no satisfactory sense.
[53] – Fleury remarks on this ‘This letter plainly shews that the Bishops who were there present (i. e. at the Council of Aquileia) either did not acknowledge the Council which had been lately held at Constantinople to be an Œcumenical Council, or that they were not yet informed of what had been transacted in it.
[54] – In the regard of the question between Nectarius and Maximus, the Western Bishops had been deceived by the latter. Maximus, called the Cynic because he retained the outward garb of a Cynic philosopher after he professed to have become a Christian, was irregularly consecrated at Constantinople, but was never recognised, and was formally pronounced by the Council not to be a true Bishop. He then went about trying to stir up other Churches in his favour. See Prof. Bright’s Hist. of the Church, pp. 160–166. Nectarius was elected after the resignation of Gregory Nazianzen, during the Council of Constantinople. He, like S. Ambrose, was unbaptized and held a high civil office at the time of his election.
[55] – This is translated from an ingenious and probable conjecture of Valesius.
[56] – The text through this long sentence is confused and ungrammatical, but it conveys the general sense expressed in the translation with tolerable clearness.
[57] – i. e. Gratian.
[58] – The sense is here to be elicited probably by repeating the word ‘quod,’ so that the sentence should run, ‘dogma nescio quod, quod Apollinaris asseritur.’
[59] – There seems to be something corrupt in the text. Perhaps we should read ‘moventur,’ ‘the dangerous parts of Illyricum are in commotion;’ or ‘suspecta’ has taken the place of some word, such as ‘superiora,’ which would stand in antithesis to ‘maritima.’
[60] – It may complete the subject of this series of letters to remind the reader that about the same time that the Council of the Italian Bishops was held, Theodosius convened a second Council at Constantinople to deal with the questions raised by the Westerns, where most of the Bishops who had formed the previous General Council re-assembled. They replied to the invitation to another General Council at Rome by a Synodical letter, which is given at full length by Theodoret (Eccles. Hist. v. 9.). In it they excuse themselves from attending, on the ground of their presence being required in their own Dioceses, especially after the long exile of many of them, and the prevalence of Arian usurpation, wishing that they ‘had the wings of a dove,’ to fly to their Western brethren. They then give a summary of the doctrinal decisions of the two Councils, and announce that they have sent three Bishops as deputies to explain all things more fully to them, and, with reference to the disputed successions at Constantinople and Antioch, give their assurance to their brethren that both Nectarius and Flavian were canonically elected, and the elections ratified both by the clergy and the faithful of each diocese, and by the Council, reminding them of the ancient Canon re-affirmed at Nicæa that each province should settle all such questions for themselves.
[61] – Acholius, or Ascholius, as he is called by Socrates, was the Bishop who baptised Theodosius, during an illness which seized him on a campaign against the Goths. He was present at the Council of Constantinople, and afterwards at that of Rome, not as one of the deputies from the East, but probably because his see had been so recently transferred to the Eastern Empire, that he might seem to belong to both East and West. (Tillemont Ambr. ch. xxxi.) It was there that he met S. Ambrose, who had gone to Rome to attend the Council, and had fallen ill. His death must have occurred in A.D. 383, for his successor Anysius was Bishop before the death of Damasus, Bishop of Rome, who died in A.D. 384. Theodoret therefore (B. v. ch. 18.) must be wrong in making him the Bishop who wrote to S. Ambrose an account of the massacre at Thessalonica, which occurred in A.D. 390. But the passage of Theodoret occurs in only one MS., and is perhaps not genuine.
[62] – The Goths had been settled within the boundaries of the Empire by Valens in A.D. 376, when they implored his protection against the Huns. He established them in Moesia, where they soon revolted, and ravaged Thrace, uniting with their former enemies, the Huns, and other barbarians. Valens was defeated and slain by them in A.D. 378, and then they overran all the neighbouring provinces. There is a graphic account in Gibbon, ch. xxvi.
[63] – The Benedictine text here reads ‘claudebatur.’ Several MSS., as the editors mention in a note, have ‘claudebat.’ They themselves suggest ‘claudicabat.’ But ‘claudebat’ really gives the same meaning, and there seems little doubt that it is the true reading. It comes from claudeo or claudo, (for both forms are to be found,) meaning ‘to be lame,’ ‘to halt.’ It occurs three times in Cicero.
[64] – ‘fisco vel arcæ.’ The ‘fiscus,’ or imperial treasury, received whatever was assigned to the Emperor individually, as distinguished from the ‘aerarium,’ which received what belonged to the senate, as representing the old republica: ‘arca’ is sometimes used in late writers as equivalent to ‘fiscus,’ sometimes, when distinguished from it, as here, it signifies the city funds, which were distinct from both.
[65] – Julian’s edict, forbidding the Christians to teach in the schools of grammar and rhetoric, is mentioned with disapproval by Gibbon ch. xxiii.
[66] – i. e. his half brother Gratian.
[67] – i. e. Maximus.
[68] – Valentinian the 1st.
[69] – This is sometimes represented as an exaggerated piece of rhetoric on S. Ambrose’s part, not to be regarded as representing a real truth: but it may very well do so, for Valentinian was almost constantly occupied with wars on the frontiers of the empire, and it does not appear from his life that he was ever at Rome during his reign. Milan, not Rome, was the chief seat of the Western Emperors at this time, when they were not with their armies.
[70] – The Præfectus Urbi at this time ‘was regarded as the direct representative of the Emperor,’ and, among other duties, ‘he had every month to make a report to the Emperor of the transactions of the Senate,’ and also was ‘the medium through which the Emperors received the petitions and presents from their capital.’ Dict. of Ant. sub voc.
[71] – By the ‘late emperor’ is meant Julian; ‘his successor’ is Valentinian the 1st, and ‘last Emperors’ are Valentinian the 1st and Valens.
[72] – There is a play here on the words ‘nomen’ and ‘numen.’
[73] – Symmachus is thinking of Virgil’s invocation, Di patrii, Indigetes, et Romule, Vestaque Mater, &c. Georg. i. 498. The Di patrii are explained as being those brought by Æneas into Italy, Indigetes those native to the soil of Italy.
[74] – In strict law a slave’s peculium was the property of his owner, but custom had allowed it to be regarded his own property.
[75] – Another trace of Virgil: Cum jam glandes atque arbuta sacræ
Deficerent silvæ et victum Dodona negaret. Georg. i. 158.
[76] – Valentinian the 1st, as Symmachus mentions above, had tolerated the heathen rites, and this he here represents as having availed to win the special favour of the gods.
[77] – This an official title of honour. There were three ranks among those who held office under the Emperors, 1 Illustres, 2 Spectabiles, 3 Clarissimi, which is the one here applied to Symmachus. The latter was applied to all senators: the other two were reserved for the higher offices of state. See Gibbon, ch. xvii.
[78] – He is referring apparently to Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, but somewhat exaggerates the brevity of their reigns. Galba reigned nearly seven months, Otho three months, Vitellius nearly eight months.
[79] – The captive Emperor is Valerian, who, A.D. 260, was taken prisoner by Sapor king of Persia, and treated with the utmost indignity. The other is his son Gallienus, and S. Ambrose’s expression with regard to him may be explained by a sentence of Gibbon, (ch. xi. init.) ‘Under the deplorable reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, the empire was oppressed and almost destroyed by the soldiers, the tyrants, and the barbarians.’
[80] – S. Ambrose refers here to a law of Valentinian’s, forbidding the Clergy from receiving bequests from widows and unmarried females. It was addressed to Damasus, Bishop of Rome. S. Ambrose’s caution in de Off. Min. 1, 20, 87, shews that control was needed. S. Jerome, speaking of this law says, ‘I do not complain of the law, but grieve that we have deserved it.’
[81] – In the provincial towns the political power in the times of the Emperors had passed into the hands of the curia or provincial Senate; and, with the power, many burdensome and extensive duties, were laid upon the curiales or decurions, as they were called. (See § 15.) Exemption from these had been granted first by Constantine; afterwards, as it was found that persons sought Holy Orders in order to evade civil duties, the privilege was restrained: and various changes were introduced by different Emperors. A full outline of the various laws is given in a learned note in Newman’s Fleury, vol. i. p. 162. where the text is speaking of S. Ambrose’s Letter to Theodosius, (infr. Lett. xl.) where he again complains of the same hardship. The subject is also more fully dealt with by Bingham Antiq. B. V. ch. iii. § 14–16.
[82] – ‘Conferte’ is here adopted as a manifest emendation of ‘conferet.’ The transfer of two letters is a common mistake of copyists.
[83] – This was the case in Julian’s reign, as may be seen in Theod. iii. 12.
[84] – The reading of all the other Edd. ‘sacri nemoris’ for ‘agri nemorum’ is here adopted, as yielding a clearer sense.
[85] – Pannonia was at this time divided into three provinces, viz. Pannonia Prima and Secunda, and Valeria Ripensis.
[86] – Rhaetia Secunda was the name given to Vindelicia when separated again from Rhaetia proper, shortly before the time of Constantine: it had been united to it about the end of the first century.
[87] – The Reading ‘nuda gignentium’ is adopted from Ed. Rom. The phrase occurs in Sallust Jug. 79, 6. ‘Gignentia’ is used for plants, trees &c. The clause ‘quae nos’ &c. is strange, but probably refers to the torpidity of winter, which is felt by man as well as by the lower creation.
[88] – This passage seems suggested by reminiscences of Virgil, the phrase ‘absconditam pretio humum’ possibly from Aen. iv, 211. urbem Exiguam pretio posuit, while in the latter part S. Ambrose perhaps had in his mind the description of Evander’s town in Aen. viii. See especially ll. 347–366.
[89] – The story of Cybele being brought to Rome, and landing outside the city, where the little stream of the Almo joins the Tiber, is told at length by Ovid, Fast. iv. 250–348. In commemoration of the washing of the Statue and sacred implements at the landing, an annual ceremony was maintained, which seems to have been popular, from the numerous allusions to it in later writers. See Lucan 1. 600, Martial iii. 47. 2, Stat. Silv. v. 1. 222, Sil. Ital. viii. 365, all quoted in Dict. of Geogr. When the rites were performed away from Rome, the nearest river was conventionally made the Almo for the time. It is remarkable that Ammianus Marcellinus xxiii, 3, 7. mentions as one of the Emperor Julian’s lasts acts, his keeping the day of this rite, when on his last campaign against the Persians, and performing all the ceremonies at Callinicum or Nicephorium on the Euphrates.
[90] – Venus Cælestis is a Latin equivalent of Ἀφροδίτη οὐρανία, and this name was transferred, according to Herodotus (Bk. i. ch. 105.) to the Phœnician goddess Astarte, or Ashtaroth. The same author also (B. i. ch. 131.) identifies Aphrodite with the Persian goddess Mitra, which however is shewn by Prof. Rawlinson, ad loc., to be an error, as Mithras is the sun-god of the Persians. The Temple of Venus Cælestis, or Astarte, at Carthage was very shortly after this time converted into a Christian Church, as recorded by Gibbon on the authority of Prosper Aquitan. (ch. xxviii).
[91] – S. Ambrose’s repeated assertions, that the Christians formed a majority in the Senate, are characterised by writers unfavourable to Christianity as unfounded, but they produce no proof. Gibbon (ch. xxviii. note 12.) simply says that it is an assertion ‘in contradiction to common sense.’ But as a large majority of the Senate voted for the abolition of the worship of Jupiter about the same time, as Gibbon himself records, common sense would seem rather to agree with S. Ambrose.
[92] – Referring to the unhappy end of Gratian who in the previous year (A.D. 383.) had been overpowered by Maximus, who revolted in Britain, and attacked him in Gaul. His troops deserted him and he was put to death by Maximus’ orders.
[93] – Pompeius was murdered, as he landed in Egypt, after escaping from Pharsalia, by Achillas an Eunuch and one of the guardians of king Ptolemy.
[94] – Tomyris queen of the Massagetæ. See the story in Herod. i. 214.
[95] – This is the first of the famous Hamilcars, the one who led the great invasion of Sicily in B.C. 480, and was totally defeated by Gelon. Herodotus, B. vii. ch. 167, tells the story to which S. Ambrose alludes as the account given by the Carthaginians of his end.
[96] – S. Ambrose is alluding to the famous story of Julian burning his fleet, after crossing the Tigris to attack Sapor, king of Persia, in his dominions. This was regarded afterwards by the Christians as an act of judicial blindness. See Augustine de Civ. Dei iv. 29, v. 21. Ammianus, xxiv. 7. asserts that he repented of the order as soon as it was issued, but was too late to stop the flames. Gibbon endeavours to justify the act, and says, ‘had he been victorious we should now admire his conduct.’ See his narrative in ch. xxiv. The author of his life in the Dict. of Ant. styles it ‘the best thing he could have done, if his march into the interior of Persia, had been dictated by absolute necessity.’ Setting these hypotheses aside, and looking only at the actual result, we may fairly think that the Christian interpretation of the facts, even if over-strongly expressed, is the truer.
[97] – He here refers to Josephus Antiq. v. ch. iv.
[98] – The name given in the Hebrew is Ramath Lehi, which means, ‘the hill or lifting up of the jaw-bone.’ S. Ambrose interprets it below ‘maxillae interfectionem.’ He would seem to be here suggesting a Greek etymology. The Benedictine note suggests that the name Agon is a confusion on his part from the word σιαγὼν in Josephus.
[99] – The words ‘quasi in cubitum intexti’ are probably from the Old Latin Version of the Bible. Field, on Origen’s Hexapla in loc. (Judg. xvi. 13.) mentions that some MSS of LXX read ἐὰν ὑφάνης ὡςει πῆχυν or ὡς ἐπὶ πῆχυν, which may very well have been translated by some such words as the above, in the Old Latin Version which S. Ambrose used.
[100] – The expression ‘principes virtutum’ seems to be a phrase from the Old Testament. In the Vulgate we find ‘rex virtutum’ Ps. lxvii, (lxviii. E.V.) 13, where the E.V. has ‘kings of armies,’ and in Judith xiv. 17 (19 E.V.) ‘Quod quum audissent principes virtutis Assyriorum,’ and in 1 Macc. v. 56. ‘Azarias princeps virtutis.’ The ‘comites consistoriani’ formed a sort of cabinet (consistorium) or privy council to the Emperor. The Benedictine Editors take ‘principes virtutum’ as meaning the Magistri militum, but the absence of any conjunction is against this.
[101] – This must mean the Præfectus prætorio Italiæ, one of the four great Viceroys, under whom the Dioceses of the Empire were placed. He was supreme over all Italy, and the countries north of it to the Danube, and the western part of the north of Africa. He had under him three Dioceses, containing thirty Provinces.
[102] – The title given them is ‘Decani.’ They seem to have been something like the lictors of the great officers of state under the republic.
[103] – These ‘vela’ or hangings were a token that the building was claimed for the ‘fiscus,’ or private property of the Emperor. Gibbon in his grand way says, ‘the splendid canopy and hangings of the royal seat were arranged in the customary manner,’ but, as is noticed by the writer of the Life of S. Ambrose in Dict. of Christian Biog. it is clear from the sequel of the narrative (see § 20) that they were outside, not inside the Church.
[104] – The words in the original are ‘missam facere.’ Prof. Bright in his History notes that this is ‘the earliest instance, apparently, of this term being used for the Eucharistic service.’
[105] – ‘The introduction of barbarians into the Roman armies became every day more universal, more necessary, and more fatal. The most daring of the Scythians, of the Goths, and of the Germans, were enrolled not only in the auxiliaries of their respective nations, but in the legions themselves, and among the most distinguished of the Palatine troops.’ (Gibbon, ch. xvii.) The Goths were Arians. It was much about this time that Ulfilas, the apostle of the Goths, made his famous translation of the Bible into Gothic. See Bright’s Hist. of the Church p. 157.
[106] – This is the Vulgate rendering of ‘At Salem is His Tabernacle.’
[107] – On the high rank and great influence of the Præpositus cubiculi, or Grand Chamberlain, see Gibbon ch. xvii. They ranked with the Præfecti prætorio and other highest officers of state as Illustres. See note on Lett. xvii. § 1.
[108] – A reply of Valentinian the 1st to some Bishops of the Hellespont and Bithynia, who demanded permission to meet ‘to amend the doctrine of the faith,’ is given by Sozomen. (vi. 7.) His words are, ‘It is not lawful for me, as a layman, to busy myself about such matters as these: let the Bishops, whose business it is, meet by themselves wherever they will.’ To the same effect are the words of his which Theodoret reports, (iv. 6.) when bidding the Bishops of the province elect a successor to Auxentius. He bids them choose a fit person, ‘that we also, who rule the empire, may sincerely bow our heads to him, and welcome his reproofs, (for, being men, we cannot but stumble,) as a remedial discipline.’ What law is referred to is uncertain. The Benedictine Editors, after mentioning some which had been suggested ‘think it more probable that the law referred to is not extant.’
[109] – Gibbon (ch. xxv.) in his character of Valentinian says, ‘In the time of Julian he provoked the danger of disgrace by the contempt which he publicly expressed for the reigning religion.’ The story is told by Theod. Eccles. Hist. iii. 16. Valentinian was in official attendance on the Emperor Julian on one occasion when he went to the temple of Fortune to perform rites. ‘On either side of the door were stationed attendants, who sprinkled all who came in with lustral water to purify them, as they believed. When some of the drops fell on his cloak, Valentinian struck the attendants with his fist, saying that he was defiled not purified by them.’ For this he was dismissed from the court, and sent to a solitary garrison. The same story is told with slight variations by Sozomen. Hist. vi. 6.
[110] – He is alluding to his own election.
[111] – This is true of the first decision of the Council, but as S. Ambrose says, ‘it ended badly,’ for the Bishops were inveigled into accepting a less orthodox formula. See Prof. Bright’s Hist. p. 94, 98.
[112] – S. Ambrose here delicately alludes to the service he had rendered to Valentinian in going on his behalf to the court of the usurper Maximus after the death of Gratian, which is referred to in Letter xxiv.
[113] – ‘This was not so great an inconvenience to them as might appear at first sight, for the early Basilicas were not unlike the heathen temples, or our own collegiate chapels, that is, part of a range of buildings, which contained the lodgings of the ecclesiastics, and formed a fortress in themselves, which could easily be blockaded either from within or without.’ Newman. Ch. of the Fathers. p. 22.
[114] – The words ‘custodiam’ and ‘amisit,’ are repeated by S. Ambrose from the former part of the sentence. ‘Amisit’ as applied here recalls the Psalmist’s expression, ‘Hath God forgotten to be gracious?’ Ps. lxxvii. 9.
[115] – This refers to a story thus recounted in Paulinus’ Life of S. Ambrose ch. 12, ‘Among many who tried to force S. Ambrose into exile, but through God’s protection failed of their purpose, one Euthymius more hapless than the rest, was stirred to such a pitch of frenzy that he hired a house close to the Church, and there kept a carriage, that he might the more readily carry off Ambrose into exile, by seizing him and putting him in the carriage. But his wickedness fell upon his own pate, (Ps. vii. 7.) for that very day year, he was himself put into the carriage and from the same house was carried into exile, confessing that it was by the just judgment of God that his wickedness had recoiled on himself, and he was carried into exile in the very chariot which he had prepared for the Bishop. And the Bishop did much to comfort him, by giving him money, and other necessaries.’
[116] – The word is ‘curiales.’ See [Footnote 81] on Lett. xviii. To the authorities there referred to add Bingh. Antiq. iv, 4, 4, where Gothofred’s enumeration of their duties is given in full in the notes.
[117] – Zech. v. 1 [E.V. a flying roll. Vulg. volumen volans.]
[118] – i. e. by causing them to commit sacrilege.
[119] – There is a play here on the word ‘aerarios,’ as connected with ‘aerarium’ the treasury. The aerarii were the lowest class of people at Rome, and so S. Ambrose calls the ‘pauperes Christi’ his aerarii, while at the same time they are the treasures of the Church.
[120] – S. Augustine mentions in his Confessions (ix. 7.) S. Ambrose’s introduction both of Hymns and chanting during this period of trial. ‘Then was it first instituted that, after the manner of the Eastern Churches, Hymns and Psalms should be sung, lest the people should wax faint through the tediousness of sorrow; and from that day to this the custom is retained, divers, yea, almost all Thy Congregations throughout other parts of the world following herein.’ Oxf. Transl. He speaks in the same passage of the behaviour of the people: ‘The devout people kept watch in the Church, ready to die with their Bishop Thy servant.’ He also dwells on the effect produced on himself, these events happening shortly before his conversion. ‘How did I weep in Thy Hymns and Canticles, touched to the quick by the voice of Thy sweet-attuned Church! The voices flowed into mine ears, and the Truth distilled into mine heart, whence the affections of my devotion overflowed, and tears ran down, and happy was I therein.’ Ib. ix. 6. It is quite possible that some of the twelve Hymns, acknowledged by the Benedictine Editors as genuine, were then first sung. Among them are the well-known ‘Aeterna Christi munera,’ ‘Aeterne rerum Conditor,’ ‘Deus Creator omnium,’ and others, whose strains are now familiar in English versions.
[121] – This is said to be the Church now called ‘S. Ambrose the greater.’ The Roman Church is the one called in the previous letter the ‘New Basilica,’ and also the Church of the Apostles. It was probably called ‘Romana’ from being near the Porta Romana.
[122] – S. Augustine says that it was revealed to him in a dream.
[123] – These were ἐνεργούμενοι, or persons possessed by evil spirits. On them see Bingh. Antiq. iii. 4, 6. The laying on of hands was part of the rite of exorcism.
[124] – The text stands ‘arriperetur urna,’ nor is there any variation of MSS. noted. But it seems absolutely necessary to read ‘una.’ An ‘urna’ could have nothing to do with the matter. It might hold ashes, but surely not the bones of two men of marvellous size. The histories founded on the letter all tacitly adopt the emendation, and speak of ‘a woman among the possessed.’ See Fleury. B. xviii. 46. Tillemont in Vit.
[125] – now of S. Vitalis and S. Agricola Fleury p. 104. Eng. Tr.
[126] – This is distinctly asserted by S. Augustine in all the three passages referred to in the Introduction.
[127] – The word is ‘Enneacaidecateris.’ Mr. Hensley remarks in his article on Easter, ‘It has been often stated that the Council established a particular cycle, that of nineteen years, but this is a mistake.’
[128] – ‘Nam incipit esse contrarium.’ According to Ducange ‘incipio’ is used in late Latin in the sense of the Greek verb μέλλω, and here, as it would seem, with the force with which that verb is so often used as equivalent to ‘it is likely’ or ‘it is sure’ that such and such is the case: see Lidd. and Scott. μέλλω, ii. 3, 4.
[129] – An allusion to Virg. Georg., 1, 276. Ipsa dies alios alio dedit ordine luna Felices operum; quintam fuge, etc.
[130] – Days immediately following the Kalends, Nones or Ides, considered unlucky by the Romans. See A. Gellius, v. 17. What the ‘Egyptian days’ were is not ascertained.
[131] – This is the ordinary phrase for the day of the lunar month. See Bright Early Engl. Ch. Hist. p. 195.
[132] – S. Ambrose’s Latin is ‘mensis novorum.’ The LXX has ἐν μηνὶ τῶν νέων. The Vulgate ‘in mense novarum frugum.’
[133] – bitter herbs E.T. Ex. xii. 8.
[134] – The Era of Diocletian was the prevalent one at this time, and till the general adoption of the Christian Era, which did not become established until the 8th Century. See Mr. Hensley’s article ‘Era’ in Dict. of Christ. Antiq. He gives there the rule for reducing the Era of Diocletian, the epoch of which is Aug. 29th A.D. 284, to the Christian Era, viz. to add 283 years and 240 days to the given date of Diocletian’s Era. According to this the Easter of the 89th year of Diocletian would be A.D. 373, and that of the 93rd would be A.D. 377. The ‘times lately past’ would probably refer to A.D. 383, when, as may be seen by the Table, the ‘fourteenth moon’ fell on a Sunday.
[135] – There is a slight error here. The interval is 32 days, not 31.
[136] – There is some uncertainty about the reading here. The original reading in the text was ‘biennium,’ and, as this clearly did not agree with the facts the Benedictine Editors adopted a suggestion that ‘biennium’ was a mistaken rendering of a MS. which had ‘vi-ennium.’ But the period of 6 years would not be precise, as the year referred to must be A.D. 379, (see table,) which would be seven years before.
[137] – The precise words are not found in either of these passages.
[138] – in haste E.T.
[139] – against all the gods of Egypt E.T.
[140] – This would seem to be not quite correct. Mr. Hensley remarks that in A.D. 360. Easter day was on April 23rd but that the ‘fourteenth moon’ of that year was a Monday and not on a Sunday. The question is discussed in Ideler Chronol. vol. II. p. 254–257.
[141] – i. e. as Bishop.
[142] – The Juthungi were a German tribe settled on the north bank of the Danube, in what is now Austria Proper and Moravia. It is uncertain whether they were, as Ammianus Marcellinus describes them, a sept of the Alemanni, or whether they were Goths. It has been suggested that the name is only another form of Gothi or Gothones, (Dict. of Antiq.) The want of a detailed and accurate history of these times, which are just beyond the range of Ammianus, makes it difficult to make out clearly the allusions which S. Ambrose here makes. Tillemont explains them thus, ‘Bauton seeing the Juthungan Alemanni ravaging Rhaetia, while the Roman soldiers were engaged in guarding the passes of the Alps against Maximus, summoned the Huns and Alans to make war on them. These tribes accordingly pillaged the territories of the Alemanni up to the frontiers of Gaul. But on Maximus complaining that they had been brought against him, Valentinian, to deprive him of any pretext for breaking off the peace, induced them to retire in the midst of their victories by presents of money.’ He also considers that the reason why the Juthungi came to pillage Rhaetia that year was the extraordinary fertility, and that it is this invasion to which allusion is made in Letter xxiv, 21, where S. Ambrose says that Rhaetia Secunda ‘drew down an enemy on herself by her abundance.’
[143] – S. Ambrose means Maximus’ brother.
[144] – He seems to mean that pity for the dead should move him to less harsh treatment. But perhaps the word ‘tuam’ may have dropped out, and we should read ‘tu tuam causam considera,’ ‘do you consider your own case.’
[145] – It seems necessary here to read ‘allegabis’ for ‘allegabas,’ as the past tense would be unmeaning.
[146] – Cabillonum is the ancient name of Châlons-sur-Saône.
[147] – He refers to the Bishops Idacius and Ithacius, who had induced Maximus to put Priscillian and others of his party to death, in spite of the remonstrances of S. Martin, who urged Maximus to be content with their having been condemned by ecclesiastical sentence. Priscillian ‘had adopted a strange compound of various errors,’ (Prof. Bright Hist. p. 160.) chiefly Manichean. There is a full account of Maximus’ dealings with them in Fleury, xviii. 29, 30. Newman’s Transl. vol. 1, p. 66–69. S. Ambrose in Letter xxvi. condemns the conduct of these Bishops, and the appeal to the civil sword in Ecclesiastical cases, in still stronger terms.
[148] – The Benedictine Editors consider him to be referring to the Novatians.
[149] – S. Ambrose’s Latin is ‘scribe hoc viros abdicatos.’ The Vulg. has ‘scribe virum istum sterilem.’ The LXX. γράψον τὸν ἄνδρα τοῦτον ἐκκήρυκτον.
[150] – abdicati.
[151] – Fleury remarks on this, ‘We must remember that the canonical penances inflicted for great crimes were at that time so very severe, that they were equal to a rigorous punishment.’
[152] – See [Footnote 147] on Letter xxiv.
[153] – S. Ambrose makes the same statement again, De Spirit. iii. 17. ‘It is important then to notice where the Lord maintained this argument, for oft-times His oracles derive their value from the quality of the place where He was.’
[154] – nevel.
[155] – These words are not in the Heb. In LXX they take the place of the half-homer of barley, γομὸρ κριθῶν καὶ νέβελ οἴνου. S. Ambrose combines both.
[156] – It was said just afterwards, if the story of the woman taken in adultery be in its right place, which is doubtful.
[157] – Leah means ‘wearied,’ and the name is supposed to refer to her ‘tenderness’ or weakness of eyes. (Gen. xxix. 16). S. Ambrose gives a mistaken meaning to the name Rachel, which really means ‘ewe.’
[158] – S. Ambrose often gives this exposition of the name ‘Shechem.’
[159] – Isaac means ‘laughter.’ Gen. xxi. 6.
[160] – He is here referring to Virg. Ecl. 5, 77. Dumque thymo pascuntur apes, dum rore cicadae.
[161] – Here again he is thinking of Virg. Georg. 3, 328. Et cantu querulae rumpent arbusta cicadae.
[162] – Here again S. Ambrose is thinking of Virg. Georg. 2, 154. Squameus in spiram tractu se colligit anguis.
[163] – Perhaps quoted from memory from S. John iv. 26.
[164] – ‘Veri vana.’ This is simply one of the Virgilian expressions of which S. Ambrose is so full. It is taken from Aen. x. 630, Nunc manet insontem gravis exitus, aut ego veri Vana feror.
[165] – The Engl. Vers. is ‘Prepare war, wake up the mighty men.’ The Vulg. ‘Sanctificate bellum, suscitate robustos.’
[166] – This refers to Ps. xix. 5. where the sun, that rejoiceth as a giant to run his course, is usually interpreted by the Fathers of the Messiah. It was a very favourite thought with S. Ambrose. In his Hymn ‘De Adventu Domini’ he adapts the language of the Psalm to it in words of beautiful simplicity, Procedit e thalamo suo, Pudoris aulâ regiâ Geminæ Gigas substantiæ Alacris ut currat viam. Egressus Ejus a Patre, Regressus Ejus ad Patrem, Excursus usque ad Inferos, Recursus ad sedem Dei. In the De Incarn. ch. v. he gives a fuller explanation. ‘Him the Prophet Daniel describes as a Giant, because being of a twofold nature, He partaketh in one Person both of the Godhead and of a human Body, and exulted in going forth as a Bridegroom from His chamber, like a Giant, to run His course. He is Bridegroom of the soul as being the Word, He is a Giant of earth because He fulfilled all the duties of our daily life, and, though He was ever the eternal God, took upon Him the Mystery of the Incarnation.’
[167] – The English Version has ‘The partridge sitteth on eggs and hatcheth them not.’ S. Ambrose is referring to § 11 of the preceding Letter, where he applies the text to Satan. He makes the same application of it in Letter xlvi. 14.
[168] – perdendo.
[169] – contrarius.
[170] – judicio.
[171] – judicio.
[172] – judicium.
[173] – ‘Cornici oculum effodere’ was a familiar Latin proverb for overcoming craft with craft. See Cic. pro Mur. 11, pro Flacco, 20.
[174] – primitivus.
[175] – primogenitus.
[176] – Horontianus appears to have been, like Irenæus, a pupil of S. Ambrose, and to have been ordained by him, and to have been, as the Benedictine Editors say, ‘In clericorum contubernio educatus ab infantia.’ Nothing more is known of him. See Letter lxx. 25.
[177] – ἐντελέχεια.
[178] – propria corporis.
[179] – Sun, E. V. Sol, Vulg.
[180] – primitias.
[181] – primogenita.
[182] – The difference in the original is only the punctuation; in the first case, ‘Nam quod videt quis quid, et sperat:’ in the second, ‘Nam quod videt quis, quid et sperat?’
[183] – S. Ambrose is evidently referring to his mission to Maximus, and the persecution of Justina.
[184] – There is another reading of several MSS., ‘et ille profecto gemitus,’ which seems to offer a better sense, ‘and that groaning is indeed truly unutterable, etc.’
[185] – Canaan. E.V.
[186] – The Vulgate has, ‘Trahitur autem sapientia de occultis.’ The E.V. is, ‘The price of wisdom is above rubies.’
[187] – This is referred by the Benedictine Editors to Prov. xxii. 7. but it does not agree with either the Sept. or Vulgate.
[188] – τοῦ πνεύματος is inserted in a few MSS, and Spiritus is in the Vulgate.
[189] – The story of Calanus and Alexander is related in Arian vii. 2. It is also more briefly alluded to by Plutarch. Alex. 65. Neither writer mentions this letter.
[190] – vibulamina. Gr. μοσχεύματα.
[191] – i. e. the three children in the furnace.
[192] – S. Ambrose is here imitating the consolation offered by Ser. Sulpicius to Cicero on the death of his daughter. See Ep. ad Div. iv, 5, 4.
[193] – distinxisti ei.
[194] – ‘Oriens’ or ‘the East’ was the title of the great civil ‘diocese’ which included Syria, Palestine, Cilicia, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, and some adjacent districts, and corresponded to the Patriarchate of Antioch in the ecclesiastical division. It was originally under one chief called ‘Comes orientis,’ but it would appear from this passage, as is asserted by Gothofred, that the civil and military functions had been divided, and there were now two officers, ‘Comes orientis militarium partium,’ and ‘Comes orientis civilium partium.’ The subject is somewhat obscure.
[195] – Callinicum was in Osrhoene, a name given to the north-western part of Mesopotamia.
[196] – Socrates, B. v. ch. 13., mentions that Nectarius’ house was burnt by the Arian party in the same year in which this letter was written.
[197] – See a note in Newman’s Fleury, p. 160.
[198] – Andragathius, who commanded a fleet in Maximus’ interest expecting Theodosius to come to Italy by sea.
[199] – The Benedictine editors say ‘tota hæc pericope in uno Cod. Reg. desideratur: forte non male.’ It is difficult to elicit any sense from it.
[200] – Siscia, now Sissek, was a large town in upper Pannonia, on the south bank of the Save. Petavio, now Pettau, was on the Drave. It seems likely that ‘in Sicilia’ should be omitted, as being only a false meaning for ‘Sciscia.’ There is no mention of Sicily being in any way connected with the war. But see Tillemont, Theod. art. xlv.
[201] – S. Ambrose is quoting from memory and slightly varies the facts from the narrative in book of Judges.
[202] – See a learned note in Newman’s Fleury vol. 1 p. 162, on the exemption of the Clergy from municipal offices, compare also Letter xviii. 14, and the note there.
[203] – i. e. the Count of the East.
[204] – This refers to the famous sedition at Antioch, when the mob, enraged at the imposition of new taxes, overthrew the Emperor’s statues, and dragged them through the city. After a period of suspense, during which S. Chrysostom preached the Homilies on the Statues, Theodosius, who had at first been violently enraged, sent them a free pardon. This was in the previous year.
[205] – i. e. of Maximus.
[206] – spiritum.
[207] – sacramentum.
[208] – refrigerat.
[209] – The Latin title is ‘Magister equitum et peditum.’ When the Præfecti Prætorio became civil rather than military officers, the chief command of the armies was transferred to two high officers, called, one ‘Magister equitum,’ and the other ‘Magister peditum.’ When the empire was divided these became four, and eventually the number was increased to eight, who were all called ‘Magistri equitum et peditum.’ See Gibbon ch. xvii. 3.
[210] – i. e. the ‘Comes Orientis,’ under whose jurisdiction the matter was, and who had sent the report to the Emperor. See [ Lett. xl. 6.]
[211] – sospitatis indicio.
[212] – This sentence as it stands in the text is incomplete, the ‘quia’ having no correlative. The ‘at vero quia’ seems like ‘at enim’ in Classical Latin, or perhaps the ‘quia’ should be omitted.
[213] – See [Letter xix, 7.] S. Ambrose in De Abraham B. 1. c. 9, 93 alludes to the use of the veil in Christian marriages.
[214] – This name appears in the reply of the Milan Synod as Plotinus, which is probably the true form.
[215] – There are three laws in the code of Theodosius directed against the Manichees, one of the year 372 A.D. which forbade them to hold assemblies, one of 389 A.D. and one of 391 A.D. ordering their banishment. It is probably the second of these that is referred to, though Gothofred refers it to the third, in which case the date of the Letter must be altered.
[216] – All these names except Geminianus occur in the list of Bishops present at the Council of Aquileia. See [p. 60].
[217] – νοῦς.
[218] – This whole passage is full of expressions borrowed from Virgil.
[219] – This title seems here to be applied especially to the constellations of the Pleiades and Hyades, each of which consisted of seven stars.
[220] – See [note] on Letter xxvi. 9.
[221] – morsus hominum. E. V. ‘principal men.’
[222] – Devoravit mors praevalens. The E. V. is, ‘He will swallow up death in victory.’ The Vulg. has, ‘Praecipitabit mortem in sempiternum.’
[223] – The word ‘vitae’ is here inserted as necessary to the sense, and to the accuracy of the quotation.
[224] – νοῦς.
[225] – diminuit.
[226] – ampliavit.
[227] – This agrees with the LXX, καὶ ἄνθρωπός ἐστι καὶ τίς γνώσεται αὐτόν;
[228] – specie.
[229] – puerum.
[230] – ‘Ecce ego mittam servum meum, Oriens nomen Ejus.’ Vulg. has ‘Ecce ego adducam servum meum Orientem.’ ‘Oriens nomen Ejus’ comes in v. 12. ‘Behold I will bring forth my servant the Branch.’ The same word in the original is used also in Is. iv. 2. Jerem. xxiii. 5. xxiii. 15. and in all those passages the Vulg. renders it by ‘Germen.’ In the passages of Zech. and Jerem. the LXX. have the word ἀνατολή. The word in the original means ‘a sprout’ or ‘shoot.’
[231] – See [Letter xxxii. 1.]
[232] – He is quoting from a letter of Cicero’s. Ep. ix. 3. Longi subsellii, ut noster Pompeius appellat, judicatio et mora.
[233] – He is here quoting from Cicero De off. iii. 1, where Cicero gives as a saying of Scipio Africanus, on the authority of Cato, ‘numquam se minus otiosum esse quam quum otiosus, nec minus solum quam quum solus esset.’ It is quoted again by S. Ambrose in De off. Min. iii. 1, 107.
[234] – This is the reading of most MSS, according to the Benedictine Editors. And, though the connection of ideas is somewhat abrupt, they explain it to be, that, as the gift of faith was bestowed on Abraham the Chaldean, so the gift of prophecy was bestowed on Balaam. All the other Editions have ‘Balaam’ instead of ‘Abraham’. This makes the connection easier, but then ‘adscitur ad fidem’ is strangely applied to him, and it could only mean, ‘is employed to utter the truth.’ He might be called a Chaldean as the common name among the Romans for Eastern diviners generally.
[235] – The Magister officiorum was a sort of Chief Secretary of state, both for home and foreign affairs. A summary of his duties may be seen in Gibbon ch. xvii, iv, 2. It was the influence which this post gave him over Theodosius which enabled Rufinus to stir the Emperor’s passionateness to the crime of Thessalonica.
[236] – The adjective Portuensis generally refers to the town called Portus, which grew up in the times of the Emperors on the harbour of Ostia. It is probable therefore that the reference is to some work of which the person spoken of had the superintendence.
[237] – As Lake Larius was sometimes called Lacus Comacinus in the times of the Emperors, (Dict. of Geogr. voc. Comum.) it is probable that the ‘Comacinæ rupes’ were some familiar rocks on its margin. The comparison to a bull is simply an adaptation of Virgil’s ‘Et faciem tauro propior,’ Georg. iii. 58.
[238] – The word ‘bonis’ must certainly here be inserted in the text, ‘uterque alienae magis ordinationis vitiis quam suis bonis fretus,’ as suggested by the Benedictine Editors. It occurs just below in the corresponding sentence, ‘suis potius bonis quam alieno vitio defendi.’
[239] – He is sometimes spoken of as Bishop of Nairsus in Dacia Mediterranea (see Note in [p. 67].) but Tillemont (note 43 in Life of S. Ambrose) has made it probable that there were two Bishops of the name of Bonosus, one of Nairsus, and the other of Sardica, the latter of whom is the one dealt with by the Synod of Capua.
[240] – He is referring to the ‘Memorial of Symmachus.’ [p. 94]. The ‘two petitions,’ libellos duos, are Letters 17 and 18.
[241] – He means that the reason why he declines all communication with Eugenius, who wished to secure his great political influence on his side, was, that he felt sure that Eugenius, though at present temporising with both parties, would in the end yield to the pressure of the pagan party, and restore the revenues to the heathen temples. ‘Extorquendum’ is, in accordance with late Latin idiom, a mere future passive.
[242] – confusus fuerit.
[243] – confundar.
[244] – See Letter [xliv. 9], and [note c] there.
[245] – compares.
[246] – The argument here turns on the Latin words. ‘Avunculus,’ uncle, is a mere diminutive of ‘avus,’ grand-father; and the one word ‘neptis’ is used both for niece and grand-daughter without any distinction.
[247] – The ‘not’ is inserted according to the suggestion of the Benedictine Editors. There seems a contradiction in terms without it.
[248] – agnatio.
[249] – agnatio.
[250] – cognatio.
[251] – ‘Apices’ here and in § 5 undoubtedly means ‘a letter.’ ‘Apex,’ in late Latin, is used for a single letter written, and ‘apices’ like ‘literae,’ for a continuous writing. Aulus Gellius (xiii. 30, 10. xvii. 9, 12.) quoted in White’s Dictionary, uses the phrase ‘literarum apices,’ and in Cod. Just. ii. 8, 6. we find ‘Augusti apices’ for ‘the Emperor’s rescripts.’
[252] – Theodoret, v. 24. gives a detailed account of the ways in which the special intervention of heaven was displayed in Theodosius’ campaign against Eugenius. S. Aug. De Civ. Dei, v. 26. says that Theodosius ‘contra robustissimum Eugenii exercitum magis orando quam feriendo pugnavit,’ and, after mentioning stories told by eye-witnesses of the manifest intervention of God on his behalf, quotes the well-known lines of Claudian, O nimium dilecte Deo cui fundit ab antris Æolus armatas hyemes, cui militat æther, Et conjurati veniunt ad classica venti.
[253] – The word here used is plural, Venetiarum. From this it has been argued that this letter must be of later date than S. Ambrose’s time, as Venetiæ is the usual name for the city, which was not founded till the time of Attila. (Gibbon ch. xxxv. vol. iv. p. 242 ed. Smith.) But he certainly uses the plural form in Letter xviii. 21, which is undoubtedly his, and therefore, as Tillemont has pointed out, no argument can be founded on this against the present letter. It is possible that under the plural form he intends to include Venetia and Histria, which are reckoned together as one consular province in the civil division of the empire, (see Marquardt’s Table, in Smith’s Gibbon vol. ii. p. 315.) and also as one ecclesiastical province in the Exarchate of Milan, (see Bingham ix. 1, 6.) By ‘finitimis Italiæ partibus’ he probably means Flaminia and Picenum Annonarium, which were also included in the ‘Diocese’ of Italy and Exarchate of Milan.
[254] – intentio.
[255] – It is to be noted that Eusebius, who died in A.D. 371, was not the last Bishop of Vercellæ, but Limenius, whose name occurs among the Bishops who took part in the Council of Aquileia. This has also been made an argument against S. Ambrose’s authorship, but there does not seem much weight in it. Eusebius was much the more famous man of the two, and his teaching and example and the memory of his labours and martyrdom are naturally appealed to by S. Ambrose.
[256] – These were, it appears, followers of Jovinian. See above, Introd. to Letter of Siricius, [p. 280].
[257] – reprobus.
[258] – reprobum.
[259] – Nothing is known of this man, nor is even the name certain, as there are many various readings. The Benedictines suggest that it may mean Philodemus, who is mentioned by Diog. Laert. x. 3. as a follower of Epicurus, and is also spoken of by Cicero, De fin. 11, 35. and by Horace, Sat. 1, 2, 21.
[260] – sobrii estote. Vulg.
[261] – Nothing is known of Demarchus, whom S. Ambrose here quotes. The Benedictines suggest that it may be a mistake for Hermarchus, who was Epicurus’ successor as head of his school, and who wrote books in defence of the Epicurean philosophy. He is mentioned several times by Cicero.
[262] – Though the so-called Epicureans of later days perverted his theory to what is generally known as Epicureanism, Epicurus himself certainly did not mean by pleasure sensual pleasure. ‘Pleasure was not with him a momentary and transitory sensation, but he conceived it as something lasting and imperishable, consisting in pure and noble mental enjoyments.’ ‘He was a man of pure simple and temperate habits.’ Dict. of Biog. in voc. Vol. ii. p. 34, 35.
[263] – This must be the sense if we retain the interrogation. If it is omitted the passage would mean, ‘Men then are recalled from that, in which’ &c., i. e., it is plainly unfitting for men to do that, in which &c.
[264] – S. Ambrose is alluding apparently to Ezra proclaiming and keeping a fast to remove God’s anger against his people. Should we not read ‘memoriae’ for ‘memoriâ?’ Ezra did restore the Scriptures to the memory of the people, but it does not appear that he restored them from memory?
[265] – Sobrietatis inebrietas.
[266] – Sola.
[267] – Mary and Miriam are really the same name, the former having come through the Greek form Μαρία.
[268] – laqueus.
[269] – A reminiscence of Virgil’s, Ante expectatum positis stat in agmine castris. Georg. iii. 348.
[270] – The reading here varies. Ben. has ‘in Concilio Nicaeni tractatus,’ which may mean ‘the Council which made the Nicene Creed,’ (for the phrase ‘Nicaenus tractatus’ as applied to the Creed see note 1 on Acts of Council of Aquileia.) Another reading is ‘in Concilii Nicaeni tractatu,’ and another ‘in Concilio Nicaeno tractatus.’ There is a difficulty about S. Ambrose’s statement, as there is nothing on the subject in the Canons of Nicaea. The Benedictine editors, after discussing other explanations, suggest that S. Ambrose may have had an inaccurate copy of the Canons, with the one he here quotes inserted from some other Council. Some unauthentic documents professing to give Nicene regulations on the subject are quoted in Dict. of Christian Antiq. Art. Digamy.
[271] – impressio.
[272] – praescriptio.
[273] – The most conspicuous instance was Nectarius. See [note 54], on Letter xiii.
[274] – Eusebius and Dionysius Bishop of Milan were driven into exile by the Emperor Valens, because they refused at the third Council of Milan, A.D. 355, to subscribe the condemnation of Athanasius. There is a brief but graphic account of the circumstances in Bright’s History of the Church, pages 70–73.
[275] – longaevi super terram.
[276] – The expression ‘aula regalis,’ applied to the Mother of our Lord, may be illustrated from De Instit. Virg. ch. xii. § 79. Ipse ergo Rex Israel transivit hanc portam, ipse Dux sedit in ea, quando Verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis, quasi Rex sedens in aula regali uteri virginalis. Compare also the expression in S. Ambrose’s Hymn on the Nativity, Procedit e thalamo suo, Pudoris aula regia, &c.
[277] – With this Letter begins what the Benedictines have called a second division of the Letters, containing those which furnish no internal evidence of their date sufficient to justify their being assigned a place in chronological order. They are arranged according to their matter, 1st, those which contain expositions of passages of Holy Scripture, (lxi–lxxv.), 2nd, those which discuss as important, and mostly doctrinal subjects, (lxxvi–lxxxiii.), 3rd, a few brief letters of ordinary friendly intercourse, (lxxxiv–xci.)
[278] – See [note 222] on Letter xliv. 10.
[279] – Whether the true reading here be ‘traditio’ as Ben. has, or ‘editio’ as Rom., the reference must be to the ἐκδόσεις or versions which Origen brought together in his Hexapla, of which the fifth, the sixth, and the seventh, (for there was a seventh,) were only known by their numbers. See Art. by Tregelles on ‘Ancient Versions,’ in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, vol. iii. p. 1623.
[280] – a diebus saeculi.
[281] – Saeculum.
[282] – i. e. the priesthood. cf. 1 Tim. iii. 13.
[283] – Bethlehem.
[284] – institutis.
[285] – castellum.
[286] – [a]‏עֳנִי‎] signifying affliction; [a]‏עֲנִי‎] one humbled by affliction and so, it was inferred, brought to obedience.
[287] – Baehr on Herod. ii. 37. quotes with apparent approval Wesseling’s opinion that in fact, though Herodotus does not expressly state it, among the Egyptians only the priests and those initiated in the mysteries received circumcision. It is to this perhaps that S. Ambrose is here alluding. See also the art. on ‘Circumcision’ in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible.
[288] – confusus fuerit.
[289] – subditus fiat. Vulg.
[290] – in Christo. εἰς χριστόν.
[291] – Why this letter, which plainly declares itself in the first section to be a sequel of the previous one, is addressed to a different name, it is difficult to say. There is a similar difficulty about Letter xxvi, and possibly the same solution may apply here as is suggested by the Ben. Edd. there. See Introd. to [ Lett. xxvi.]
[292] – The phrase ‘cernere hereditatem’ is a well-known law-term, meaning literally ‘to decide to accept an inheritance,’ and then ‘to enter upon it.’ But as this sense will not agree with the context, it seems necessary to take ‘cernere,’ as the Benedictine note does, in its common sense of ‘to see.’
[293] – The words ἁρμονίᾳ τοῦ Λόγου δεδεμένον seem to be a gloss on S. Paul’s compound συναρμολογούμενον. They are not part of his text, though S. Ambrose seems here to be quoting them as if they were.
[294] – laborat.
[295] – cleros.
[296] – It seems necessary to the sense here to insert ‘quae’ before ‘obtexerent.’
[297] – v. c. here is an abbreviation for vir clarissimus, a title of official rank. See [note] in p. 101.
[298] – lætus.

Transcriber’s Notes.