AD THE READER
(Oxford Edition, 1715)Since it has always been my desire, first to serve the Christian Church, and then the republic of letters to the best of my ability, I felt that I could not spend those hours which were unoccupied by my duties as Regius Professor of Theology, and by the other cares and business pressing upon me, in any study more pleasant or useful than that of correcting, explaining, and publishing the surviving works of Clement of Alexandria, a most ancient and learned Father.
My first concern, therefore, was to present the author himself as complete and free from errors as possible. To this end, I not only consulted all printed editions—in which, if we except those of Victorius and Sylburgius, there is almost nothing accurate—but I also diligently read through every manuscript copy I could find and compared what I had read with the published texts. Furthermore, the library of New College, Oxford, provided a manuscript of the *Exhortation to the Greeks*, along with the two later books of the *Pedagogue* and several fragments of the same. The library of our most august King provided one manuscript of the three books of the *Pedagogue*, and another that is in almost every respect consistent with it. To restore to their pristine soundness those notable passages of our Clement which Eusebius inserted into his work *On Evangelical Preparation*, the printed copies and a manuscript copy—which is preserved here in our College of St. John the Baptist—contributed no small help. In the dearth of old copies, the works of ancient writers, especially of Plato and Philo Judaeus, have often provided a remedy; for our Clement translated from the latter not only brief statements, but even entire pages into his own *Stromata*, sometimes omitting some things, changing others, or reducing them to an epitome as it best suited his purpose, and often with the name of the author concealed. For the *Stromata*, I have not yet been able to see any manuscript copy. But the most illustrious Bernard de Montfaucon—a man who, with the intense ardor he always feels for promoting humane letters, has transmitted to me variant readings accurately transcribed, not only from the Ottobonian codex, which contains some rather long fragments of them, but also from a Parisian codex containing the entire *Stromata* work—has relieved this situation for me, both of my misfortune and my burden. Since these arrived a little late, reaching my hands only after the first four books, along with the beginning of the fifth, had already come off the press, I have taken care to have them exhibited at the end of this work.
The labor of distinguishing the words of Holy Scripture and other ancient books from the words of our Clement—a task which no one hitherto has performed with sufficient accuracy—was indeed not small, but it was essential for anyone undertaking to explain this author. As for a Latin version, whether to compose a new one or to correct the old one was a task of even greater magnitude. For the translation of Hervetus, which is for the most part in men's hands and is the constant companion of later editions of Clement—although it has often been improved by learned men in the past—is still in many places so alien to the mind of the author, in others so mangled and imperfect, and in so many places so ambiguous and obscure, that you often find nothing less than Clement in Clement himself, and the Latin does not await light from the Greek anymore than the Greek from the Latin. Anyone who might undertake the correction of this as the situation demands would seem to be cleaning the Augean stable indeed. Therefore, we have translated the *Exhortation to the Greeks* from the Greek into Latin again, intending perhaps to proceed to the books of the *Pedagogue* and the *Stromata* as well, had not other studies, which could not be set aside for long, finally compelled us to think instead about adapting Hervetus to the Greek text. This, as it now appears, even if it is little elegant or polished, will nevertheless, it is hoped, be considered in most places a not entirely unfaithful interpreter of Clement.
To the Greek and Latin text of Sylburgius, Heinsius, and other learned men, we have added notes, which the previously published books, being too far removed from each other and from the author himself, present at the end of the entire work—causing unwelcome delays for studious readers. To these we have added others, excerpted from all sides by ourselves from the philological works of this and the immediately preceding century. In the margin of his own copy, which he bequeathed to me upon his death when I had reached the fourth book of the *Stromata*, the late Grabius had annotated several things. But after him, I must mention W. Lowth, a most worthy prebendary of the Cathedral Church of Winchester; he not only offered me of his own accord many notes on Clement, but also reduced the *Exhortation to the Greeks* and the eight books of the *Stromata* into chapters, as far as could be done, according to the varying nature of the contents. These will be found below, distinguished by the names of their authors and arranged in their proper places. I have further asked other learned friends to contribute their own efforts; I shall give the greatest thanks I can to all who have contributed anything to the illustration or emendation of our author. Whether what we have extracted from our own modest store will be of any service to these ends, the fair reader will easily judge. Moreover, what follows is what was collected by the most illustrious Joannes regarding Clement and his writings.
Albertus Fabricius [joined] with an Index of the authors whom Clement cited, which is very copious; to this we have added another, which displays the scriptural passages quoted by him. A Commentary by Herretus follows, so that nothing of those things which the other editions of Clement exhibit might be wanting in this one of ours. Two Indices close the train, the former of matters, the latter of words; for these we are indebted in the greatest part to Sylburgius. Lastly, since I saw that the Sylburgian edition and the two Parisian editions were chiefly in the hands of the learned, I took care that the pages of the latter were noted in the margin of the Greek text, but those of the former in the margin of the Latin.
These, kind reader, are the things by which I wished to admonish you regarding this our edition of Clement of Alexandria. But if it should appear a little later than you expected, or if, now that it has been made public, it should respond less to your hopes, I ask that you impute this at least in part to the weakness of my eyes; which, having attacked me when I was first occupied with the *Paedagogus*, eventually grew so strong while the fifth book of the *Stromata* was sweating under the press that I was forced by inescapable necessity to rely much more on the eyes of others than on my own. But if these labors of ours bring you any pleasure or utility, do not disdain to return the favor by commending us to God, the Best and Greatest, in your prayers. Farewell. Given at London, the 12th of the Kalends of September, A.D. 1715.
A new edition of the Works of Clement appeared at Leipzig, 1830-34, but in Greek only, edited by Reinhold Klotz, Doctor of Philosophy. (a) What the editor achieved in this recension, he explains thus in his own prefaces:
PREFACE TO VOLUME I
The most illustrious Karl Ernst Richter, who began to publish this Sacred Library a few years ago, and with whom I have a close friendship, requested of me that, just as he himself had published the works of Josephus and Philo Judaeus, so I should take care of the editing of the writings of Clement of Alexandria; although it did not escape me how laborious and difficult a task this was, nevertheless I did not think that my work, however little, should be refused and declined to a friend who was asking and almost demanding it: for which reason, if in anything my powers should seem not at all equal to the task I have undertaken, it is due more to my facility, by which I have always thought I should serve the will of my friends, than to any other fault of mine.A But I was not bound by laws prescribed for me, such that I should institute a new recension of these writings either by seeking out new books or by gathering from every source other critical aids, but rather that I should commit to print the edition that was considered the best, and if I had detected anything openly erroneous, I should correct and amend it: in which matter if I sometimes tried to perform more than I had undertaken, and on almost every page I thought it necessary to depart from those who had established the discourse of Clement before me, I did so as the nature of the matter demanded it, and I hope I have gained the favor of many for this, which I performed spontaneously: for such has been the lot of this writer that, since he departed from Friedrich Sylburgius—who had no one discoverable to him who could or would devote greater and more useful labor to him—he found no editor. For Joannes Potterus, who edited the writings of Clement at the beginning of the previous century, although he is most deserving of them in that he collated the manuscripts diligently and accurately, did not for that reason dare to correct and conform the corrupt passages as the books themselves demanded. And so it often happened that the reading which the books demanded and which he himself thought worthy of approval was relegated to a place only in the annotation: open errors of the scribes were not removed. Sylburgius, on the contrary, although he used only one Palatine manuscript in addition to the edition of P. Victorius, nevertheless corrected many faults, and bestowed every care and effort upon refining them one and all.
Since this is so, I do not hope that anyone will disagree with me on this matter, that I preferred to follow the edition of Sylburgius rather than that of Potter, so that I diligently compared this with that, and if anything had been more rightly established by earlier critics either from books or by conjecture, I embraced it, in which matter it will be stated in that volume which will contain the critical annotation, how much and what is owed to each.
B Nor were those laws prescribed for me, that I should institute a new recension—but that I should use the Parisian scholia, not yet published, which will be added to our edition, in correcting these books of Clement. Next, beyond the fact that I studiously collected what learned men had instructed here and there regarding passages of Clement and, where I had use for them, turned them to my own purpose, I also examined those things which Villoison, in his *Epistolae Vinarienses* from page 92-97, drew forth from the Weimar library regarding certain passages of Clement's writings. In these annotations of learned men, although some things were explained in such a way that they won my assent and I did not hesitate to accept the reading they proposed, nevertheless I recognized that many things were so constituted that one who acts as a cautious critic ought to either call them into doubt or reject them outright. Therefore, many passages which learned men held to be most corrupt, I believe I have healed either by changing the punctuation or by some simpler medicine than that which was theirs. Although I could provide very many examples of this, it will be made clear when we attend to the matter.
As for the manuscripts, that book which is preserved in the library of the new College at Oxford seems to excel the rest, though it contains nothing beyond the *Cohortatio ad Graecos* and only the two later books of the *Paedagogus*. I thought this was to be followed especially in these books. For besides the fact that it usually exhibited better readings and rejected worse ones, it sometimes even supplied single words or several together which we see were omitted in other books through the negligence of the scribes, such as in *Protrept.*, § 2, p. 3, ed. Pott., these words: Καὶ τῶν δραμάτων οἱ ὑποκριταὶ θυμηδίας θεάματα, which that they proceeded from Clement himself there can be no doubt. Ibid., § 11, p. 11, ed. Pott., I thought these words from it should be added: Καὶ πλάνης ἀκράτου κυβευτήρια. For it is the part of a good critic not only to reject what is rightly suspect, but also, if anything has been lost through the carelessness of the scribes, to restore it as much as lies within his power.
I endeavored to establish the verses which Clement cites in such a way that, except for a few which I clearly saw to be depraved, I satisfied both the meter and the poet's meaning, especially since I was about to indicate in the critical annotation what the reading was in the books. Others were so joined with Clement's discourse that they could not be separated.
A and could not be arranged. Thus in *Paedagogus*, lib. II, § 109, p. 235, ed. Pott., "For what prudent thing could women do..."—leaving the reading intact, since Clement used these lines as his own, although a little later in *Paedagogus*, lib. II, § 7, p. 254, ed. Pott., he correctly has the verse written, which Aristophanes made, as follows: "For what prudent thing, women, could we do..."—and likewise in *Paedagog., lib. II, § 25, p. 181 sq., ed. Pott., I have edited these words as they were commonly read: "For life is nothing else than revelry, drunkenness, baths, unmixed wine, chamber-pots, idleness, drink," in which, while I concede that Clement had the comic poet's verse before his eyes, I can neither approve of the reasoning of Markland, who in *Explicat. vet. auct.*, p. 247, wished these words to be written thus: "For life is nothing else than drunkenness, revelry, baths, unmixed wine, chamber-pots, idleness, drink," nor follow Porson, who in *Adversaria*, p. 300 sq., wished these to be verses: "For life is nothing else than drunkenness, Baths, unmixed wine, chamber-pots, idleness, drink." Ac primum, the words "for life is nothing else than" are clearly Clement's, as in *Paedagog.*, lib. II, § 1, p. 163, ed. Pott., where these words are read: "For whom life is nothing else than the belly," which have nothing in common with the verse: then, in Porson's reasoning, one cannot understand how the word *komos* (revelry) was inserted by the scribes, unless perhaps you argue that it arose from the fact that it had been noted in the margin that "the comedian says so." B Just as, therefore, in these places I preferred to defer to the authority of the books rather than, while pursuing uncertain and probable things, to depart from the rule of severe criticism, so elsewhere I have not hesitated to attribute so much to conjectures that I dared to receive them while setting the books aside. Although this has been done in many places, I have one that is sufficient to bring forward, where I thought that a certain conjecture of mine should be preferred to the uncertain—and I know not if absurd—reading of all the books. *Paedagog.*, lib. I, § 49, p. 283, ed. Pott., where these words are in the books: "Moreover, women must bring fromed the storeroom what we need with their own hands; nor is it disgraceful for them to go to the mill; nor [to be busy] about the food, so that it may be agreeable to the husband; [it is] a reproach to a housewife and helper," where, when one had conjectured that "about the food" (*peri to opson*) should be written, another [conjectured] "about the height" (*peri to hypsos*), Sylburgius rightly rejected both, saying that the one was mentioned above, and the other was said afterwards; yet he was false in this, as my opinion holds, in that he thought the reading of the books could be explained in some way: how little he succeeded in this I prefer not to say. I say this: that whoever has diligently read Homer and has knowledge of Clement's zeal for adapting these excellent poems to his own use whenever the opportunity was given, he will not doubt that these words were correctly written by me thus: "Nor indeed [be busy] about the water," so that it may be agreeable to the husband, "a reproach to a housewife and helper," for the poet has excellently described this duty of a woman in *Odyss. Κ*, v. 358 sqq., with these words: "The fourth brought water, and kindled a fire Much [wood] under a large tripod; the water grew warm. But when the water boiled in the shining bronze, She poured it into a bathing tub, and [drew] from the large tripod, Having mixed it to be agreeable, over [his] head and shoulders, So that she took away from my limbs the man-destroying weariness," where, just as I have punctuated this verse: "Having mixed it to be agreeable, over [his] head and shoulders," more correctly than Fr. A. Wollius did, D so in *Iliad Θ*, v. 176 sq., it seems it should be written: "He commanded you to cease from battle and war [And] to go back among the tribes of the gods, or into the divine sea," instead of what the same Wollius edited, "having ceased, he commanded you." Cf. *Iliad B*, v. 28 and 65. "He commanded you to arm the long-haired Achaeans, In full force." And *Ω*, 175: "The Olympian commanded you to ransom noble Hector." In that passage of Clement, even the word "agreeable" (*thymeres*) is enough to prove that the verse of Homer was present before the writer's eyes. Therefore, among learned judges there will be no doubt about my conjecture.