could devote to theological studies, as those who, distracted by no other pursuits, dedicate themselves entirely to them. However, before I approach the commentary itself, I shall first submit some passages wherein our manuscript differed from the Greek manuscripts commonly circulated: a fact which I believe happened not infrequently through the carelessness of copyists or printers, since such a reading is consistent neither with the edition, nor with the Complutensian Bibles, of which I made mention in the letter to the reader concerning Euthymius. When, therefore, I saw an evident error in the manuscript, with no note made here or there regarding the matter, I restored it as was proper; or where it seemed worth the effort, I took care to note it in the margin, and for this reason I shall not submit those passages here. Furthermore, we have not decided to note the passages (just as we did not in the Gospels) where both this and other Greek manuscripts of ours differ from the Latin Vulgate edition, because anyone can seek that from various other translators. We shall also add an index of the thoughts that seemed worthy of memory in these commentaries, since we see that many desire this: the number designating the page, the letter however 'a' the first part of the column, and 'b' the latter. Furthermore, before you proceed to the reading of the book, I ask that you correct those errors which have escaped either the eyes of the printers or our own for the sake of a correct reading: in the annotation of which, the first number designates the page, the second the column, and the third the verse; where, however, only two numbers are marked, the former shows the column of the page already placed, the latter the verse. But if a single number is assigned, it shall designate the verse of the said column. Farewell.
TO THE PHILHELLENES
A The commentaries contained in this book manifest such marvellous conciseness and clarity, as well as an exposition of those things always sought in the Holy Scripture, that they easily persuade me that they differ from those older ones, from which they were gathered together as if into one body, just as much as honey is more precious than flowers. For indeed, the man who gathered such things, like a bee, mimicked it: plucking the finest things from each of those who wrote before him, as it does from flowers blooming everywhere, and from these many, as if they were singing and chanting to God in the sanctuary, he composed this one marvellous choir. But that a certain Oecumenius by name is such a one, this a person might now be able to learn from what follows. For I found in the commentary on the Epistle to the Colossians, at the very last page, such a testimony as this: "From the copy," he says, "not having well found the paragraphs of the blessed John for the Epistle to the Colossians, I wrote them out as I was able. If, therefore, anything light or reprehensible is found in them, let the reader know that this error is mine." With this testimony, the entire interpretation of the Epistle to the Colossians is also completed. And yet this has the name of Oecumenius prefixed to it. So that from this one might infer—or rather, one already has it beyond doubt—that this labour belongs to this Oecumenius, at least regarding the Epistles of Paul. For this man, having condensed the entire work of Chrysostom, as it is easy for every reader to perceive, added to it the commentaries of other holy men, announcing the name of each in the title, such as Cyril, Gennadius, Theodoret, Gregory, Basil, Severian, and others of that kind, and especially a certain Photius, from whom many of the commentaries were transferred, who, according to me, is the greatest of them all. Know then, wherever you might not find a name inscribed, that such an interpretation is Chrysostom’s, condensed into a few words by this man, as has been said. B Where you find the name of Chrysostom himself prefixed—which is rare to see—know that the man has not condensed or altered the exposition there, but has merely copied the very words of Chrysostom verbatim. But if you see the name of Oecumenius himself, who laboured to produce this entire collection, do not be surprised. For those things which he himself happened to conceive and discover, and not learn from others who came before him, he deemed it proper to prefix his own name to those, so that there might not be any confusion for the reader, in case he might think all that is uncredited belongs to one person, such as Chrysostom, even though some things are of another, such as himself, unless he himself has indicated it by writing his own name in front. Now, the things written for both the Acts and the so-called Catholic Epistles have some dispute, whether they are the writing and gathering of the same Oecumenius or not. But I believe these also to be no less his, following many proofs, which I shall not state for now, so that I may not be overly long in the style of a letter. The commentary on the Apocalypse of the blessed John was indeed composed by Andrew, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, but was later condensed into a summary and brevity by a certain Arethas, bishop of the same city, just as the inscription explicitly reveals. Now, John Matthew Giberti, the Bishop of Verona, having acquired a copy containing the entire such work, handed it to me, ordering me to correct it and to purify it accurately from any errors I might find therein. This I most gladly accepted, and having complied with his order, as was fitting, I brought the requested task to completion to the best of my ability. Then I handed it over to the bibliographers, whom the same Giberti keeps at home, fed at his own great expense, so that they might multiply it with their art. It is necessary, therefore, that each of the readers render the greatest [thanks] to the most philanthropic God
to have gratitude. A Let those who take account of these compositions, which are already in danger of being utterly obliterated by time and neglect, offer thanks to the Savior who granted us this most magnificent man. And let one pray for him continually, that he may provide others like him to the world. For let anyone who hopes that, upon this event, all Hellenic and Roman B learning, its ancient beauty, or rather its very life, might in a brief time be recovered, hope for this. Farewell.
ARGUMENT OF THE BOOK OF ACTS
The narrator of the Acts of the Apostles is Luke the Evangelist. A For being an Antiochene by race, and a physician by profession, he traveled with the apostles, and especially with Paul, and he writes what he knew precisely. He relates how the Lord was taken up, with angels receiving Him. And the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, which occurred at Pentecost upon the apostles and all who were present at that time. Furthermore, the appointment of Matthias in place of Judas the traitor, and the appointment of the seven deacons. And the election of Paul, and all that he suffered, and all the miracles which the apostles performed through prayer and the faith which they had in Christ.
The names of the apostles are these: Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the tax collector. James of Alphaeus and Simon the Cananaean, and Judas of James, and Matthias who was numbered with the eleven in place of the traitor. The names of the appointed deacons are these: Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus. After these, Paul was also called, a vessel of election.
The signs which these apostles performed are these: α'. Peter and John healed in the name of the Lord the man lame from birth, who sat at the Beautiful Gate. C β'. Peter convicted Ananias and his wife Sapphira, who had purloined from what they had promised to God, and they became dead instantly. γ'. The shadow of Peter, coming upon the sick, healed them. δ'. Stephen performed wonders and signs. ε'. Philip instructed the eunuch who was reading the prophet Isaiah, and baptized him. ς'. The same Philip in Samaria D