Nilus

It is more pleasant to be silent than to speak of things that are not fitting. ^A One must receive as given by God things that come from God.

Follow the actions of all wise men, Better not to live than to live ignominiously. Grief brings death to men. Imitate refined things; do not imitate an evil way of life. Consider your parents to be gods. Providing for guests, then you shall receive in kind. Flee from swearing an oath, even if you have sworn justly. Deem this life a public spectacle. Live in the best way; you shall receive the heavenly inheritance. From a wise man it is necessary to learn something wise. You will complete your skill if you look to God. Raise your hands perpetually toward God. ^B Endeavor to love the glory of labors. Hasten to obtain the place above, if it is right. Stammer wisely rather than play the philosopher unreasonably. For since these things provide what is good, they must be practiced.

CHRISTOPHORUS THE PROTOASECRETIS

EXHORTATION TO ISRAEL. CANTUS I.

Cast aside blasphemy, Cast aside unbelief, Cast aside the veil Of your soul, O Israelite.

Learn the outcomes Of deep mysteries, Of hidden things, Which the prophets spoke.

Become an Israelite In practice and in theory, Raising up your mind Like Jacob of old.

^D Abjure blasphemy, abjure unbelief, abjure the veil of the mind, O Israelite. Learn the outcomes of deep mysteries, of hidden things, which the prophets foretold. Become an Israelite in practice and theory, raising up your mind like Jacob of old.

EXHORTATION TO THE JEWS

Learn studiously the knowledge of the Trinity, and be instructed in the divine incarnation of Christ. ^A In the first times the Father first spoke the word: "Let us make Adam in my image." Enos, foreseeing a more perfect life in Christ, proclaimed that the Saviour was to be called upon. May the oak of the patriarch illuminate your faith, which once received the most holy Trinity in hospitality. ^B Great Jacob once wrestled with God in the form of a man, teaching what was to come. Behold, Moses the lawgiver commands you to hear the Lawgiver who is to be born. The dew descended upon the fleece of Gideon, prefiguring the birth of the only Theotokos. Let Isaiah say how the Virgin gives birth, ^C fleeing the pains and labors of motherhood. The Lord of glory appeared without comeliness: "For the transgressions of my people I was sacrificed." His patience overcomes the insults of the blasphemers; His back is scourged, His face is spit upon. Jeremiah astonishes every mind, saying: "Come, let us cast wood into the bread of the lamb." Let the great David, the ancestor of God, ^D declare: How did you pierce the hands and feet of the Lord? How did you give gall and vinegar for drink, and cast lots for the tunic of the Creator? But with hell gaping open, He rose as if from sleep, and ascended to the throne of the Father in the highest.

You, therefore, Israelite, remember your unbelief, make haste to be baptized, for Christ has appeared. The sign given of old is now fulfilled; for the ruler has ceased to reign over my people to the end. The prophet Daniel revealed the time, saying there would be seventy weeks. I am enlightened, brother, I receive baptism, having learned what I did not know of the mysteries of the Law. O choir of the prophets, receive me as a brother; for having obeyed you, I am clothed in grace. I offer you a purified mind, my Saviour. Basil the emperor cries out now to the Saviour: As you once accepted the sacrifice of Abraham, so accept also my gift ^A from the newly-chosen flock. For I have consecrated to you my children with my wife, the kingdom itself, and my whole life.

CHRISTOPHORUS THE PROTOASECRETIS: EXHORTATION TO THE SAME ISRAELITES. CANTO I.

Learn the meanings of the divine oracles, Do not understand the utterances Of the prophets in a carnal sense. Do not think that the city Of Sion is built Of stones that are seen And honored in this world. Nor expect this To be beheld by carnal eyes In this life. . . The word of the prophet Has been clearly fulfilled, And Sion has been built Of incomparable stones.

Sion, the Church, The prophets foretold As the great city Of the King of all. In it, a precious stone Was laid as a foundation, Christ, as foretold By the glory of the prophets. Upon the foundation Of Christ the pearl, You shall find the twelve Most beautiful stones. Understand the twelve stones To be the divine apostles, Shining in the midst Of Sion the Church.

Consider the emerald for me To be Peter the chief, Holding the first place in the midst Of the chorus of the apostles. Regard as the carbuncle Paul the god-inspired, For day and night He sends forth lightnings. And the hyacinth Is the great John, Thundering heavenly mysteries To the Church. And understand the remaining stones To be the apostles, By whom was built Sion the divine city.

MICHAEL HAMARTOLUS

TO THE MOST HOLY, MOST WISE, GOD-LIKE, PASTOR OF PASTORS, THE BISHOP OF TYRE, MICHAEL, SINNER, PRIEST AND MONK, GREETING.

(Boissonade, *Anecdota Graeca ex codd. Reg.*, tom. IV, p. 452.)

^A Heart and liver are necessary to all living creatures: the former, on account of the principle of heat (for there must needs be a certain hearth, in which resides the vital fire of nature, and this must be well guarded, as the citadel of the body); the liver, for the sake of digestion. All blood vessels require these two, as Aristotle says. But to us, who have been honored with the image of God, an unshaken faith and an immaculate conscience are necessary. The former, like an inexpugnable acropolis, regarding the spiritual goad of death—that is, unbelief—that perpetually pierces the soul as mere arrows of children, is guarded and made radiant by the fire of divine love, and illuminates with gleaming rays the very hearth and excellent dwelling place of that same fire, the eye of the soul. ^B And the conscience, for the sake of reception, digestion, and conspicuous perseverance, rejects the superfluous delights of the world, and as it were evacuating the pleasure that vaunts itself with wheedling words, receives instead the fatness of the virtues for the spiritual advancement of the soul, and for its preservation and constancy. Having this pair, spiritually gilded in its wings, a venerable duality opposite to the material duality, O godly-inspired Lord, you keep it within your heart, lifting your mind toward the height of the heavens, and from the fatal arrows

not of the visible sort, you keep yourself preserved. Wherefore, condescending with your lofty humility, you addressed us humble ones through your writing, and considered us worthy of your words. I, however, soothing my grief by the writing of your wisdom as if by some divine incantation, and laying aside, like the stone of Tantalus ^B, the burden of calamity—which I found difficult to cast off because of the ecumenical storm and the complete ruin of the people named after Christ—was transformed toward a brighter state. Inspired in my reasoning, I was filled with great joy; I sought the wings of a dove, or of some other of the swiftest birds, to fly and rest near you, the sweet man of God, so that from your conversation I might calm the swelling surge of calamities. But (O bitter fortune! rightly spoke he who said, ^C "Many things lie between the cup and the edge of the lip") a cruel persecution immediately arose, and thwarted me from my purpose. But as I was made more certain by the most beloved servant of God, Lord John, the notary of the city of Lapithos, he himself, O Lord, if not indeed the fire, has certainly experienced the smoke of calamities, having escaped naked from his persecutors. And I pondered the words of the poet: "There is danger for all in obstacles; no one knows where one should stand, once the matter has begun."

^D

[The following portion contains critical apparatus and academic commentary inserted into the text for the edition; all such notes are skipped.]

But he who attempts to do well, failing in foresight, ^A fell into great and bitter calamity. But to him who acts well, God ordains all things well, causing good things to meet and imprudence to depart. But you, being a companion of God, when something bitter befalls you, lord, remember Euripides, and you shall be the more tranquil: « There is no man who is happy in all things; Think of yourself as one of many. » For being wise, as you are, you will not be afflicted by trifles; for no one shall steal away your inalienable treasure, which you share—a most excellent thing—with us also, through your wise exhortations, in letters and worthy of our companionship. For we truly love you, a man made precious to God, adorning the episcopal stole ^B with your achievements; moreover, we wish to receive your exquisite letters with open hands. But farewell, and may your health stay strong, and may your utmost holiness continue for the longest of times.

ANONYMOUS POLITICAL VERSES OF CONTRITION ACCORDING TO THE ALPHABET FROM A SORROWFUL SOUL TO THE SAVIOR.

ANONYMOUS POLITICAL CATANUCTIC VERSES ACCORDING TO THE ALPHABET ON THE PART OF THE SORROWFUL SOUL, TO THE SAVIOR.

From the heart, sighs; from the lips, words; ^D from my eyes, tears I offer to you, O Christ.

^A Wounded am I by the darts of desires, by soul-destroying darts; as a physician, as the merciful one, grant me healing. I have had the earth for my first mother, and back to earth I return: what is the enjoyment of temporal things? What is the pleasure of life? Lament with me here, weep with me here, you whose spirit is compassionate, whose mind is kind. I have alienated my soul from salutary things and moved it toward harmful ones; O cruel error! I lead a life, but not a quiet one; my evil actions even before the end persuade me to live in fear and anguish. ^B I have sinned against you who will sit as Judge over human nature: what shall I do? Where shall I flee? Where shall I hide from you? I groan and am fiercely driven by thoughts of death, not fearing the end, but what follows after the end. Look mercifully, O Savior, upon a miserable soul that has sinned in many things, that has provoked your wrath. The splendor of light is prepared for those who live rightly here, darkness for those who transgress; flee, my soul, from this darkness. Grant me, O Christ, the remission of my evil deeds, you who are the abyss of goodness and the fountain of benignity. After the end, every groan is useless, every lamentation; now is the groan efficacious, efficacious is the mourning. ^C I have despised the laws of Christ, while being a diligent observer of the law of desires: who then will not lament for me? Who will not weep for me? I have not looked upon strangers kindly, I have not been inclined toward the poor, I have closed my house to the needy: alas, for a cruel mind! You are wholly, O Savior, sweetness, unexhausted gentleness: turn the bitterness of my soul into sweetness. I am tossed by the sea, O Christ, of sins; give me, as to Peter, your hand; save me as a helmsman. Negligently have I wasted my whole life. Woe is me! How shall I escape the intolerable punishments? I have compelled your bowels to wrath, your paternal bowels; but correct me benignly, and do not punish me in your wrath. ^D What is your goodness, O Christ, what the abundance of your patience, that you do not burn those who dote upon perishable things, but sustain them? I have gathered a forest of desires, the material for fire. [The text below describes the merits of the poet's style, suggesting comparison with the distichs of Symeon Metaphrastes.]

But shower upon me a drop of mercy before the end. ^A

Guardian assigned to me, incorporeal Angel, not enduring the mire of my vices, you have departed. Charon is preparing the scythe of the end, O soul; why do you not care? Why do you not mourn? Woe to you for your sloth! O soul, seek the things that are divine; have affection for the things that are beyond reason; for the disturbance of corruption leads to punishment. Alas! How shall I stand before you? How shall I render an account of my actions to you, my Creator? Save me, as you know how, save me. Do not despise me, through the prayers of your immaculate Mother, you who alone are without sin, alone merciful. Receive me as the prodigal, the harlot, the publican, ^B as the thief; and save me, for the sake of your mercy.

SUIDAS. NOTICE.

(FABRIC. *Bibliotheca Graeca* ed. Harles tom. VI p. 390.)

A man most deserving of note in our memory, and most learned and skilled to the highest degree in the Greek and Latin languages, is Ludolphus Neocorus, or Kusterus, who, having left his ancestral faith in Paris and embraced the Roman faith, died on the 12th of October, A.D. 1716. After his *Diatribe on Suidas*, which was published at Cambridge in 1701, in which he recounts the faults and defects of the edition of Portus, and relates with what resources and what apparatus he himself undertook a new one, correcting and illustrating various passages of Suidas by way of a specimen, he brought the work itself to completion five years later, and allowed his new Greek-Latin Suidas with notes to issue from the Cambridge press in the year 1705, in three folio volumes. In the Preface to this edition, while he discusses accurately the author whom he undertook to illustrate, his age, the virtues and faults of his Lexicon, and the previous editions, I did not wish to do what had already been done, but to present here to you the complete Dissertation of that most famous man—my friend while he lived—together with my own observations.

The Lexicon of Suidas, as it does not belong to our project, we omit; but so that you may bear this less painfully, diligent Reader, we present to you: 1st, A *Notitia* in which the age of Suidas and the value and dignity of his book are discussed; 2nd, Three very extensive indices, arranged according to the order of the alphabet, which represent the whole of Suidas, albeit concisely. The first displays the writers about whom Suidas treats; the second, those whom he cites; the third, the writers investigated by learned men in Suidas, where he attributes passages to unnamed authors. EDITOR OF THE PATROLOGY.

1. Who Suidas may have been, or when he lived, he who inquires in vain, if no Suidas ever existed: as many writers report that the most refined man, Angelus Politianus, believed; ^A looking back without a doubt to these words of his, which are read in bk. XI, epist. 20 (1). "Suidas himself (if indeed this Suidas ever existed), is not an altogether bad author." But that Suidas truly existed, and that his name is not fictitious, is proven not only by the manuscripts of this Lexicon, in which the name of Suidas, or Sudas (2), appears; but also by Eustathius, who in his verbose commentary on Homer cites our Suidas several times (3). Who Suidas may have been (4), however, is difficult to say; since not only other writers, but he himself is silent about himself, and he has not revealed it in this notorious Lexicon. It seems indeed in the entry *Samothrace* to indicate his country or race, when he says: « For in the beginning that island » (that is, Samothrace) « was inhabited by Samians, from whom it receives its name. » But those words are not Suidas's own, but of an anonymous writer, from whom this passage is excerpted.

2. As regards the age of Suidas, the opinions of learned men are various, which we will recall to examination. Hugo Grotius, in ep. 110 to the French (5), thinks that Suidas lived a little after Constantine, the son of Leo (6), who began to rule in the year of Christ 912; with this added reasoning, that insofar as he himself remembers, he is the last of the emperors. ^B

CONCERNING THE LEXICON OF SUIDAS

^{C D}

^A in the Lexicon of Suidas, one must judge concerning his age, that he must surely be more recent, inasmuch as he lived at the very end of the eleventh century or the beginning of the twelfth, under Alexios Komnenos. For, regarding certain places (which I see have not yet been observed by name) in the entry *Gyoras*, the entry *Deptrou*, and the entry *Ichtuyes*, certain passages are adduced from Michael Psellos, who flourished under Alexios Komnenos and whose life extended until the beginning of the twelfth century. If, therefore, Suidas himself inserted those passages into his Lexicon, it must be that he lived after Psellos; but he lived before Eustathios, since he is the first to mention our author in his commentary on Homer. Now Eustathios lived a short interval after Psellos, specifically toward the end of the twelfth century and the beginning of the thirteenth. But as far as those passages of Psellos are concerned, there is no doubt that they were added to the Lexicon of Suidas by more recent hands; and I would dare to affirm this confidently regarding the first passage ^B which is adduced under the entry *Gyoras*, since the Paris manuscripts do not recognize it. If, therefore, the age of Suidas cannot be inferred even from this mark of time, the Reader will ask what, then, is to be determined in this matter. For our part, we judge as follows: it is indeed uncertain at what time the true Suidas, or the first author of this Lexicon, lived; yet he is without doubt more ancient than is commonly believed, since we are persuaded that many passages which smack of a more recent age were added to this Lexicon by others afterwards. This is evident even from the Paris manuscript A, which is the best and most ancient of the three codices of Suidas that are preserved in the Royal Library of Paris. For therein, many passages which are found in later manuscripts and in all modern editions either are missing entirely or were sometimes written in the margin by a more recent hand: such as the verses of the Oneirocritics, which were transferred ^C into this Lexicon from Astrampsychos or Nikephoros; likewise passages excerpted from Paulos Aegineta and others.

(12) Kuster at first acknowledged only the Paris manuscript that is in the library of the Most Christian King, codex 1837, fol. 184, with this title: *Summary of political [and other] matters regarding all the sciences, made for the most pious emperor, the lord Michael Doukas, by the order of his father and the emperor*. Michael Doukas, son of Constantine Doukas, was emperor from A. 1071 to 1078.

As he observes that these are not recognized by the Paris manuscripts, from this he seems to have tacitly professed at the same time that the other passages adduced from Psellos are contained in those codices, which he does not deny below in § 16 have an antiquity of at least five hundred years. And so I think the opinion of those is true who maintain that Suidas himself translated certain things from the book of Psellos into his Lexicon, and flourished under Alexios Komnenos, ^D as Vossius also believed, around the end of the eleventh century. Hamberger, in *Zuverl. Nachr.* IV, p. 185, with Oudin in *Comment. de SS. E.*, vol. II, p. 1454, binds the age of Suidas to the middle of the eleventh century, because he cites certain passages of Michael Psellos and Symeon Metaphrastes; although on the other hand he is praised by Eustathios of Thessalonica, yet Saxius (who cites many learned men) in *Onomast.* vol. II, p. 154, subscribes to the opinion of Pagi, who in his *Critica Baroniana* on the year 975, no. XIX, says: "At this time, it seems, Suidas flourished—for by the entry *Adam*, collecting various sums of years, he terminates his computation at the death of John Tzimiskes, emperor, who was taken away by death in this year." HARL.

3. Although we posit that Suidas is more ancient than is commonly believed, we nevertheless do not, with Lilius Gregorius Gyraldus, deem him so ancient that Strabo, who is known to have flourished under Augustus, could have known of him. The most learned man, who was lately praised, evidently supposes that our Suidas is the same as the ancient historian Suidas, of whom, besides Strabo, the scholiast of Apollonius of Rhodes and Stephanus Byzantinus make mention. His words in Dialogue III, "On the history of poets," are these: "To which this may truthfully be replied, that Suidas was an ancient writer, of whom mention is made primarily by Strabo, and by those who wrote commentaries on Apollonius of Rhodes, and by Stephanus, and others. This Suidas, therefore, among other things (for he also wrote a History), composed commentaries, as is reasonable to believe, not very large, which were later much enriched and augmented by others, to this magnitude which we see, and first obtained the name of Suidas. And a little later: "At the same time, we must also discard the distinction which some grammarians make, as if that [ancient] one were a historian, and this one a more recent grammarian." By these words he contains a twofold opinion; namely, that Suidas first composed a lexicon, which was later enriched and augmented by others; and furthermore, that Suidas was both a historian and a lexicographer. We approve of the former opinion, and many others agree with us. The latter lacks supporters, and our Suidas is rightly considered by the common consensus of the learned to be different from the ancient historian, and consequently more recent. And thus far on the age of Suidas.

4. As for the Lexicon itself, it is compiled from various authors, the list of whose names is partly contained in that catalogue which is provided by Suidas himself in the entry for Adam, [1199, C: *Suidas in Thessalica*...] ... part of the scholia, which circulate among the Tragedians and Comedians, is contained therein. The same author (p. 392) does not doubt that the work of Julius Sophista, the title of which was conceived thus, *Epitome of the glosses of Pamphilus in ninety-five books*, was transcribed by Suidas, and that he also transcribed from the Greek version of the book of Jerome *On ecclesiastical writers*, and from the little book of Hesychius of Miletus *On illustrious men*... [1200, D: *The lexicon also...*]. Thus he possessed and transcribed it. He often condensed it; I shall omit Harpocration's Lexicon, as well as the rhetorical lexicon, of which we treated above from Ruhnken's Preface to Timaeus' Lexicon, part II, we read: "An outstanding work of an ancient Atticizer, from which to us (as Valckenaer, soon to be mentioned, notes) one of the greatest of the fragments of the comedies, throughout that great lexicon, was preserved: some things from the Phrynichian *Sophistical Apparatus*, and from the lexicon of Zonaras; he transcribed a large part of the scholia on Sophocles and especially on the comedies of Aristophanes, even the *Thesmophoriazusae*, which had not yet been found in the libraries." Valckenaer observed this learnedly in his notes on Theocritus' *Adoniazusae* (p. 297, and on the scholia of Aristophanes' *Thesmophoriazusae*... and in the diatribe appended to Euripides' *Hippolytus*, p. 204). Then he continues: "But if one may confess the truth, concerning most of Suidas' excerpts from books that have reached us, the anthology of epigrams excepted, [this is the case]..."

, that our two indices appended later ^A show to the reader. But perhaps the reader will wonder why, in the last or third index, the Scholiast of Pindar, Theocritus, and Apollonius does not appear; since Reinesius, in his *Var. Lect.* page 479, has these words concerning Suidas: "Suidas exhausted Harpocration and the ancient scholiasts—most of all Aristophanes, Sophocles, Thucydides, Pindar, Theocritus, Apollonius—and digested them into his own armory." But the man spoke there rather incautiously. For Suidas is so far from having exhausted all the later scholiasts and enriched his own collection from them, that he has scarcely excerpted even one or another passage from them.

5. Otherwise, of the ancient scholiasts, he has compiled none more diligently than the scholiast of Aristophanes; for he has poured almost the whole of him into his Lexicon. Yet it is asked among the learned whether Suidas borrowed from the modern scholiast of Aristophanes, or rather the scholiast from Suidas; or whether the modern scholia on Aristophanes were propagated to us from some ancient codex, or were refined by Musurus or someone else from Suidas’ Lexicon. We believe that the modern scholia on Aristophanes have reached us for the most part transcribed from some ancient codex, and that the same were nevertheless interspersed with some passages by later writers ^B, partly from Suidas, partly from other writers. Indeed, that the things which are read in that scholiast on the *Equites*, p. 323: "The strigil, of things towards another, etc.," and likewise on the *Acharnians*, p. 396: "Sicyon, from the nominative, etc.," were inserted from Suidas (in v. Στλεγγίς and v. Σίκυον), readers of refined taste can easily perceive. For we could dismiss those things from the lexicographer without great loss to literature. But he had the books of Polybius, which now have perished for us. Whether he derived the lost books of Dio Cassius from elsewhere, I would not dare to define. He certainly had a few things of others; and the minor works of Aelian, Iamblichus, Eunapius, and Damascius, of which we have hitherto been deprived; not indeed that they are of such great moment, if anyone should so wish; yet from these unedited books, lovers of ancient literature eagerly excerpt the things for which Suidas had a craving.

6. As far as the mode is concerned, these collections were digested; in which one might not rarely desire the judgment and diligence of the compiler. For in the first place, our author, when he gathered into his Lexicon passages excerpted from various writers, was often misled by faulty codices, whence it happens that he sometimes palms off on the reader adulterated and corrupt words instead of true and genuine ones. Thus you have *Amastes* in him for *Akmaes*, *Erithmesen* for *Eremesen*, *Pepiasmenois* for *Memiasmenois*, *Talesin* for *Telesin*, *Istinos* for *Ysqinos*, *Koilidian* for *Kyloidein*, *Phremas* for *Di’ eremas*, *Deixantes* for *Diexantes*, *Alibyes* for... [interpolation in comedies].

^C That this scholiast was interpolated on page 106, at the words of the Comic poet in *Plutus*, *"The tongue to the herald,"* etc., and likewise on page 486, at those words in the *Wasps*, *"The ass at the hearth,"* etc., is evident not only from the fact that Eustathius is cited there, who is certainly later than Suidas, but also from the fact that these two passages are missing in the most ancient Aldine edition. The same must be said of another passage which is read in the same scholia, page 15, where Phalaris is praised. For the old Aldine edition does not acknowledge that one either. But on this matter, a man excellent in every kind of learning, Richard Bentley, had already warned the learned in his *Dissert. de Phalaridis epist.*, page 22. It is to be noted, however, that Suidas sometimes has more than the modern scholia on Aristophanes; whence it seems it can be rightly gathered that those scholia have not reached us intact. See our author in v. *Akalephe*, v. *Akoretes*, v. *Enkekordylemenos*, v. *Mellonikian*, v. *Naxiourges*, v. *Pyrorrhages*, v. *Sibyllia*, v. *Strouthos*, v. *Titthai*, v. *Tragikoteros*, v. *Hyperakontizeis*, etc. And these things, in passing, concerning the scholiast of Aristophanes. ^D

^A The Libyans: *Hemimallones* for *Haimimallones*; *thesmotokon* for *esmotokon*; *Hebos* for *Hybos*; *Anarpastoi* for *Anorgiastoi*; *dapsato* for *olopsato*; *lotos* for *edetys*; *eucheimonos* for *leucheimonos*; *paiôle* for *apaiôle*; *paiolêma* for *apaiolêma*; *ozôta* for *oxôta*; *ysepiros* for *osypiros*; *phoonta* for *aphoonta*; *phylokrinei* for *philokrinei*; and other things. Sometimes, however, the reading of Suidas is better than that which our present-day codices exhibit. For example, in Aristophanes, *Thesmophoriazusae*, p. 811, it is read today: *Tenioisi kai Skirois*: where the codex of Suidas formerly had *Stenioisi* for *Tenioisi*; which reading we prove to be true in the notes on the word *Stênia*. For the conjecture of Bisetus, who thought that *threisioisi* should be substituted there, is deservedly to be rejected. In the same comic poet, in the *Thesmophoriazusae*, p. 777, the verse is read here: *Tas symphoras gar ouchi tois stenasmasi*. The last word there is corrupt; in its place Suidas, in his own series, correctly has *technasmasi*. In the play *Ecclesiazusae*, this verse occurs: *He graus anestekuia para ton nekron*. The meter is obviously limping; which you may restore in its entirety from Suidas in v. *pleionon* thus: *He graus anestekuia para ton pleionon*. For a scholium has today wrongly occupied the place of the genuine word in the comic poet. In the play *Thesmophoriazusae*, p. 794, among other things, these are also read: *Leon, leon soi gegonen, aut' aigma syn*. Great Scaliger, when he saw that the measure did not fit this verse, thought it should be rewritten thus: *Leon, leon soi gegonen, aut' eigmi son*. But in vain. For we prove in the notes on that passage that from Suidas, in v. *Leon*, *exagma* should be substituted for *aigma*. In the *Anthologia*, lib. III, cap. 14, p. 343, an epigram on Protesilaus is read, a part of which is this hexameter: *Dendrea dysmimêta, kai ên pote teichos idôsi*. As for this *dysmimêta*, it is manifest that it is adverse to the sense; in its place Brodaeus thought *dysmenêta* should be substituted; and Obsopoeus, *dysmeilikta*. But both wandered from the mark. For we note in our remarks on that passage that in Suidas, under v. *dysmimêta*, it should be *dysmeleta*. Among other things, these are also read in Josephus, lib. 1 *De bello Jud.*, p. 739: *hê oikia hoplitôn ektato*. The last word there lies in error; in its place, from Suidas v. *Nênakto*, it should be *nenakto*; the sense manifestly urges this. The diligent reader will be able to collect more examples of this kind from our notes. For we have proposed these things here only as specimens.

Furthermore, it must be observed that Suidas is accustomed to recount the names of men in a continuous series, and sometimes to refer them to one head: from which it happens that matters pertaining to different people appear to be attributed to one, and everything is thrown into confusion in the histories, unless you distinguish the narratives and carefully note to whom each entry is to be referred. You have examples in v. *Eumenes*, v. *Heron*, v. *Severos*, and elsewhere.

7. Sometimes, however (which is a greater sin), our grammarian mixes up the affairs of men who are entirely different, and who do not even have a name in common, and refers historical excerpts to an entirely different head; of whose *ablepsias* (blindness) I shall produce a few examples here. In v. *Maximos*, what is read from the beginning up to the words *epibouleuôn* is to be understood regarding the emperor Maximinus Thrax. But those things which follow thereafter, without any note of distinction, are subject to Galerius Maximianus, as is apparent from Euseb. *Hist. Eccles.*, lib. VIII, cap. 14 and 16. In v. *Alyattês*, the words *tôn Lydôn basileus* — *adelphên êschynen*, cited from Niccolò Damascenus in *Collectaneis Constantini* (edited by Valesius, p. 453), whence that passage is taken, are said of Sadyattes, the father of Alyattes: our author wrongly refers them to Alyattes. In v. *Nikon*, our grammarian, through supine negligence, ^{B C D}

^A has received into the text without judgment or discernment [passages] which are taken from the margin. No one, unless he be a complete stranger to this Lexicon, will deny that there are many places in Suidas which have crept from the margin into the text, and which manifestly betray the ignorance of the copyists. Let the reader at least look at what we have noted at v. *Agroiōtēs*, v. *Anatheinai*, v. *Aristogeitōn*, [v.] *Kyd*, v. *Eillein*, v. *Nannos*, v. *Hypnomachō*.

9. Although these faults ^B (27) are to be attributed partly to Suidas himself, partly to copyists and later compilers, the book is nevertheless by far most useful (28), and a thesaurus which—with the incomparable Reinesius—one may deservedly call a storehouse of all manner of erudition. The history of the poets, orators, historians, etc., contained within it alone is worth its weight in gold, and the literary republic could not be deprived of it without irreparable loss. I pass over so many and such splendid fragments of ancient writers, lost today, which are preserved for us in this Lexicon ^C and which gain for it no small value. [Hemsterhusius, on the scholia to Aristophanes’ *Plutus*, p. 324, and Valckenarius, on Theocritus’ *Adoniazousai*, p. 298, judge the same. HARL.]

10. The *Collectanea* of Suidas appeared first at Milan (29), A.D. 1499, in Greek only; in which edition some places are missing. ^D That book is, indeed, very rare, and much is to be attributed to it. Certainly, very many excellent things, worthy of being known, would be hidden from us in the same darknesses of antiquity as countless other things, were we to lack this work of Suidas.

The first edition, which appeared at Milan (not Rome, as Michael Neander, in the *Notitia auctorum* prefixed to the Gnomology of Stobaeus, p. 68, opined after Gesner), on large and clean paper, with elegant type, is owed to Demetrius Chalcondyles, a most learned Greek, and to Joannes Maria Catanæus, who prefixed the Latin preface—the teacher—and to Joannes Bisolus and Benedictus Mangius of Carpi, who provided the labor of the press and the expenses along with him. This is the Catanæan Suidas, which is mentioned in the secret epistles of C.S. Schurtzfleisch, p. 5. Chalcondyles, in the Greek preface he prefixed, testifies that he used several manuscript codices, and in correcting the work, spared no effort: however, when he could not correct some things, he left them as he found them, and some he added, having taken them from elsewhere.

"The one who has performed the correction of this book is Demetrius Chalcondyles, who, having made use of more than one copy, and finding in all of them no small number of errors—the majority of which were the same in all—labored much and, having arranged them, corrected them. There were some, however, which he was not able to correct with the proper emendation, but he was careful to preserve the interpretation of the word; the cited passage itself, however, which was introduced for the sake of clarity but was corrupt, he left as it was. Yet he also added some words that were altogether absent from Suidas, having collected them from elsewhere, so that those seeking their meaning might have them more easily and readily available from this source, and he also made it his concern to explain some words that were uninterpreted where it was possible. He adds furthermore that the book of Suidas was once so rare and precious in Greece and Italy that he who possessed it would boast of it as if it were a notable treasury and the horn of Amalthea that he possessed."

In its title there appears a Greek dialogue between a bookseller and a reader

philomathoues,

Demetrius, the world owes you eternal honors, For the worthy and noble work you bring forth. Motta owes more, to whom so great a glory Results from his dear pupil, as much as is given under your guidance.

Also this other one, in which he claims greater honor from the Milan edition of Suidas than the one he promises to those places which brought forth Hesiod, Homer, and Pindar, the poets, into the light:

Phocis was once celebrated for learned Poets, From whom Ascra drew a new melody from its depths. Next to this is Helicon, perhaps a competitor to the living one, In which Smyrna expressed the noble sage so well. The Dircean swan is said to have flown through the Cadmean citadels And to have resounded with an immense sound. A more worthy glory of Suidas emerges than from the Insubrian city, Into whose lap all of Greece has fallen. — Fabr.

Bandinus in *Annalibus Juntarum typogr.* I, page 77: "I saw," he says, "the Lexicon of Suidas printed in Greek at Milan at the expense and by the skill of Demetrius Chalcondyla in the year 1499, folio, in which at the foot of the first page it is read: *Monasterii Angelorum Petrus Candidus*; who illustrated this old edition with notes." [HARL.]

^A ... of Suidas was once so rare ... [the text continues through the column entries] ...

^B Theodosius Junior's time similarly ... [This list of Suidas's sources follows in the Greek/Latin original].

^C ... and so on. Editio Aldina has in place of a preface a prefixed notice by Aldus regarding the singular method which the writer here observes in the order of the series of letters, which is then repeated also in the Basle edition and those of Portus and Kuster.

^D ... note referring to the Basle edition of 1564, which Hieronymus Wolfius edited ... [a description of the work and its reception follows]. If we are to believe the most excellent Vossius, lib. II of his *De hist. Graecis*, c. 26, page 302, it was translated into Latin long before Wolfius by Robert Grosseteste, or Capito, the Bishop of Lincoln, who died in the year of Christ 1253. But although Joannes Balaeus, *Cent.* IV, c. 18, page 306, notes this among the writings of Robert, and records it as having been translated into Suidas by him, this does not seem to be understood except as the apocryphal narrative which exists in Suidas under *Iesous*, and from...

^A fragments more brief), he published at Basel without the Greek text. This version, having been revised by Wolf himself, was afterwards reprinted in 1581. It is no wonder, however, that Wolf was less successful, since, uninstructed by any manuscript codices, he followed the text of Suidas as it was at that time, which was corrupt, in his version. Finally, Aemilius Portus, son of Franciscus, formerly a professor of the Greek language at the Academy of Heidelberg, published at Geneva in 1619, in two folio volumes, Suidas with a new Latin version, or rather a paraphrase, and notes. (35) Thus far Kuster.

There were many learned men who, either incidentally and as if through a lattice, or by set purpose, sustained the effort to apply a healing hand to the disjointed and corrupt passages of Suidas, or to explain those that were obscure in various ways. The observations and strictures of Bosius, Schweighäuser, and others, already mentioned above, or cited by me in the Introduction to the History of Greek Literature, Vol. II, 1, p. 507 sq., I shall pass over; they come into the account here under the learned men. Observations on Suidas, in Miscellanea observationes, Vol. I, pp. 314–316. Observations of the same author on Strabo, Diodorus, Anacreon, Suidas, ibid. Vol. II, Tom. I, pp. 8–13; Gratiani de S. Bavone (that is, Joan. Alberti), on Suidas, ^B observation, ibid. Vol. II, Tom. I, pp. 126–134. Of the same author in certain places of Suidas, observations therein, Vol. IX, pp. 143–156, some of which are either repeated or augmented with new ones in the same Alberti’s *Miscellanea critica*, cited above, pp. 267–294. The same, in *Observationes philologicae* on the sacred books of the New Testament, Leyden, 1725, 8vo, attempted this several times, and even on p. 313 defends Suidas. How often and in almost infinite places Suidas is amended or explained in the notes to Hesychius’ Lexicon, you will see at the end, Tom. II, edited by Alberti in the index of authors, emended works, etc., under *Suidas*, to which also, by Ruhnken in his notes to Timaeus’ Platonic Lexicon, light is poured on almost every page.

Already long before, Salmasius, in *Exercitationes Plinianae*, pp. 472, 761, 762, 889, amended, and much more often explained and illustrated, passages of Suidas. I. C. G. Ernesti, V. C., *Letter on the use of Suidas the lexicographer for the criticism and interpretation of the sacred books*, Leipzig, 1785, 8vo. The same, but more complete, has been reprinted in the learned and scholarly book: *Suidae et Phavorini glossae sacrae, Graece cum spicilegio glossarum sacrarum Hesychii et Etym. M. congessit, emendavit et nobis illustravit Jo. Chr. Gottlieb Ernesti, prof. philos. P. E. Acc. dissertatiuncula de glossis sacris Suidae et Phavorini*, Leipzig, 1786, May 8. However, when the illustrious man writes in Dissertation § II that it is certain that Suidas and Phavorinus, "whatever glosses they have," even with labor, which, without the help of our industry, cannot be understood at all. But on page 136 to the same Bloccius: "My Suidas will not be made public before a year or more elapses before it comes into the hands of men." The remark about Wolf’s Suidas seems to be in a letter of Junius to Guil. Lindanus, p. 267: "I fear that for Wolf his labor will be little glorious, unless he comes instructed with the resources which, besides me, I do not know if anyone else has; let him for a little while enjoy the small glory sought in that *mustaceum*." FABR.

Alberti in a letter to our Fabricius, written at Haarlem, the eighth day before the Kalends of May 1733, (Reimarus in the *Commentary on the life and writings of Jo. A. Fabricius*, p. 215): "One thing," he says, "I add, that I have acquired two remarkable treasures: namely, a copy of Nonnus’ *Dionysiaca* (1569) with very rich, unpublished, handwritten notes by Dan. Heinsius, and a most desired and little-known copy of Suidas (ed. Basel, 1544) to which Adrianus Junius had added his own ^C emendations and the locations of the authors: whose book (our friend) and Albertus Verlanius, Hornanus, grandson of Adrianus Junius by his daughter, in the dedication of the poems of Adrianus Junius, 1598, 8vo. But since it was not permitted to purchase that very copy, I copied all of Junius’s notes into my own codex, and saved them from destruction." HARL.

Regarding the plan of the great Pearson, Mericus Casaubon writes in his notes on Hierocles, published at London in 1655, p. 181: "Joannes Pearson, a man most learned in both Greek letters and every kind of book, who, from the excellent editions of Hesychius and Suidas, which he has long been preparing, if life allows, will one day be recognized by the learned as most eminent as he truly is." Suidas, annotated here and there by Pearson’s hand, is preserved at Cambridge, whose handwritten notes Kuster used and cites here and there. But a false rumor about Beveridge came to Schurtzfleisch, who, in *Epistolae arcanae* Vol. I, p. 5, wrote in 1679: "Beveridge’s Suidas will soon come into our hands, which a learned and hardworking man among the English is treating with great diligence." p. 283 sqq. HARL.

^A Hesychio, whom they were compiling," or other glossaries now unknown to us, or whether he excerpted them from his own study of the commentaries and scholia of ancient writers; what other learned men judge concerning the sacred Hesychian glosses, we have already seen in the chapter on Hesychius; that Suidas, however, drew mostly from other sources, for the most part not unknown today, we have likewise noted in this chapter. We have already praised above the distinguished Schulze’s specimen of *Miscellaneous Observations* on Suidas. But the learned man pursues many places of Suidas from "Αατος up to Ἐφραθᾶ, and these he illustrates now with critical skill, now he opens the sources from which Suidas drew, and now he explains the matters and words after the manner of the grammarians. Brucker and Fabricius undertook to amend the place in Suidas regarding Πτεροφόρος, etc., in their mutual correspondence, provided as an appendix to Reimar's *De Vita Fabricii*, p. 225 sq. Suidas was occasionally amended by Taylor in his *Lectiones Lysiacae*, in the preface to his edition of Lysias, London 1739, 4, ch. 3. Whether Jo. Taylor's appendix of notes to the Lexicon of Suidas (see Bruggemann, *View of the English Editions, etc.*, p. 448) ever saw the light, I for one do not know. Villoison, in *Anecdota Graeca* II, p. 31, n. 1, and p. 163, note, illustrates and amends two places in Suidas. But it would be an endless task to collect and note everything that Hemsterhuis, Valckenaer, Markland, Pierson, Koen, the interpreters of Thomas Magister, and many other men learned in Greek have contributed here and there in notes on the classical authors or elsewhere in books of *Observations*, *Emendations*, etc., to illustrate and correct Suidas. It suffices to indicate a few works in which the Lexicon of Suidas is treated with devotion and at length. Ernesti the younger, in his *Commentary on the Commentaries of Procopius of Caesarea*, etc., p. 4, noted that Olearius had inscribed many learned observations in his own copy. Later, through the care of that most kindly man, these were brought forth from the shadows in a book entitled: *Jo. Aug. Ernesti Observationes philologicae criticae in Aristophanis Nubes et Flavii Josephi Antiquitates Judaicas. Accesserunt Godofredi Olearii notae ad Suidam.* Leipzig 1795, May 8. Yet the notes on Suidas, which are undeservedly attributed to Olearius, and especially concern the matters and people of whom there is speech in Suidas, have Reinesius as their true parent. For this most learned and skillful man ^B of Suidas, as edited by Emilio Porto, in a copy which is still preserved in the public library at Citza, had inscribed many things by which he had amended the Latin translation or the text itself, especially according to the Milan edition; often by conjecture, or by comparison with the authors from whom Suidas drew his glosses, he had supplied gaps, or restored the true reading, or more often had explained proper names and their force and power or history, or added to them with new material. Olearius had transferred these Reinesian observations into his own copy: yet he neglected many of Reinesius’s acute emendations and learned expositions, while on the contrary he added certain of his own, and those sometimes quite light; this, which was later ^D and clearly revealed by the distinguished Muller, rector at Citza, in his *Program on Suidas, with observations by Reinesius*, Citza and Leipzig 1796, 8. The same man taught that Kuster had silently used these Reinesian observations.

In the first place, notable are the emendations to Suidas by Jo. Toup, in which very many places are both explained and emended, London 1760-1767, vol. III, 8. The same author’s *Critical Epistle to William, Bishop of Gloucester*, London 1767, 8. The same author’s most recent efforts, i.e., an appendix of notes and emendations to Suidas, etc., ibid., 1775, 8. All of which were first reprinted in this author's *Jo. Toup. Opuscula critica*, Leipzig 1780 and 1781, vol. II, 8. Then, with the significant addition of new animadversions and emendations on Suidas, and more abundant ones on Hesychius, and on Pollux and Harpocration fewer ones, and with the appendix of Tyrwhitt and other distinguished men’s notes ^C in Toup's emendations, after the death of the author, they were published again in England with a preface by Thomas Burghess, under the title: *Emendationes in Suidam et Hesychium et alios lexicographos Graecos*. Written by Jo. Toup, prebendary of Exeter Cathedral and rector of the church of St. Martin with the chapel of Loo in the county of Cornwall. At Oxford, at the Clarendon Press, 790, 4 vols., IV. Toup was indeed a critic, but also immoderate and harsh, and not rarely indifferent towards others. Whether he was aided by the works of Pearson and Adr. Junius, and if, as they say, he plowed with another man’s heifer, as Eckard in the *Uebersicht der Oerter — und Grundsalze zur Geschichte der Bibliotheken*, p. 115, suspects, I for one do not know and would hardly believe. He was also ingenious, but a somewhat bold critic.

Gilbert Wakefield, in *Silva critica, sive in auctores sacros profanosque commentario philologico*, Cambridge 1789-1795, 8, V parts, who in all five parts scattered critical observations on Suidas, sometimes sparingly, sometimes with a more liberal hand. The distinguished Hoepfner, co-rector of the Gymnasium of Eisleben, a man deservedly highly esteemed (who himself was at one time planning a new edition of the Lexicon, but then abandoned the plan), undertook labor most excellent and useful for a future editor of Suidas, and showed others the way, by which, from other scholia and glossaries, in equal manner and counsel, Suidas might be illustrated and emended; he edited: *Glossarum Suidae e Sophocle ejusque schol. depromptarum specimen I accuratius collegit, emendavit, illustravit I. G. C. Hoepfner in: Magazin für Schullehrer, herausgegeben von G. A. Ruperti und H. Schilchthorst*, vol. I, part 1, p. 250, 264. *Specimen II* ibid. part 11, p. 452-454. *Specimen III* in the *Magazin für Philologen* of the same editors, vol. I, p. 146-154. From these it becomes clear how great a field lies open to him who would exercise the powers of his talent and erudition in restoring Suidas. HARL. [After the edition given by Ludolph Kuster in the year 1705, at Cambridge, Lexicon]

INDEX PREFACED TO THE LEXICON OF SUIDAS

The present book is indeed by Suidas, but the men who composed it were learned: these are their names:

^BEUDEMUS, rhetor, on diction in alphabetical order. HELLADIUS, in the time of Theodosius the Younger, similarly. EUGENIUS from Augustopolis in Phrygia, on miscellaneous diction, in alphabetical order.

^C I have said that this book, which is prefaced to the Lexicon of Suidas, exists in libraries; Kuster thinks it is spurious and compiled and stitched together unskillfully from other lexicons by some more recent Greek. Gaddius is mistaken, who (vol. I, p. 173) thinks this Eudemus is the same as Eudemus the Rhodian, a philosopher, a disciple of Aristotle, about whom I spoke in book II, chapter 8 [vol. III, p. 292, sq.], where I also mentioned Eudemus the Cyprian, whom Aristotle celebrated after his death in the dialogue *On the Soul*, and also the third Eudemus, a contemporary of Galen, a Peripatetic. Eudemus of Pergamum was also different, of whom Plutarch writes in the *Life of the Gracchi*, p. 830. Regarding other Eudemuses, one should consult Jonsius, book I, chapter 15. However, whom the same author calls Eudemus the orator of the Megalopolitans, the teacher of Philopoemen, he is not *Eudemus* in the codices of Plutarch, p. 356, but *Ecdemus*, a disciple of Arcesilaus the Academic, the same who is called *Ecdelus* in the same author in the *Life of Aratus*, pp. 1028–1030. — HARL.

^D This is Helladius the Alexandrian, of whose lexicon Photius speaks in codex CXLV, who mentions him again in codex CLVIII. Suidas in *Helladius* refers to the title of the work: *The use of various diction in alphabetical order*. [See above in the catalogue of grammarians regarding this man and Helladius of Besantinous.] This is not another Helladius, the grammarian, whose mention occurs in Socrates, *History*, book V, chapter 16. But there is another Helladius, of Besantinous, about whom see the notes on Photius' codex CCLXXIX. This man is called Besantinous from his fatherland, a town of Egypt in the Thebaid, which received its name from Antinoopolis of Hadrian and the god Besa, whose oracle is attested to have been there by Ammianus Marcellinus, book XIX, chapter 12. See there the note by H. Valesius, Casaubon on Spartianus' *Hadrian*, chapter 14, and Claud. Nicaeus on the pantheon coin of Hadrian, p. 53. Mention of a pantomime Helladius is in the *Chronicon of Malalas*, vol. II, p. 98.

As Suidas attests in *Eugenius*, where he commemorates his other writings. Hermolaus in his *Epitome of Ethnika* of Stephanus of Byzantium, under *Anactorium*: "Eugenius, who before us adorned the things in the imperial city (in the royal city, not, as Tho. Pinedo suggests, in the royal court, or, as Berkelius, in the royal school) in a collection of diction." Another Eugenius was the philosopher, father of Themistius the philosopher and rhetor, about whom see volume VIII, book V, c. 18 [old ed.]; another Eugenius, about whom Photius, codex XXIII. The entries for "miscellaneous diction" are missing in the Madrid codex. HARL.

INDEX OF WRITERS

INDEX OF WRITERS

—

A

ABARIS, a Scythian, son of Seuthes, wrote Scythian oracles, the Wedding of the Hebrus River, purifications, and a theogony, and the coming of Apollo to the Hyperboreans, in poem form. ABAS, a sophist, historical commentaries, rhetorical art. ABRON, a Phrygian or Rhodian, a grammarian, a disciple of Tryphon, a freedman, a sophist, or one who taught rhetoric at Rome ^C. ACACIUS, patriarch of Constantinople. ACACIUS, an equal of Libanius and the Emperor Julian, whose judgments he criticized alongside the Tuscan Phrygian, a distinguished rhetorician.

(41-42) This Zosimus, of Gaza or Ascalon in Syria, was a sophist, famous in the times of the same Anastasius, as Suidas attests under the entry for Zosimus. Regarding him, as with other Zosimuses, it has been said in Vol. VI, p. 733, and see Valckenaer, in the same place, p. 294, etc. Harl. (43) This Cæcilius, a Calantian of Sicily, taught in Rome in the times of Augustus, as Suidas attests under the entry for Hermagoras. You must see the same under Cæcilius, and what learned men note regarding his writings in Longinus [in the old edition]. Harl. (47) Kuster accepted this as if he had compiled 91 books, which is not credible; but Julius had contracted the 95 books of Pamphylus, or, as below, 95. This Julius is uncertain, whether he was different from Julian, a sophist, a teacher, whose lexicon on rhetoricians Photius mentions in codex CL. Fabr. Concerning the glosses of Pamphylus and others, Valckenaer is extensive in his notes to Theocritus, Adonis, p. 293, etc. Harl. ^D (48) This is Minucius Pacatus, a grammarian, who, with a Greek name, was also known as Pacatus Irenæus, and whose History Socrates praises in book III, ch. 7. Concerning him [page 170 in this volume and above in the grammatical catalogue] Pacatus in the Madrid codex, which omits "in alphabetical order." Harl. (49) Glosses of Pamphylus, the Alexandrian grammarian, are cited by Athenæus, the author of the Etymologicum, Eustathius, etc. Other writings of his are mentioned by Suidas under the entry for Pamphylus. The "five" are missing in the codex. Matrit. Harl. (50) Valerius Pollio, of Alexandria, father of Diodorus the philosopher, famous in the time of Hadrian, whose Lexicon Photius mentions in codex CXLIX. Concerning the writer Pollio, Suidas and, among more recent writers, Jonsius III, 7, p. 246, etc. Harl.

WRITERS MENTIONED BY SUIDAS